Reviews of 1066 29

• 
  re:1066
  A review of 1066
  by pedromart on 06/06/2005
  You have a real nice way with structure and action. The script hit it's beats in all the right places and almost all elements are necessary and contribute to the overall story, although the part with Edith seems the weakest. And his journey to Italy. Tosig could just have easily done what he did without sending Harold on a journey. Also, I never really understood what the... You have a real nice way with structure and action. The script hit it's beats in all the right places and almost all elements are necessary and contribute to the overall story, although the part with Edith seems the weakest. And his journey to Italy. Tosig could just have easily done what he did without sending Harold on a journey. Also, I never really understood what the Queen wanted, what had she to gain with Tosig as king instead of Harold?
  
  I would ease up on William's cruelty, it veers dangerously close to camp, which I don't think you want. There is something tragic about Harold but it gets dimished if the vilian is comically over the top.
  
  There's the use of the word 'terrorist' in the beginning. This is a jarring anomaly, as the word wasn't coined until the 20th century.
  
  You do a good job of getting the necessary expostion out without clunky speeches but I was a little confused as to the nature of England's rulers until about mid-way through. By that I mean, I assumed William the Conqueror would be England's first Norman king, so realizing Edward was Norman also made me wonder how he got to be king. Also, I'd like to understand more of who the Saxons were as opposed to the Normans, what kind of cultural identiy separated the two.
  
  I think alot of the actual history is just as compelling as anything invented. If Edward supposedly uttered, 'Into Harold's hands I committ my Kingdom' show it, it's a good moment. And since he did choose Harold, you should show their relationship more, Edward must have been fond of Harold, even if he felt conflicted in choosing an successor.
  
  Also, Harold got excommunicated - more conflict, more drama - this should definately be included. And in the tapestry, Harold gets an arrow in his eye, another great, and tragic image for a film.
  
  Anyway, you're right that it's certainly a great subject for a movie and I think you've got a great start to things. Try and instill more a sense that this poor guy is doomed, not matter what he does, his fate is in forces beyond his control. read
• 
  1066 and all that
  A review of 1066
  by ozmarns on 06/05/2005
  This is the story of childhood friends who end up facing each other across the battlefield at Hastings, one is Harold Godwinson and the other William Rufus (William the Conqueror). Now I think Harold actually spent his childhood exile in Leinster not Normandy so the writer has tinkered with history to create a kind of inverse buddy flic. No bad thing - childhood friends who... This is the story of childhood friends who end up facing each other across the battlefield at Hastings, one is Harold Godwinson and the other William Rufus (William the Conqueror). Now I think Harold actually spent his childhood exile in Leinster not Normandy so the writer has tinkered with history to create a kind of inverse buddy flic. No bad thing - childhood friends who end up enemies – a good trope.
  
  There’s a prodigious amount of research gone into the script and the story gets off to a cracking start with treachery and bloodshed on the Welsh borders. The pace is fast all the way through with plenty of action sequences. Some of the gore is a bit grand guignol for my taste but hey I’m a female. There are some excellent secondary characters and we’re interested in both Harold and William as characters.
  
  But we start to lose the cohesion in a welter of historical detail by the middle of Act 2 and I found myself wondering what kind of story I was reading. Braveheart is a revenge movie. Gladiator is a revenge movie. I thought 1066 was going to be an inverse buddy movie and then I became unsure of what it was supposed to be.
  
  By the way, as a female, I’d have to say Edith Swan-neck is dreary. She was Harold’s much loved concubine not Snow White. William adored his wife Matilda – I think it’s a shame we never hear anything about Matilda. Both men seem to have been brutal and ruthless yet curiously uxorious. The more our attention is drawn to both the similarities and differences between the two men the better.
  
  Some small quibbles –
  I doubt very much that William would murder an archbishop in public. Private maybe. But even then he’d have been very careful. You didn't take on the Vatican lightly in those days.
  p60 Harold addresses Edward the Confessor as “Your Highness�. Edward’s a king not a prince.
  Gruffud’s death is too quick. Harold’s avenging a brother there. read
• 
  Great Story
  A review of 1066
  by johnnyunderworld on 06/01/2005
  This was a really well- crafted story. I really liked just about everything in this story. The charachters were developed really well, especially considering there were so many. Their personalities, attitudes, and motivations really came through. The story itself was engaging and the interweaved story lines were all nicely put together. It really was a fast paced, easy, and... This was a really well- crafted story. I really liked just about everything in this story. The charachters were developed really well, especially considering there were so many. Their personalities, attitudes, and motivations really came through. The story itself was engaging and the interweaved story lines were all nicely put together. It really was a fast paced, easy, and enjoyable read. I would recommend this very highly.
  
  That being said, I have a few minor suggestions. I thought there were a few jokes that missed the mark and seemed a little unneccessary. an example would be the foot in the stew. Another scene was the seduction of Harold by his new bride. It seemed as if he caved a little too easily maybe. And the last few lines, by Harold and Beaumont, seemed a bit cliche. These are all small gripes and none of them detracted from my overall enjoyment of the screenplay.
  
  Good luck with this. read
• 
  1065 1/2
  A review of 1066
  by kwilton on 05/27/2005
  There is a lot in this story, no doubt about that. Unfortunately, a lot of it shouldn't be there. The tale moves along at a snails pace because there is so much direction within the piece. Practically every curl of a lip is in the script. Truly there are so many pages and pages of direction, micro-management, that really don't belong in a script. And without it, I doubt... There is a lot in this story, no doubt about that. Unfortunately, a lot of it shouldn't be there. The tale moves along at a snails pace because there is so much direction within the piece. Practically every curl of a lip is in the script.
  
  Truly there are so many pages and pages of direction, micro-management, that really don't belong in a script. And without it, I doubt the script would actually make the required 90 pages. However, I will not be referring this to the HOJ, on principle. Although I do think you ought to have another long look at the volume of directions.
  
  And, like the writer, I read it to the end because I am also fascinated by this period of English history. However, the start is so slow it is painful to read. Sure there has to be some parenthasis in the building of a character but there is so much that we almost run out of time before the real battle. And, as this script is called 1066, I presumed it was an important part of the story.
  
  The dialogue is also out of time. It sounds wrong to use modern phraseology. Like: "On my mark, designation area two. Fire!" Designation area? Come on now, this is 1066. And this is not an isolated incident, it was just second the most remarkeable. The most being where the Welsh are referred to as Terrorists.
  
  There were also plenty of inaccuracies that they became an irritation after a while. Such as:
  
  Was the holy land a thousand miles away? That should be however many leagues away, as I am sure miles were a much later contrivance.
  
  P.38. His judgement is flawed, not floored.
  
  Alan of Brittany should be Alain De...
  
  William Tell was Swiss, not Swedish. And so on...
  
  The dialogue in the first campfire scene was very clumsy and lumpy. It sounded as though they were reading from heavily pregnant cue cards. The dialogue improves later but doesn't come across as natural, for the period. Yes, yes, I know that, if it were totally accurate, none of us would understabd a single syllable, but it has to feel like it is. Create an illusion of authenticity.
  
  You miss out a large number of very important details. If this is true, a lot more real that lord of the Rings, then include the saliant facts to make informative as well as interesting. For instance, William who had to stoop to subterfuge in order to get Harold to swear to aid the Norman claim to the throne. There is the (in)famous swearing over the saintly relic. This part could and should be shown to us, possibly as a flash back.
  
  And if you do want to give the world a history lesson, tell us the name of the stone bridge. Everyone remembers the Battle of Hastings, no one remembers the Battle of Stamford Bridge, and the remarkable forced march to Yorkshire — and back again. Without that distraction, world history would be a different matter altogether.
  
  You also neglect to mention that the Battle of Hastings took place, not in Hastings at all, but well inland on Senlack Hill, in what is now called Battle. Important historical facts.
  
  Also, the battle was not over in a moment, as you portray. The Saxon shield wall held for many hours against one withering assault after another. And, late in the day, the Norman line broke and fled. And, as you portray, a small group of the Saxon’s did follow. However, it was only William the Bully that turned the fleeing infantry around. Now, off the safer heights of the hill, surrounded and outnumbered, the chasing Saxon infantry and cavalry were slaughtered.
  
  This incident supposedly gave William the idea to pull the same ruse again. This time it also drew out another wave of chasing Saxons and, this time, prepared, the Normans were soon victorious.
  
  Tell it like it is, it's a great story.
  _______________________________________
  
  No, to my mind, a film called 1066 should spend a little more time in 1066. The events of that year could make a great tale in a time when the historical epic has a proven track record. read
• 
  More documentary than docudrama
  A review of 1066
  by engnorway on 05/26/2005
  This period has always fascinated me but this telling comes off more documentary than docudrama. Historical pieces are always difficult to write and for the most part this is okay, but it doesn't really grab me. I don't like the herky jerky feel of the time line for one. Start with the characters younger to set them up but don't jump around. And you can use short hand for... This period has always fascinated me but this telling comes off more documentary than docudrama. Historical pieces are always difficult to write and for the most part this is okay, but it doesn't really grab me.
  
  I don't like the herky jerky feel of the time line for one. Start with the characters younger to set them up but don't jump around. And you can use short hand for some of this. You don't need to show all the events that are in here and I'm sure there are some events you didn't cover that would add something.
  
  I agree with you about fictionalizing because as Randal Wallace said "I don't care about facts. I care about the truth." But that's also part of the problem here. It seems like your spark was the events and not so much the people and what drove them. I never really got a sense of why these people did what they were doing (in most cases) and I really wanted to get some sense, very early, of what the dramatic need for Harold was.
  
  Your dialogue is not bad but sometimes you use it to explain back story or what the current state of affairs are and you should really see if you can find a way to trim a lot of it or craft interactions so we fill in the blanks and still understand where things stand at that point.
  
  You also have a TON of description that could be streamlined. You don't need to describe every blow of every battle and fight. Let the correographer do that. If two people are sword fighting simply say "they exchange blows back and forth, an even fight." Describe only what you need to. "Finally, Harold charges and flicks his blade, overwhelming William. William drops his sword and falls to the ground." This sort of thing clears up tons of space for more story development.
  
  I think now that you have your basic story events down you might want to go back and see if you can structure them better. If you take a few more passes at this it would be fun to watch as I am a buff for this period but right now this drags and feels flat. read
• 
  A good yarn
  A review of 1066
  by Chrysalis on 05/26/2005
  I liked this script. In general I think it's a good job. I only have a few comments and they are mostly about format. 1)Don't use "We" in the action paragraphs. It is distracting and not quite proper. You are writing a script not directing it. Instead of "We open on sprawling hills under a threatening series of clouds." You can write something like "Dark threatening... I liked this script. In general I think it's a good job. I only have a few comments and they are mostly about format.
  
  1)Don't use "We" in the action paragraphs. It is distracting and not quite proper. You are writing a script not directing it. Instead of "We open on sprawling hills under a threatening series of clouds." You can write something like "Dark threatening clouds overshadow the hills sprawled out in every direction." It's just cleaner writing.
  
  2)Every bit of dialogue needs a character heading. Even if the dialogue continues through / broken up by action paragraphs.
  
  3) You tell a bit too much instead of showing. Example: "Leofwine is struggling to find his identity as the youngest of four brothers." That's good for you as the writer to know, but you have to show this through Leofwine's actions, which you by and large do. If you take out superfluous sentences like this you might be able to trim the script by a few pages.
  
  4)I don't see Harold and William being friends. I see them together as kids, but there doesn't seem to be much interaction between them aside when they fight (the wooden swordplay). It would be helpful to show a scene of them as kids truly enjoying each other's company, so when they are adults the audience can feel how difficult it is for them to fight each other. As it stands their emotional conflicts come off a bit weak.
  
  But what I've mentioned are just small things. In general I like this script and I really like the way you describe your characters "he is a cannonball of a man." Great stuff. Give this a quick once over cleaning it up and you have a finished script.
  
  Good luck and keep up the good work. read
• 
  Epic historical drama.
  A review of 1066
  by jiggson on 05/25/2005
  I had a hard time with this one. I can't entirely put my finger on what it is though. The overall ark of the story was hard to follow for me. I lost track of a character or location. This might play out better on screen, but reading it I lost track. The end of the screenplay was stronger than the beginning. I would recommend taking a look at the exposition and description... I had a hard time with this one. I can't entirely put my finger on what it is though. The overall ark of the story was hard to follow for me. I lost track of a character or location. This might play out better on screen, but reading it I lost track. The end of the screenplay was stronger than the beginning. I would recommend taking a look at the exposition and description in the first third. There are some "saunters, traipses, sidles" used for direction that take away from the flow. You also come right out and say how characters react to certain remarks or events. Most of the time it was not necessary because we know how people will react. We know when something revealed is shocking or upsetting. Have confidence in the writing and the reader. Some of the humor was pretty dark, while some other humor was slapstick and I wasn't sure how it would come off on screen. Overall it was an interesting read and subject/characters that have lots of potential. The last comment I have is not a criticism. I remember a documentary on Harold and during the battle at Stamford Bridge, there was supposedly a lone Viking who held the entire English army off for a while. I was looking forward to this legend in the screenplay. It could be a good way for Bono to go down. read
• 
  King Harold Dies in Vain.
  A review of 1066
  by luckywright on 05/22/2005
  I had trouble with the genre. Ambigous. slipping back and fourth from historical drama to horror comedy. Monty Pythonizm. People were obviously cruel in the Dark Ages, but for me the drama loses its strengh and momentum with visual horror reacted upon comically as with the messenger's head rolling out of the marque and the bit about scratching an itch with a severed hand. Lots... I had trouble with the genre. Ambigous. slipping back and fourth from historical drama to horror comedy. Monty Pythonizm. People were obviously cruel in the Dark Ages, but for me the drama loses its strengh and momentum with visual horror reacted upon comically as with the messenger's head rolling out of the marque and the bit about scratching an itch with a severed hand. Lots of intrigue. Held my interest till the end. And then . . . The let down. Needs to be something good come about because of Harrold's death. The statue didn't do it for me. In the beginning, Harrold is not mean like everyone else, but he doesn't have a passion like they do either. Wasn't sure he was the protaganist at first. He wasn't interested in being King and I didn't feel he had much interest in Edith. There was not enough informatoin about Edith for me to care about her either, so when she placed flowers in front of Harrolds statue I didn't feel anything. Enjoyed the banter between William and Harrold but the rest of the dialogue seemed stiff. Too many complete sentences. You have real potential C.J., and so does your work. Wish you luck. read
• 
  Bloody French!
  A review of 1066
  by **DELETED ACCOUNT** on 05/22/2005
  I can't even begin to imagine the amount of research you must've done to prepare to write "1066". I remember thinking to myself in a History of the English Language class, "man, the Norman invasion would make a great movie." Apparently, it does. I was most impressed with your weaving an engaging story around historical facts. I was concerned near the end because you set... I can't even begin to imagine the amount of research you must've done to prepare to write "1066". I remember thinking to myself in a History of the English Language class, "man, the Norman invasion would make a great movie." Apparently, it does. I was most impressed with your weaving an engaging story around historical facts. I was concerned near the end because you set up Harold and Edith Swan-Neck's relationship then we don't see a lot of her for a large chunk of the story. However, the way you brought her back in the end was excellent. Speaking of the ending, I'm glad you stuck with the historical outcome instead of "Hollywood-ing it up". Overall, I thought the characters were well developed and go through well-drawn emotional arcs.
  
  Some criticism. In several places, the humor sees either ill placed or forced. Like on page 51, when William catapults all those hands and feet at the Castle of Domfront. You have a series of shots where all the hands and feet land. Some in stew, dogs fight over a hand, a foot hits a woman. All this is very funny but it's also out of place. The scene before is a gorehound's dream: dismemberment. That coupled with the humor of the montage takes away from William's cruelty. Another moment like that is on page 40 with Guy, Rene, and the severed head. It's another dramatic and gory moment but Guy and Rene being "comically aghast" at the rolling head spoils the moment.
  
  One slight problem I had was with Harold and Ealdgyth. Maybe I missed this in the reading but if she's a Celt, how does she know English (or West Saxon rather)? Wouldn't she speak some Celtic language? But for the sake of the narrative, I'll let it slide. Other than that and the misplaced comedy, I thought "1066" was a brilliantly written screenplay and very engaging. Best of luck to you. read
• 
  Entertaining
  A review of 1066
  by Beate on 05/21/2005
  Basically I liked this script about the Battle of Hastings and it was entertaining to read. I missed short descriptions of each character(age etc.) The characterisations are ok - sometimes a bit black and white. Sentences like “Leofwine is struggeling to find his own identity…� cannot be filmed and should be cut. Sometimes the dialogue is too explanatory. Celts were... Basically I liked this script about the Battle of Hastings and it was entertaining to read. I missed short descriptions of each character(age etc.) The characterisations are ok - sometimes a bit black and white. Sentences like “Leofwine is struggeling to find his own identity…� cannot be filmed and should be cut. Sometimes the dialogue is too explanatory. Celts were bandits and revolutionaries? (p2) Did they have secret passage door that worked like that? (p12) Why do French people talk with a French accent when they are among themselves? (p12) The first flashback is very long-maybe too long. I think the shots cannot be kept apart-it’s confusing who is who.(p46). The men biting into the foot/ scratching were unbelievable(p51) Did people throw confetti and rice at that time)(p52). Harold wears an armour and a helmet – still he can sprint and we see his features.(p77). How did Harold know that there was marsh?(p95). Why did they attack when the Vikings where an easy target on a bridge? Why not shoot them simply down?(p103) I though Harold was shot in the eye(p121). read