The Reckoning

Nikolas (Paul Bettany) is a 14th (or so) century priest with a guilty conscience. Guilty of adultery, he exiles himself to the countryside and casts his lot with a group of itinerant theatrical players lead by Martin (DaFoe). Though Nikolas has no discernible acting talent, the troupe begins to grow attached to him, especially as he develops an interest in the mystery of the disappearance and death of several young boys in a small town the players have come to visit. Nikolas exhumes the corpse, attracting the attention and ire of the local magistrate, and discovers a cover-up and conspiracy which his conscience can not allow to go unexposed. Since the courts, the local law enforcement, the church and the local nobility will not listen, Nikolas must plead his case to the citizenry. The troupe takes up the task using their well honed talents.

This is a very clever, well written, very well filmed, carefully planned piece of historical fiction. The medieval period is portrayed with far greater accuracy and sensitivity than the usual contemporary film affords, though its cleanliness is a bit absurd, the set is magnificent and reminiscent of Herzog's talents in creating a historic context. The language of the film is also as authentic as it could be without resorting to archaic tongues few would understand. The acting is exceptional, though a couple of Bettany's soliloquies were a little predictably presented (he seems to do a lot of this sort of thing) with DaFoe and Gina McKee providing especially touching and intense performances.

The acting and strong script combine to make The Reckoning as good as a character study as it is as a dramatic mystery. It is not, however, a fast paced thriller and will undoubtedly disappoint those used to the style of mystery currently in vogue - that is guns-a-blazin' sex and violence-decorated kill-fests. If you're not in the mood for a slow-moving but intense film experience, avoid The Reckoning. If you want to be immersed in a different, but very real, world, and experience a contemporary issue through the eyes of those who live in that world, see it.

Everything in the setting and art direction of this nicely done dramatic mystery is of Academy Award caliber, so why was it not nominated? It should have been.

The plot is simple but handled in a most perceptive and well-conceived manner, and makes for a riveting tale, with superb performances by nearly everyone involved. A murder mystery set in the 13th century in England, of course with the dangerous politics of aristocracy as fodder.

The fault of this film is in the portrayal of the villain, who is lacking in development and nothing more than a one-dimensional Simon Legree. One fully expects him to pull his mustache and cackle. His eventual downfall is welcome, but handled in way that just seems unrealistic for the times.

Here is a fellow who is suspected of planning a revolt against the King of England, yet he only has about 6 knights in his stable when push comes to shove? What? Then the angry villagers burn down the gigantic castle, which was the size of about the rest of the town. Right, they'd prefer to just burn it down rather than use it.

Other than that, a great film.

The mission of the movie seems to be to portray how things were in the middle ages, and while I think it's a pretty good and well-acted movie with a relevant story, I doubt that most of the main characters' actions and way of thinking are anywhere near historically accurate. The year is 1380. What's all this about voting?? And the priest's sense of justice seems just a wee bit too well-developed. And would the actors turn around to help a deaf and dumb condemned prisoner that they practically didn't know? Doesn't feel realistic to me. The movie seems glazed over with a lot of modern sentiment and sense of justice (and democracy!), which essentially turns it into light entertainment rather than a serious story. But at its heart it does have a message of showing how the powerful used to prey on the powerless (and, indirectly, how they still do today), and as such does contribute something to the current mass audience's understanding of history and the world.

7 out of 10.

I've watched this movie 4 times in the last three days, and I'm still not sure I've grokked all of its subtleties yet. Beautiful, yes -- the village set is a series of enclosures, mazes within mazes, that contribute to the entrapped mood surrounding the characters. Even in the scenes outside the village, the woods and hills close in around the actors, like the enfolding wings and backdrops of a stage. The closeups are unsettlingly revealing - filthy fingers with smooth nails using a sharp, rough flint to cut hair down to the scalp....dark eyes revealing everything and nothing....a hand laid caressingly near the jugular....strong fingers....and Paul Bettany's disturbing blue eyes. I can't say enough about Bettany's take on the outcast priest -- he manages moral outrage and submissive pathos with equal ease, and his smiles always have a hint of tears behind them. A haunting performance -- I would go across the world to see Bettany play Hamlet or Macbeth.

The Reckoning really is a medieval thriller. Most of the people you ask what do you expect from a medieval movie will tell you that they'll see a bunch of guys in metal armors with large swords beating the living daylight out of each other. The Reckoning is more like The Name Of The Rose (1986). All the `good' guys aren't goodie little two-shoes and all the bad guys aren't evil, malicious, arrogant royals with black hearts. There are a lot of similarities with In The Name Of The Rose (1986). A young runaway priest meets a group of actors, joins them and they set off for the nearest town. Upon arrival they witness the trial of a deaf-mute woman who supposedly killed a boy in a nearby woods. Driven by guilt (for setting a play with misinterpreted story) actors decide to take the case in their own hands and solve the murder. Cast is very good. Paul Bettany really is a good actor. He's come a long way since A Knight's Tale (2001) and A Beautiful Mind (2001). Willem Defoe is truly magnificent. He's one of those actors that can play any given part and in The Reckoning he plays the leader of the actors, with ideas way ahead of his time. Brian Cox although has little screen time cannot be unnoticed. Gina McKee sucks, and I don't know what is she doing in this movie. Probably the producers wanted a woman character in the story so writers made up Sarah. Blah. Vincent Cassel is excellent as a blue-blooded count. Not much lines dough. I strongly recommend this film, for it is one of the best thrillers that has appeared in a past few years. If you liked In The Name Of The Rose (1986), I think you'll love this film too. And vice versa.