MovieChat Forums > The Lion in Winter (1968) Discussion > I was underwhelmed...

I was underwhelmed...

posted 11 years ago by DrinkFromTheSameFountain
8 replies | jump to latest

The good points: The movie was never boring. Good, passionate performances by Peter O'Toole and Anthony Hopkins. Some of the dialogue was snappy.

Otherwise, I thought this movie was too much of one thing and not enough of another. Every five seconds, any two character go from love and devotion to hate and betrayal. Every five seconds, this movie has a climax! I couldn't keep up! And it just made me think that the writer wasn't serious in the least when he wrote this play. At least "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" (another play I might call "thin") had one central thing to bring everything to a climax, their "dead son", something for the writer to focus on. But in this movie there was so much yelling and going around in circles, it was really like any daytime soap opera. It ended up being somewhat meaningless to me.

The only part that moved me was when Richard/Hopkins said to his father "You never called my name. I would have walked, crawled..." I thought that part was touching, and he and O'Toole were the only ones who acted with any passion, IMO. I thought Katharine Hepburn's performance was almost schtick. She bored me.

I didn't hate this movie, but it seemed like the writer thought he was more clever than he was. There was zero emotional subtext in the film, even though it seemed to see itself otherwise. That is, unless, this movie was intended to be tongue-in-cheek, which is entirely possible.

[–] schwapj 11 years ago

Most of this movie is about people throwing their own family overboard, making alliances with any and all of them until a better alliance or plan presents itself, and all merely to gain a bit of political power. There are some very thinly stretched bonds of affection between some of them but not always the same ones and not always at the same time. I think it's an excellent comment on how the lust for power affects people, which you instead saw as a lack of emotional subtext. I'm not saying I'm right or you are wrong, just how we interpreted things.

Katherine Hepburn had to play the role the way she did. Eleanor was naturally an intellectual and strategic match for Henry, but Henry was so often emotionally cruel to her that she had to build a completely unnatural wall around herself to keep from being mortally wounded. She carried herself stiffly (at least in Henry's presence) and so ended up coming across that way. There were a few scenes with Richard where the weight bears her down and she lets it out in front of him; maybe other directing or editing choices would have changed your view of her.

[–] urgeking 9 years ago

I think there was quite a bit of emotional subtext, but to some extent the movie was about people trying to bury their vulnerability under ruthlessness and jealousy. As for "going around in circles", I think that's one of the important points the writer is trying to convey-- these people ARE going around in circles, but either they don't realize it, or they do realize it but aren't letting themselves learn enough from it, or not soon enough to do any good-- a comment on all of us, perhaps?

[–] aciolino 9 years ago

I agree with everything you wrote with the exception that it is never boring. It is a bore-festival. It is pretentious beyond words and only the simplest minds think they hear moments of profundity or depth. It is a sham, a joke on all of us. Not "tongue-in-cheek" as you suspect (but I understand why you suspect that) but merely a lie.

Even the dialogue you point out is so contrived and trivial, and could have been written by any high school student of writing -- it is the essence of pretentiousness. The characters are flat, dull, and all are unsympathetic as they are un-real, vapid.

[–] ronfirv 9 years ago

Could have been written by any high school student, and is the essence of pretentiousness? Ergo, HS students are pretentious!
Seriously, whatever the petty jealousy or other negative emotion behind your mini-rant, let me just pass on a saying of the late Tennessee Williams :
Don't wear your heart on your sleeve for all the 'daws to peck at.

[–] aciolino 9 years ago

Let me pass on a little saying from a different philosopher:

You are a jerk.

[–] urgeking 9 years ago

...only the simplest minds think they hear moments of profundity or depth.

Yes. If any of the rest of us think we've heard some, we must be wrong, because only YOU are qualified to define what is and isn't deep or profound. No one could have insights that you don't have. Golly, I'm SO impressed w/yr superiority.

It is a sham, a joke on all of us. Not "tongue-in-cheek" as you suspect (but I understand why you suspect that) but merely a lie.

My, my, someone really wants to bring this movie down using any insults that are handy. Why such venom? Oh, right, I forgot, trolling! Silly me. So-- If this movie's dialogue is such "a lie", what exactly IS the lie that it's telling? And please be specific.

[–] jrhpax 7 years ago

To the person who made the original post: I was underwhelmed, too. I agree with everything you wrote.

It's a shame that IMDB has deteriorated into a venue of trolls.

[–] 7 years ago

[deleted]