The Inside Scoop on Gaming

After the recent furor on the forums (sounds like a boxing pay-per-view, eh?) about “A Knight’s Tale,” I decided to see it for myself. My wife wanted to see it for Heath Ledger, I wanted to see it because of all of the noise surrounding it and because Rufus Sewell was great in “Dark City.” I knew going into it that it took certain liberties with “real” history, but I was prepared for some oddness.

The plot of the movie is pretty pedestrian—a young squire pretends to be a knight to put food into his fellow’s stomachs after the real knight dies just before a joust. Jousting in this movie is elevated to football—the crowds love it, and knights would rather win at jousting than, say, swordplay. (I guess swordplay is the medieval equivalent of rugby.) Eventually, this young knight gets swept up in the sport, meets a great girl, and goes to the World Championships, where he stands to win, or lose, everything.

In its own way, this movie is no different than “Necessary Roughness,” “Major League,” or “The Replacements.” It’s about losers who hit the big-time and how the entrenched “winners” stand against them. It just decides to use medieval trappings to tell the story, rather than a football. And just in case you’ve seen the medieval version—they added some twists.

The movie has some pretty neat references to “The Canterbury Tales,” and Geoffrey Chaucer makes a few appearances—and he’s great, one part medieval writer and one part speechwriter for “The Rock.” The princess in the film isn’t a weepy, weak-kneed girl, either—she knows what she wants and provides much of the strength for the hero. There’s a friend of the would-be Knight who manages to get himself so worked up when threatening people that by the end of his rant he can only mutter, “Pain—lot’s of pain!” and there’s a female blacksmith who invents a stronger steel. It’s okay—it doesn’t pretend to be history. It instead tries to be a rousing good story, and the music…

From the opening joust with a medieval crowd stomping and clapping to Queen’s “We Will Rock You,” to the final credits when Robbie Williams proves that he can hit the same notes as Freddie Mercury in a “We are the Champions” cover backed by Queen, the movie is filled with rock music. Is this bad? It depends. If you take your movies too seriously, you won’t like it—but I found that given the fact that much of the movie has been tread over time and time again, it was these little differences that made it draw my attention. Every time my awareness of the film started to flag, a ballroom dance to Bowie’s “Golden Years” started, or a parade to a rock song occurred—in each case it woke me up and pulled me back in.

In the end, anyone who expects too much of “A Knight’s Tale” is sure to be disappointed. It’s a tad predictable, and I could see the twist at the end a mile away. But Sewell is great as a black knight, Heath Ledger is as good as he was in his other movies, and Chaucer is making it into a game of mine, and soon. There’s also refreshingly little blood or foul language—I have a huge tolerance for both, but found this to be a movie you can take an older child or parent to. (The only thing really risqué was Geoffrey Chaucer’s buttocks, which you see for a few moments.)

If you’re the type of stick-in-the-mud who’s disgusted by historical inaccuracy, you should avoid this or any other movie that tries to tell a good story at the expense of history (Braveheart, anyone?) But if you want a movie that you can take an S.O. or other family member to, and you can weather the initial shock of the clichéd training scene being accompanied by “Low Rider,” then this movie might be for you.

When I saw the film, I was reminded of “Ever After,” with Drew Barrymore. It was a re-telling of “Cinderella” and it took some huge liberties with the story and with history, especially if you know anything about the French aristocracy. On the other hand, every birthday party I go to has a wish-list that asks for “Ever After” on DVD, both the parties for young girls and the ones for twenty-somethings. There’s something to be said for a movie that hits a chord like that, and you have to ask if story is more important or historical accuracy. I was also reminded a little bit of Monty Python. One of the original Pythons once said that the entire troupe began because somebody idly wondered why you couldn’t end a standard comedy skit with a safe dropping on someone’s head. I imagine the same could be said for the director of “A Knight’s Tale.” “Why can’t we have ‘We will Rock You!’ lead us in, like we would at a modern sports event?”

"A Knight's Tale"
"A Knight's Tale" Capsule Review by Eric Brennan on 15/05/01 Style: 4 (Classy and well done) Substance: 3 (Average) After the "furor on the forums," read one open-minded review of the movie! Product: "A Knight's Tale" Author: Dir. by Brian Helgeland Category: RPG Company/Publisher: N/A Line: N/A Cost: Between $6-9 Page count: n/a Year published: 2001 ISBN: n/a SKU: N/A Comp copy?: no Capsule Review by Eric Brennan on 15/05/01 Genre tags: Fantasy	After the recent furor on the forums (sounds like a boxing pay-per-view, eh?) about “A Knight’s Tale,” I decided to see it for myself. My wife wanted to see it for Heath Ledger, I wanted to see it because of all of the noise surrounding it and because Rufus Sewell was great in “Dark City.” I knew going into it that it took certain liberties with “real” history, but I was prepared for some oddness. The plot of the movie is pretty pedestrian—a young squire pretends to be a knight to put food into his fellow’s stomachs after the real knight dies just before a joust. Jousting in this movie is elevated to football—the crowds love it, and knights would rather win at jousting than, say, swordplay. (I guess swordplay is the medieval equivalent of rugby.) Eventually, this young knight gets swept up in the sport, meets a great girl, and goes to the World Championships, where he stands to win, or lose, everything. In its own way, this movie is no different than “Necessary Roughness,” “Major League,” or “The Replacements.” It’s about losers who hit the big-time and how the entrenched “winners” stand against them. It just decides to use medieval trappings to tell the story, rather than a football. And just in case you’ve seen the medieval version—they added some twists. The movie has some pretty neat references to “The Canterbury Tales,” and Geoffrey Chaucer makes a few appearances—and he’s great, one part medieval writer and one part speechwriter for “The Rock.” The princess in the film isn’t a weepy, weak-kneed girl, either—she knows what she wants and provides much of the strength for the hero. There’s a friend of the would-be Knight who manages to get himself so worked up when threatening people that by the end of his rant he can only mutter, “Pain—lot’s of pain!” and there’s a female blacksmith who invents a stronger steel. It’s okay—it doesn’t pretend to be history. It instead tries to be a rousing good story, and the music… From the opening joust with a medieval crowd stomping and clapping to Queen’s “We Will Rock You,” to the final credits when Robbie Williams proves that he can hit the same notes as Freddie Mercury in a “We are the Champions” cover backed by Queen, the movie is filled with rock music. Is this bad? It depends. If you take your movies too seriously, you won’t like it—but I found that given the fact that much of the movie has been tread over time and time again, it was these little differences that made it draw my attention. Every time my awareness of the film started to flag, a ballroom dance to Bowie’s “Golden Years” started, or a parade to a rock song occurred—in each case it woke me up and pulled me back in. In the end, anyone who expects too much of “A Knight’s Tale” is sure to be disappointed. It’s a tad predictable, and I could see the twist at the end a mile away. But Sewell is great as a black knight, Heath Ledger is as good as he was in his other movies, and Chaucer is making it into a game of mine, and soon. There’s also refreshingly little blood or foul language—I have a huge tolerance for both, but found this to be a movie you can take an older child or parent to. (The only thing really risqué was Geoffrey Chaucer’s buttocks, which you see for a few moments.) If you’re the type of stick-in-the-mud who’s disgusted by historical inaccuracy, you should avoid this or any other movie that tries to tell a good story at the expense of history (Braveheart, anyone?) But if you want a movie that you can take an S.O. or other family member to, and you can weather the initial shock of the clichéd training scene being accompanied by “Low Rider,” then this movie might be for you. When I saw the film, I was reminded of “Ever After,” with Drew Barrymore. It was a re-telling of “Cinderella” and it took some huge liberties with the story and with history, especially if you know anything about the French aristocracy. On the other hand, every birthday party I go to has a wish-list that asks for “Ever After” on DVD, both the parties for young girls and the ones for twenty-somethings. There’s something to be said for a movie that hits a chord like that, and you have to ask if story is more important or historical accuracy. I was also reminded a little bit of Monty Python. One of the original Pythons once said that the entire troupe began because somebody idly wondered why you couldn’t end a standard comedy skit with a safe dropping on someone’s head. I imagine the same could be said for the director of “A Knight’s Tale.” “Why can’t we have ‘We will Rock You!’ lead us in, like we would at a modern sports event?”

"A Knight's Tale"