Sounds like they took 'artistic license' a bit too literally when they portayed King Richard as just another mass-murdering Hitler-type.
It's Cosmo...He's Chinese.
He was brutal and a raging homosexual. Richard the Lionheart cared little for England - he used it as a source of income to fund his crusades.
shareThe artistic license was in all the portrayals of Richard as a noble king who loved England; he really was a "war-lover", who never went to England, and only drew upon its resources to fund his incessant war making, first in the crusades, then in various campaigns in Europe. In fact, his death did occur very similarly to what is shown in this movie. It is ironic that he is seen as so noble, while his brother John, who really did try to rule England, and signed one of history's most important documents, the Magna Carta, is seen as such a bum.
share... well... John didn't exactly volunteer to sign Magna Carta, you know. ;-) His connections in Rome made sure the Pope believed it to be a sign of willful insurrection (and got the Pope back on John's side for awhile). Brutal times and brutal people, no two ways about it.
Glad to have caught this excellent film after so many years (I saw it when it was first released). Loved it again! :-)
No, the Barons forced John to sign the Magna Carta, but the result is the same, the first step toward constitutional government. The truth is, both Richard and John were power hungry, grasping types -- not too much of a surprise, given their parentage -- but at least John did his stuff at home, unlike Richard, who ignored and seemingly hated England.
And I also saw this movie when it first came out; loved it then, and still find it a very enjoyable take on the Robin Hood legend.
Most English kings at this point in time considered themselves more French than English. French was the language spoken at court, Richard's wealthiest provinces were in France, his mother was French. And as far as being a war-lover, you'd have to try damn hard to find a monarch that wasn't in this point in history. This wasn't the age of peace, free-love and singing kumbaya by the campfire while smoking a joint. And besides, if the King of France hadn't got his panties in a twist, and King Fred of Germany hadn't drowned himself, Richard's crusade might very well have taken Jerusalem.
share[deleted]
Also, Richard knew very little of the English language. He actually spoke French. So in all of these films showing him to be English... not so much.
shareSounds like they took 'artistic license' a bit too literally when they portayed King Richard as just another mass-murdering Hitler-type.
No they didn't. He was.
The church may shout but Darwin roars
Richard was a bit of a mass murderer if you look at history. His massacre at Acre was condemned even by many people at the time.
"Nothings gonna change my world!"
''Sounds like they took 'artistic license' a bit too literally when they portayed King Richard as just another mass-murdering Hitler-type.''
I think the slaughtered women and children of Acre would disagree with you.
If you are sick of the ''I love Jesus 100% signature'', copy and paste this into your profile!
During a ten-year reign, Richard spent less than 6 months time in England. He derived more prestige and income from being duke of Normandy, duke of Aquitaine and count of Anjou. Richard considered England to be a "milch cow" for his military campaigns. His queen, Berengaria, never even set foot in England. He was first, last and always a warrior knight- with all the violence that that entails. Don't judge him by the standards of the 21st century. He was a man of his time.
"It ain't dying I'm talking about, it's LIVING!"
Captain Augustus McCrae
Richard the Lionheart could hardly speak English!
Its that man again!!