TheNabOwnzz The Lion in Winter is basically a study on immorality as a whole, as every single character seems to want to further their own agenda's and everyone seems to want to cheat eachother for self benefit. With every character having these kind of traits, it is ofcourse not easy to relate to them, but when a story is told this way with incredibly intellectual yet still coherent dialogue and some of the greatest acting and actors on the screen this makes for a fascinating immorality tale.The greatest star because of this is obviously the incredible screenplay by James Goldman as this film is such an incredible display of dialogue, editing & verbal debates in general. The symbolism and depth in the dialogue is incredible, yet it also manages to make common sense, such is the masterful skill of Goldman's screenplay. It is a motion picture fueled by its incredible use of dialogue, yet it also consists of excellent silent scenes which are used to bring out the incredible score by John Barry. Both elegant ( such as the incredible scene where Eleanor first arrives on the boat ) and haunting ( In the scene when Henry II reflects on the complications with his children near the castle walls ) John Barry's score is a stroke of genius and adds to the depressing yet also sometimes beautiful nature of this film.Yet without the incredible energetic acting by the incredible cast this film has, it would not be able to reach the level it has eventually reached. The entire cast all pull off absolutely stunning performances, but the lead performances by Peter O'Toole ( Henry II ) & Katharine Hepburn ( Eleanor of Aquitaine ) are the greatest of them all. Such stunning energetic verbal debates are constantly arising between the two of them and the intellectuality is just incredible yet believeable in these conversations. Also great performances by an early role of Anthony Hopkins, Nigel Terry, John Castle & a very young Timothy Dalton as each has an incredible screen presence and every single one just embodies their character perfectly.Yet while mostly being an indoor dialogue ridden film it also has a couple of great outdoor shots with fantastic cinematography, such as the one as stated earlier where Eleanor first arrives. It does give us time to breathe after extended verbal battles between Henry and often times either his sons or Eleanor by often times seeing him mindlessly wandering the castle halls due to his sons or Eleanor's immorality.It is such a fine display of great writing and energetic acting combined with fantastic music and a witty constantly twisting plot that it doesn't matter that immorality is the most common theme in the film, as it is a condition that is shown so splendidly that it is in itself an immersive artpiece on the study of the concept of immorality.

clanciai Most people seem to exalt this film to supreme top standard, while no one finds anything wrong with it. Maybe it's time for some alternative view.It's good, of course, everything is excellent, the acting is perfect, Katharine Hepburn reigning supreme and defeating everyone by just being what she is, and her part of the dialogue strikes everyone down. Peter O'Toole is next to it, and the three intriguing sons, only one of them being a bastard while he denounces them all three as bastards, add to the total family conflict. This could actually be the inner conflict of any family, these controversies are quite normal, and you could find the same pattern even in almost any Danish dogma film. Their quarrel isn't unique, they just carry it to extremes by overdoing it with a vengeance, and all except Katharine Hepburn almost go under in the process.So the story isn't really very remarkable. They just happen to be royalties, a king and queen and princes, and that's all. It all happens within the castle, almost within four walls, and is really a chamber play, unlike the four years earlier 'Becket', which was much more of a monumental story and drama and historically more correct, although they also took considerable liberties with facts there. Here it's all conjecture, it's a mess of a speculation in intrigue, and they even mix homosexuality into the slander to make it as worse as possible. Hence it's actually a rather artificial concoction of a drama just for showing off, but it's splendid theatre all the way. The dialogue is a feast of sumptuous quarrelsome eloquence, and especially the Queen constantly surpasses herself in delivering poisonous knockouts under the belt.Peter O'Toole was even better in ' Becket', but here he repeats the same role as a 12 year older man and convincingly. He is aging, he is losing control, he has reasons enough to worry about the future, while his sons are more than catching up with him. Prince John is something of a caricature and almost a parody of himself, Anthony Hopkins as Richard is not quite ready yet and too much into his mother to be recognizable as Richard, while Geoffrey is the best of them as a cool calculating bastard.Rosamund, his mother is constantly mentioned while she does not occur in either of the films, although her part in fact was extremely important, especially in the circumstances of Becket's death, but here at least her presence is constantly felt, as something of a bad conscience and lingering wet blanket for the entire all too powerful family for their own good. Neither Richard nor John became very happy as kings, which all films and history show, let alone Walter Scott.John Barry's music, finally, adds to the genuineness and atmosphere of the 12th century. He used to make music to thrillers and James Bond, but he is just as eloquent here with choirs and nunneries and efficient medieval bells.It's a great film, of course, but I still prefer 'Becket'.

Jackson Booth-Millard I had seen Guess Who's Coming to Dinner and On Golden Pond, I am keen to see all four of the films that the leading actress of these has won her Oscars for, this was the third I watched with her starring, and it sounded like an interesting film. Basically it is Christmas in the year 1183, an ageing and conniving King Henry II (Golden Globe winning, and Oscar nominated Peter O'Toole) is planning a family reunion to announce his successor to the throne. Henry arranges for the release of his wife, Duchess Eleanor of Aquitaine (Oscar and BAFTA winning, and Golden Globe nominated Katharine Hepburn), who has been imprisoned, for supporting the revolt of one of his sons. Henry has three sons; Richard (BAFTA nominated Sir Anthony Hopkins), Geoffrey (John Castle) and John (Nigel Terry), they all desire to take the throne. Henry has also summoned his mistress, Princess Alais (Golden Globe nominated Jane Merrow), and her young but crafty brother, King Philip II of France (Timothy Dalton), who also desires the throne. Henry wishes for his boy Prince John to take over, but Eleanor believes their son Prince Richard should be king, each of the family and schemers gather for the holiday. The fate of Henry's empire and the future for England is at stake, apart from Alais, everybody engages with him, in their own ways of deception and treachery, to stake their claim. Each of the sons have some flaw that makes the decision for Henry difficult, and he and Eleanor have spent years fighting, but in the end Henry agrees with Eleanor that none of his three sons are suited, he condemns them to death, but unable to kill them allows them to escape, while Henry laughs off Eleanor returning to prison, both go back to hoping for the future. Also starring Nigel Stock as William Marshal, Kenneth Ives as Queen Eleanor's Guard and O.Z. Whitehead as Bishop of Durham. O'Toole was previously Oscar nominated for playing King Henry II in the film Becket, he again gives a fantastic performance, but it is indeed Hepburn that excels as the queen who will not back down until she gets what she wants, the best scenes are the two of them verbally attacking each other, there are also fantastic performances from young Hopkins and Dalton. I could tell this was an adaptation of a play, because it is all about the dialogue, with a perfectly punchy script, and mostly set in the castle, it is essentially all about the characters squabbling for a dynasty during medieval times, a most worthwhile historical drama. It won the Oscar for Best Writing, Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium and Best Original Score for John Barry, and it was nominated for Best Picture, Best Director for Anthony Harvey and Best Costume Design, it won the BAFTA for the Anthony Asquith Award for Film Music, and it was nominated for Best Cinematography, Best Costume Design, Best Screenplay, Best Sound Track and the UN Award for Anthony Harvey, and it won the Golden Globe for Best Motion Picture - Drama, and it was nominated for Best Director, Best Screenplay and Best Original Score. Good!

Tad Pole Peter O'Toole (England's King Henry II, here) had a great sense of humor, and for 1968 he thought a film version of the American TV Sit-Com MY THREE SONS meets the Edward Albee Broadway play WHO'S AFRAID OF VIRGINIA WOOLF would be just the ticket to get out the Nixon vote. William conquered England for the French in 1066, and for generations Afterwards his army's descendants adulterated our pure Anglo Saxon vernacular with thousands of Frenchisms. Recently, French politicians have had the Gaul to hypocritically ban the very words with which they raped and pillaged King Arthur's English! THE LION IN WINTER director Anthony Harvey wisely dispenses with the traditional paragraphs of expository print-on-screen at the start (that is, "Who ARE these people?) and finish ("And then what became of them?") of this flick. He cut this background crap NOT because he thought most viewers already would know who's who, but on account of the fact that all of the characters here ARE REALLY FRENCH!! Therefore, no one CARES who lives or dies, as long as they do it quickly. Just as people trek to Indy every May yearning to see a spectacular car wreck, THE LION IN WINTER crowd hopes against hope for a HAMLET-style climax: EVERYONE DIES. Alas, no such luck.