Not a movie for historians or Shakespeare buffs

Rating: 5/10 (4 November 2019)

Once I went to a medieval times restaurant with my father. The section we were seated in was the "Green Knight" section and the Green Knight turned out to be the villain of the play before us. My father got a bit excited by this. At one point the king declared that he was making peace with the Green Knight's country. My father then shouted "No peace, war! War!" I feel like almost everyone in this movie is doing the exact same thing for Hal.
Now, I'm quite a fan of Shakespeare as well as something of an amateur historian. I have a small library of books dedicated to British history and the monarchy. So I was excited by the announcement of this film as it touched two passions of mine. Needless to say, it wasn't quite what I thought it would be
It's very clear that this production is only minimally based on the famous Shakespeare plays. They borrow the characters and follow the same plot to a degree, but it bears very little resemblance to the plays beyond that. This isn't about the matter of language, but more the feel and actual story of the plays.
That's not always a bad thing. The character of Falstaff is not just a cowardly buffoon like in the plays, but an interesting man and capable warrior even. Still a drunk yes, but his character is richer and has more depth than in the plays.
No my main problem is Hal. Though acted well, Hal just feels so very out of place in this story. Like I said about my father, Hal is the king desiring peace while my father is everyone in England desiring war. Hal feels like a 21st century man in a medieval drama. It just doesn't fit, especially not in history.
The real Hal, or Henry V, was actually a man of his time: a brilliant warrior and quite the opposite of the pacifist he seems in this film. The fact of the times is that war was popular in medieval times, and war with France was very popular in England as they had quite the rivalry. There is a reason Henry V's son, Henry VI was deposed twice: peace, especially with France, was seen as weakness. Henry V would have been raised from the cradle to believe France was the enemy and England should defeat it. It just struck me as so completely out of step to have Hal be so against war. Perhaps they were afraid they would make him look like a warmonger, but that would have been easily enough to avoid. Rather they fail to grasp that this is a historical film, and the truth of the matter is war was the most effective means of diplomacy and brought about glory and popularity. There is a reason Richard the Lionheart has a better reputation than he probably deserves in England: war equaled strength and in that day a man wanted to be seen as strong.
It's not a bad movie. The acting is good, the story isn't bad either, but it clearly wasn't meant for people like me. If I didn't understand the tine period as well as I do, know the plays so well, nor have studied the true history as I have, I probably could have given this a higher score. It's a good drama, but Hal just stands out as out of place and nothing like a true medieval king.