Yay or Nay?: Outlaw King (Movie)

Okay…why is this movie nearly 5 stars on Netflix? Is it because of Chris Pine? Because even he couldn’t save this monstrosity of a film. Like honestly, I watched this with my mother, and we couldn’t tell apart half the characters, and thirty minutes into the film I felt like we’d been watching for an hour. And it's a PERIOD PIECE, one of my favorite genre of movies. 

The Story 

I just…there was a lot wrong, including a very disjunct story and lack of properly introducing problems and characters. In fact, that’s a glaring issue, since the only context to the history that we get is a brief introductory text on the screen that’s so small and fast that you can’t read it, or have to skim it to at least get the gist of it. For context, its based on the historically true events of King Robert the Bruce, of Scots, a King who fought for Scottish independence in the 14th century. 

Chris Pine, obviously, is the King Robert the Bruce, and he’s a good lord, kind to his people, a truly ideal leader. But then someone named Walter Wallace dies— for the life of me, I still don’t know who that guy is, or even if he showed up in the movie (so if someone does know, please tell me!), and he decides to take up arms against Edward I, King of England for Scottish independence. 

My Thoughts

So, if this was not clear, I was on Wikipedia more than I could actually watch the movie. Mainly because even though just following the movie’s story, a lot of characters and key points go missing because there’s no explanation of their significance or value throughout. I have no clue why Chris Pine’s character takes up arms— why the death of one lord incited this whole thing, or why he kills this other lord (spoilers) since it makes no sense. I do not have enough background to situate me within the piece. 

And it's not about “oh well you don’t know Scottish history, so you might feel lost”. Nah, lots of period dramas can keep their stories and characters straight as well as guide the viewer through the period, and why the moments throughout the film are significant and what they mean. 

This film had more of a conglomeration of events and loosely put together characters without any backstory that makes following them an actual chore to do since, well, you won’t understand. Like, you will get the bare bones of the story, but often times you’ll be sitting there asking “why is this happening, what’s going on?” and likely without an answer. I think Chris Pine actually was talking with a British accent for the first 15 minutes and then switches over to a Scottish one (very well-done, to his credit), but that’s where I started to question how good this movie actually was. 

That, and I figured out 30 minutes into the film that this bowl-haired dude was the Prince of Wales— or a Prince of England. It shouldn’t take me that long to figure crucial things like that out. I shouldn’t have to do research on why certain things fit together or occurred in the movie I’m watching. A film’s core point to success is being able to convey a coherent storyline and investable characters within 2 hours. And as far as I’m concerned, it didn’t do that. What kept me till the end was likely the awesome battles (which are pretty damn good, albeit gory). But as far as this film goes, it doesn’t do any of the things that a normal period piece, let alone movie should do to convey its story, and keep audiences invested in it. 

The best part, or should I say character was James McDougall. He was crazy, vengeful, and probably was the only character I’d argue had a real and followable storyline and arc. He kicked ass. 

My Rating

So, yeah, this was not a good movie. I still can’t understand why it's almost five-stars on Netflix. It was not good. It was not that enjoyable, and no amount of Chris Pine can save it. 

My Rating: ⭐⭐ 2 Stars

~Meghan