Based on the true story of the uprising that inspired the legend of Robin Hood, Andrew Garfield stars as the leader of a rebellion against King Richard II’s tyranny in a fight for justice.
“The Uprising” tells the story you’d expect from the title: a group of ordinary people rising against a ruling class that has made life unbearable. It’s a grounded, historically focused look at peasant life in the 12th century and the tensions that inevitably lead to rebellion. The problem is that after establishing its premise pretty early, the movie spends the rest of its runtime slowly marching through a series of predictable events without doing much to elevate the material.
This movie drags pretty badly. I had the urge to check my watch multiple times while watching it. It feels four hours long, and I think the constant stillness really hurts the pacing.
The deliberate choice to shoot with a shaky-cam style makes the whole film feel like a made-for-TV History Channel movie. Visually, it comes across as cheap, and it ends up emphasizing the corny parts of the script. The film is trying to be authentic and historically accurate while also feeling like a dramatized stage play, and those two approaches don’t always work together.
Andrew Garfield is okay in this. I just don’t think he was given much to do, and it feels like he’s operating with basically one emotion for the entire movie. The actor playing the king took me out of the film almost every time he was on screen. He feels miscast, and I’m not sure his performance matched the rest of the cast.
I do commend “The Uprising” for going all-in on an authentic portrayal of the 12th century and life in that era. It presents a very convincing picture of how miserable life could be for ordinary people and how much they had to endure under a system where the king’s authority was absolute.
That said, some of the set pieces felt very low-budget. It was hard not to compare it to “A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms,” which does an incredible job of creating a world that feels genuinely lived in and believable. With “The Uprising,” I occasionally wondered if they had just filmed in a random pasture, thrown some costumes on people, and started rolling cameras.
I also don’t think the movie has all that much to unpack. You understand what it’s about pretty quickly, and from there it’s mostly a straightforward series of events that play out exactly how you’d expect a movie called “The Uprising” to play out.
There’s enough here to enjoy if you’re looking for a predictable story that’s highly committed to historical accuracy. I’m just not sure it has enough to stand out in a modern era when audiences have seen what’s possible with cinematic storytelling. Overall, I appreciated the commitment to authenticity, but the pacing, visuals, and lack of anything truly memorable made it a tough watch for me.
In Theaters Friday, September 11th
10k
20k
1.5k
2.2k