A Rebellion That Never Quite Finds Its Voice Lies in ‘The Uprising’
There’s nothing quite like seeing a film trailer and instantly recognizing its potential. Trailers have a unique job: saying so much without saying much at all. They have to convey a film’s heart in a minute or two while grabbing audiences’ attention. They need to be flashy in just the right way, and leave you wanting more. I wanted more the moment I saw The Uprising’s trailer. It had grit, action, and names behind it that meant something. Yet as I walked out of the theater, I felt like the potential I’d seen in that trailer was squandered.
Don’t get me wrong, a potentially terrific movie is buried somewhere inside The Uprising. The ingredients are there: a fascinating, often-overlooked chapter of English history; acclaimed filmmaker Paul Greengrass at the helm; a terrific ensemble led by Andrew Garfield; and a story about ordinary people pushed to the breaking point by an increasingly powerful ruling class. The 1381 Peasants’ Revolt feels almost tailor-made for the big screen, especially now, when stories about economic inequality, political distrust, and resistance to authority feel remarkably relevant.
However, The Uprising never quite turns those ingredients into the stirring historical epic it clearly wants to, and should, be. Director Paul Greengrass approaches the story with the same restless energy that has defined much of his work, which you can feel in every minute detail. The result is a film that can be visceral and occasionally thrilling, but ultimately frustrating because it feels unfocused and meandering. Some sequences show exactly why Greengrass remains such an effective director of large-scale tension, but other stretches let his stylistic choices become distracting enough to pull the audience out of the story. When The Uprising is good, it’s great; however, this Robin Hood origin story leaves a lot to be desired.
[Warning: spoilers from The Uprising are below!]
A Fascinating Chapter of History
The Uprising opens in 1381, as England struggles in the aftermath of the Black Death. Life has never been the same since; however, those in charge are increasing pressure on those most impacted. There has been a significant number of lives lost amongst the poor working class, causing enormous social and economic consequences that the crown either isn’t aware of, or just doesn’t care. The country has been devastated beyond belief, with the ruling class continuing to exert its power, ultimately resulting in the ordinary people becoming increasingly furious. They are tired of the relentless taxation and oppression, so something has to give.
The countrymen need a voice, someone to stand up to the travesty, and that’s where Andrew Garfield’s unnamed Ploughman comes in. Having lost his wife and children to the plague, he’s a grieving man who has little patience left for a system that seems determined to squeeze whatever remains from people like him.
After an encounter with a tax collector pushes tensions past the breaking point, the Ploughman decides to take his fight to the crown and officially joins the growing rebellion. However, the movement is just his, as many others are looking to join the fight. He walks among historical figures such as Wat Tyler (Cosmo Jarvis) and John Ball (Jamie Bell), each with their own motives for enacting change before time runs out.
Their movement eventually grows into something far larger than any of them could have anticipated, sending thousands of rebels toward London in the hope of confronting the young King Richard II. Is there hope for a better tomorrow for the people of England, or will the king’s fist only grow tighter?
Too many ideas fighting for attention in The Uprising
When you look at the premise, there’s no denying that there’s a fantastic foundation for an action film. The problem is that The Uprising often seems unsure what kind of movie it wants to be. On one hand, this film is a gritty historical drama about a population pushed into rebellion. On another, it is a contemporary political allegory about wealth inequality and the abuse of power. Then, particularly toward the end, it starts flirting with Robin Hood mythology.
None of these ideas are inherently incompatible, and they can coexist in an engaging film. In fact, they should have come together perfectly in this film, yet for some reason they don’t assimilate in The Uprising in a satisfying way.
The political parallels are perhaps the most interesting part of The Uprising, with Greengrass clearly wanting audiences to recognize the similarities between medieval England’s frustrations and those of the modern world. The film understands that anger over taxation, economic disparity, and political leadership can transcend centuries.
Yet The Uprising doesn’t always trust its own material enough to let those parallels develop naturally. Instead, the screenplay feels surprisingly blunt, with some characters existing only to explain the film’s political ideas rather than develop as complex human beings. This is especially true of the Ploughman, who is meant to be the audience’s emotional entry point into the rebellion.
Garfield does everything possible to give him dimension, but the character is written broadly enough that the actor doesn’t always have much to work with. That’s a real shame, because Garfield is one of the movie’s strongest assets. He brings a wounded intensity to the role, letting the Ploughman’s grief linger beneath nearly everything he does. Garfield doesn’t play him as a traditional heroic revolutionary. Instead, his transformation feels almost reluctant. He is a man already devastated by circumstances beyond his control, and his involvement in the uprising gradually becomes an extension of that personal devastation.
When he’s given the opportunity to simply react rather than deliver some of the film’s heavier dialogue, the performance becomes considerably more effective. His eyes and physicality communicate far more than the screenplay’s speeches. The character’s exhaustion makes his eventual radicalization believable, even if the journey toward it isn’t always as dramatically satisfying as it should be. Andrew Garfield’s performance is ultimately one of the reasons The Uprising remains watchable even when the film itself begins to stumble.
Final Thoughts on The Uprising
The Uprising has so much going for it that it should work. It has all the pieces for a quality film, yet something still feels missing. Its screenplay is too simplistic when it should be more complex; its political commentary is occasionally too obvious, and its visual style sometimes overwhelms the story rather than enhancing it. Add the Robin Hood material on top, and it feels like the creatives aren’t sure what they truly wanted from the film, or whether they trusted it to stand on its own two feet.
As a historical action drama, it is occasionally gripping and visually ambitious. As a character piece, it is considerably less successful. And as a political statement, it has plenty to say but doesn’t always know how to say it. The result is a film with plenty of fire but surprisingly little focus, which ultimately feels like a good enough reason to watch something else and save yourself the trouble of slogging through The Uprising.
The Uprising is currently in theaters! Are you planning on checking this film out? Share your thoughts on social media and tag @bsb.insider to keep the conversation going!
Review: KPop Demon Hunters Blends Spectacle, Sound, And Emotion Into A Bold Genre Experiment
