Review of The Lion in Winter (1968) by Tonypolito — 15 Aug 2010

The plot, drama and dialogue seem somewhat lacking as compared to the superior cinema of the genre and time: "Becket," "A Man for All Seasons" and "Anne of the Thousand Days." Still, it's solid enough work to deserve equitable comparison to those films.

The fact that the originating stage version of this hyper-talky work went dark after just 92 curtains is telling. King Henry II's three sons each covet being next-to-the-throne (even the pimply/whiney youngest John) - while the four other key players - Henry, the Queen, visiting King Philip of France and Henry's mistress Alais - each have their own schemes for succession.

Accordingly, the plot's drenched in deceit, double-crossing, betrayal and insincere words. Unfortunately, each player changes his/her mind regarding his/her own plan about every 30 seconds, to the point where the entire plotline becomes totally unbelievable.

The top-billed deliveries here by Peter O'Toole (as Henry) and Katherine Hepburn (as his Oscar-winning Queen) are the strongest facet of the film. One might suspect that the better-known, Shakespearian theater-bred Anthony Hopkins (as Richard the Lionhearted, the eldest son) and Timothy Dalton (as Philip), here in their screen debuts, drive the supporting performances. But it's actually Royal Academy-trained Jane Merrow, as ingenue-like yet subtly clever and conniving Alais, who's far more interesting to watch.

No history lesson here; this is actually fictional work wrapped around historical figures and draws ever-so loosely on factual events.

Dialogue is sometimes satisfyingly sharp, but more often seems merely pretentious.

Panavision/EastmanColor. The costuming, cinematography and color are all adequate, but there's zero resto work here, so expect spackle consistent with age.

RECOMMENDATION: See the other three films first, before spending any time with this one.