Outlaw King (2018) User Reviews

Great film, but should have been a 6 episode mini series

[Dannyboi94 · 7/10 · 9 November 2018]

Outlaw King is one of the most visually breathtaking films of 2018, the cinematography, the set pieces, costume designs, are absolutely perfect. The story, based of a true event, is very engaging, and the film does a great job at making you route for Robert Bruce. However, the film feels like it should have been longer, which makes me believe that it should have been a mini series instead. The period in which this film takes place, was a major event in Scottish history, and they crammed it all within a 2 hour movie. Some of it works, and some of it doesn't.

The actors are all fantastic, Chris Pine was great as the Bruce, although I would have preferred Gerard Butler in the role, Pine gave a very convincing performance. Most of the other characters are very bland, and you don't get much time to spend with them, as they just stand in the background and do some cool stuff. Aaron Taylor Johnson however was the highlight of the film, and I wish we got to see more of him. He was insanely entertaining here, as a savage lunatic eager to avenge his family.

Some reviews I have read have pointed out that the English are portrayed in a very negative manner, which is true. They are made to be evil in this film, burning castles, and slaughtering innocent people, but this film is as historically accurate as possible, and these events most likely took place. But like I said before, everything is crammed together quickly, if they had made a mini series they could have showed more of the story.

The action scenes are brilliant in the Outlaw King, and you can tell that most of it was inspired by Braveheart, from the gore, to the realism. However I feel the movie put style over story and characters. I would watch it just for its visuals alone.

The Outlaw King will disappoint fans wanting a new Braveheart, but history buffs, or hardcore movie goers will love this film for what it is, a good piece of entertaining visuals and action.

7.7/10

Wallace successor

[kosmasp · 8/10 · 15 June 2019]

So I had no idea what this was going to be about, but the movie works even without any previous knowledge. Actually even if you haven't seen Braveheart, you will get thrown into circumstances that you will get very quickly. Maybe not have seen Braveheart works better for some, because they won't compare the two movies, no matter when they play time wise in History.

Having said all that, Chris Pine is really relishing in a role that is quite difficult to pull off. He has to be tough yet show a "softer" side too. Especially when it comes to his wife. Now how much of this is accurate, I can't tell, because I'm not read up on the details of what actually happened. I'm guessing that the bigger events/fights are more or less accurate. There is blood, there is a bit of nudity and there is a lot of fighting with swords ... if that sounds like "fun" to you, the movie will be entertaining. And you will also learn a little bit of actual history

Netflix film deserves a big screen

[chong_an · 8/10 · 8 September 2018]

The older generation of Scottish nobles tired of war and surrendered to the English King Edward, but the younger generation only surrendered reluctantly. After his father's death, Robert the Bruce (with a reasonable claim to the Scottish throne) led a rebellion, with multiple victories and losses, in battles small and big.

There are too many minor Scottish leaders who joined the cause, only to be slaughtered in the battles. (I can't call them cannon fodder - cannons had yet to be invented.)

The film is spectacular on the big screen, especially the large-battle scenes. I saw it in a 2000-seat theatre at the Toronto International Film Festival. I'm not sure it will translate well to TV, unless you have something like a 70-inch beast.

Directors Cut Please

[rgdw · 6/10 · 9 November 2018]

This film has so much potential, the scenery is stunning and the acting was strong (Pugh, in particular was excellent). The problem with this film is that it felt far too rushed. The scene with the queen's declaration of love after barely establishing a relationship between the characters on screen showcasing this problem.

I'd love to see the full directors cut. It seems Director David McKenzie has been caught out by perhaps trying to appeal to the masses by cutting around 30 mins from the original screening in Toronto, following heavy criticism from the film critics. Critics often get it wrong, without proper screen testing it seems like a knee jerk reaction has been taken, which is a shame.

Hopefully he releases a directors cut, the full, as intended Toronto screening, or a longer version of what has been released on Netflix, I would like to see if that solves the pacing issues, and if so, this could easily move up a couple of points on the rating.

Well Done Period Piece...Highly Entertaining

[AudioFileZ · 7/10 · 12 November 2018]

Outlaw King is a eminently enjoyable film. The acting is serviceable, but the costumes, period sets, and cinematography is world-class. The battle scenes are realistic to the point a few may find certain ones too much so. The story works and it's not meant to be any kind of definitive history lesson which it is not. That would be a different movie and would likely be too long eschewing much of the entertainment factor which is the point here. It gets the gist of something historical and makes it interesting and highly entertaining. I think it's well worth watching.

nice surprise

[Kirpianuscus · 28 November 2018]

Expecting to see a historical movie, your expectation represents the start point. High, skeptical, mix of hope and doubts. But this film is the best answer. For impecable cinematography, for admirable performances, for Chris Pine beautiful job and for atmosphere who seems be the ideal spice in this case. Sure, it is, in same measure, too short and too long. It is far to be the second part for "Braveheart".But it gives more than yours expectations. A great story, impressive fight and battle scenes, care for details and a powerful, convincing lesson about fundamental values. In the age of blockbusters, it is a "must see ". For the force to remind old fashion historical movies in the clothes of present tools. So, more than a nice surprise.

Great history, writing only OK

[amywolfe11325 · 7/10 · 19 September 2018]

Saw this at TIFF and it was definitely a fun and interesting movie. As a history buff the costumes and overall historical accuracy was great. However the scenes moved incredibly quickly, and the writing didn't have a lot of heart. Bruce is all the good guy and the king and prince of wales pure evil. The characters are so much more complex in real life and adding that to the script could have made it fall a little less flat. Again it was fun, but not exactly an Oscar film.

Deserves greater praise

[alex-p-williams · 9/10 · 22 January 2019]

Much criticism of this film points at the 'cramming' of a good chunk of 3 years in The Wars of Scottish Independence, into a film less than 2 hours long. The film starts off in 1304 with the siege of Stirling Castle, which features the spectacular tracking shots that help define the exquisite use of cinematography throughout the films duration. Is it crammed? To an extent yes, but it is a film, and a historical one that requires prior knowledge; as a result, viewers are either gripped, in the story or emotionally tied to the characters, or not. The film does take certain liberties with historical accuracy, namely certain events either merged together or moved around on the timeline - all in aid of dramatic effect. Nonetheless this does not shadow the realism that does exist, especially in terms of the savagery of warfare and intrigue. As well as the superb set pieces and costume designs that accompany the productions heavy attention to detail.

Although it is understandable how many get lost within the story, it skips much character building and connections between each fighting scene, in sacrifice for fitting in several important confrontations, especially the end pitched Battle of Loudoun Hill - in which Bruce achieves his astonishing victory. In this case, perhaps a mini-series or a two-parter would have quelled these disappointments. But perhaps not have matched the explosive, intense, almost breath-taking at times, nature of this film.

Overall Outlaw King is a fine addition to the family of historical films, and perhaps one the best medieval ones yet. It should be taken for what it is, not what it could have been; a quick, brief search on Wikipedia would work a treat for anyone looking to get a better estimation of this film. 9/10.

Good medieval historical epic

[dworldeater · 7/10 · 6 March 2022]

The Outlaw King is a film about Robert The Bruce that picks up where Brave heart left off. The cinematography, costumes and f/x are all excellent. The acting is also up to par as well. The battle scenes are also quite good and get brutal at times. The Outlaw King is a good film and has a lot going for it. However, Chris Pine is not Mel Gibson and the storytelling is not as engaging or as smooth. While I thought the performances here are adequate, there is nothing electric that goes above and beyond that. The Outlaw King is certainly a quality production and good for an evenings entertainment.

Absolutely brilliant

[les_bartlett · 9/10 · 21 November 2018]

As a Scot I can say that I found this film superb, great acting, scenery as expected stunning and the filmography amazing. Even the accent of Chris Pine was spot on and the storyline fantastic. The negative Joe's will do their usual and look for the faults as they do in every film rather than having watched someone they like but still feel the need to pick a fault, so ignore these as the film is brilliant in every way (and no I don't work on it, or was an extra)

Would have been phenomenal as a mini series but....

[dawn-nixon · 6/10 · 10 November 2018]

Although this is well filmed, well acted, the Storyline was ultimately inaccurate due to cramming too much into one film. The historical inaccuracy could have been avoided. The storyline could have been developed so it fully made sense. Bit of a shame really.

Don't listen to the negativity.

[ryankhawkes · 9/10 · 10 November 2018]

This was a legitimately moving and entertaining movie. The acting is absolutely fantastic, the cinematography is impeccable and the practical effects are undeniably realistic.

Great cinematography but little emotion.

[Millbags09 · 6/10 · 9 November 2018]

Good direction, decent acting, beautiful cinematography but just not clearest story to convert into a movie. I'm sorry, understand that Robert The Bruce is a Scottish hero, but this movie has little heart. It doesn't have anywhere near the same emotional content that a movie like Braveheart does, which is always going to be the comparison (due to the chronology and the frequent mentions of William Wallace). All through the film you get the impression that Robert the Bruce is not fighting for worthy causes such as revenge, his country or even freedom, he's out for his own interests, just trying to grab power for his own purposes. He wants to be a king and now he has his opportunity to seize the crown. Which means it's difficult to get behind the character and be emotionally involved in the story. Overall, a decent effort from Netflix, but they could perhaps have chosen a clearer story for their historical epic. Even the last battle scene feels a little rushed and just kind of tails off with a weird and slightly uncomfortable one on one sword fight at the end. Perhaps a character like Boudicca, Alfred the Great or Owain Glendower would provide a clearer historical protagonist and a more emotional story arc.

Forced inclusions ruins historic film.

[loganwolfsbain · 1/10 · 11 May 2019]

Would have been great historically but once again like all media at the moment the film was ruined where in once scene black people were forcefully included, as not to upset or offend anyone.

Any film or series which disrespects history and stands in the way of a truthfully portrayal of history does not deserve a real review.

Sad but as always I refuse to stand by and let this new insane me tally destroy our beautiful history.

Disappointing

[rohindrad · 6/10 · 12 November 2018]

This whole movie is like a instant noodle.. it all happened too quickly. There is no emotion in the whole story. But all credit goes to the acting and cinamography.

Scottish historical action done well

[Leofwine_draca · 7/10 · 11 November 2018]

OUTLAW KING is a semi-sequel to the Mel Gibson classic BRAVEHEART, made over 20 years later and by Netflix of all people. You needn't worry about this being a low budget production, however, as it's actually the most expensive film ever made in Scotland, and an entirely visual experience in which the medieval era has never looked so realistic. From stunning scenery and authentic sets and props to lavish battle sequences in which CGI effects are integrated seamlessly with the real actors, this is a wonderful film to look at and behold. The story itself is straightforward, following Robert the Bruce's rise to become king of Scotland and his battles waged against Edwards I and II. There isn't a great deal of depth here, and the first half is quite slow, but that's not really a problem. Chris Pine does well with the material, perhaps not as charismatic as Gibson was but arguably more realistic. The supporting cast work very hard too, aside from Florence Pugh, but then it's not really her fault given her underwritten and extraneous role (she's only there to have a female character in the story). Elsewhere, the film doesn't shy away from the gore of the era, which is all for the better, and it builds to a climax that satisfies. Will a sequel follow? I hope so.

A realistic more modern sequel to Braveheart

[phd_travel · 7/10 · 6 February 2019]

Actually this movie is quite good. Don't give up during the slow part in the beginning. The story is quite clear, the Scottish accents aren't too incomprehensible, the filming is on location and quite beautiful at times and muddy and realistic at others. Chris Pine doesn't act to big hero like or put on too much of an accent. He is part of the bigger story instead of the movie being all about him. Supporting cast including Florence Pugh as his wife and Aaron Taylor Johnson as his ally are effective.

It's not Braveheart. It's good in a different way - less Hollywood and more modern. Surprised it was just released on Netflix with the big battle scenes.

Surprisingly Good

[ccflan · 9/10 · 14 September 2018]

I saw this movie at the Toronto Film Festival and was not expecting great things. Full disclosure, I thought Braveheart was idiotic and was expecting another Hollywood movie full of anachronisms, bad history and over the top performances. To my surprise I thoroughly enjoyed it gore and all and it deserves to be seen on a big screen to do its epic scope justice. The Scottish countryside is spectacular as are the battle scenes. The film takes some liberties with history, changing the timeline a little or merging characters and events, but generally the changes work to heighten the dramatic conflicts. Outlaw King tries bravely to lay out the complexities of the Scottish war of independence and the shifting alliances but some of the characters will get lost in the mix for those unfamiliar with the actual story. Aaron Taylor Johnson stands out as James Douglas, and Stephen Dillane is at his Stannis Baratheon best as Edward I. Florence Pugh made her relatively small role as Robert's wife stand out with the intensity of her performance. The soundtrack is haunting and music is used to excellent effect. In one scene where the Bruce has has suffered a devastating personal loss Chris Pine says nothing but begins to sing a traditional Scottish lament and the other men join in, which expresses far more emotion than any dialogue could, especially as he sings so well that he would be welcome at any ceilidh. Is it perfect? No. Is it worth watching? Definitely yes, preferably on a big screen.

It's a glossier than average TV Movie

[JohnLondon-03818 · 6/10 · 11 November 2018]

OK, I accept that a certain editorial leeway has to be given in order to dramatise history, but eventually there is a point where you have to title it 'Work of fiction'. This film is sufficiently removed from actual history that even 'Based on historical events' is bordering on flattery.

I know, I know. Nobody is meant to care and it is all just entertainment. But this film dresses itself up as some kind of historic truth. If polititians or companies rewrote history for commercial gain and presented it as truth, we'd rightly be up in arms. God knows the real story and events are exciting enough without having to lard them up with hackneyed characatuers and cliches.

The Bruce was a great man and a flawed man in a complex age of power politics. His allegiances vis a vis Scotland and England were fluid at best. The murder of Comyn was just that, murder. Edward II, though a useless King in other ways had to be dragged from the battlefield - there was no mano a mano showdown. I could go on.

Enjoy the yarn, but appreciate this is a 'Disney' film about boy with sword meets girl with modern sensibilities, whilst charming minority group with pleasing ethnic music overcomes neighbours who are all shallow, sadistic stereotypes. It's the medieval equivalent of a 1940's war film with monocled German baddies.

And the film? Nice scenery, bit of blokey bonding, splatter battle scenes. Not one you'd watch twice.

👍👍

[caiylan · 9/10 · 9 November 2018]

This was a real enjoyable movie! A lot better than I expected seeing some of the previous reviews, just shows you should watch & see yourself! The filming locations were beautiful & the actors were believable, good job all around! I have to say Netflix did really good on this occasion!

mud and blood

[ferguson-6 · 6/10 · 10 November 2018]

Greetings again from the darkness. Much was made of the 'artistic license' director Mel Gibson took in creating his own version of historical events and actions of William Wallace for his Oscar-winning BRAVEHEART (1995). Director David Mackenzie (in his follow up to the excellent HELL OR HIGH WATER, 2016) pays a bit more attention to historical details as he picks up the story at the end of Wallace's rebellion - and the beginning of the uprising led by Robert the Bruce.

Chris Pine plays Robert the Bruce, a man forced to pledge loyalty to Kind Edward I and England prior to leading the rebellion. It's the year 1304 and director Mackenzie's opening sequence is a several minute long tracking shot that is simply superb. It features our introduction to Robert the Bruce (Pine), King Edward I (Stephen Dillane) and Prince Edward (Billy Howle, ON CHESIL BEACH), as well as an early swordfight and an eye-popping fireball shot from an enormous catapult into the protective wall of a distant castle.

Not long after, we learn William Wallace has been killed, the King has provided Robert the Bruce a wife in Elizabeth de Burgh (Florence Pugh, LADY MACBETH) and Robert takes the life of fellow Scotsman John Comyn ... an act that costs him dearly in the early going. However, it does lead to his being named King of Scots by the Church, and he slowly begins to build his forces. Of course, Scotland's forces are always dwarfed in numbers by that of the English Empire, but never in spirit.

Pine plays Robert the Bruce as the strong, (mostly) silent leader, while Howle and Aaron Taylor-Johnson cross into camp in their respective portrayals of Prince Edward (yet another wide-eyed son intent on making his father proud) and James Douglas (a manic, crazy-eyed Scotsman bent on revenge). Ms. Pugh brings courage and a headstrong nature to Elizabeth (in far too limited a role), while Mr. Dillane shows us a worn down King Edward I who gets the film's best line ... "I am so sick of Scotland!"

The two words of the title are actually separated by a slash in the opening credits; a device meant to emphasize the dual sides to the man and his actions. In addition to that opening long shot, there is a visually stunning sequence of a nighttime raid on a camp site. Unfortunately after that, we get mostly mud and blood, including the pivotal Battle of Loudon Hill which features the ultimate in home field advantage. There are some terrific costumes and set pieces, but mostly it's elaborate and detailed moviemaking (with a few downright silly moments) that never fully clicks. Perhaps that's a factor of having 5 different writers involved. With many familiar faces from "Game of Thrones", it will be interesting to see how this plays on laptops and TVs via Netflix. Another Robert the Bruce film is scheduled for theatrical release in 2019, and the inevitable comparison will be made at that time.

Netflix should've released this in a wide theatrically

[jnucif2720 · 10/10 · 11 November 2018]

The good news Netflix continues to impress with their movies, this is an excellent example. The setting centers around 13 th century England and their reign over the British Isles. The time that William Wallace and Robert Bruce challenged the throne for their independence . Historically it is quite accurate. As a production it excels in cinematography, acting and the cheography of its battle scenes which are spectacular and visceral . If you have a good sound system with a decent sized 4K screen you'll be impressed with this brilliant production

history lesson

[SnoopyStyle · 6/10 · 17 November 2018]

In 1304, Robert the Bruce (Chris Pine), under his father's command, joins the other nobles to submit to the King of England after their defeat. Only William Wallace remains free as a marauding outlaw. After the execution of Wallace, Robert slowly decides to unite the Scots in an uprising against the English.

This is inevitably compared to Braveheart. Certainly, it's a lower budget affair. The battles are smaller, more brutal, more chaotic, and more visceral. Somehow I find them fitting for the times. It's Chris Pine where the difference is more noticeable. He's a modern American actor. He's more emo and less commanding. That's a problem for this commander of men. This is a brutal time. While he does harden over the course of the movie, he does not leave behind his modern sensibilities. He's not hitting the right notes for this iconic man. His wife is also a bit bland although I do like their relationship. It seems that all the elements are there but it doesn't quite have the gravitas. This is a history lesson but as a human story, it lacks a certain human touch. The emotional journey rings a little hollow.

Just simply not good

[tutt55 · 5/10 · 12 November 2018]

This story has all the makings of a great movie. However, this movie was an injustice to said story. The writing was not very good. The pace was atrocious. And the story was crammed into 2 hours when it should've been comprised of multiple episodes. It felt rushed like it was racing to see how soon it could get to the end...which wasn't really an ending and left much of the story of Robert the Bruce left untold. It seemingly jumped rapidly from one scene to the next, sacrificing any connection a viewer could have with the characters. Watching, I didn't really care if Robert succeeded or not. The movie didn't connect me to him. I didn't care about the relationship with his daughter. I didn't care about the relationship he had with his wife. They were distant acquaintances one moment. She said something Talia Shire-ish (Win, Rocky. Win.) and then they have sex a few scenes later and are separated until the end of the movie. There was nothing in the movie that showed she was an integral part of his life really. So, no character development. No connectivity with the characters. Rushed pacing. Shallow story telling. There was some good cinematography and some of the battle scene was ok. This was just a huge disappointment overall.

Action not bad, acting and script disappointing.

[georgewhittingham1 · 7/10 · 13 November 2018]

I watch a lot of medieval viking type stuff, and to be fair the film looked pretty good, the action scenes were done well and seemed relatively realistic.

Chris Pine as a Scotsman though? I don't think so, his accent was awful and I struggled to hear what he was saying half the time.

Arron Taylor Johnson was a little better, though we seemed to only really see him screaming his head off as he violently killed English soldiers. (Surprised to see him in this)

The prince/ king wasn't bad either, it didn't help that the script wasn't particularly well thought out - the relationship between Robert The Bruce and his wife I couldn't help laugh at, it was so forced! They have a really long almost slightly distasteful sex scene as well, I actually said that out loud at the time.

All in all, nothing special, 5.5