Summary:
A Scottish man seeks a loan from a British nobleman, and after his honor is wronged he seeks vengeance.
My Thoughts:
This movie had the makings of a great epic- it has a good cast, beautiful locations, and a compelling story- but “Rob Roy” never really seems to rise to the epic level it wants us to think it is. To be fair, “Rob Roy” came out at a strange time; “Braveheart” also hit cinemas in 1995 (in fact it won best picture). When you have two epic films that come out around the same time, both dealing with an English vs Scottish conflict, it should be obvious that the two will draw some comparisons, so lets get this right out of the way at the top of this review: “Rob Roy” is inferior to “Braveheart” in many ways.
“I will think on you dead, until my husband makes you so.”
Scotsman Rob Roy (Liam Neeson, “Darkman”) seeks a loan from the Marquis of Montrose (John Hurt, “The Elephant Man”), and in doing so he enters into business with Montrose’s lead banker Killearn (Brian Cox, “Trick ‘r Treat”). Killearn is in league with the deviously cunning Cunningham (Tim Roth, “Pulp Fiction”), whom plots to make his fortune off Roy’s demise. Cunningham makes things personal when he attacks Rob’s wife Mary (Jessica Lange, “Tootsie”).
“Rob Roy” is about as average as a movie can get. It has two or three scenes that stand out, and the rest of them are pretty forgettable. That being said, there are many elements of this movie that almost elevate it to a better one, but fail to do so do to other less impressive elements; this film is uneven, and that’s about the best I can say for it.
Lets get the good stuff out of the way first, eh?
I thought the writing in this film was pretty great. There were plenty of incredibly well written and memorable, and emotional lines (“If I can bear to be done, you can bear to remain silence”). There were also some really well executed scenes, like, for example, when we first meet Rob Roy. Rob’s introduction sets this film up to be a much better one; it paints him as an intelligent man whom is as fair as he is just. We get a sense that Rob would be a great commander in battle, should one ever arise; he’s the kind of man men follow without hesitation. But after that introductory scene, Rob’s character becomes nothing more than an average negotiator.
I thought Jessica Lange was absolutely amazing in this movie. I have to be honest, I’ve never seen Lange in a roll that blew me away (I think I’ve mostly seen her in American Horror Story), so it always surprised me whenever people brought up the fact that Lange has won two Oscars and been nominated for several more. Seeing this film made me realize I know next to nothing about Lange’s career; something I now intend to remedy. The scene that demands the most from her is also the most disturbing scene in the film, and she does an incredibly fine job of maintaining dignity while portraying a horrible tragedy.
I was actually surprised Tim Roth received an Oscar nomination for this film. While I was watching this, pretty much any time Roth was on screen I had to fight the urge to roll my eyes. His performance felt so over the top that I wondered how in the world the director hadn’t told him to tone it down. Roth’s performance as Cunningham reminded me heavily of Alan Rickman as the flamboyant Sherriff of Nottingham in “Robin Hood Prince of Thieves”. Now, I actually appreciate Rickman’s overblown performance in “Prince of Thieves”, but that film has a very different tone from this one; “Prince of Thieves” is a swashbuckling adventure, and this film feels more like a costume drama that is trying to be like “Barry Lyndon”. Michael Caton-Jones is no Stanley Kubrick, however, and the drama that happens over the course of this slower-paced two hour and twenty minute movie is in no way as compelling as what happens in the hurricane of drama that is “Barry Lyndon”. Roth’s performance just doesn’t at all feel at home here, which is perhaps why he sticks out in every scene, but that’s not the same thing as stealing every scene.
Most of the other performances were fine or middling. Liam Neeson is certainly in this movie, but I never really feel much emotion from him one way or another; he plays the stoic highlander well, but unfortunately that means a rather flat character for us overall. I think someone must have told John Hurt to play up his British accent, because he sounded a touch ridiculous in a few scenes.
I think my biggest overall problems with this film are just general pacing and story issues. Not a ton of drama happens until about the halfway mark, and then after that, the characters who were most affected by the tragedy seem intent on keeping what happened quiet. There isn’t a rousing call to battle; instead there are more talks to try to maintain the peace. The film just sort of seems to plod on and on until finally, the truth is revealed and Roy decides he must take action.
I did really enjoy the themes. Most of this film was about honor and loyalty and fighting to defend those things. Roy is a man that I would want in charge of me were I alive in 1700s Scotland; he’s a smart man who doesn’t do things rashly. He cares about his men and would like to see them live before he would like to see vengeance extracted on the British; he makes for a fine leader, but the decisions he makes make for a slower paced film. In real life, I’d be happy with Roy; but the Seth watching this movie last night wanted Roy to storm some castles.
Verdict:
This film just doesn’t have the excitement as some other historical epics, nor are the characters well developed enough that I truly feel the emotional draw of every scene. This film does have some well-done scenes, a few solid performances, beautiful cinematography of the Scottish Highlands, and a screenwriter that knows how to write a memorable bit of dialogue, but it displays all of these qualities incredibly unevenly throughout the film, and in the end, the movie fails to rise above anything beyond a middling score.
Review Written By: