The Uprising turns a medieval insurrection into chaotic modern myth

There is a misconception among certain filmmakers and audiences that the more muddled a film is, the more realistic it appears. This mindset fuels the release of R-rated period pieces like The Uprising, which is far from an adventure about Robin Hood, despite its superficial similarities. Instead, The Uprising presents a grim narrative steeped in semi-historical fact and muddy storytelling, attempting to meet the expectations of a modern-day audience.

Shot in Paul Greengrass' signature handheld style, complete with mockumentary-style zooms, the movie aims to create a modern aesthetic of realism while addressing the rebellion of the common people against their political and economic oppressors. This approach may resonate with contemporary societal issues, as the struggle of the oppressed has echoed through Western revolutions throughout history, including the 1381 Peasants' Revolt.

However, the film's attempt to make the connection between modern-day struggles and historical events is not particularly engaging or effective. The reason lies in Greengrass' decision to split the film's focus between two characters: Ploughman, a literary figure, and Wat Tyler, the actual leader of the uprising. This hasty melding of two thin characters, along with other weak supporting roles, dilutes the film's essence and reduces it to its broadest elements.

Characters like Ploughman, Wat Tyler, the dissident priest John Ball, and the ex-nun Thomasin McKenzie all contribute to this diluted representation, making their shared movement less complex and more one-dimensional for viewers without medieval studies backgrounds. Furthermore, the movie's attempt to incorporate elements like the plague and the assaulter taxman into its narrative fails to elevate the story.

Instead, it results in a film that is difficult to watch, drowning in visual chaos due to Greengrass' return to his shaky camera style. This stylistic choice, while not inherently ill-suited for a certain genre, negatively impacts the film's ability to immerse viewers in the historical conflict. In contrast, the film's moments of court intrigue unintentionally evoke the satirical comedy of Succession, further distancing it from its intended impact.

Despite the semi-campy performance of Andrew Garfield and the grim turn by Garfield himself, the film lacks the levity necessary to balance its heavy themes and grim tone. While Greengrass was clearly inspired by the fable-like elements of his subject matter, his attempt to create a dark-and-gritty medieval revisionism results in a film that ultimately fails to deliver an enjoyable or effective experience for the audience.