If this were a work of fiction it'd be a pretty good film - colourful, dramatic, reasonably well written, good story. As an entertainment its pretty good.
The snag is that it claims not to be fiction but rather history. Its about as much a history lesson as Star Wars.
Yes, taking a very, very broad brush view of the film the main events do happen in pretty much the right order and mostly with the right outcome. But when we get down the the trivial little details like who wins some of the battles, and who did what, where, when and above all why its terrible. Really, really terrible.
To say that this is a hagiography in favour of Cromwell barely scratches the surface. At times its like a propaganda piece from the former Soviet Union.
Other reviewers have mentioned many of the details, but the very idea that Cromwell was in any remote way a democrat or gave a fig for ordinary people is beyond laughable. The man was a positive ayatollah, and the years under his rule were way worse than those under the king he overthrew. That is, after all, why ultimately the monarchy returns barely more than a decade after Charles' execution.
Does that matter - it is, after all, just a film? Yes indeed it does. History matters, but for most people who do not get an opportunity to study this pivotal period this will be how they see the period and the main participants.
And, frankly, the real history was way more interesting.
The snag is that it claims not to be fiction but rather history. Its about as much a history lesson as Star Wars.
Yes, taking a very, very broad brush view of the film the main events do happen in pretty much the right order and mostly with the right outcome. But when we get down the the trivial little details like who wins some of the battles, and who did what, where, when and above all why its terrible. Really, really terrible.
To say that this is a hagiography in favour of Cromwell barely scratches the surface. At times its like a propaganda piece from the former Soviet Union.
Other reviewers have mentioned many of the details, but the very idea that Cromwell was in any remote way a democrat or gave a fig for ordinary people is beyond laughable. The man was a positive ayatollah, and the years under his rule were way worse than those under the king he overthrew. That is, after all, why ultimately the monarchy returns barely more than a decade after Charles' execution.
Does that matter - it is, after all, just a film? Yes indeed it does. History matters, but for most people who do not get an opportunity to study this pivotal period this will be how they see the period and the main participants.
And, frankly, the real history was way more interesting.