I've been a fan of "The Last Kingdom" for years, have happily watched each & every returning series (upon its subsequent release) & for the most part, found it to be a consistently strong show from beginning to end. Thus, upon the announcement of "The Seven Kings Must Die", it was arguably understandable for me to assume (considering the same creators were involved in the making of this production) that stoic reliability of standard would therefore be maintained in the long awaited film sequel... So it gives me no joy to state how frustratingly, I was wrong to make that optimistic presumption - because rather than feel like a natural end to the franchise, it alternatively seems akin to a rushed, watered-down, badly-paced denouement whose under-development's inexplicable when the premise could've so easily been realised (to far greater effect) in an additional 10 episode final 6th season, fleshing out the narrative & bringing the story to a rewarding end in a way which is fitting / appropriate. Hence, rather than finish on a high, the resultant dissatisfaction instilled by its mediocrity does undoubtedly give the impression of a lacklustre low, failing to provide fans with the cinematic climax it sought to build... So the brand goes out with a whimper instead of a bang - (I think we'd all agree?) less than what it rightfully deserves.
Of course, the project invariably had lots of potential brimming beneath the surface but when the method of delivery fails to demonstrably justify the change in format in the space of its own run-time (transferring itself from the small screen to the big, yet frustratingly retaining the muted grandeur of a large budget TV budget - apparently a "movie", still operating within the restrictive boundaries of limitations which theoretically shouldn't be there now it's grown in size & become something else entirely), the necessitated omissions made to ensure this "works" (killing off major characters without even having the courtesy to actually depict their profoundly important deaths - especially doing actors Eliza Butterworth & Timothy Innes so dirty, people who've loyally stayed for years - re-contextualising the conflict we've grown to historically appreciate, starving it of time to permit for the sudden developments to feel organically occurring in nature) are consequently less defensible (artistically), exacerbating the discontentment further.
Take the "Battle of Brunanburh" for instance (not exactly a "spoiler" since it's an actual fact we've known about for centuries & a seismic event in our nation's past, both in scale & later impact, portrayed in the final 30 minutes here, symptomatically typifying the problems I had with this) - blatantly endeavouring to mimic the majesty of Miguel Sapochnik's iconic "Game of Thrones" installment "The Battle of The Bastards" (lensed by DoP Fabian Wagner), however director Ed Bazalgette (a talent I've admired for a while) & cinematographer Luke Bryant jarringly shoot the clash predominantly in a series of quickly-cut close ups, visibly heightening the sense of claustrophobia & tension (with action inescapably close to each participant, heightening the atmosphere) but equally (& inadvertently), for a colossal skirmish of such epic proportions, it also comes across as annoyingly small (due to the sense that we seldom witness - quite literally - the wider implications, far reaching in proportionality & perhaps what a theatrical viewing experience is meant to convey), possessing surprisingly intimate moments... Not enough to give more than is detracted from the sequence, as a whole.
That's not to say I found this to be bad. Not at all. Far from it... I simply believe the concept could've been "more", had the team executed the idea differently & potentially received a higher investment from Netflix. Adequate, despite my complaints - plausibly less than the sum of its parts.
25 out of 34 found this helpful.
Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
