Richard the Lionheart: Rebellion

2015 "The heartless war of King Henry II against his sons."
2.6| 1h36m| NR| en| More Info
Released: 11 June 2015 Released
Producted By: WonderPhil Productions
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website: http://www.richardthemovie.com/
Info

The year is 1173. England and France are at war. The destiny of the two great powers has never been so intertwined. As King Henry's wife, Queen Eleanor, is captured and imprisoned by the king himself, Richard and his brothers lead the fight against their father in a heartless war. Allegiances shift with each victory or defeat as the destinies of England and France keep swaying in a delicate balance.

Watch Online

Richard the Lionheart: Rebellion (2015) is now streaming with subscription on Prime Video

Director

Stefano Milla

Production Companies

WonderPhil Productions

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

Stream on any device, 30-day free trial
Watch Now
Richard the Lionheart: Rebellion Videos and Images

Richard the Lionheart: Rebellion Audience Reviews

Protraph Lack of good storyline.
Manthast Absolutely amazing
Sameeha Pugh It is encouraging that the film ends so strongly.Otherwise, it wouldn't have been a particularly memorable film
Tymon Sutton The acting is good, and the firecracker script has some excellent ideas.
fydlrhu OK. This is my first review. I felt morally obligated to warn others. I admit I have wasted a lot of time in my life, but the 15 minutes I wasted watching this move...I truly regret. I actually felt embarrassed for everyone involved -- myself, the actors, the director, cast, crew, innocent bystanders, and all the anals of history (yes anal, as in 'anal orifice,' for who deserves the title more than war-mongering madmen?) Please, please, please...learn from my mistake. Don't waste your time and money on this jolly band of Ren-Faire flunkies with a camera, iMovie and iDeas. You will be as sorry as I am right now.
David Ware Firstly I'm a filmmaker, and I have nothing but respect for those that have actually navigated the gauntlet and succeeded in creating and finishing a film, so; good for the filmmakers.Unfortunately that's where the praise stops. As they should be experienced enough by now to spot a terrible script. (Cheapest bit to get right, but so rarely done)The Director ... There aren't words, just: casting: awful, simply awful... What's with the accents all over the place, half the English weren't, the French king sounded like no other 'french' (one heavily and horribly American, others eastern European) in his small theatre OTT. accent. The fights were needlessly unrealistic, tried to be cool, unlucky gamble. Really should have spent more time with casting, as none of the actors came off well and that tells me of a poor director that didn't rehearse with them enough. And didn't breakdown the script properly.the cinematography: were there two conflicting DOP's?? Some shots were actually classy and well graded and framed and beautiful, making me believe the world. Then they were cut in with horribly framed, shaky hand-held pointless shots which made absolutely no sense. A DOP should be able to tell the story just with the shot selection, how you frame actors can tell a huge amount about their relations and emotions and so on.The editing... Just... Wow. Equal to cinematography. So many shots were utterly pointless and just throw you out, they stand out for all the wrong reasons.All goes back to the direction: did I mention BOOBS? Yeah because they helped the story... Maybe they were the story, three boobs decided to... Waste their and everyone else's time, all the way to this present day.And I love that almost all the positive reviews on here are clearly from the same person, all around the same date, all written in the same flawed English and grammatical structure. That amused me greatly.Don't get me wrong, I love this genre, but I really really want the filmmaker to grow, and learn from his mistakes. And I never even mentioned the sound... Obviously radio mics were above the budget which went on clean costumes (or were they via re-enactors?) and OTT/ unnecessary makeup. I did however quite like the locations, when believable / historically believable.Well done for trying.
GHill1173 Don't get me wrong, this film is absolutely terrible. You really only need to look at the trailer to see that this is a very low budget production. But, to be honest, that's what makes it so entertaining. Yes the acting and directing was horrendous, and it has all the historical accuracy of a Year 5 textbook, but that's part of the charm. It's so bad, it's actually quite good. And so if you want a film with realistic and relatable characters, that keeps you on the edge of your seat and truly brings history to life, then this probably isn't the right film for you. But if you want to watch something just to poke fun at how hilariously bad it is, then this is perfect for you.
collioure_bee Bad direction, bad script, bad production, bad research and acting. This is very low budget (nothing wrong with that) but it shows. According to this the Battle of Devil's Bridge was fought by about ten people. The scenery around the North West of France is snow capped mountains (it isn't) and the first castle they battled in was defended by one knight. Had to give up after just fifteen minutes (if that but it felt like longer) and walk out. Felt to me like they were just mugging me off.Apparently I need ten lines of text for the review. Which is ten more than the film merits. Originally, all I wanted to say was "Oh dear. Why?"