delbruk

This one is truly original. A Cult film for the Geriatric crowd. It is good to see that I am not the only one who was impressed with this obscure film from when HBO was in its infancy (channel 6 anyone?) There are some very good actors associated with this project for anyone who was conscious in the 60's and 70's. From Ruth McDevitt to Ian Wolfe you have seen them before in many supporting roles, here you get to see them lead. The film almost has a strange aura similar to The Sentinel (1977) although without the supernatural aspects. Here we have a social satire which focuses on the geriatric crowd affirming their rights in the face of oppression. Coming out of the era of civil rights don't think this subject matter wasn't a projection of society in which many sub-cultures where finding ways to be empowered. This film takes that premise and twists it into some very humorous and macabre situations. The cement pouring scene is a memorable one which stands alongside any early giallo for inventiveness. Dated but still worth it if you can find it if cult is your thing.

It is always interesting to read the reviews of others in assessing a film that touches on traditional mythos in society. There is no shortage of reviewers from the UK who feel as if their legend has been tainted. Notably this film succeeds by attempting to integrate an actual historical investigation into the origins of the Arthur legend. As the basis for the film this works and adds a fresh perspective to the well known story. However, where the film begins to fade is the interjection of all of Arthur's mythological characters and props. Merlin is now the leader of the native tribes, Guinevere a pagan warrior, etc. The scene which has Arthur recollecting about his mother and Excalibur is especially contrived. Its not that these artistic liscenses have destroyed the fabric of the film, it is simply that in attempting to de-mystify the legend all they have done is reformulate the old myth in a different era...rather unoriginal but understandable. The film's major failing is in the direction which attempts to create the sense that this new legend must be supported by Hollywood superhero tactics which are so wholly laughable as to detract from the whole film. One expressly humorous scene shows a Knight with an arrow piercing his chest throw a sword twenty odd feet perfectly into his nemesis before he expires. Schwarzeneger would be proud. The funny thing here is that most of these annoyances could be edited out to save this film's credibility if anyone cared. Finally with all of these shortcomings the film is still actually enjoyable. The knights are all cast well and likable as men driven by their sense of freedom during Roman reign. Gruffudd, Mikkelsen, and Winstone all deserve mention. Here I believe the all-Euro casting succeeds at least in the US where fresher faces add a nuance to new mythos.

This is an innovative, historical, and very well acted account of the US Government's attempt to put a generation of anti-war protestors on trial. From a political standpoint this film succeeds in outlining the key issues protestors had against the Vietnam War. From a legal standpoint this film succeeds in defining what may have been the most unorthodox and legally flawed trial ever to take place in America. On the artistic side, this film combines fantastic actors who embody the spirit of the true life defendants as well as offering intertwined detailed accounts from the participants themselves.

In respect to the reviewer who stated this wasn't what he remembered, I can only say that media accounts usually do not cover events accurately and that this whole docudrama is taken from the actual court transcripts. As someone who has taught and studied this trial and accounts, I assure you will not find better.

For an understanding of what divided and still splinters our country, this truly is required viewing.