TO KILL A KING

UK, 2003, 102 minutes, Colour.
Tim Roth, Dougray Scott, Olivia Williams, James Bolam, Corin Redgrave, Rupert Everett.
Directed by Mike Barker.

Cromwell and Fairfax was the original tide of the film released as To Kill a King. Perhaps Cromwell and Fairfax sounded too much like a buddy movie, two cowboys, two policemen, two petty criminals. The title, To Kill a King, however, brings out the latent republicanism in all of us! While Charles I is executed in the film, the focus is not on the fate of the monarch who saw his authority as absolute by divine right but on the two generals who led the revolt against the King and created a short-¬lived republic in England.

A personal note on the fascination with Cromwell - not just my Irish ancestry! When I was majoring in History in Canberra during the 1960s, our professor, Manning Clark, a legend because of his imaginative and insightful writings on Australian history, was on sabbatical for two terms. His substitute was a professor of English history whose specialty, unexpectedly surprising for us, was the history of the Rump Parliament and the Commonwealth. We spent the two terms avoiding the Royalist writings whose post-1660s anti-Cromwell views coloured subsequent received English history. We had to read the Puritan texts, books and letters, which glorified Cromwell and Fairfax as patriots and heroes.

In 1970 came Ken Hughes' Cromwell with Richard Harris as Cromwell and Alec Guinness as Charles I. It was a version that was generally pro-Puritan, a film that would have given support to those who helped promote Cromwell to the ranks of the ten top Britons in the BBC-sponsored survey in 2002.

Now more than thirty years after Cromwell comes To Kill A King. This version seems to be anti-Cromwell, anti-Charles I and pro-Thomas Fairfax. In fact, some reviewers commented on the presentation of Cromwell's cruelty, stating that he was less brutal and intolerant in real life. This might need to be modified by the Irish and the Scots. Reviewers also noted a homoeroticism in the relationship between the two men. at least on the part of Cromwell who seems inordinately jealous of Fairfax's wife, Anne, and who refers several times to how Thomas is loved by the people and how he had a pretty face. But that would take us down Freudian paths, whereas, we are following Jung and personality type here.

What Cromwell and Fairfax would identify with in Type terms in real life is something historians might help us with. Our immediate concern is with how screenwriter, Jenny Mayhew, and director, Mike Barker, interpret them. Both are energised by politics, military action and the support of the people. While they are outgoing, both of them have a strong liking for introversion, for stepping back into their private worlds, as well. Both are decisive. They receive acclaim as strong generals, Fairfax being especially successful in his tactics for victory. The structure of the plot and their interactions present them as down-to-earth, living very much in the present, whether it be on the battlefield or in the halls of government. Cromwell himself, a far more politically shrewd character than Fairfax, seems more intuituve.

Both are men of strong principles. Their criteria for decision-making arc based on authenticity and truth. As the film progresses with Fairfax as hero, having to face the actions of the Parliament and of Cromwell in bringing down Charles I, he is tormented by the dilemmas of his patriotic principles and his innate sense of justice for all. He does make some decisions, especially urging the Speaker of the House, Denzil Holies (James Bolam), to escape to France with his family. At the end, when he sees that Cromwell needs to be stopped, even assassinated, his long loyalty and love for Cromwell cannot allow the new tyrant to be killed, even though he had set up the attempt.
Cromwell, on the other hand, is drawn as going in the opposite direction to Fairfax. A loyal second in command in the field, he assumes more power.


On further reflection, Fairfax, played by a very dignified Dougray Scott, becomes ever more heroic, perhaps saintly, even at die end when he decides that Cromwell must be killed. In fact, the portrait of Fairfax is one of a man comfortable in himself, able to act appropriately while acknowledging the moral complexities of a transition from monarchy to republic. He also moves towards his opposites, more introverted and retiring as he returns to has Yorkshire estate when Cromwell becomes Lord Protector, less prone to take action, realising the complexities of what he has set in motion and, with the love of his wife (Olivia Williams) and his desire for children, tempering his strong stances with love and sympathy. He is presented as a hero and as an ideal, not perfect, but a man of integrity.

And what of Charles I? He is played intelligently by an almost unrecognisable Rupert Everett (though his height is apparently a foot taller than that of Charles I in actuality - with Tim Roth far shorter than the real Cromwell). Charles is presented as a man of dignity with such faith in his authority and its sanction by God that anything else is, for him, inconceivable. He is played as shrewd in politicking, with sensitivity towards his friends, but someone so conditioned by his society and his royal heritage that it is difficult to read him as a whole personality. His death scene is played as a tragedy, the death of a man with a fatal flaw, but one who to execution with great dignity and bearing.

What finally emerges from the film and from his voiceover comments is that Fairfax is a good man.

1. Audience interest in British history? Knowledge of the period? How well did the film supply information?

2. The period, of Charles I, of Cromwell? 17th-century Britain? Costumes, decor, sets? The presentation of the Royalists? Of the Puritans? Lifestyle, ways of dressing, manners? The musical score?

3. The sympathies of the screenplay? For Charles? For Oliver Cromwell? For Fairfax? Each of their stances?

4. The original title, Cromwell and Fairfax? This title and the focus on Charles I, the intentions of the Puritans? The challenging of the Divine Right of Kings? Cromwell and Fairfax as friends, allies, common enemies?

5. Charles I, his character, Divine Right, his sense of inheritance? His stances on the monarchy, on Parliament? The clash with Cromwell? The encounters with Lady Fairfax, as an ally? The range of supporters, the nobility? His imprisonment, his bearing in prison, the condemnation, his execution?

6. Parliament, the settings, the views of the members? The Royalists and traditions? The revolutionaries and their egalitarian approach? The sittings, the speeches?

7. Denzil Holies, his role, loyalties, family, providing for the King, the King providing an escape?

8. Cromwell, as a character, his background, a hard man, his family, the warts and all approach? Politics? Military? His command of men? His relationship to Fairfax, their collaboration, the battles, their differences? Cromwell himself, the preview to his government?

9. Fairfax, his character, his role, his politics, his loyalties? The troops and battles? His wife? His leadership as a decent man? His attitude towards the King’s death? To Cromwell and his leadership?

10. The recreation of the period, the atmosphere, understanding the issues of the time and the consequences?