History Film / Cromwell

''Cromwell'' is a 1970 British {{epic|Movie}} PeriodPiece about the UsefulNotes/EnglishCivilWar and the events that led up to it. Based on the life of UsefulNotes/OliverCromwell and his role in the war, it was directed by Ken Hughes, and starred Creator/RichardHarris as the title character and Creator/AlecGuinness as King UsefulNotes/CharlesI. The cast also features Creator/RobertMorley as the Earl of Manchester, Dorothy Tutin as Queen Henrietta Maria, Frank Finlay as John Carter, Creator/TimothyDalton as Prince Rupert of the Rhine, Patrick Wymark as the Earl of Strafford, Creator/PatrickMagee as Hugh Peters, Creator/NigelStock as Sir Edward Hyde, Creator/CharlesGray as the Earl of Essex, and Creator/MichaelJayston as Henry Ireton.

* KnowWhenToFoldEm: One could make a good argument that both historically and in the context of the film Prince Rupert couldn't have held a besieged Bristol against Cromwell's forces anyway and took the best exit ramp he could. But Charles I and his vassals condemn Rupert as a DirtyCoward for deserting his post and ultimately costing them the war, especially since the price for his escape was all of Bristol's supplies and most of the army's cannons. Historically, everyone was convinced Bristol was absolutely impregnable even though it was successfully besieged multiple times throughout the English civil wars.

* JerkassHasAPoint: Cromwell's colleague, Henry Ireton, is condescending and belligerent with his radical views being opposed by Cromwell at every point. Though nearly every one of them (the onset of an English Civil War, marching on Parliament to dictate terms to the King, Oliver himself should take control of the country) end up becoming reality.
* KnowWhenToFoldEm: A zigzagged example. One could make a good argument that both historically and in the context of the film Prince Rupert couldn't have held a besieged Bristol against Cromwell's forces anyway and took the best exit ramp he could. On the other hand, Charles I and his vassals rightly condemn Rupert as a DirtyCoward for deserting his post and ultimately costing them the war, especially since the price for his escape was all of Bristol's supplies and most of the army's cannons.

* KnowWhenToFoldEm: A zigzagged example. One could make a good argument that both historically and in the context of the film Prince Rupert couldn't have held a besieged Bristol against Cromwell's forces anyway and took the best exit ramp he could. Then again Charles I and his vassals rightly condemn the Prince as a DirtyCoward for deserting his post in the first place, especially considering the price for his escape was all of Bristol's supplies and most of the army's cannons.

* HistoricalRelationshipOverhaul: One fact the movie never touches on is that Ireton was Cromwell's son-in-law, having married his oldest daughter Bridget.

* JerkassHasAPoint: Cromwell's colleague, Henry Ireton, is condescending and belligerent with his radical views being opposed by Cromwell at every point. Though nearly every one of them (the onset of an English Civil War, marching on Parliament to dictate terms to the King, that Oliver himself should take control of the country) end up becoming reality.

* LargeHam: Cromwell. The Earl of Strafford counts as one too as his boisterous nature grates on Charles' nerves so much the king has to tell him to take it down a notch.

* LargeHam: Cromwell. The Earl of Strafford counts as one too as his boisterous nature grates on Charles I's nerves so much the king has to tell him to take it down a notch.

* LargeHam: Cromwell. The Earl of Strafford counts as well as his boisterousness gets to the point where King Charles has to tell him to take it down a notch.

* LargeHam: Cromwell again.

* ReasonYouSuckSpeech: Charles I unleashes a vicious one on his nephew, Prince Rupert, for losing (and abandoning) the city of Bristol. A justified case as Charles knows without Bristol, he has completely lost the war, although both historically and in the context of the story, there's a pretty good argument Rupert couldn't've held Bristol anyway and [[KnowWhenToFoldEm took the best]] [[DirtyCoward exit ramp he could]].

* OOCIsSeriousBusiness: King Charles I presents himself as a cool, level-headed monarch, but there are several instances where he loses his composure and temper. First is when he chews out his wife when her LadyMacbeth tendencies force him to execute the Earl of Strafford, one of his strongest supporters, to appease Parliament. Second is when he severely castigates Prince Rupert for losing (and abandoning) the city of Bristol (see ReasonYouSuckSpeech below) thereby costing his side the war. And finally, he coldly and disdainfully expresses his contempt for the terms of surrender Cromwell offers him once Cromwell is out of earshot, terms that even he admits are ''exceedingly'' generous considering he just ''lost'' the civil war, foreshadowing for his intrigues to start a second civil war and revealing how deeply the war has hardened him against democratic government.

* ReasonYouSuckSpeech: Charles I unleashes a vicious one on his nephew, Prince Rupert, for losing (and abandoning) the city of Bristol. A justified case as Charles knows without Bristol, he has completely lost the war, although both historically and in the context of the story, there's a pretty good argument Rupert couldn't've held Bristol anyway and [[KnowWhenToFoldEm took the best exit ramp he could]].

* OOCIsSeriousBusiness: King Charles I presents himself as a cool, level-headed monarch, but there are a couple of instances where he loses his composure and temper. First is when he chews out his wife when her LadyMacbeth tendencies force him to execute the Earl of Strafford, one of his strongest supporters, to appease Parliament. Second is when he severely castigates Prince Rupert for losing (and abandoning) the city of Bristol (see ReasonYouSuckSpeech below) thereby costing his side the war. And finally, he coldly and disdainfully expresses his contempt for the terms of surrender Cromwell offers him once Cromwell is out of earshot, terms that even he admits are ''exceedingly'' generous considering he just ''lost'' the civil war, foreshadowing for his intrigues to start a second civil war and revealing how deeply the war has hardened him against democratic government.

* ReasonYouSuckSpeech: Charles I unleashes a vicious one on his nephew, Prince Rupert, for losing (and abandoning) the city of Bristol. A justified case as Charles knows without Bristol, he has completely lost the war, although both historically and in the context of the story, there's a pretty good argument Rupert couldn't've held Bristol anyway and [[KnowWhenToFoldEm took the best exit ramp he could].

* WorthyOpponent: Both Oliver Cromwell and Charles I come to see each other as this with both having a healthy respect for one another despite being enemies. Cromwell in particular, despite being hotblooded and constantly railing against the King's actions, is very cordial and accommodating to him in their several conversations. He also takes no joy or pleasure when Charles is summarily executed for treason.

* OOCIsSeriousBusiness: King Charles I presents himself as a cool, level-headed monarch, but there are a couple of instances where he loses his composure and temper. First is when he chews out his wife when her LadyMacbeth tendencies force him to execute the Earl of Strafford, one of his strongest supporters, to appease Parliament. Second is when he severely castigates Prince Rupert for losing (and abandoning) the city of Bristol (see ReasonYouSuckSpeech below) thereby costing his side the war.

* ReasonYouSuckSpeech: Charles I unleashes a vicious one on his nephew, Prince Rupert, for losing (and abandoning) the city of Bristol. A justified case as Charles knows without Bristol, he has completely lost the war.

* OOCIsSeriousBusiness: King Charles I presents himself as a cool, level-headed monarch, but there are two instances in the film where he loses his composure and temper. First is when he chews out his wife when her LadyMacbeth tendencies force him to execute the Earl of Strafford, one of his strongest supporters, to appease Parliament. Second is when he severely castigates Prince Rupert for losing (and abandoning) the city of Bristol (see ReasonYouSuckSpeech below) thereby costing his side the war.

* WorthyOpponent: Both Oliver Cromwell and Charles I come to see each other as this with both having a healthy respect for one another despite being enemies. Cromwell in particular, despite being hotblooded and constantly railing against the King's actions, is very cordial and accommodating to him in their several conversations. He also takes no joy or pleasure when the Charles is summarily executed for treason.

* OOCIsSeriousBusiness: King Charles I presents himself as a cool, level-headed monarch, but there are two instances in the film where he loses his composure and temper. First is when he chews out his wife when her LadyMacbeth tendencies force him to execute the Earl of Strafford, one of his strongest supporters, to appease Parliament. Second is when he severely castigates Prince Rupert for losing (and abandoning) the city of Bristol (see ReasonYouSuckSpeech below).

* WorthyOpponent: Both Oliver Cromwell and Charles I come to see each other as this with both having a healthy respect for one another despite being enemies. Cromwell in particular, despite being hotblooded and constantly railing against the King's actions, is very cordial with him in their several conversations. He also takes no joy or pleasure when the Charles is summarily executed for treason.

* OOCIsSeriousBusiness: King Charles I presents himself as a cool, level-headed monarch, but there are two instances in the film where he loses his composure and temper. First is when he chews out his wife when her LadyMacbeth tendencies force him to execute the Earl of Strafford, one of his strongest supporters, to appease Parliament. Second is when he severely castigates Prince Rupert for losing (and abandoning) the city of Bristol (see ReasonYouSuckSpeech below). For Charles knows with that loss, he has very well lost the war.

** Charles I is also shown to love his children deeply. While he initially scolds his eldest son, Charles II, for praying in his mother's Catholic monastery rather than an English Protestant one, he ensures his son's safety by sending him to France. Charles II is devastated to leave his father, with the two hugging before Charles II departs. When Cromwell's army arrests Charles I, his main concern is his children, who Cromwell says can be taken with the king to London. Charles then spends most of his time playing with his daughter, Elizabeth, and his son, Henry. Shortly before the king's execution, Charles has a tearful goodbye with Elizabeth and Henry, telling the latter to tell their mother he loved her while telling Henry to support his elder brother's birthright as king rather than be made a puppet rule.

* {{Foil}}: Oliver Cromwell and King Charles I are shown to be very alike: HappilyMarried, devoutly Protestant family men who care very deeply about England and its future. But their differences, namely that King Charles is a cool-headed and dignified believer in his own divine right and Cromwell a hot-head who believes in some form of popular sovereignty, necessarily bring them into conflict, where another key difference makes itself known: King Charles is ultimately no great general and struggles to raise men to his standard, while Cromwell is a true military genius who builds a juggarnaut of a modern army. In the end, Cromwell's revolution costs him the lives of his children in the course of putting himself into power as a king in all but name and setting the foundations for modern British democracy, while Charles is able to save his own offspring on his way to the chopping block where both he royalist power in England are each dealt a fatal blow.

* HistoricalHeroUpgrade: The movie gives the impression that Cromwell spent the years of the Rump Parliament on his lands in Huntingdon. In actuality, he was leading a brutal military campaign in Ireland, which earned him a reputation for cruelty and has been retroactively accused of being tantamount to genocide by some historians.