User reviews

This film was a total surprise for me. I went to see it without any pre conceived ideas; I had no clue what to expect. I based my decision on the the strength of the cast here assembled. It proved me right, as this is a movie that is very satisfying without being pretentious, or preachy.

It is, without a doubt, a major achievement for its director, Paul McGuigan. It probably would be intimidating to undertake a project of this magnitude and still bring together all the right elements to make this film enjoyable. The only sad part is that it seems this film is not getting its fair share the way it's being marketed, at least in this country.

Paul Bettany is amazing as the young priest who commits a terrible sin and has to leave the security of his church. He is fortunate to meet with the kind hearted Martin, and his troupe of players. William Dafoe is very good as the principal actor in this group. Brian Cox's role is brief, but he is very effective. Elvira Minguez has no dialogue at all, but her presence is crucial to the story and her Martha adds another layer to the story.

Despite the different acting styles and accents, the story keeps the viewer engrossed in the story. I do hope it will get the audience it sadly needs, for this is a much better film than the silly stuff being offered these days.

The yarn talks upon a priest (Paul Bettany) who is joined with a comedian actors troupe (Willem Dafoe, Gina McKee, Brian Cox , among others). They will arrive in a village with a rousing castle ruled by a tyrant (Vincent Cassel). There happens one murder and is framed a deaf-mute woman (Elvira Minguez). The priest discovers the killing has occurred and attempt to solve it by recreating the crime in a play .

The film deals with Dark Ages , it's time of destruction , hunger, deceases and rampage . It's developed in 14th century , England , during King Richard's time , the Normans vanquished Saxons . War and pest originated millions of deaths . The story mingles medieval set , drama, suspense , sexual situations , a love story and is entertaining enough . The motion picture was in great majority directed in Spain (Andalucia) and has breathtaking scenarios . The movie obtained a limited success , in the United States got a resounding flop and achieved a lukewarm reception by the public ; however Europe attained more box office because is a European film more than American . The picture gets a certain resemblance to ¨The name of the rose¨ , thus the Medieval time , suspense , thrills and intrigue about killing . The main actors are very well , Paul Bettany and Willem Dafoe's interpretations are top notch likeness to support cast as Brian Cox, Ewen Bremmer, James Cosmo, Matthew Mac Fadden , all of them are outstanding . Cinematography by Peter Soba is magnificent and Mark Mancina's musical score is atmospheric . The movie is correctly directed by Paul McGuigan.

Rating : Good. Well worth watching.

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.

A gem of a film. Artistic without being pretentious, moving without being cliché. Paul Bettany is completely believable as a tormented priest, Willem Dafoe is as always intense and a joy to watch. The movie takes place in the dark ages mostly in a small outpost in the English countryside. A woman is wrongly accused of murder and a traveling troupe of actors, lead by Dafoe, enters the town and becomes involved in clearing her name of the accusation.

I was most impressed with the set they used for the village, it's incredible. The set immerses you in the desperate and dramatic feel of the film properly. The film has an authentic theatrical feel to it. More like it's being acted on stage rather than on location. I recommend this well acted tale.

Director Paul McGuigan gathers a team of excellent actors in this medieval mystery drama. This is not an easy genre, although there are excellent books to start from and at least one film to remember, 'The Name of the Rose' that was a great success a couple of decades ago. In 'Reckoning' the staging of the action is very good, the characters are strong and credible, and the atmosphere of the time - 14th century England - makes it to the screen. The story of an ex-priest joining a group of actors who get involved in a crime and wrong justice story in a village they perform is quite interesting, at least at the beginning. Paul Bettamy and William Defoe give good performances, and the rest of the team is not far behind. The problem is with the story - it starts well leading to a theater in movie scene which is the key of the whole movie. The mistake in the script is that this scene comes too early, and the rest of the story is too easy to predict and not interesting enough. I lost interest in the second half, and it looked like the director also ran out of ideas, most of the best visuals are in the first half, the second just repeats what we saw in the first and in many other films. Overall a movie above average, 7 out of 10 on my personal scale.

Few films have managed to depict the Medieval period so well as this one. The dirt, the illnesses, shabby clothes, prejudices, terrible witch hunting's - all is here and well shown. Willem Defoe is a great choice for the main role, as well as unusually silent Vincent Cassdel, who play a traveling comedian and a terrible landlord respectively. The plot is also good - a sinned priest is on the run, he joins the traveling actors troupe and together they come to a small town, where a woman is going to be hanged for alleged child murder. The actors decide to learn the truth and finally they stage a play impromptu showing the real events of that blood chilling murder. What is bad in this film is a very slow tempo and really tedious dialogs so often. Pity, this film could have been much better...

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.

An intriguing premise, plus some insight into the lives of traveling actors and the religious beliefs during the depicted time, are the aspects that keep this film going along. Many of the sequences are filmed by clichés in terms of the editing choices, close-ups, fast motion and slow motion used. The visual style is good otherwise, with high camera angles used effectively, apt sets and costumes, plus some moody landscapes - it is just all put together in a rather drone manner. The film takes a while to build up too, and it tends to be over-complicated without explaining well all that needs to be known. Still, there are interesting elements at hand here, so if it sounds appealing, the film is most likely worth a look.

"The Reckoning" is one of those movies that starts off well but then falls apart in the second half.

Paul Bettany stars as Nicholas, a priest in the Middle Ages who is forced to flee his village when he is caught en flagrante with another man's wife. While hiding in the woods, he encounters a troupe of traveling actors who allow him to join their company. When they arrive at a nearby city, they discover that a woman there has just been sentenced to death for the murder of a young boy. When the troupe decides to reenact the crime in a performance for the townspeople, Nicholas, while doing the research, becomes convinced that the woman is innocent and that the lord of the town himself may be the guilty party.

For the first half hour or so, the movie has us hooked with the novelty of the setting and the masterful way in which the art direction, costume design and cinematography capture the look and feel of life in late 14th Century England. The plot in its initial stages retains just enough ambiguity to keep us intrigued about where exactly it is headed. Unfortunately, about midway through the film, the story addresses that very question and it turns out to be a not very satisfactory answer. As Nicholas becomes more and more overtly involved with solving the mystery and more and more involved in the life of the villagers, the story itself become more and more contrived and melodramatic. We simply don't believe much of what we see happening on the screen, neither the acting troupe's dramatization of the events nor Nicholas' face-to-face confrontation with the evil lord of the city. The scenes in the story are put forward in such a theatrical way that the film begins to feel less like real life and more like the movies. It probably doesn't help that Bettany and Willem Dafoe as the head of the actor's ensemble deliver fairly bland, lackluster performances.

I wanted to like "The Reckoning" very much, and for a while I really thought I would. But the elements just don't come together in any convincing, meaningful way and so we are left largely disappointed at the end.

I read the book first (Morality Play by W. Unsworth, very charming, with sophisticated plot about almost philosophical issues of truth and its interpretations) and then I found out there was a movie made according to it and allready re-run several times on the czech version of HBO TV channel.

I watched The Reckoning only few weeks ago and I think it is a very beautiful movie. Not that moving as it might have been, but beautiful to watch. Well, after a little dissappointment /movie's major issue and its somewhat morbid ending are VERY different from the book/. But only because I was expecting something.

The Reckoning catches - best of all "medieval" films I have seen - the atmosphere of medieval society, which seem so very oppressive to us, with its fears and firmly given orders and the necessity to belong somewhere, be a member of a defined group - or not to be. This is gloomy. The plot is not made exactly as a thriller - not much surprising. Its major point is, I gues, to make viewers feel, as if they were inside the story, could touch the real people. And the characters feel as real people, reserved towards strangers and not pretending warmth, when not feeling it.

It is played wonderfully. Bettany is amazing as melancholic hero-anti-hero, who sruggles with his fears and overcomes it, Dafoe is real master actor with slight tendencies to manipate the others, realistic but brave enough to join the desperate outcast and do something good and almost suicidal, Cox is down-to-earth old man, McKee is silent medieval woman with no voice within the group.And the major villain Cassel is a charismatic dictator-nihilist, who enjoys cat-mouse plays. See it while you can :-).

It's 1380 England. Norman barons have ruled for 300 years. Both the church and state work together to maintain the absolute rule. Nicholas (Paul Bettany) is a monk who had an affair with a married woman and must go on the run. He witnesses a group of traveling performers kill a man. Martin (Willem Dafoe) explains that their leader was old and begged to be killed. Nicholas is taken into the troupe. They arrive in a village where a woman is sentenced to hang for murdering a boy with testimony from monk Simon Damian (Ewen Bremner). Their performance fails to get much of an audience. Martin decides to make up a new play based on the boy's murder but they soon discover more to the story.

I like this murky ugly world of the medieval traveling entertainers. The story is a bit too complicated and a bit too talky. I do like the heated debate about creating a story not from the bible. The cast is full of first rate talents. The acting is superb. The problem is that the movie is juggling too many balls. In addition to the mystery, Nicholas is haunted by the constant flashbacks. The cast is so full of great actors that it's a scramble to follow everybody. This is a movie in need of some trimming.

I really like Paul Bettany and Dafoe is either wonderful or awful depending on the role, but always worth watching. I also think Barry Unsworth, author of the book on which this film was based, is a superb writer. So when I came across this movie, I was anxious to see it, and in some ways it did not disappoint.

It was well acted. Paul and Dafoe were both good, and the supporting players were convincing. The script was weak, however. The villain was so heinous he was almost a cartoon and the motives of our hero (Bettany's character) we muddled at best. And although the villagers certainly looked like I would imagine 14th century serfs would look, they seemed to have enough leisure time to worry about social injustice and working together for a better life (when they were not searching for roots and twigs, no doubt).

It would have been a far more interesting movie if it had concerned itself with the trials and travails of the traveling players instead of trying to be an action/suspense film.

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.

Not bad but not great either.. it's like you want it to be more than what it is.. the scenery looks amazing I love these types of movies.. the cast does its job . Not a bad movie to watch if you have some time to waste but don't go expecting a Grammy..

Set in the dark ages (circa 1380) in Britain, "The Reckoning" tells of a priest on the run who takes up with a traveling troupe of actors only to find himself embroiled in an already solved murder mystery which he feels compelled to resolve. The film does a good job of recreating the bitter and bleak austerity of medieval England beset with wintry cold, threat of the black death, and ubiquitous deprivations. However, the story of a man who feels compelled to crusade for the freedom of a woman of whom he knows almost nothing and at his own peril and that of his troupe stages a kangaroo court for the not-so-massive masses in the town square under the noses of the Sheriff officials while doing a quickie autopsy with black topsoil passing as frozen ground, blaa, blaa...well, it all seems a lot far fetched. With ho-hums from the critics and a lukewarm reception by the public, this marginally interesting though earnest flick will play best with fans of the players and those into medieval peasant stuff. (B-)

This is a socio-political message thinly disguised as a medieval detective story. Its bevy of A-list actors are far better than its script, not that the script is bad; it's just unevenly paced, it misses dramatic beats, and the dialogue veers into stuffy-preachy-philosophy a tad much. I'm always a sucker for religious examination in film, and this offers that in a smart way.

It's visually beautiful in capturing the feel of medieval winter and harshness of daily life.

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.

I'm a huge fan of The Name of the Rose and I try to catch all medieval movies I can. I ran into this by chance, but read from here that it should be a good looking movie in the style of TNOTR. It wasn't at all, I was hugely disappointed.

The story is a murder mystery, yes. The setting is medieval with castles and all, yes. That's about it, I can't think of other similarities. But let's start with the good things.

The acting is pretty good as far as Bettany and a few others go. I've never been a huge fan of any of these actors, but especially Bettany played his role very well, it's not often that you see a role played so richly yet it doesn't go into theatrical over acting. The story is also interesting and the production design and locations are gorgeous.

The biggest problem I had with the movie is that it feels more like a stage play rather than a movie. While there are few nice and creative shots and - I'll mention again - the sets look great, the cinematography and lighting varies from OK to plain awful most of the time. It's very confusing. Lot's of hand held camera and there appears to be zero post processing or color correction. It felt sort of improvised, more like a theatrical act captured on video rather than a movie where you actually care about the aesthetics of the shots.

It's kind of annoying that such great sets and locations are ruined by this directorial decision. I'm guessing many didn't mind this as there are very good reviews, but to me it matters a lot how the film looks and feels. While the atmosphere is kind of medieval, it's not "movie medieval", it's like you'd be visiting the village today and they were performing this as a summer theater act. At night the castle was lit like a tourist attraction.

I was kind of surprised of all this as some on the boards mentioned McGuigan being a visual director with lackluster stories. I find this the exact opposite. The story is so much better than the visuals that ended up on screen.

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.

Murder mysteries have always captivated the human mind for one reason or another. One only has to turn on the TV to TNT or USA and chances are that a "Law & Order" episode will be on. Setting one in the Middle Ages has plenty of possibilities, since what people knew and how they acted at the time are vastly different from what people know and do in the present day. Sadly, the result is a mess for 90% of the movie.

Nicholas (Paul Bettany) is a priest who fled his town after committing an unspeakable act. He joins up with a troupe of traveling actors (led by Willem Dafoe), and they come across a town where they perform a play. When they arrive, a deaf-mute girl has been convicted of a murder. The group of actors decide to put on a play about the crime, and while creating it, they realize that nothing is what it seems.

Few will disagree that the main purpose of a murder mystery is to not only find out who did it, but why. "The Reckoning" accomplishes this, to be sure, but it's nearly impossible to figure out what is going on. Granted, a good mystery keeps the audience hanging until the end, but the protagonist is not supposed to get ahead of the viewer. That's what happens here. While everything is explained in the final 20 minutes, that means that for for over an hour and a half the film is an irritating mess.

Additionally, this film relies on the viewer to not ask some questions about the common knowledge at the time. I have read posts on IMDb questioning this, and I have my doubts as well. I won't say what it is, but if you watch the movie, you'll wonder the same thing.

The acting isn't standout at all. The actors simply do what is required of them, but they could have been played by anyone. Willem Dafoe tries to add a little spice with his subtly curious accent, but there's really not enough material to do anything really original with. The exception is Elvira Minguez, who despite not being able to speak or hear, manages to gain our sympathy.

Paul McGuigan knows how to make a film look nice, but he doesn't know how to make it make sense. The setting is very authentic, and everything LOOKS great, but the story construction brings everything down. His later feature, "Lucky Number Slevin," suffered from a similar problem, but not as bad. McGuigan keeps the pace up, but the the plot twists are barely emphasized at all, many are almost "blink and miss." Worse, he leaves some of the key elements to the imagination when they shouldn't be. Finally, he doesn't have much control over his actors' accents, some of which are so thick that it's impossible to understand what they are saying.

Overall, it's another film that looks better than it really is.