OUTLAW KING (2018)
Outlaw King (2018 film). The poster art copyright belongs to the distributor of the film, Netflix, the publisher, Sigma Films, Netflix, Anonymous Content, Clockwork Sessions, or the graphic artist.
*spoilers ahead*
Synopsis
Outlaw King (2018) is a Netflix Original portraying the tumultuous years surrounding Robert the Bruce’s usurpation of the Scottish throne. In the face of a dominant and brutal English occupation, Bruce uses clever tactics and the will of the people to liberate Scotland. While the film has some glaring historical inaccuracies, director David MacKenzie does an admirable job of tackling a complicated period of Scottish history.
The film begins at the siege of Stirling in 1304, with the submission of a disgruntled Scottish nobility, including Robert Bruce (Chris Pine) to Edward I of England (Stephen Dillane. Following this tense ceremony of submission and intimidation, Bruce finds himself in a ‘friendly’ duel with the Prince of Wales (Billy Howle), but under which lies tension and strong dislike between the two men that will become more prevalent as the plot continues. The first part of the film goes on to show Bruce struggling beneath the authority of the English occupation in Scotland, whilst adjusting to a new marriage to Edward I’s goddaughter, Elizabeth de Burgh (Florence Pugh).
After witnessing the example made of William Wallace and the grief of the Scottish population, Bruce and his brothers are inspired to start a rebellion against the English occupation. A disastrous attempt to gain the support of his Scottish rival, John Comyn, results in Bruce quickly having himself inaugurated as King of Scots. The new king is quickly tested, suffering two devastating defeats and being forced into exile as an outlaw, with his queen and daughter captured by the Prince of Wales.
The remainder of the film follows Bruce’s impressive comeback, focusing on his military growth as he takes back Scotland piece by piece. This culminates in the climactic Battle of Loudon Hill between Bruce and the Prince of Wales.
Historical Detail
The Outlaw King (2018) team clearly did their homework, as the small but important details to this film are truly impressive. The inclusion of the important support of the Scottish Church, accurate locations (although filming took place elsewhere), and detailed Bruce supporters are excellent. Bruce’s inauguration as king is particularly impressive, with the correct terms and rituals being used, and the all-important role of Isabella MacDuff as the one to crown Bruce.
The accurate detail in the more brutal scenes of this film are also well done. The inclusion of the siege of Stirling and Edward’s one-time use of the trebuchet ‘War Wolf’ in the film’s beginning effectively and accurately sets the scene. Displays of heraldry throughout is excellent, especially in scenes of battle, as well as the detailed accuracy of costumes. Although difficult to watch, the stomach-churning goriness of the film accurately captures the brutal nature of executions and military tactics of the period.
Forgivable Inaccuracies
As impressive as the details of this film are, there are some painfully obvious inaccuracies. However, I would argue that the majority of these are understandable and forgivable considering the budget and time constraints of filming, as well as the desire for this film to have a stream-lined plot to make it accessible and enjoyable for all, not just history buffs.
The notable absence of some figures key to Bruce’s life is disheartening. Thomas Randolph, Bruce’s nephew and most trusted lieutenant, is completely erased from the film. Bruce’s brother Thomas is missing, with his influential brother Edward assumedly being renamed as Euan. The Bruce sisters are also erased from this film, despite the great sacrifice and suffering they endured for supporting their oldest brother’s seizing of the throne. However, this is a film already crammed with characters, foreground and background alike, and so it is understandable that there has been a cull in figures in order to simplify a very complicated and changing situation. Edward Bruce’s re-naming as Euan is probably to avoid a mix-up with two already prominent Edwards, the King of England and Prince of Wales, respectively.
The portrayal of Angus Òg MacDonald, Lord of Islay (Tony Curran), could have been much better. In the film, Angus seems like a casual, runaway adherent to the Bruce family – in reality, he was a powerful Gaelic magnate who swayed Bruce’s success in affirming his authority as King of Scots. I would have loved to have seen Curran play a powerful head of an iconic family, exercising greater independent thought and leadership to Bruce and even dressing and behaving with more grandeur. Bruce’s visit to Islay could have included Angus MacDonald’s impressive western isle court, not the wooden huts on the beach that we see. Although well-executed by Curran, Angus’ portrayal in the film generally undermines the significant power of Gaelic Scotland at the time, which could have been an excellent addition to the plot as it was in truth.
The BIG Issue
Edward II of England is a hotly contested king and the subject of many a conspiracy theory relating to his removal from the throne of England in 1327. History has not remembered Edward kindly, and he’s regularly portrayed as a weak individual through passivity, which I think is too harsh an assumption to make.
Outlaw King (2018) is equally as harsh on him, but from the complete opposite end of the spectrum! Prince Edward’s insecurity as the underwhelming son of the iconic Edward I is done in a bratty display of bloodthirsty and merciless behaviour, bordering on madness. While many disapproved of this different portrayal of Prince Edward, I believe it was a refreshing take on the usual meek and mild Edward that we tend to be presented with. Edward’s weakness as Prince, and one day King of England, was shown through his insecure desperation to outshine his father’s reputation. It’s an intriguing take.
The sorest issue in this film for me is its ending. The penultimate face-off between Bruce and the Prince of Wales is at the Battle of Loudon Hill. The battle is very well presented and beautifully filmed, accurate to its occurrence – Bruce’s use of the land was his ultimate weapon in taking down the bigger and stronger English army. However, this battle accuracy is marred by the incredibly inaccurate presence of the Prince of Wales, and his embarrassing conclusive actions of the day. Prince Edward was not at this battle, nor was Edward I, who was still very much alive at this point. In reality, Loudon Hill saw a strong victory over Aymer de Valence, Earl of Pembroke, but was not conclusive enough to remove English and Scottish opposition from Bruce’s path, as the film suggests. However, I do understand why Prince Edward was placed in this battle – for the film, this was the decisive battle between two enemies, and the prince as the leading antagonist had to be there. Nevertheless, I really dislike the way the prince is concluded in the film. The new King of England being abandoned to cry and vomit in the mud, and being allowed to flee by Bruce rather than captured as an invaluable hostage? Excellent acting from Billy Howle, but a cringeworthy conclusion to the character.
Decision
I actually love this film. For me, the attention to background and small historical detail is wonderful and outweighs the blunders that I think are a result of budget, time constraint, and accessibility. If this film had been part of a trilogy, or even a series, I think it would have been brilliant – Prince Edward’s embarrassing defeat could have been saved for the Battle of Bannockburn.
Chris Pine as Robert the Bruce was a welcome pleasant surprise, with a great attempt at a notoriously difficult accent and an enjoyable portrayal of a quieter Bruce. Aaron Taylor-Johnson as James ‘the Black’ Douglas was remarkable, and I would love to see what he would do with the character as he later became a political force as well as having a talent for violence. The standout performance for me was the wonderful Florence Pugh as Elizabeth de Burgh – the fiery tenacity that she brought to the character and her portrayal of Elizabeth in the truly awful situations she is placed in was excellent.
It’s got some major blunders, but it’s an impressive attempt at scaling a giant of Scottish history. The showcasing of Scotland’s beauty and the passion of the Scottish Wars of Independence, whatever the motivation, are excellently shown. It’s an 8/10 for me!
Please do let me know your thoughts on this film – leave me a comment and follow me on Instagram @historywithbeth for more Scottish medieval content!
