*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
December 12, 2019, 07:53:38 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Members
Stats
  • Total Posts: 1365607
  • Total Topics: 96711
  • Online Today: 384
  • Online Ever: 1136
  • (July 19, 2019, 06:36:21 PM)
Users Online

Recent

Author Topic: The King - new Netflix film  (Read 5994 times)

Offline Andrew_McGuire

  • scientist
  • Posts: 499
Re: The King - new Netflix film
« Reply #75 on: November 16, 2019, 04:54:55 PM »
It's fair to say that little thought is given in the UK to French thinking - and feeling - about the Hundred Years' War, and I'm sure some exposure to the French point of view may be constructive, while bearing in mind the adage, "They would say that, wouldn't they?" (Furthermore, they still haven't apologised for the Norman Conquest, while continuing to gripe about the - very real - depredations of English armies a few hundred years later).

I'm far from well versed in the scholarship of the period, but I noted with interest Bernard Cornwell's historical note to his novel Azincourt (sic), in which he addressed the recent trend to downsize the French numbers at the battle. In short, he said that, if the smaller estimates are correct, the battle is "an impostor". There has to be a reason the English victory caused such a shock wave at the time, and made the French so wary of giving battle thereafter. If Henry's army wasn't dramatically outnumbered and crippled by dysentery, what was it?

Offline Cubs

  • scatterbrained genius
  • Posts: 3625
  • "I simply cannot survive without beauty ..."
Re: The King - new Netflix film
« Reply #76 on: November 16, 2019, 07:54:50 PM »
I have also noticed some people are quite creative about counting the numbers of the French Army, deciding to omit troops who were present but weren't actively committed on the day! Quite an imaginative way of depicting the size of a force I must say.
'Sir John ejaculated explosively, sitting up in his chair.' ... 'The Black Gang'.

Paul Cubbin Miniature Painter

Offline mweaver

  • Supporting Adventurer
  • scatterbrained genius
  • *
  • Posts: 2201
Re: The King - new Netflix film
« Reply #77 on: November 17, 2019, 06:31:52 PM »
Thanks.  Barker and Curry were in fact the two things I have read recently.

I like the "they still haven't apologised for the Norman Conquest" observation, Andrew.

-Michael

Offline Hammers

  • Amateur papiermachiéer
  • Supporting Adventurer
  • elder god
  • *
  • Posts: 14826
  • Workbench and Pulp Moderator
    • Adventure gaming
Re: The King - new Netflix film
« Reply #78 on: November 18, 2019, 12:04:02 PM »
Sounds like the usual "Oh, God, I'll never get tenure if I don't find a topic for my Ph.D." syndrome.

 lol

Offline commissarmoody

  • galactic brain
  • Posts: 6923
    • Moodys Adventures
Re: The King - new Netflix film
« Reply #79 on: November 18, 2019, 01:49:08 PM »
Just watched it. Happy that i didnt pay 14 dollers to see it in the theater.  lol
"Peace" is that brief, glorious moment in history when everybody stands around reloading.

- Anonymous

Offline JamesValentine

  • mad scientist
  • Posts: 508
  • I hate this dump
Re: The King - new Netflix film
« Reply #80 on: November 18, 2019, 03:47:19 PM »
It's like somebody made a film after looking at "my pop up book of henry" and that's it.

Offline Andrew_McGuire

  • scientist
  • Posts: 499
Re: The King - new Netflix film
« Reply #81 on: November 18, 2019, 06:09:34 PM »
I'm sure the museum referred to in the Daily Telegraph article is well worth a visit, and the French scholarship may well bring a more balanced and nuanced perspective, but I can't help wondering how far the revisionism will go; how long before they claim Agincourt as a victory, for example? Excuse my cynicism.

Offline Cubs

  • scatterbrained genius
  • Posts: 3625
  • "I simply cannot survive without beauty ..."
Re: The King - new Netflix film
« Reply #82 on: November 18, 2019, 06:43:46 PM »
Revisionist history always seems to follow fashionable perspectives, designed to smooth over sensibilities rather than clarify fact.

Offline Andrew_McGuire

  • scientist
  • Posts: 499
Re: The King - new Netflix film
« Reply #83 on: November 18, 2019, 07:00:28 PM »
Very true. New perspectives can be stimulating and aid understanding, but they don't always provide real insight, except into the author's mindset, which can sometimes be little more than a cry for attention. Not too cynical, I hope.

Offline mweaver

  • Supporting Adventurer
  • scatterbrained genius
  • *
  • Posts: 2201
Re: The King - new Netflix film
« Reply #84 on: November 19, 2019, 02:31:41 AM »
"Revisionist history" is one of those phrases that tends to raise hackles ("political correctness" is another one), but basically it just means reexamining received historical dogma and offering some significant new interpretation or emphasis.  Some revisionist ideas die a relatively quick death (“the Roman Empire fell because they all had led poisoning from the lead water pipes in their houses!” didn’t last long as archaeologists unhelpfully pointed out that the Romans pretty much always used ceramic pipes to carry water). Other revisionist ideas gain traction because they correct genuine flaws in previous interpretations. The historiography on the causes of the English Civil was first dominated by the “Whig” interpretation (it was all the Stuarts’ fault, the dandified losers), which was in turn replaced by the Marxist interpretation (it was all about class struggle, actually).  The flaw in both interpretations is that they largely ignored the importance of religion in the equation, which historians in the last couple of decades have very effectively argued was extremely important to the outbreak of the war.

Another example is the growing number of (mostly British) historians – including J.M. Bourne and Brian Bond - who have been arguing that the traditional “lions led by donkeys” interpretation of British generals in WWI is seriously flawed in many ways.  I have found their arguments to be very convincing.

The most annoying thing about the phrase “revisionist history” for me is how often it is overused – usually by publishers hawking a book they have just published.

-Michael

Offline levied troop

  • mad scientist
  • Posts: 827
Re: The King - new Netflix film
« Reply #85 on: November 19, 2019, 08:52:59 AM »
I'm sure the museum referred to in the Daily Telegraph article is well worth a visit,

It is, small but well put together. The battlefield is well worth a tour, it’s largely the same as 1415.
The League of Gentlemen Anti Alchemists
(We Turn Gold into Lead)

Offline Cubs

  • scatterbrained genius
  • Posts: 3625
  • "I simply cannot survive without beauty ..."
Re: The King - new Netflix film
« Reply #86 on: November 19, 2019, 08:59:42 AM »
"Revisionist history" is one of those phrases that tends to raise hackles ("political correctness" is another one), but basically it just means reexamining received historical dogma and offering some significant new interpretation or emphasis. 


True enough, I must say Mike Snooks' book 'How Can Man Die Better' is a superb work that clears up a lot of myths and inconsistencies about Isandlwana, so I have to concede that sometimes it does work!

Offline THE CID

  • mastermind
  • Posts: 1151
Re: The King - new Netflix film
« Reply #87 on: November 19, 2019, 09:23:29 AM »
Didn't enjoy it at all. The leading part just didn't cut the mustard portraying a warrior King. The Historical absence was for all to see, and the fiction plot was just slow and boring.
On the plus side, it's promising that Netflix are attempting to create historical subjects, I quite enjoyed Outlaw King.
Ive seen things you people wouldn't believe - Roy Batty.

Offline mweaver

  • Supporting Adventurer
  • scatterbrained genius
  • *
  • Posts: 2201
Re: The King - new Netflix film
« Reply #88 on: November 19, 2019, 01:13:16 PM »
The Mike Snooks book sounds interesting, Cubs; I'll look for it.

-Michael

Offline Dr. Zombie

  • Supporting Adventurer
  • scatterbrained genius
  • *
  • Posts: 2714
Re: The King - new Netflix film
« Reply #89 on: November 21, 2019, 09:46:56 AM »
I liked the film.

But then again I am not burdened with a huge knowledge about all the characters and I have no national pride riding on it either. I felt it was a fine action movie set in a medieval setting with a Shakespeareish twist. For "Hollywood" the costumes and sets were very good. And so were the fight scenes. Fighting in armor 9 out of 10 times end with a struggle on the ground and with someone getting shanked by a dagger. They even used halfswording techniques as shown by medieval manuscripts to be the correct way to use your sword when fighting armored opponents.