Age of Uprising: The Legend of Michael Kohlhaas

I concur with many of you that this movie was way to long, slow and anticlimactic.

Pictorially it was beautiful but there was so much lost potential with this film that was left omitted.

It contained lots of chatter and religious doctrine about turning your cheek, etc from a church at that time was about as ruthless as royalty in feudal times.

It started out with great expectation but ended with sad disappointment.

I had thoroughly enjoyed Mads Mikkelsen in the Pusher, and his role as Michael Kohlhaas was great.

In the end the director needed to tighten the film belt by a few notches to have made this movie a good movie.

The above summary was provided by my lovely wife as she watched the movie with me. While I wouldn't have exactly phrased it that way, it is to the point and I cannot deny this does, in an odd way, encapsulate what the movie "Age of Uprising: The Legend of Michael Kohlhaas" is for the average viewer. It's a shame, because I had expected more from this film since it stars a very exciting actor, the Danish man of many talents, Mads Mikkelsen--a guy you probably recognize but whose name you might not.

Mikkelsen has received a lot of attention in the States lately with his performance as the lead in the TV series "Hannibal". His portrayal of the serial killer is far different from earlier ones--with a much more thoughtful and sophisticated persona than other Hannibals. Before this, he received a lot of publicity as one of James Bond's villains in "Casino Royale". However, I have known about him long before this, as he's been a star in Danish films for some time--and I really love Danish movies. Interestingly, here in "Age of Uprising", Mikkelsen speaks French--not English or Danish. My daughter (a HUGE fan of "Hannibal"") did some research for me about this and found that the actor also speaks German and Russian! Wow...he certainly isn't a dumb guy! But, he's simply done many better films than this particular one.

The film is based on the true story of Hans Kohlhase---a 16th century rebel who, for a time, plagued Germany. His life was the basis of a novel by the German author Heinrich von Kleist and the story was first brought to film in 1969 as "Michael Kohlhaas--der Rebell" (starring the British actor David Warner).

When the story begins, a nobleman seizes some horses belonging to the merchant, Michael Kohlhaas. He had no legal basis for doing this but to make matters worse, he savagely sent his dogs on Kohlhaas' servant and then mistreated the horses severely. In response, Kohlhaas sued the nobleman. Unfortunately, back in the day, life wasn't necessarily fair- -and Kohlhaas' case was thrown out of court. Soon, Kohlhaas' wife is murdered in retribution for the lawsuit. With no other apparent choices other than to just accept this injustice, Kohlhaas and his men go on a vigilante crusade--dispensing their form of justice through the countryside. What's next? Well, you could watch the film...or just read Wikipedia. Unfortunately, I'd recommend the latter. Why? Because the story IS an interesting case of class warfare and should have been exciting--sort of like a German version of "Braveheart". Unfortunately, it's not. The film is tedious and extremely bereft of life when it should have been inspiring and exciting. The musical score is extremely stark and minimalistic--adding to the tedium that you see on the screen. The movie manages to make the least of the great source material.

The bottom line is that I loved Mads Mikkelsen's work...just not this particular film. My advice is to try watching his best films--such as his Oscar-nominated movies "The Hunt" and "After the Wedding" as well as "Flame and Citron". These are truly exceptional and show off Mikkelsen's immense talents to their fullest.

French films dealing with medieval events tend to be romantic, adventurous and beautiful, with colourful costumes, picturesque landscapes and magnificent dwellings. The story around Michael Kohlhaas is originally German, so is the book, that is why it is difficult to comprehend why the French became interested in this. The result is a joint French-German drama (well, I even recognised some German actors in small roles) where the French language is aggravating rather than supplementing - at least for me. The run is slow, the environment is ugly, there are a few twists, thus I started to focus on acting very soon. Of course, Mads Mikkelsen (a Dane!) is great as usual, and as far I understood, his French was very good (true, he is often employed in foreign films, I have seen him speaking Swedish, English, German as well throughout the film). Other performances seemed a bit arid to me - apparently due to the characters - and, all in all, the film in question caused ambivalent feelings; there was a lot of inner profundity, but the course of events seemed perfunctory. But fans of Mikkelsen will not be disappointed as there are a few scenes without his presence only.

Some people might not feel comfortable with this film, which is not surprising. It does move with a very slow pace and it is a movie about values. The question is, do you want a movie that might feel like a lecture to you? It isn't of course, but I would understand if some viewers would feel like that.

Mads is playing as strong as ever and the character is complicated, but has a strong sense of righteousness. Something that has been the downfall for many people. And standing up for yourself or others is not that easy. It's easier to just back down and take it, than to stand up and fight. But is it worth it? There are quite a few questions that you might ask yourself after watching this movie, because it does not answer everything for you ...

AGE OF UPRISING: THE LEGEND OF MICHAEL KOHLHAAS is an interesting film about a mini revolution that took place in historical France. It's often a beautifully shot film, breathtakingly so at times, and it features a typically strong performance from Mads Mikkelsen in the lead role. Mikkelsen plays a sympathetic figure, a man who becomes oppressed to the extent that he has no choice but to fight back.

The problem with AGE OF UPRISING is that it goes out of its way to be as slow and arty as is humanly possibly. There's an hour's worth of plotting and incident dragged out to two hours, and boy, does it drag. Each scene plays out for far too long, and everything seems to be deliberately subdued and painstakingly detailed. Now, I do appreciate all of the lovely scenery, and having seen this in high definition I can say it's a visually stunning film.

But movies are about more than the visuals, and in that respect AGE OF UPRISING disappoints. The traditional storyline is a familiar one and nothing much happens that hasn't been seen elsewhere. In the end you can only sit back and enjoy it to a degree - and roles for the likes of Bruno Ganz help - but without getting more fully invested in a more involving movie.