To Kill a King - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

To Kill a King Reviews

Page 1 of 6
Super Reviewer
½ August 28, 2012
I enjoy English history. I am always looking for a well acted, good story, that has been put together well. I felt that this movie was almost that. It seemed to lack that certain something, though, that made it really good. Not enough drama. Not enough action (definitely not). All in all, however, I found it interesting...
Harlequin68
Super Reviewer
½ November 19, 2008
[font=Century Gothic]"To Kill a King" starts in 1645 as the English Civil War between the royalist forces defending King Charles I(Rupert Everett) and rebel forces favoring Parliament is finally winding down with the latter being victorious. Despite that, Oliver Cromwell(Tim Roth) still has to save his comrade in arms Lord Fairfax(Dougray Scott) from an assassin. All that is left to do is to have the king sign a treaty, allowing reforms to kick in. But he is not beaten yet, bribing Holles(James Bolam), the leader of Parliament, to win a vote, thereby angering Cromwell and Fairfax no end...[/font]
[font=Century Gothic][/font]
[font=Century Gothic]With too much ground to cover with a limited budget, "To Kill a King" is a shallow and dry treatment of an important bit of history that errs by focusing primarily on the relationship between Cromwell and Fairfax(and also a lot on Fairfax and his wife Anne(Olivia Williams)) without giving any insight into whether Cromwell actually believed his rhetoric on reform or was just power mad. What may have worked would have been a focus on one particular moment, say the debate concerning the execution of the king and everything that would imply. As revolutions go, this one went too far(so many unnecessary deaths) and not far enough(no real reforms). Anyway, the reforms that Parliament was calling for would come in effect peacefully in 1688.[/font]
½ February 16, 2008
Despite the brilliant cast I couldn't really enjoy this movie. The subject of this movie wasn't anything that I had an interest in, but I watched it for the potential.
½ May 13, 2012
An average historical movie. I'd have liked to see more battles and less of the interpersonal interaction or at least more battles and the same amount of interaction.
February 11, 2011
A very slow, muddled movie. The performances are fairly disappointing, given the strength of the actors. The characters all blended into the background as the political conflict became central. Left me disinterested.
March 10, 2009
i didn't really like it, watched it in Civ. I couldn't understand it until the end, it got pretty good in the end though, more action.
½ August 7, 2008
After years of fighting together in a bloody civil war to gain rights and justice for the citizens of England, General Thomas Fairfax (Dougray Scott) and Oliver Cromwell (Tim Roth) find themselves at odds. King Charles I (played by Rupert Everett) refuses to sign the treaty which grants basic rights to the people of England. Cromwell wants to depose the king, Fairfax wants to reform him. The situation comes to a boil when Cromwell decides to put the king on trial.

A must see for all you history buffs.
July 16, 2008
An average historical movie. I'd have liked to see more battles and less of the interpersonal interaction or at least more battles and the same amount of interaction.
January 11, 2014
The historical inaccuracies in this film are astounding. Ann De Vere's father had died well before she married Sir Thomas Fairfax. Their daughter Moll was born before the Civil War commenced. Prisoners on either side were not manacled as show in this film. Sir Thomas Fairfax had no dealings with the king or parliament - he was a solider not a politician. This film gives the impression that Fairfax and Cromwell had been friends for years and had planned the overthrow of the king way back when, when it actually fact the two men met for the first time in October, 1643. Fairfax was a monarchist whose sole aim was to see the king's power and authority curtailed and not to see the king or the monarchy done away with. As for Fairfax trying to assassinate Cromwell is purely artistic licence as this was not true. I read a review on another website about a teacher purchasing this video to show his or her students as they were studying the Civil War. I can only say that I am astonished at this because no one is going to learn anything about the Civil War from this movie. Watch the film as a movie and not as a piece of historical fact and you will enjoy it. I think.
September 27, 2012
Con mas interes historico que otra cosa, es un interesante acercamiento al poco conocido Olivier Cromwell, que sinceramente, ahora me le imagino igual que Tim Roth.
½ September 13, 2012
Historical Facts neatly put to a great extent. Entertaining. No wonder Cromwell was so Hated...
½ January 4, 2011
This film plays more like a historical pageant, failing to ever come to grips with the characters that people what should be a compelling story. The plot jumps from major event to major event with scarcely a moment taken for development. As good an actor as Tim Roth is, every time you begin to see him bring something out of Cromwell the director thrusts you into a new scene leaving you unsatisfied.
½ October 31, 2010
Even a pest kind of person like Cromwell did some good to mankind : he died :p Tim Roth is excellent in his character as usual and it's actually interesting to realize how he resembles the portraits of Cromwell ! Rupert Everett is a delight under the skin of King Charles I, too :)~
½ July 18, 2010
I found this movie in the BluRay bin for 9.99.

It is worth every cent and more.

A solid cast of the time piece of the execution of Charles I, King of England. The English Civil War and the belligerents are all played well and casted superbly.

I was pleasently surprised with this movie as a blind buy and it's not an overly long epic which is good at times for replay value.

Splendid.
April 19, 2010
" Brilliant storytelling a movie worth seeing highly recomanded"
May 23, 2009
This film is absolutely dire! Quite apart from the fact that it is hopelessly historically innacurate, it takes unforgiveable liberties with the character of Oliver Cromwell. I am not suggesting the man was a saint, far from it, but he most certainly was not the bloodthirsty psychopath portrayed by Tim Roth! Cromwell was an honourable man with sincerely held religious beliefs (which I do not share by the way) He was faithful to his wife, loved his family and was an honest and upright member of parliament. (Something we badly need today!) He was also a brilliant commander and leader of men. To suggest that he would randomly shoot someone in the street is frankly an insult. Yes he was subject to severe mood swings, perhaps even manic depression, but he did not lose control to that extent.
For goodness sake, there is a statue of the man outside Parliament. He gave us the right to a democratically elected system of government.
This film seriously and unforgiveably maligns Oliver Cromwell. I suggest the writers take more than a desultory look at the history books!
January 19, 2009
:fresh: [b][i]To Kill a King is an exciting historic movie that showed me things I didn't know about that period and depicted in a more realistic way, the personalities and the facts. The performances are terrific, the costume design, the screenplay, the cinematography, everyhing is wonderful. I really recommend this picture.[/i][/b]
December 25, 2008
Fantastic movie about the English civil war. Tim Roth is a great Cromwell. Rupert Jones is a good Charles I.
Harlequin68
Super Reviewer
½ November 19, 2008
[font=Century Gothic]"To Kill a King" starts in 1645 as the English Civil War between the royalist forces defending King Charles I(Rupert Everett) and rebel forces favoring Parliament is finally winding down with the latter being victorious. Despite that, Oliver Cromwell(Tim Roth) still has to save his comrade in arms Lord Fairfax(Dougray Scott) from an assassin. All that is left to do is to have the king sign a treaty, allowing reforms to kick in. But he is not beaten yet, bribing Holles(James Bolam), the leader of Parliament, to win a vote, thereby angering Cromwell and Fairfax no end...[/font]
[font=Century Gothic][/font]
[font=Century Gothic]With too much ground to cover with a limited budget, "To Kill a King" is a shallow and dry treatment of an important bit of history that errs by focusing primarily on the relationship between Cromwell and Fairfax(and also a lot on Fairfax and his wife Anne(Olivia Williams)) without giving any insight into whether Cromwell actually believed his rhetoric on reform or was just power mad. What may have worked would have been a focus on one particular moment, say the debate concerning the execution of the king and everything that would imply. As revolutions go, this one went too far(so many unnecessary deaths) and not far enough(no real reforms). Anyway, the reforms that Parliament was calling for would come in effect peacefully in 1688.[/font]
½ December 31, 2004
Best in Show: Tim Roth
One for the future: Dougray Scott
Stand-out scene: Attempted assassination
Brainer or no-brainer: Brainer
Stands up to one viewing or repeated?: Repeated
DVD commentary any good?: n/a

DVD
The now defunct Natural Nylon production company were behind this movie about Cromwell's rise to power and this fares well in comparison with recent historical dramas such as The Gunpowder Plot (made for TV but worthy of a theatrical release). Tim Roth is a weaselly, snivelling Cromwell while the more temperate Sir Thomas Fairfax is brought to life by the luscious Dougray Scott. Swapping his Scottish brogue for clipped English tones, Scott is convincing as a level-headed man of the gentry torn between his loyalty to the monarchy (Rupert Everett makes for a bristling, scene-stealing Charles I) and his desire for parliamentary modernisation. Having not studied this era of history i'm unsure as to the accuracy of the plot, but care has been taken to bring the intricacies of the times to life in some detail. Olivia Williams (The Sixth Sense) brings gumption to a supporting role as Fairfax's friend-of-the-king's wife and the likes of James Bolan and Corin Redgrave flesh out the impressive cast. One I enjoyed immensely.
Page 1 of 6