The Reckoning (2020) User Reviews

Underrated!

[Go_For_The_Jugular · 5/10 · 8 April 2021]

Maybe it's because the majority of the cast are relatively unknown, that this film doesn't get the recognition it deserves...but this film is solid. I totally understand that we all perceive movies differently...but giving this movie a 1/10 is just bizarre!

It looks and sounds great...in fact, the score is amazing. Even the music for the closing credits is excellent! A strong female lead and a good supporting cast.

The only issue I have is that for a film set in the 1600's, sometimes the actors say things/behave in a way that's straight out of the 21st century! I won't spoil it and say what these things were, but they certainly seem out of place...and if you're really watching, you'll notice it too.

Overall I really enjoyed it. I'm not really a fan of films set in medieval times, but this and 'A Knight's Tale' are certainly mould breakers.

Great movie cut down by inferior writing...

[paul_haakonsen · 5/10 · 23 March 2021]

I had virtually no idea what I sat down to watch, as I happened to get the opportunity to watch the 2020 movie "The Reckoning". But the movie's cover had some appeal to it, and since I hadn't already seen the movie, of course I managed to find the time to do so.

Well, "The Reckoning" definitely had potential to be something unique and interesting, yet amazingly enough then writers Neil Marshall, Charlotte Kirk and Edward Evers-Swindell managed to produce only a lukewarm script that offered little in terms of a storyline that ensorcelled the audience. Sure, "The Reckoning" is watchable, but it is a very bland and highly forgettable movie.

The storyline in "The Reckoning" was one that had so much to offer, yet the writers failed entirely to seize the material readily available within hands reach and let director Neil Marshall bring something truly worthwhile to the screen. The end result is a very mediocre movie about alleged witchery and plague set during the year of 1665.

Visually, then "The Reckoning" wasn't lacking anything. There were a great many sets, scenes, props and costumes, which definitely helped to build a world set in 1665. But the lack of an interesting and captivating storyline just made it all seem so futile.

The characters in the movie had lots of potential to be grown and nurtured into full-fledged characters with many aspects to them, but again, the writers were just not delivering where it mattered. And this resulted in most of the characters coming off on the screen as being superficial and rather one-dimensional characters.

Now, it should be said that acting in the movie was actually fairly good, especially when taking into consideration the severe limitations imposed on the actors and actresses by a lack of proper script and having half-written characters to work with. It should be mentioned that Charlotte Kirk (playing Grace Haverstock), Sean Pertwee (playing John Moorcroft) and Steven Waddington (playing Squire Pendleton) definitely put on great performances, just a shame it was done within such a mediocre movie.

While I managed to sit through the entire movie, this movie was not one that rang overly entertaining, nor is it a movie that I would recommend you rushing out to get a copy of - because it just wasn't that good. My rating of the movie settles on a very mediocre and bland five out of ten stars.

Don't believe the ridiculous reviews

[martoxley · 6/10 · 19 May 2021]

This is an ok film, certainly not a 1/10! I really like Neil Marshall films, The Descent, Doomsday, Dog Soldiers, you can always feel the common directorial style.

It's not a patch on these but it's still reasonable and definitely worth a watch. Sean Pertwee as the witchfinder is terrific, let's face it he's always consistently good.

You could say this is a bit of a modern day reboot of The Witchfinder General with Vincent Price. The lead actress is pretty good, as is pretty much the whole cast. I won't say too much, just watch it and enjoy it.

Soulless and Bland

[Inspector_Tiger · 3/10 · 22 August 2020]

(Very mild spoilers in the last paragraph)

"Clumsy" is the first word that comes to mind when describing Neil Marshall's disappointingly unambitious Dark Age drama. In recent years we've been spoiled, perhaps, with well-executed female-led period revenge tales; Jennifer Kent's spellbinding The Nightingale was one of the best films of last year, and Mirrah Foulkes' devilish Judy & Punch quickly became a highlight of 2020. It's hard, then, not to compare The Reckoning to other films in recent memory with such superficial similarities, especially when it pales so thoroughly in comparison.

Grace (Charlotte Kirk) kicks us off by laying to rest her husband who has hanged himself on a tree outside their cottage. We learn, through parallel flashbacks, that he contracted "The Sickness" and took his own life to protect his family from the contagion. This sets off a chain of events that leads to Grace being accused of witchcraft by the town's petulant sheriff (Steven Waddington), who calls in a witch hunter to prosecute her (Sean Pertwee, spending the film twirling not only his own mustache but even the mustaches of those around him). What follows is a series of torture scenes, each more uncomfortably unrestrained than the last, interspersed with Grace's increasingly disturbing nightmares. These dream sequences should be the core of the film, as Grace's visions get more introspective and erotic, imagining her husband's embrace shifting into carnal acts with the devil himself. Instead, just like the torture, they never get more interesting even as they grow more graphic.

Every turn the plot takes is a predictable one. Every character is as stock as they come. Kirk, leading the cast and co-writing the script, delivers a bland performance that rarely conveys the suffering Grace endures. Marshall's direction is just as uninspired, with an inconsistent tone and a wobbly handheld camera that sticks to flat planes and textbook compositions. The production design lacks authenticity and the effects, while bloody, carry neither grit nor weight. Supporting performances are almost universally awful, given no help by the broad, clunky dialogue or their paint-by-numbers characterizations. Even Christopher Drake's sweeping score is overshadowed by the Hans Zimmer soundtracks it so clearly tries to evoke.

By the end of The Reckoning, once it's become clear that there's no deeper meaning to explore, no surprising twist to alleviate the gloom and nothing left to do but wait out the runtime, Grace's final revenge feels like less of a resolution and more of a liberation - as she stumbles, victorious, through a marsh, drenched in blood and dragging a broadsword behind her, the audience is equally free to go rewatch Judy & Punch instead.

Not a period piece, not a horror, not an action adventure... Is this a joke?

[rboy-47076 · 1/10 · 5 February 2021]

Is somehow slotted as a period piece - which is just not connected to reality and quite annoying - the only thing remotely connected to the late 17th century is the opening scene showing a date and blurb of annoying, inaccurate, platitudes concerning witches and the plague... The sets are all wrong and disjointed, the costumes are all a mishmash of donated primary school theater garb, and the makeup - god - from the effects to the protagonist's odd, modern, yet still glamour shot tacky, cosmetics (that remain distinctly perfect the entirety of the film) all horribly distract from this amateur swiss cheese plot, insanely low budget camera work, and dialogue befitting 90's video game cut scenes (I've seen ticktoks with better cinematography.) Plague doctors with Top Hats... What? Why not baseball caps? Tenet farmers needing loans for rent, yet own bespoke flint locks, jewelry, and clothing ... What? HUGE London-esque dungeons filled with prisoners in a random countryside holding... Huh? A plague that stops being important 14 mins in... Weird as hell witch trial that makes no linear sense... This is not a period piece, not a horror movie, not an action thriller... It seems like a joke kinda... Like an episode of Xena... It is all just odd - I had to double take that this was at all connected to Neil Marshall... It just made me mad.

What happened to Marshall

[djaho · 1/10 · 16 February 2021]

From scene 1 to the last. Garbage. Poor acting, poor story. Actors look bored. Worst Neil Marshall film ever. Bring back the director of the Descent

Not bad at all!

[amichaelsmith · 7/10 · 14 May 2021]

I truly don't understand the negativity on this film. Everything about it is 70's Hammer horror films! I loved it. It's fun and very gothic. The movie this one is shamelessly patterned after (witchfinder general wirh Vincent price) is essentially the same story only more graphic. Lol! I had fun, I don't care what anyone else says.

3 Stars

[Foutainoflife · 3/10 · 24 February 2021]

Not very impressed with this.

A woman is accused of witchcraft while struggling in the aftermath of her husband committing suicide.

This story, setting and effects need some work. I assume this is a film that had a smaller budget but some of the small things that bugged me didn't seem like they would've been too much of an expense. Let's start with how incredibly clean this supposed plague infested town was. Sure, there were some corpses here and there and there were rats but the streets were clean, the establishments were clean and it just totally lacked realism. Where were the wagon and horse worn, muddy streets? Where was the hay, dirt and come to think of it why were the rats so clean? Why was our main actress's face always impeccable? I'm sorry but I just take issue with these things. On terms of all it lacked in this regard, it seemed more like I was watching a stage play.

The effects were CGI stuff and, well, you could tell it.

I wanted to like this so much more but it just fell really short of being worth a lot of investment. The only thing that makes me give it 3 Stars is the fact that I have seen worse.

The movie critics love to hate

[ansell-72879 · 6/10 · 2 May 2021]

A fair to middling film condemned by all, The Reckoning is not the mess its purported to be. Sadly, it has fallen victim to feminist politics, from which there is no recovering, and has terminally been branded misogynistic. There are scenes of torture but director Neil Marshall discretely cuts away so these episodes are more imagined than actually seen on the screen.

The film which is set in the 1660s against the background of the plague and follows Charlotte Kirk's character Grace Haverstock as she is falsely accused of witchcraft by Steven Waddington's Squire Pendleton. Enter Sean Pertwee's Witchfinder John Moorcroft and things fall apart rapidly for Grace.

The films premise is inherently interesting, the period the 1660s is a fascinating historical period and the cast do their best. (Haverstock is not really up to the job but gets better as the movie progresses.) And as far as misogyny is concerned, I can only assume that the reviewers who condemn The Reckoning on these grounds haven't seen The Devil's Rejects whose treatment of women is genuinely disturbing.

The Reckoning is not the best example of folk horror but it is certainly watchable.

Just a horribly bad movie. Also Hair and Makeup

[bigbadbassface · 2/10 · 6 February 2021]

5 seconds in I was distracted by the actress's hair and makeup. Lol 1665. Watched it to the end and nothing redeeming about this movie. Slow and plodding with 1 hour 45 minute runtime. Could have been 80 minutes and still too long.

Better than expected and with a twist

[gemann0069 · 8/10 · 12 October 2022]

You would think that movies like this would follow the sane formula. It takes place during the time when women were blamed for everything and then accused of being a witch. The film depicts the depravity of men and false beliefs. And how easy it is to convince people and then will follow and perpetuate the lie. As the movie goes on the viewer is made to believe that she will succome to the accusations. And why not? She's as good as dead either way. Instead of taking the devils offer she remains faithful to God and is rewarded with the gift of vengeance. There is a deeper meaning here. Most will ignore it. Few may get it.

Witch hunt

[kosmasp · 6/10 · 17 April 2022]

This is how I feel sometimes. Even more so now that I got confirmation that quite a lot of my previews reviews have been taken of imdb. I have no idea why - and I am not sure if it is good to know (someone reported them or they just got lost). Because either way it is bad and kind of sad.

This was one of the movies that I have to re-write my review for. I will save my reviews from now on, but it won't help too much if I don't know when and which review has been taken off. Not knowing why and what brings us to the movie. Because our main character here is being accused of things ...mainly because she is a woman and because she does not want to have anything to do with another male. So you know what he is going to accuse her of ... crazy times for women back then.

The movie is well acted, while it does try to avoid cliches as much as possible. Overall this is quite decent and I might even consider giving this a 7 one of these days. Maybe after a re-watch.

The reason cinema is dying is people are allowed to make bad films like this.

[aslowfade · 1/10 · 26 February 2021]

I was really keen to see this but Wow what a mess. Firstly it's meant to be the 1700's but it looks like it was shot yesterday at a mock medieval town with a group of locals dressed up in hired costumes . Absolutely no atmosphere or grading to give it a 'feel' then comes the acting . You will know the quality of it in the first two minute opening sequence. The lead actress is just awful , utterly unbelievable whither she is trying to drag a sword across the ground or being tortured. Also she looks like she has just stepped out of the make-up truck in every scene. The script is almost no existent just shouts of Witch, she's a witch , go on get her.... Poor Sean Pertwee did his best but can not save it . And finally the music . Clearly not composed for the film just bought the rights to some medieval / dramatic stuff and laid it over the top. Truly there are 100 better fan made films on YouTube, made with more care and attention then this.

What?

[whiteslavery89 · 1/10 · 5 February 2021]

Who let this movie be released? I thought I was watching a terrible made-for-tv movie on the CW.

A Real Snoozefest

[ryan_sy · 3/10 · 5 February 2021]

I watched about 30 minutes of this before I had to stop. There was no redeeming factor to keep my interest alive at all. The actors were flat, the costumes appeared fake, and the pace of the movie was so slow, that I would rather have watched CSPAN.

This was a huge let down as Neil Marshal has directed quality movies in the past.

Watch at your own risk

[3/10]

Neil Marshall is dead, well his career is.

[jhajzy · 2/10 · 4 February 2021]

When a film starts with a bunch of writing to set the scene I know it has a good chance of being bad. This wasn't bad! It was terrible. Skip the first ten minutes because not a thing happens. The rest is just badly acted drivel. Gone are the glory days of Dog Soldiers and The Decent. This washed up director should stop. Please stop!

More good than bad

[curtinleslie56 · 6/10 · 20 April 2021]

I.don't know where the so called critics get their eyes from this was a brilliant movie absolutely loved it great acting good story and a good Friday night movie to share with friends.

I reckon, you've wasted our time

[TheTruthofItIs · 1/10 · 26 February 2021]

God, what a poor experience this film is! Set in 1665 England, the year of the Great Plague, the film is dreary, low budget and filmed in such darkness most of the time that it might as well be a black-and-white. The characters and action is so cliché, too, greedy landowner hits on hot farm-girl widow, she rebuffs him, and he declares her a witch! Really? Was this written by a moron?! There's just no way ANY of this happened back then, or any time. And Charlotte Kirk as Grace Haverstock, the farm-girl widow. She's WAAAYYY too hot for this character. Women back then in old England, during The Great Plague, were nasty looking, with bad dentals, so this film is just all kinds of wrong, bad writing and directing. Just add it to the Covid-era pile of rubbish out back.

COERCION AS PROOF

[kirbylee70-599-526179 · 7/10 · 20 April 2021]

There have been plenty of movies made about witches over the years, everything from comedies like HOCUS POCUS to THE CRAFT to SUSPIRIA and more. But few of these films have dealt with the historical aspects of the witch finders, those men placed in charge of seeking out witches among the population during the plague years. THE WITCHFINDER GENERAL with Vincent Price in 1968 was the last movie I can recall on the topic. That all changes with Neil Marshall's THE RECKONING.

The year is 1655 and the black plague has left a vast number of dead in its wake across the land. As bodies are loaded onto carts and houses tagged as plague infested take place simply people do their best to survive. Among those is Joseph (Joe Anderson) and his wife Grace (Charlotte Kirk). Along with their newborn child they do their best. Then Joseph comes down with the plague and in an attempt to spare his wife and child he hangs himself. Grace buries him and attempts to continue on.

But landlord squire Pendleton (Steven Warrington) shows at Grace's door one day demanding that the rent be paid. Grace offers him the wedding bands she and Joseph had in return for 6 month's rent. He counters with an offer of another way, having sex with him. The two fight and Grace burns him with a hot poker chasing him from the house.

Rather than admit he was turned away Pendleton scours to the nearby tavern and begins rousing the patrons with the idea that Grace and her child only survived because she is a witch. The group gather together and capture Grace and child, burning down her house in the process of arresting her. Pendleton tries to force her to admit being a witch but she refuses. So he proceeds to taker a stronger approach.

Pendleton has summoned Judge Moorcroft (Sean Pertwee), the cruelest and notorious witch finder in the land. He is accompanied by his assistant Ursula (Suzanne Magowan), a woman he once burned as a witch who was saved only when the rains put out the fire that left her terribly scarred. The pair bring with them the tools of his trade, a series of torture devices each one more horrible than the next.

Not only will they use these devices to force Grace into confessing they employ methods like sleep deprivation as well. This leads to Grace having hallucinations of her husband talking to her as well as the Devil himself appearing to attempt to gain her soul. But Grace remains steadfast in her determination not to admit to something she is not. It's not just that she is innocent but she also saw her own mother burned at the stake by the same Moorcroft in spite of her innocence.

A battle of wills and physical harm follows as the pair battle to see who will win. Townspeople take sides and argue. Grace's best friend is one of the few taking her side and pays the price when her husband beats her. Pendleton is not looking for condemnation of Grace but a confession as a way of removing any stain from his name. Not everyone will be happy with what happens to them by the end of the film.

While watching the film I was caught up in the drama that was taking place. Marshall is a skilled director and knows how to create suspense and guide the viewer to where he wants them to go. His previous films prove that. But this one seemed a tad long and could have used a bit of trimming. It doesn't make it a bad movie but less 10-15 minutes and it would have been better.

There is little doubt that the scenes of torture while muted somewhat will be most disturbing to viewers. Explanations of what select devices do will leave the squeamish looking for the remote. But Marshall is simply displaying history and holds back unlike movies of the past that felt gore was needed.

Beneath the movie on the surface is a tale reminiscent of the days we are living in now. The plague can be viewed as the pandemic, although the movie was written before it took place. The witch hunt of the roused crowds is comparable to the Twitter/Facebook crowds that attempt to destroy those who disagree with them. And the birth of a woman capable of holding her own in a world of men is on display which will no doubt draw comparisons to loutish men who continue to abuse women.

The movie is one that will hold your interest for the most part and make you think at the same time. That's a good thing to find in a film these days, especially when it's done with a subtle touch rather than the sledge hammer method many film makers feel is necessary. It would be nice if more film makers followed Marshall's lead and showed a little more restraint when it comes to including topical ideas.

Everything possible bad exists in this film

[namstonk · 1/10 · 3 May 2021]

Yup, this is a bad film, made worse because it clearly had a decent budget, films with a quarter of the budget are better. First our lead speaks as if she has just left RADA, her make-up and hair are all neatly done. The clothes she wears are all machine stitched, not to mention always clean, surprisingly difficult living on a farm in 1665.

It carries on like that throughout the film. The dialogue is appalling, so bad you wonder if a child wrote it. As for the story, well it's laughable bad. However it's the acting that is cringe worthy, Charlotte Kirk is rancid bad and is only in the role as her other-half is director Neil Marshall. If the name does ring-a-bell, Kirk is the 'actress' who had affairs with the CEO of Warner Bros and Vice-Chairman of NBCUniversal.

To think this is the same director who gave us Dog Soldiers, how times change.

Gothic, Medieval, Europe -- Sign me in.

[visionandyouth · 8/10 · 24 April 2021]

A great story about witch hunts in medieval Europe.

Feels like a a very grim tale.

Wonderful gothic atmosphere, good background score and good performances from all the actors.

Beautiful ending !

I thoroughly enjoyed it, and i will say this.... If you got passion and u have knowledge then it's a very well made movie.

No end to her talents!

[parry_na · 7/10 · 5 November 2021]

You're not to worry too much about period detail and accuracy in this ridiculous but entertainingly grim film.

Visually, this is superb. There's a Dario Argento flavour to the rich colour canvas used by director Neil Marshall (who co-wrote this with leading actress Charlotte Kirk). Things are briskly paced too, sometimes too much during important scenes (the Squire's lacing of one character's drink in a fairly crucial bar scene, for one; blink and you'll miss it). The 106 minute running time never stands still for long.

Despite this, some explanations might have helped my appreciation. Does heroine Grace hallucinate that she sees, and gets intimate with, the devil, or is he real? There's a scene that indicates that his night-time visits might be real, but as Grace is closely guarded at all times and no-one notices anything out of the ordinary, this is far from clear.

If this is about female empowerment, it doesn't convince because Grace's Herculean recovery from the relentless and staggered punishments she receives are preposterous. She suffers nothing more than a slight limp which doesn't impede her overpowering various powerful people and freeing prisoners. At the end, I wondered - jokingly - if she was going to swim across the lengthy moat as well. Blow me, she did! An alternative view is that she was indeed willed to survive by the demon, which would make sense, but doesn't do a lot to underline her own strength.

The torture she endures never quite makes the us hide behind our hands because we're spared truly graphic scenes - but we're left in doubt exactly what will happen to her, as it is often described in loving detail by terrific villains Moorcroft (Sean Pertwee) and The Squire (Stephen Waddington).

This is a 'Witchfinder General'-type film given the 2021 'final girl' treatment. Whilst Grace looks every inch a modern day lass and her physical prowess under the circumstances is ludicrous, I had a good time with this. It's colourful, has some terrific imagery and displays some committed acting. My score is 7 out of 10.

Neil Marshall lite.

[running_with_scissors · 4/10 · 9 February 2021]

Dog Soldiers, Descent, Doomsday, Centurion are all guilty pleasures. Even the critically damned Hellboy was enjoyable.

This on the other hand was a hard watch. The lead actress is pretty poor, apparently having suffered terrible torture throughout the movie, she still looks as radiant and agile at the end.

Heres hoping someone will give Marshall a budget to get himself back on track.

UPDATE - After reading reviews I can see the lead actress is Marshalls wife. The penny has dropped now, that would also explain why the numerous times she was naked the camera panned just about everywhere else.

Medieval saw/hostel

[Stanlee107 · 2/10 · 17 February 2021]

You know this will be bad when it started out with the #based on a true story# then it descends into a storyline that is so far fetched it defies all logic! (like all those favourable reviewers for this film!) This is a medieval version of the Salem witch trials. It captures how people could be swayed into believing all the accused were witches.

However all of the other elements of the film are so atrocious. The stoic female protagonist is as defiant as the allegedly son of God. Torture films are not inherently bad but they must have a good storyline and script to sell it to the viewer. A prime example of this is the French film Martyrs that is an uncomfortable watch but you cannot help but emphasise with the protagonist. This film, however, is a poor mockery of women that inspired this film. The ending just got ridiculous in that the accused protagonist becomes the fourth forgotten musketeer! Yes I wish I made this up!

Decent production value wasted on bland nonsense

[fits-47019 · 2/10 · 8 February 2021]

A half assed, bland attempt at a revenge story. If you are going to do this type of thing, at least go for it. Be good or be over the top bad, just don't be this dull.