Le Lion des Flandres

I started out unbiased and neutral of this movie. I got through to the whole ninety minutes of it. And wow, this is a great example of a movie not to do this. Even at the 1984 pace and special effects it's bad, so bad that I had to cringe several time for the bad acting and effects.

The acting for nearly all actors is bad and the direction is even worse. I forgive the special effects team because the budget had to be extremely low. The cast is so few they can hardly muster any extra's during the battle or during the french royal scenes.

Please Hollywood and other movie makers, take note of this movie how to NOT do this kind of genre. I barely make any reviews, but this is a movie I had to review.

Don't waste time on this. It's 90 minutes you will never get back!

During the reign of Philippe Le Bel, France was at the peak of its power and its wealth in the Middle-Ages;the king imposed a centralized kingdom, which displeased the bourgeois as well as the nobles; he was not very popular and few movies were made about his reign. The most famous was the TV miniseries "les rois maudits" :the celebrated destruction.of the order of the templars who represented an international financial power ;burnt alive on the stake with other companions, Jacques De Molay ,the Grand Master would have cursed all the kings to come ;historians say that the master simply appealed to God's justice ;the fact that Philippe died within the year fueled the legend. The second subject concerns Philippe's daughters -in -law ,two adulteresses,filmed by Abel Gance in "la tour de Nesles " in which history was given a rough ride .

But no film about Flanders ,it was the first time a movie had been made about this aspect of the king's reign ; it's a gripping historical epic, with shakespearian accents (all that concerns Gui De Dampierre) , scenes which verge on fantasy (the battle of the golden spurs ) and generally good acting .

Like the French, the Flemish were overburdened with taxes ;Philippe 's rapaciousness knew no bounds (he expelled the Jews,after confiscating their possessions) in the movie he seems a little listless, encouraged by his wife Jeanne De Navarre the First (was she really the cruel woman who insisted even Flemish women and children be slaughtered too? Opinions differ ,she married the king at 11 ,when he was five years her senior and her political role did not seem so important ).

This war ,which turns "holy" in the king's mind in the second part,was David against Goliath ;although the French lost the battle of the golden spurs , Philippe had the last laugh and the poor province was finally defeated in 1304 and was part of the kingdom till 1369.

This is a very violent movie, a story which in the end is a plea for oppressed people , a rebellion against the high and the mighty .

Low budget doesn't have to mean a bad film but in this case it unfortunately does. Looks like a TV production, is (mostly) poorly acted and badly scripted, with only a passing attention to historical detail or any kind of accuracy. The subject matter deserves much better.

De leeuw van Vlaanderen is a medieval movie about the Flemish resistance against the French invading armies in 1302. The Flemish peasants won the battle because of their courage and the helping hand of God, manifesting itself as a golden knight on the battlefield. A sort of Braveheart (1995), but without the skirts.

It could have been a good movie. But the director, actually a novelist who thinks he can direct, screwed it up BIG TIME, again. Everything is leading up to the battle, but the battle itself is poorly filmed. If you can't afford to put in hundreds of extras on the grass, you shouldn't use too much long shots. But concentrate on the dynamics of the battle. There were too many empty spaces, which made the whole thing look ridiculous. Even Monty Python in The Holy Grail (1975) was more convincing!

The rest of the movie is static and theatrical. The occasional bad acting sequences are followed by sequences of low dramatic value and pointless discussions, where you feel as a spectator the need to push the fast-forward button. Yes, thank God I didn't see this one in the theatre.

note: I am sorry if I kind of hinted that Hugo Claus is trying to be Ed Wood. Ed Wood is maybe the worst director, but has still something Hugo Claus will never have: PASSION.

I was so well surprised by this obscure film from Netherlands and taking place in the Middle Age. It is a medieval tale so gritty, accurate, bloody and not to be watched by kids in matinees. I have rarely seen a so realistic medieval tale, except of course Paul Verhoeven's FLESH AND BLOOD, and maybe a couple of others, all recent films. But in the eighties, there was not many of them. Very few indeed. It looks like a Mel Gibson's feature, bloody, and the most accurate.