Very well filmed and acted and maybe that's the problem. The performance of Alec Guinness is sublime and makes one sympathetic towards Charles 1. However, in trying to truncate the events of many years into a few key passages it does History no favours. The inaccuracies are obvious with the Earl of Manchester arguing against Cromwell in the Commons. It never happened as Manchester was in the Lord's. Cromwell's son was not killed at Naesby. And so the inaccuracies go on. There should be no sympathy for Charles. He was a corrupt tyrant. The losers were the thousands of working people killed, maimed and starved during the Wars of the three kingdoms. These wars would have been avoided if Charles had been reasonable. The film does try to portray the many efforts that Parliament made to avoid the wars. Also worth noting that Parliament in no way represented the people before or after the wars - the rotten borough system existed until the 1832 reform act and universal suffrage was not realised until after WW1.
For me this has the best performance Richard Harris ever gave and the stellar supporting cast are all on brilliant form. The lasting memory though is of the late great Alec Guinness - it is just a great pity that the power of his performance gives a false impression of who and what Charles 1 was.
For me this has the best performance Richard Harris ever gave and the stellar supporting cast are all on brilliant form. The lasting memory though is of the late great Alec Guinness - it is just a great pity that the power of his performance gives a false impression of who and what Charles 1 was.