Historical dramas can fail for many reasons, from playing fast and loose with the facts, to miscasting, to making an important event or figure seem boring. It's great when a movie really gets the historical component right, but immensely frustrating when one doesn't. In fact, a failed historical drama can be about as exciting as reading a high school textbook.
Some of the worst films of this type can at least lay claim to one great performance as a saving grace. In a number of cases, actors have managed to deliver noteworthy turns in pictures that, for whatever reason, didn't achieve what they hoped to in capturing a period of time or a notable chapter in history. Among them are well-known names such as Cate Blanchett, Billy Bob Thornton, and Leonardo DiCaprio. Given their level of talent, it's no surprise they can shine even in weak material. This list is about more than shining, though. These actors did genuinely inspired work while saddled with decidedly uninspired screenplays.
Some of the films are based on actual history, while others are merely set in prominent historical eras. In each case, there's plenty to explore about why the movie doesn't work and what the actors did to rise above the flaws.
- Photo:
The Movie's Deal: There are plenty of things you can criticize Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves for, and critics hit all of them: Kevin Costner's inconsistent accent, action scenes that are ineptly staged, and an out-of-place assault scene that's far more disturbing than a lightweight action film needs. It was a box office hit in 1991, although no one seemed to get too attached to it.
The Really Great Performance: Without any competition, the best thing in Robin Hood is Alan Rickman, who plays the Sheriff of Nottingham. The role came three years after his show-stopping turn as the villainous Hans Gruber in Die Hard, and somehow Rickman managed to be even more deliciously evil here. Rarely has the "love to hate him" factor registered so high. Roger Ebert singled out the way the actor makes his character a "wicked, droll, sly, witty master of the put-down and one-liners." He added: "When Rickman appears on the screen we perk up, because we know we'll be entertained, at whatever cost to the story."
Better performance than movie?- Photo:
The Movie's Deal: Historical dramas aren't the most obvious movies to inspire sequels, but 1998's Elizabeth was such a hit with both critics and audiences that the filmmakers decided to try it again. The magic did not return. Rather than working as a recreation of history, Elizabeth: The Golden Age feels like a soap opera, with more attention paid to costumes and sets than plot or character development. "This film rides low in the water, its cargo of opulence too much to carry," said Roger Ebert.
The Really Great Performance: Cate Blanchett reprises the role of Queen Elizabeth, and let's be honest: She can do no wrong. Even Ebert had to celebrate her, commenting, "Who else would be so tall, regal, assured and convincing that these surroundings would not diminish her?" Everything around her feels melodramatic, but Blanchett strives to make the woman she's playing as authentic as possible. She overcomes the excess of visual trappings to deliver a complex, sophisticated performance. Carrie Rickey of the Philadelphia Inquirer put it best, writing that Blanchett's "unforced majesty makes a so-so film worth watching."
Better performance than movie?- Photo:
The Movie's Deal: The sequel 300: Rise of an Empire got made despite 300 star Gerard Butler and director Zack Snyder deciding not to come back. Without their defining input, the film had to go a different way, telling the story of Greek general Themistokles taking on Persian forces, led in part by Artemisia (played by Eva Green). It was roundly slammed by critics for putting much more focus on gore than on storytelling. "Headache-inducing" is how The Dissolve described it.
The Really Great Performance: Even reviewers who hated the movie had to bask in the glow of Eva Green's awesome pedal-to-the-floor performance. The actress gives her villainous role everything she's got, infusing Artemisia with such charismatic evil that it's impossible to take your eyes offof her. She seems to know 300: Rise of an Empire is junk and single-handledly tries to elevate the material. Scott Mendelson of Forbes called Green's work "a fully physical and genuinely shaded star turn that is almost as exciting as all of the hacking and slashing."
Better performance than movie?- Photo:
The Movie's Deal: There have been more cinematic versions of the King Arthur story than you could shake Excalibur at, and the one from 2004 ranks pretty low among them. The decision to make it action-heavy was seemingly inspired by the success of pictures like Braveheart and Gladiator. A revisionist spin, which minimizes some of the most beloved elements of the tale, doesn't do the film any favors. Critics slammed it for being "profoundly stupid and inept."
The Really Great Performance: Stellan Skarsgard portrays Cerdic, the Saxon king. The Washington Post described his interpretation of the character as "Yosemite Sam with a serious case of constipation" and that's honestly a great compliment in this case. The actor takes a big swing, coming up with a way to play Cerdic that's surprising, a little kooky, and undeniably menacing. In a movie where everything else feels kind of pre-fabricated, Skarsgard's eccentricities stand out in the best possible way.
Better performance than movie?- Photo:
The Movie's Deal: Wyatt Earp was supposed to be an epic look at the life and career of the legendary sheriff, played by Kevin Costner. A 191-minute running time was widely viewed as a hindrance, as was the story's tendency to bite off more than it could chew by cramming in too many things. Roger Ebert summed it up by calling the film "a rambling, unfocused biography" and "a three-hour film that needs better pacing."
The Really Great Performance: To play the tubercular Doc Holliday, Dennis Quaid physically transformed himself, dropping his weight down to 138 pounds so that he would look credibly emaciated. That creates a sense of authenticity in the character that benefits the film overall. You care about him, if nothing else. Entertainment Weekly called Quaid "a major saving grace" who is "more alive than anyone else in the movie."
Better performance than movie?- Photo:
The Movie's Deal: Although Mary Queen of Scots got passable reviews, it was a flop with audiences, grossing $16 million domestically. And most everyone agrees that the manner in which it takes liberties with history is unsatisfying. The movie concludes with Mary (Saoirse Ronan) meeting her cousin Elizabeth (Margot Robbie) - the same one who later signed her warrant for passing. Such a meeting never happened, and it appears it was created simply to get the two lead actresses together and to manufacture artificial drama. That led The Atlantic to dub it "a two-dimensional take on an intricate piece of history."
The Really Great Performance: As Mary, Saoirse Ronan transcends the shaky material. She does something vital for period dramas, in that she makes the personality and motivations of a historical figure - a young queen, no less - feel relevant to today's audiences. Her work isn't stuffy, but vibrant and relatable. As critic Mick LaSalle of the San Francisco Examiner put it, Ronan portrays Mary as "someone with the dangerous certainty of youth, willing to wager everything on a weak hand."
Better performance than movie?- Photo:
- The Great Gatsby
- Warner Bros.
The Movie's Deal: F. Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby is a classic novel, but also one that, on the surface, can seem stuffy to younger people. Director Baz Lurhmann tried to compensate for that by making a big, glitzy, CGI-heavy 3D version with an incongruous soundtrack of modern artists like Jay-Z, Lana Del Rey, and The xx. Although a cool idea on the surface, the sheer weight of staging a dazzle-you-at-all-costs spectacle stripped Gatsby of its inherent meaning. CNN critic Tom Charity dubbed it "misconceived and misjudged, a crude burlesque on what's probably American literature's most precious jewel."
The Really Great Performance: Even if the movie as a whole doesn't quite work, there's a certain level of perfection in casting Leonardo DiCaprio as the enigmatic, party-throwing millionaire Jay Gatsby. The actor has always been known for his, shall we say, appreciation for women and living the high life. That lends a sense of authenticity to his work, on top of his obvious talent. The Globe and Mail lauded DiCaprio for managing "to convey the yearning innocence [of Gatsby] without sacrificing the palpable menace." In other words, the actor is perfect for the role, even if the movie's approach to Fitzgerald's story isn't a perfect fit.
Better performance than movie?- Photo:
- Photo:
The Movie's Deal: Even star Brad Pitt admitted that Troy wasn't very good. He told the New York Times that he only did it because he contractually owed Warner Bros. a movie. He added that it "became a commercial kind of thing. Every shot was like, Here’s the hero! There was no mystery.” Critics agreed. Troy has a 54% rating at Rotten Tomatoes.
The Really Great Performance: It's no surprise that Brian Cox is a lion in Troy, despite its overall mediocrity. He's one of those ultra-dependable character actors who never gives anything less than 100%. As Agamemnon, he delivers a powerful, fearsome performance that stands out amid the miscasting of Brad Pitt and the uninspired filmmaking. The Seattle Times raved that Cox "so impeccably conveys burning ambition that you can practically see smoke rising from him."
Better performance than movie?- Photo:
The Movie's Deal: Tom Hooper's cinematic take on the Broadway musical version of Les Miserables has its fans, but the people who dislike it are really passionate in their expression. The movie's detractors lambasted the film for its bombastic tone. Critics used terms like "overbearingly maudlin and distorted" to describe it. The Hollywood Reporter went so far as to say the actors waged "a Sisyphean battle against musical diarrhea and a laboriously repetitive visual approach." Subtle the film most definitely is not.
The Really Great Performance: Everybody remembers Anne Hathaway's Les Mis performance because she won the Best Supporting Actress Oscar for it. But let's take a minute to show some love to Samantha Barks, who plays Eponine. Having previously played the role onstage, the actress had plenty of time to fully develop her take on Eponine, and it shows. While she may not get the same kind of showy moments bigger name co-stars like Hathaway, Russell Crowe, and Hugh Jackman get, Barks brings an abundance of emotion to every scene in which she appears. USA Today nailed it when it hailed her performance as "heartbreakingly soulful."
Better performance than movie?- Photo:
The Movie's Deal: In its "Critics Consensus" summation, Rotten Tomatoes succinctly describes 2004's The Alamo as "too conventional and uninvolving to be memorable." That says it all. The film sports a weak 29% approval rating. Much of that is likely attributable to behind-the-scenes difficulties that included switching directors, dropping the budget, and chopping 45 minutes out of the original three-hour cut. It's hard to make a good movie under those conditions.
The Really Great Performance: If the film itself was savaged, the opposite was true for star Billy Bob Thornton, who plays Davy Crockett. The hazard in taking on such a legendary figure is playing the icon rather than the person (who, of course, was not yet iconic). Thornton deftly avoids that trap, creating a persona for Crockett that feels genuine. Variety echoed the sentiment of many critics, saying, "Thornton makes for an unusually self-deprecating but entirely plausible Crockett, bringing a friendly, uncloying down-home quality to the most famous defender of the Alamo."
Better performance than movie?- Photo:
The Movie's Deal: Cleopatra had one of the most notoriously troubled productions in cinema history. The original director was fired. Star Elizabeth Taylor was drinking and over-using pills during filming. Co-star Richard Burton was also drinking heavily. And the two of them were having a torrid affair, an act that got them condemned by the Vatican after it became public. Between those things, a runaway budget, and a new director - Joseph L. Mankiewicz - with no experience making epics, it's no wonder Cleopatra turned out to be a mess. A fascinating mess, but a mess just the same.
The Really Great Performance: Even amid all those problems, Burton somehow managed to deliver a commanding performance. For starters, his character, Marc Antony, is supposed to be passionately in love with Taylor's Cleopatra. Given that the actor was madly in love with his co-star during filming, you can definitely feel the desire coming off of him. The New Yorker praised the way their chemistry is as "entrancing onscreen as it was in life." The Guardian, meanwhile, cheered Burton for the way he uses "that virile, angle-grinder voice of his." Antony has some grand speeches in the movie, which Burton delivers with great authority.
Better performance than movie?- Photo:
The Movie's Deal: Cold Mountain is a prime example of a movie that's Oscar bait when it first comes out, but which nobody ever bothers to watch after awards season is over. It's rated fresh at Rotten Tomatoes, but critic Nick Schager's assessment that it's "something to mildly admire rather than embrace" seems just about right when considered today. The whole thing feels like it was manufactured to win awards, to the point of being stiff.
The Really Great Performance: It's no understatement to say that the late Philip Seymour Hoffman was brilliant in everything he did. His specialty, though, was playing deeply flawed - bordering on unlikable - characters. In Cold Mountain, he takes on the role of a fallen reverend, and once again displays his impressive talent for finding the humanity in people we typically wouldn't want to be around. Entertainment Weekly raved about the way he excelled at "making masochistic piggishness likable." Getting the audience to care about a not particularly nice character is a challenge. Hoffman does it with consummate skill.
Better performance than movie?- Photo:
The Movie's Deal: Oliver Stone was used to having critics love his work, so it must have been a surprise when his epic Alexander was almost roundly panned. The three-hour epic attempted to look at a historical figure in a new light, but just ended up muddled and unexpectedly dull. CNN's critic Paul Clinton summed it up succinctly when he called the picture "a ponderous death march of a story that seemingly never ends."
The Really Great Performance: Although casting the then 29-year-old Angelina Jolie as the mother of 28-year-old Colin Farrell is weird, the actress proves to be the only interesting thing in Alexander, thanks to what Newsweek dubbed "a grand-opera turn." Whereas most of the film is boring enough to induce sleep, she's fully alive as the sultry Olympias. Yes, she's over the top, but in a massively entertaining way that makes you sit up and pay attention. Slate's David Edelstein couldn't get enough, writing, "Jolie slits her eyes and toys with her lines, controlling the space without raising her voice... Forget Alexander: The film is a pedestal to Angelina the great."
Better performance than movie?
