The Captain Alatriste books are great actioners with Imperial Spain as the backdrop. I wish that Arturo Perez-Reverte would return to add a few more books to the series.
Another great book by Alatriste, "El Club Dumas", was also taken to the screen as "The Ninth Gate" with Johnny Depp and Frank Langella. One of the rare instances where the film is actually better than the book.
Alatriste is an excellent movie which showcases Viggo Mortensen's acting prowess. The only thing which detracts from this powerful piece is that the Battle of Rocroi (1643, which many consider the beginning of the end of the Tercios), which should have been made with CGI like the battles in LotR were, is reduced to the action of, at most, two companies. An altogether well made piece, though.
That was viggo mortensen in the thumbnail not Soloman Kane. But Soloman Kane will be getting the top spot in one of my upcoming lists in the near future :)
Although Solomon Kane is set in the Renaissance, it is a fantasy piece, so it does not fit here. An excellent movie, though, as are the stories. One of the late great Peter Postlethwaite's last works.
anonymous is as historically accurate as harry potter. the beatles sang 'turn off your mind', if you watch this you need to turn off your common sense as well.
@@charlessomerset9754 Felt the same way- having Marlowe killed by Shakespeare was the low point in a stupid movie. al least his Godzilla didn't attempt to prove that King Kong was an imposter (although his Godzilla was definitely one). Rubbish!
I will never watch Anonymous. Shakespeare existed and absolutely wrote his plays. I don't understand why people (especially Americans) have the need to create insane conspiracies.
If you only see “A Man For All Seasons” but skip watching the 2015 limited series of “Wolf Hall” (extremely highly recommended watching) or reading modern biographies about him you’ll make the mistake of thinking that Thomas More was some saintly man when he wasn’t. Sure, he had a brilliant mind, authored several books (“Utopia” being his most famous work), was an excellent lawyer…….and was a fanatical Catholic who tortured and had burned at the stake anyone who had Protestant sympathies soon after the Protestant Reformation of 1517 began when Catholic monk Martín Luther and his friends broke off from the Catholic Church for a host of abuses and doctrines that didn’t line up with the Bible. Granted, some of Protestants were just as bad at burning and torturing Catholics for their beliefs. However, More actually took delight in torturing people at his home and in the Tower and gleefully attended their burnings. He treated his wives, daughters (except Margaret), sons, in-laws and servants like garbage. Standing up to Henry VIII was a very brave and foolhardy thing to do. I suspect that More actually wanted to be a martyr because he was a narcissist and wanted to be remembered.
Yeah and you are totally unbiased clearly... None of your allegations are properly sourced and frankly given the circumstances of those days a lot of very unscrupulous powerful people needed to trash his reputation post mortem in order to justify his execution........... Your personal attacks on him basically put you in the same category of those who try very hard to trash his reputation...... you clearly don't have the guts to risk your life for any beliefs and therefore you assume that those that do must be 'narcissists who want to be remembered"
Your portrayal of More is also biased. Scholars are still debating More's personal involvement with burning Protestants at the stake. It is certain that six people were burned during the time he was Chancellor, but ascribing motives such as that he "took delight" in such punishments is conjecture on your part. We can't actually know what's in someone else's mind unless they tell us. And even then, they could be lying. Was More malicious and vengeful, or a saintly man who had the courage of his convictions but didn't harm anyone? I suspect the truth lies somewhere in between, but can we ever be sure? I don't think we can be dogmatic about More's actions or attitudes. The evidence is murky, at best.
And BTW l have seen both MFAS and WH. And all l can say is Hilary Mantel is both Catholic and British and Robert Bolt won both the Pulitzer and the Best Picture Oscar. If anyone has an axe to grind on this subject it would be them: not you. Don’t presume your assumptions will be uncritically accepted in this forum-you might as well insist that Jane Austen hated men, or that James M. Barrie was just a pederast. Sheeesh.
I think you ought to have mentioned Robert Shaw's excellent performance as Henry VIII in A Man for All Seasons
I never heard of the Alatriste movie or books before. Thanks for letting us know about it!
Your welcome :)
I LOVED The Merchant of Venice: the performances but also the soundtrack were both Superb!
Yes I agree 100%.
Pacino was in it. Makes for a great movie.
The Captain Alatriste books are great actioners with Imperial Spain as the backdrop. I wish that Arturo Perez-Reverte would return to add a few more books to the series.
Another great book by Alatriste, "El Club Dumas", was also taken to the screen as "The Ninth Gate" with Johnny Depp and Frank Langella. One of the rare instances where the film is actually better than the book.
Actually Alatriste is not a renaissance movie it is in early modern or Baroque period as it is set in 17th century much later than renaissance.
True. Although you could argue that Spain's Renaissance ended at or around the date of the Battle of Rocroi (which ends the movie).
Great recommendations! Thank you
Vanessa Redgrave playing the mother and daughter
Borgia is a highly, highly recommended renaissance series. Both versions of Borgia are highly recommended.
Alatriste is an excellent movie which showcases Viggo Mortensen's acting prowess. The only thing which detracts from this powerful piece is that the Battle of Rocroi (1643, which many consider the beginning of the end of the Tercios), which should have been made with CGI like the battles in LotR were, is reduced to the action of, at most, two companies. An altogether well made piece, though.
In late 1970s in german TV a four parts movie about the catholic armyleader Wallenstein was shown.
You missed Il Mestiere delle Armi "the Profession of Arms" great movie if you enjoy things from this era that are based on actual events
Honestly. Alatriste is the best one.
I’ve seen the agony and the ecstasy twice
I first watched on t.v. back in the late 60's and then I read the book.
What no Solomon Kane he was in the thumbnail.
That was viggo mortensen in the thumbnail not Soloman Kane. But Soloman Kane will be getting the top spot in one of my upcoming lists in the near future :)
@@HistorySpark thanks very much Kane has always been my favorite Ren-period adventurer.
Although Solomon Kane is set in the Renaissance, it is a fantasy piece, so it does not fit here. An excellent movie, though, as are the stories. One of the late great Peter Postlethwaite's last works.
anonymous is as historically accurate as harry potter. the beatles sang 'turn off your mind', if you watch this you need to turn off your common sense as well.
I agree. Rarely do historical films piss me off, but this one did.
@@charlessomerset9754 Felt the same way- having Marlowe killed by Shakespeare was the low point in a stupid movie. al least his Godzilla didn't attempt to prove that King Kong was an imposter (although his Godzilla was definitely one). Rubbish!
I will never watch Anonymous. Shakespeare existed and absolutely wrote his plays. I don't understand why people (especially Americans) have the need to create insane conspiracies.
If you only see “A Man For All Seasons” but skip watching the 2015 limited series of “Wolf Hall” (extremely highly recommended watching) or reading modern biographies about him you’ll make the mistake of thinking that Thomas More was some saintly man when he wasn’t. Sure, he had a brilliant mind, authored several books (“Utopia” being his most famous work), was an excellent lawyer…….and was a fanatical Catholic who tortured and had burned at the stake anyone who had Protestant sympathies soon after the Protestant Reformation of 1517 began when Catholic monk Martín Luther and his friends broke off from the Catholic Church for a host of abuses and doctrines that didn’t line up with the Bible. Granted, some of Protestants were just as bad at burning and torturing Catholics for their beliefs. However, More actually took delight in torturing people at his home and in the Tower and gleefully attended their burnings. He treated his wives, daughters (except Margaret), sons, in-laws and servants like garbage. Standing up to Henry VIII was a very brave and foolhardy thing to do. I suspect that More actually wanted to be a martyr because he was a narcissist and wanted to be remembered.
😮
All you have to know is that Thomas More wound up being the patron saint of lawyers.😯
Yeah and you are totally unbiased clearly...
None of your allegations are properly sourced and frankly given the circumstances of those days a lot of very unscrupulous powerful people needed to trash his reputation post mortem in order to justify his execution...........
Your personal attacks on him basically put you in the same category of those who try very hard to trash his reputation...... you clearly don't have the guts to risk your life for any beliefs and therefore you assume that those that do must be 'narcissists who want to be remembered"
Your portrayal of More is also biased. Scholars are still debating More's personal involvement with burning Protestants at the stake. It is certain that six people were burned during the time he was Chancellor, but ascribing motives such as that he "took delight" in such punishments is conjecture on your part. We can't actually know what's in someone else's mind unless they tell us. And even then, they could be lying. Was More malicious and vengeful, or a saintly man who had the courage of his convictions but didn't harm anyone? I suspect the truth lies somewhere in between, but can we ever be sure? I don't think we can be dogmatic about More's actions or attitudes. The evidence is murky, at best.
And BTW l have seen both MFAS and WH. And all l can say is Hilary Mantel is both Catholic and British and Robert Bolt won both the Pulitzer and the Best Picture Oscar. If anyone has an axe to grind on this subject it would be them: not you. Don’t presume your assumptions will be uncritically accepted in this forum-you might as well insist that Jane Austen hated men, or that James M. Barrie was just a pederast. Sheeesh.
One-second edits are really annoying.
It is deVere!