I am finishing up this 2 part, 2 and a half hour film called "1066". Has anyone else here seen it, and what do you think?
M.
| M. Eversberg II wrote: |
| I am finishing up this 2 part, 2 and a half hour film called "1066". Has anyone else here seen it, and what do you think?
M. |
Never heard of it ere now. Where can one see it?
You can get it on DVD; if you're in the UK, check here: http://www.play.com/DVD/DVD/4-/8263622/1066-T...oduct.html
It's narrated by Ian Holms, who did a good job on it.
M.
EDIT: Apparently that Browser game posted up here a few days ago is the game related to this movie.
It's narrated by Ian Holms, who did a good job on it.
M.
EDIT: Apparently that Browser game posted up here a few days ago is the game related to this movie.
out already? i knew they were making it and saw some stuff but man how time fly's.
I think the 1066 he is talking about is just a documentary. The feature film people were talking about last year has not came out yet:
The 2010 feature film called 1066 is here: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1018103/
The 2010 feature film called 1066 is here: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1018103/
| JE Sarge wrote: |
| I think the 1066 he is talking about is just a documentary. The feature film people were talking about last year has not came out yet:
The 2010 feature film called 1066 is here: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1018103/ |
I was looking at the extensive cast list for this film - no one is listed as playing Duke William! There is a character called the Saracen woman. I wonder what she is doing that far north? This is before the 1st Crusade, so they can't use that as a plot device. (I guess a Norman from Southern Italy could have brought her back with him)
Last edited by Roger Hooper on Fri 26 Jun, 2009 4:08 pm; edited 1 time in total
Looking at the cast list for the movie, I wonder if the feature film will be about the "other" 1066 - the battle in the north against Hardrada's landing?
Well, the one I'm talking about, "The Battle for Middle Earth", actually has 3 battles; Fulford against Hadrada, Stamford Bridge against Hadrada, and Hastings against William.
You do not see much of Hadrada, Harold, or William, however.
M.
You do not see much of Hadrada, Harold, or William, however.
M.
| JE Sarge wrote: |
| I think the 1066 he is talking about is just a documentary. The feature film people were talking about last year has not came out yet:
The 2010 feature film called 1066 is here: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1018103/ |
None of the cast or crew names looked familiar to me, but it still looks pretty cool! Looks like they've casted every role except Duke William, who I would guess be the lead role. Any chance of this film making it to the States? If not, no big deal. I'll just add it to my ever-growing list of things I need to see/do in England!
Mark Lester is the only one I recognized. The poster looks good. Hopefully it will make it across the water.
The unfamiliar cast makes this movie even more exciting imo. Especially in "historical" films I personally prefer to see new actors I haven't seen in any previous film, since it adds to the whole realism of the story.
This is my first post on myArmoury by the way. Looking forward to more of this forum.
This is my first post on myArmoury by the way. Looking forward to more of this forum.
| Peter Lyon wrote: |
| Looking at the cast list for the movie, I wonder if the feature film will be about the "other" 1066 - the battle in the north against Hardrada's landing? |
I'm assuming the 1066 film will cover the invasion in the north and the events surrounding it, how detailed that coverage will be remains to be seen. One of the screen writers for this film is Helen Hollick and the movie is loosely based on her historical novel "Harold the King" which covers the life and times of Harold Godwinsson. Hopefully the film will remain true to the book because it should prove to be quite an epic.
I highly recommend Hollick's novel and I think it's a must read for anyone interested in the history of 11th century England. It not only covers the events preceding the Norman invasion in rich detail but it gives an all too human perspective to the socio-political make-up of the England that once was. Norman sympathizers may find it a bit bias but one has to remember that the central character is Saxon and the story is written predominately from a Saxon point of view.
| Johan Örn wrote: |
| The unfamiliar cast makes this movie even more exciting imo. Especially in "historical" films I personally prefer to see new actors I haven't seen in any previous film, since it adds to the whole realism of the story.
This is my first post on myArmoury by the way. Looking forward to more of this forum. |
Well welcome to the Forums. :D
Maybe with unknown actors there might be more care in staying close to the real history than with a " BIG " actor with a " Big EGO " changing the story for better close-ups.
I don't expect a movie to be 100% accurate I'm just hoping that at least the broad lines of the story have some relationship to real history.
If, not then I could still live with a good story, well acted, with good costume and set design and I would try to just enjoy it as a " fantasy tale " only very loosely based on history.
( Oh, we have had these discussions Topics recently about historical authenticity in movies, but lets remember that they don't make movies for history buffs: They make them to make money. ;) ).
| Roger Hooper wrote: | ||
I was looking at the extensive cast list for this film - no one is listed as playing Duke William! There is a character called the Saracen woman. I wonder what she is doing that far north? This is before the 1st Crusade, so they can't use that as a plot device. (I guess a Norman from Southern Italy could have brought her back with him) |
Spain was mostly moorish back at that era, and much closer to England.
Aside from the Saracen woman, who strikes me as being out of place, I am eager to see this movie. Living in North America, I'm not sure how that's going to happen, but I'd like to see it just the same. It's not very often when I'm impressed by the costuming and the arms and armour in a movie, but this one caught my attention.
| Sa'ar Nudel wrote: |
|
Spain was mostly moorish back at that era, and much closer to England. |
The Muslims of Sicily were referred to as Saracens, but i don't believe the same was said of the Muslims of Spain (I certainly could be wrong about this) Of course, an 11th century Englishman wouldn't be so fine in his definitions of foreigners and neither probably would be the people who made this movie
So about the 1066: Battle for Middle Earth I was talking about (As different from the 1066 you guys are talking about); who has seen it, and what did you think?
M>
M>
| Roger Hooper wrote: | ||
The Muslims of Sicily were referred to as Saracens, but i don't believe the same was said of the Muslims of Spain (I certainly could be wrong about this) Of course, an 11th century Englishman wouldn't be so fine in his definitions of foreigners and neither probably would be the people who made this movie |
This is most correct. Though the general attitude of the Christian public in each earopean land (during high middle ages) towards the muslims could have been different from each country to another, they usualy have regarded the muslims as one homogeneous crowd, and this is far from true.
| M. Eversberg II wrote: |
| So about the 1066: Battle for Middle Earth I was talking about (As different from the 1066 you guys are talking about); who has seen it, and what did you think?
M> |
Although it's not my period of expertise, on the whole I thought it was an excellent film.
I liked the fact they'd used accurate period costume (men in hose, NOT trousers knee-high boots) and, when they introduced a race, they spoke for the first couple on minutes in their native tongue (for example, the hand-fasting at the beginning was spoke in Old English; the Vikingr spoke Norwegian (although I couldn't tell if it was old Norwegian!)
I know Regia Anglorum were heavily involved as background extras. Apparently, the actors, and even the stunt men, were told to stay away from them during the fight scenes, for fear of getting hurt!
The reference to Middle Earth sounded extremely dubious to start with but the film goes on to demonstrate how Tolkien was heavily influenced in his ideas by the language, poetry and story-telling of the Anglo-Saxons, and how many of Tolkien's 'creations' (for example, Elves and Orcs) come from Anglo-Saxon mythology
On the whole it demonstrates that a film can be historically accurate AND still be a compelling story. Unfortunately, it doesn't look like Hollywood will be picking up on this concept anytime soon (new Robin Hood, anyone?)
Off to swear a mead oath now... (M will know what I mean!)
I do think I will enjoy the new Robin Hood indeed - a classic story. I hope they treat it like one.
Page 1 of 2
You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
All contents © Copyright 2003-2006 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum