Elliot Mollison

If this was a film about a generic king and the Battle of ‘somewhere’, I think I would have liked it more. But this is meant to be about Henry V, one of, if not the most iconic kings of England and the lack of historical accuracy really brought this film down for me. The feel of the film is great, the costume and look are really good (apart from the generic armour and lack of distinguishing tunics) and I think the acting isn’t bad. But historic details that feel unnecessarily changed really got to me. For example, Henry’s involvement in the Hotspur uprising and the famous incident of the arrow in his face were emitted (possibility in editing as he does have the scar later on). Also the killing off of his brother Thomas isn’t accurate. The inclusion of the Falstaff character (an invention of Shakespeare) took the place of the Duke of York who’s bravery and sacrifice at Agincourt deserved a bit more recognition. The performance by Robert Pattinson was quite poor and the prominence of the Dauphin character was another problem. The film makes out that he was leading a united France army against Henry, which couldn’t have been further from the truth and again ignores the real French Generals that deserved more than to be written out. And don’t even get me started about the part of the film where Pattison casual trots into the middle of the battle and everyone just stops. The biggest part of the film that fails in the historical telling was the Battle of Agincourt itself. The lack of prominence of Henry’s archers and their critical importance to the outcome of the battle, as well as the formations on the battlefield (A very heavily documented event) really brought the film down. I had really high hopes for the film, the first non Shakespearian influenced telling of the Henry V story that I had seen and it really fell short. For someone who doesn’t know a decent amount about the story, which I’ll admit is one of my favourite stories, would probably enjoy it more (America audiences for sure).