I noticed the inconsistencies in Henry's opinions. In the begining he says he would not have a son that would not fight for his throne. Yet by the end he is disinheriting his sons becuase they are doing just that. Eleanor is doing the same; she yearns to make peace and restore her relationship with Henry, but she will not sacrifice her own ambitions to do so. They were the most intelligent, agressive,ambitious and prideful persons of their time and the things that made them great rulers made them terrible parents. Through their actions they taught their children to plot, lie, and kill to reach their goals and then refused to see that they taught them all to well. Henry and Eleanor were so arrogant they could not even admit that they had made mistakes. They expected their children to be like them. Which they were. Only the sons did not have the strength of character that made the parents so great. I think by the end they were tired of playing the game. Only the game they chose stopped only when you died.

I think I will change gears here and play devils advocate. I think y'all were way to hard on poor sad Alias( I think that is how they spelled here name in the credits). Here is a woman who has no power, no allies, only enemies. Her only status is as the king's mistress. She is also the only one who would not kill her brother, sell out her lover or make a deal with the devil to gain power. She was happy to be in love and be loved back. She is nowhere near Eleanor in any catogory but, neither were most of the men.

Thats what I thought of the movie any way. Mike I don't know how it did at the box office. The cover box at the video store said that Kathrine Hepburn won a academy award for her role as Eleanor.
Keith

On our second viewing, I made notes of things on which I wanted to comment. Pardon me if they seem like ramblings, however, they move according to the events in the movie.

Question: with the introduction to Jeffrey, who is fighting whom. Is it a simulation fight or an actual battle. It looked like a child burning ants with a magnifying glass. Jeffrey was so removed from the actual battle. It did not seem like a real fight since the king's messenger approached him so easily. There was real death in the battle so Keith & I thought it must be an actual skirmish, but who's battling whom. That is why I thought of the ant analogy - senseless killing.

I agreed with Vicki on Alais. What dribble. Why would Henry want her, it makes no sense. Alais reminds me of the Laura Dern character in Jurassic Park. She is so weak a character it is too distracting to watch.

When the king's messenger fetched Eleanor it was like waking a sleeping dragon. Or like watching a coma patient regain consciousness. This scene is better the second time since you know what awaits.

John seemed to be more of a boy of 13 than a man of 16. He is immature and spoiled. I also noticed that he is only 1 year younger than Phillip, but their maturity is worlds apart and with both to be king. How odd. It is hard to believe from Mike's article that John would be a good king from this crumple of a person.

I also noticed how young Eleanor looked in the beginning and how old she looked at the end. When she gets off the boat, she looks almost 20 years old, but when she gets back on the boat, she looks 100 years old. Also Katharine Hepburn's portrail was breath taking. This is the same style as Anthony Hopkins in Silence of the Lambs. Only the face tells the story and the body is shrouded. As Hanibal Lector, Anthony Hopkins hardly moved at all, only talking and watching. Katharine Hepburn is covered with a cloak and veil throughout most of the movie. Only her dialogue sustains the character.

I noticed that Richard and Eleanor seem almost incestuous in the garden. How odd, maybe that lended to her dominance over him. Richard is so one- dimensional. He needs her love and approval so bad. She was right to guess that with her imprisonment, Henry hurt Richard more than her.

I almost died laughing when Alais said that "she had nothing to lose and that made her dangerous." Her dangerous? She was way way over her head because these people were much better at the art of deceit than she was. They would see her plot coming a mile away.

I think that Jeffrey loved Eleanor, but the scorn left him bitter bitter bitter. It seemed to be the I am what I am because my parents did not love me syndrome.

Eleanor said "Why did she have such clever children", but in actuality only Jeffrey is clever. Richard is so one-dimensional and John is too immature.

You see a hint of a future hurt when Eleanor said to Henry "I wonder if you wonder if I ever slept with your father." She was just testing the water to see if there was pain there. Her infidelity must have been a real issue. And Eleanor was saving this for a more opportune moment.

THE BEST LINE IN THE MOVIE IS WHEN ELEANOR AND ALAIS ARE STANDING IN THE CHAPEL AND ELEANOR SAID TO ALAIS "YOU'LL MAKE A LOVELY BRIDE. I WONDER IF I'LL CRY." I could watch that moment forever.

After the non-ceremony, Eleanor uses Henry's kiss of Alais to fuel the next round of slings and arrows. She needs this pain to ensure that she does not weaken or become misguided by circumstance.

I think that Henry clutches to Alais because she represents youth as his is waning. I do not think that he truly loves her, but what she represents. How could he love her, there is nothing to love. But Alais does represent "land" in France, a son's future wife, fertility, innocence (gag), and a barter or toy to hurt Eleanor. Other than that Alais is nothing. Henry said that "He holds her more dearly than he realized". That made no sense of Alais as a person or mate, but as a "thing" it does.

Watching the exchange between Phillip and Richard is TOO painful. Richard is beseiged with anguish. Actually he is a walking billboard of pain. Phillilp plays him like a fool. How clever of Phillip. This scene reminded me of the relationship between Ben and Sera in "Leaving Las Vegas". The need of one person and the disregard of the other person. It is too painful. Every time you watch, you hope that it would be different, but it is not.

When Phillip said that he had hoped that Henry would come, it was too much. Phillip had all the cards in his hand and Henry had none. All three sons hiding and here was the father. That is as good as it gets. Henry with pride beaming over his "victory" was ripe for the kill.

When Henry said that "I've lost my boys", the pain was so deep. Here was Phillip's victory. And Eleanor sent them there. From this point we begin part II or round II. Now the heavy hitting begins. Now everyone is wounded and hurting.

Alais' exchange with Eleanor is feeble. Sitting there carolling. Alais does not possess the prowess to go against an opponent such as Eleanor. Alais asks Eleanor to leave him to her, but it is not that easy and Alais is oblivious to everything around her.

When Eleanor says "Shatter me. Let me have it." Boy did he ever. A new wife. Even Eleanor did not see that one coming. Eleanor has another great line " I adored you." Henry says "Of all the lies that is the one which is most terrible". Eleanor says "That is why I saved it for last." What a comeback. To think that quickly.

But when Eleanor says "I AM NOT MOVED TO TEARS". Truly she was, but coldly she responds.

I think that Eleanor during this exchange revealed too much and it imprisoned her sons. In retaliation she rebukes with the "sleeping with his father", but it was a futile attempt. In the end Eleanor says "WHAT FAMILY DOESN'T HAVE ITS UPS AND DOWNS." She also remarks that they have gone too far.

Alais does have one weak attempt when she realizes that if she marries Henry and has a son that Richard will kill it (Eleanor too remarked on this circumstance). Why not, Alais is not strong enough to defend herself against these individuals now - how could she defend herself and her child when Henry is dead. Alais does spurn Henry into action, but unlike the master Eleanor, she is not able to control his outcome or reaction. Alais sends Henry to his sons, but her goad was not enough to have him kill them or have them killed.

Eleanor brought the knives to the "boys", but what was her true intent? Did she want Henry really dead or did she want the sons killed? Unnatural animals. How odd.

Henry with the candles was odd too - IT WANTS LIGHT. What wants light - the beast which they have unleased amoungst themselves? What we do in dungeons needs the day? During this piece they refer several times to being wild animals and the eyes of animals. Also to light and darkness. True symbolizm.

The knife fight never seemed real. It is funny. Henry tells them to come for him. This was how the movie started. And they did come for him. John pleads for Henry to take him back, but then Henry almost kills John. How odd.

I noticed that it is right here that Katharine Hepburns symptoms of Parkinson's disease emerge. And rightfully so. It shows the deterioration of her character - wounded and worn down. Age and fraility strike at her.

Henry laments that "He had women in his life." Like they were his great undoing.

How wonderful. Well these are my initial comments. Sorry about the spelling, but I could not stop for my dictionary - it would have impended my insight.

Great flick.
Kim

This is one I will watch again tonight. We were able to rent it for 5 days from Blockbuster, so I may watch it several times before it's Tuesday return. Man, did I LOVE this movie! And it was made even sweeter since Pat and I both wanted to know some history...and then presto! this morning Mike sent all the goodies our way! How wonderfully cosmic.

My first love in this film is Eleanor of Acquitane...Katherine Hepburn plays this character sooooo superbly. What I like most about her is her snappy dialog. She epitomizes and truthfully portrays what marriage really is ...people who are really married love AND HATE each other...and they can do it so well because they know each other so thoroughly! (Pat reminded me that's the premise of the book The Dark Side of Love...ah yes.) I am going to watch the movie again in great part just to listen to Eleanor speak!

And the reason I prefer her to Henry is because his plotting and successful stratigems show him to be a thinker of the highest order; however, his teeth gnashing and garment rending show him to have exteme emotional tendencies. To me this is not an harmonious match...so he loses credibility as a character. Eleanor, on the other hand, never slips too far into emotion...just a few tears in each scene...and she is always ready to abandon that in favor of thinking. What a gal!

Poor Alice should have been thrown to the dogs...gag me with her simpering!

I was glad to get the historical perspective since the end of the movie left me questioning the resolution of the movie's action...what had Henry and Eleanor resolved to do? I assumed the release of the sons from prison meant that Henry had decided not to try to control the future...merely to live forever and then let the cards fall as they may. Which seems to be born out by the facts.

The most powerful scene for me was that one in the dungeon at the end when Richard stands without flinching as his father brings down the sword to kill him...I had to applaud that kind of bravery (reminds me of Mom/Barb telling me she wouldn't mind being stabbed if the attacker was looking her in the face). And the following dialog between husband (blubbering about his loss) and wife (instructing him on how he has no idea how to survive loss...she has had much practice and will go on). That was powerful stuff!

I just wonder why she was going back to prison...that struck me as odd. I could see why Henry would want her to stay in prison...their partnered scheming had propelled him to the thrown; however, turning it against each other made for a very unpeaceful life; so he could only take her in small doses (Christmas and Easter). Did she willingly go back to prison to protect the "peace" as well; or did she do it because she didn't want to lose him and thought the only way to keep even a small part of him was to allow the imprisonment?

I will probably have more to say after a second viewing; however, this is a great pick!
Vicki

I find it impossible to review this movie. I loved it too much as a whole to be able to take it apart and look at it. What I would write would be pages and pages and pages of praise for Katherine Hepburn who IS Eleanore.

About love, power, relationships, strength and anything else real......this was Maslow, not Walt Disney.

Keith's summation was mighty fine: "I think by the end they were tired of playing the game...only the game they chose stopped only when you died."

I think the Johnny character was slightly exaggerated in the movie version in order to make the other characters even more dynamic.

Mike's "History" was essential to my true appreciation of this one.

Wow, I am still in awe of Katherine Hepburn's portrayal of Eleanor of Aquitaine, and perhaps of Eleanor herself..... as a woman, as a queen, as a wife, and as a mother. You go girlfriend!!!!!!!!

the music. Wasn't that opening music just spell binding. I keep hearing it in my head all the time. It was almost like...... eureeka..... I think I just discovered the source of my devil's dream. That music was like some sort of dark cultish chant..... anybody agree? or even notice?

And now I think I'm really done.

And nice catch on that dream business, Barbara. Thanks!
Barbara

I couldn't figure out if they were singing Latin, French or...what?

I liked it...a lot. This movie tweaked me enough to at least browse my Grolier CD-ROM for more information. Mostly to 'fill-in' some of the blanks which I thought were missing from the dialog.

I was unsure of the direction of the dialog. It made me uncomfortable that they went 'at each other' in such a violent manner, and then,suddenly, one would make a most outrageously comical response! Does anyone know if this was a Shakespeare play?

Although this movie was made 25 years ago, it seems to be one of those timeless drama's that ends up as a classic...at least to my way of thinking.

Henry was a man to be at once feared and admired. He knew what he wanted and how to get it. This was a man I would not want to do battle with, but if need be, his was the sword I would want to die on. I felt his character to be fair and just, but it gave me pause to see how his sons turned out.

Richard...wow, what a surprise! I was troubled when Richard said to Philip; 'You haven't said you love me', and then proceeded to bed with him in response to Philip's...'later.' It indicated (to me) the desperation of Richard's need for love. Perhaps that's why Richard was such a good General; to excel in war in order to offset his lack of inner peace.

Geoffrey left me cold. He was, as Henry said: 'A bunch of gears' without humanity. I didn't find any information about him on the CD-ROM.

As for Johnny, I could only feel badly. He was able to think, but unable to act. It seems as though he lacked courage, but maybe he just lacked physical strength. In any case, he was indecisive. According to history, English rule declined during his reign...no duh!

Eleanor of Aquitane! I wouldn't want to meet her in a dark alley...or would I? What a powerhouse of a female. Ranks right up there with Helen of Troy, Cleopatra and Josephine! She was certainly a lusty wench who also knew how to get and keep what she wanted. A perfect match for Henry. He couldn't kill her spirit, no matter what he did. And he couldn't kill her, because she had the Aquitane, and he needed it to maintain his position of power over France.

I don't know how well this movie fared at the box office and Oscar's, but my guess is that at least 2 people were nominated. Peter O'toole and Katherine Hepburn showed us what acting legends are made of, and I was glad to have seen it.
Mike