When a film is based on a true story, it can get overstuffed by becoming a lofty "official" declaration on historical events or people. It requires a particular balancing act for a film like this to present an interesting narrative but still remain devoted to the real-life subject matter it’s adapting. I watched this balancing act with the new release "The Uprising" starring Andrew Garfield ("tick, tick…Boom," 2021) and Katherine Waterston ("Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore,' 2022).
Set in medieval England, King Richard II and his advisors lay on the taxes for the hardworking commoners. A lonely farmer, played by Andrew Garfield, starts to rebel when he refuses to pay these taxes and physically attacks members of the government when they arrive in his town to collect. He joins other poor laborers with the same mounting anger, and their cause grows in the hundreds until a grassroots mob attacks King Richard II in the Tower of London demanding justice.
"The Uprising" is a fictionalization of the Peasants’ Revolt of 1381, a real event in British history that is still taught in schools across the United Kingdom. The Peasants’ Revolt is credited for creating the legend and stories of Robin Hood. We’ve all seen plenty of film adaptations of the Robin Hood story, but the Peasants’ Revolt has never been dramatized on film before. So "The Uprising" deserves some attention for exploring an untapped part of history. It’s a convincing, large-scale, period film of a historical tragedy reminiscent of Braveheart (1995) or the lesser-known drama, "Peterloo" (2018).
The issue I have with this film is it doesn’t feel forceful enough. It doesn’t feel intense or powerful enough. Some films feel like you’re watching a marathon. Some feel like an amusement park ride. "The Uprising" felt like I was watching a bedtime story. The pacing feels too slow and casual, and none of the actors are given enough to do to develop their characters (except Andrew Garfield), so parts of this film feel mentally tedious. If there were more effective peaks and valleys in the storytelling, the two-hour eight-minute run-time might not have felt so long to me.
"The Uprising" is written and directed by Paul Greengrass ("News of the World," 2020) known for blending a simplified documentary style with emotionally stark acting performances. This blending has resulted in some great films from him like "United 93" (2007), 'Captain Phillips" (2013), and "22 July" (2018). Mr. Greengrass leans too hard into this documentary style he’s known for, making "The Uprising" feel less like a compelling underdog story of political triumph and more like a temperate history lesson.
Maybe this film would feel more emotional if the screenplay spent more time exploring the lives of its characters. Including the word “patriot” in the dialogue and the phrase “no kings” as part of the tenuous ending obviously have a contemporary ring. But these connections to the current day feel silly or detached, like they were tacked on in the screenplay’s final draft.
Andrew Garfield successfully personifies a limping, wounded grief from the Black Death at the start of this film. His grief then grows into a quiet determination for greater equality connecting with familiar friends along his way to freedom. (These familiar friends will scratch a literary itch for Robin Hood lovers.) Shaky, hand-held camera work is throughout this film, and I understand why; evoking a wild, crowded, natural look. This works best in the climactic mob attack on the Tower of London. But so much of this shakiness gets annoying when you can't clearly see what's happening in other scenes.
The historic, violent, and disheveled tone of this film is believable and consistent, but the director and his team forgot to make the tone dynamic as well.
