In the decade following the release of BECKET, audiences were treated to a parade of big- budget, star-laden historical epics based on British history. ALFRED THE GREAT obviously aspired to join the ranks of BECKET, LION IN WINTER, and MAN FOR ALL SEASONS; instead, it barely reaches the second rank of lesser films such as CROMWELL and MARY QUEEN OF SCOTS.Despite a host of prominent actors, some beautiful scenery, and big battle scenes, this film never seems to coalesce into an inspiring work of art. I think the fault lies with the meandering script and uninspired direction. My first hint that the director wasn't capable of pulling off a big epic was in the first battle scene where the Saxons pursue the Danes. When Alfred's men stop after the battle, they look like someone just shouted, "OK everyone, pant like you've been running." I have seldom seen such wooden, phony extras. The battle scenes look like each set-up was posed just before the camera started rolling. Alfred at one point receives a slash on the arm that results in a huge jet of blood, but when the battle is over, he washes it off as though it were a mosquito bite. Alfred himself is not a very compelling character. He does come off better here than in Bernard Cornwell's series of novels about him, but he's not as inspiring as Henry II, V or VIII. David Hemmings is a fine actor, and he has a perfect face for a Medieval king, but he doesn't seem to have what it takes to lead the Saxons against their invaders.Because this was the late 60s, we are treated to more realistic blood-letting than the epics of the 40s, and there are obligatory sex scenes (nothing graphic, but so very 60s). The one fun moment in the battle scenes is when the Saxons, forming a 'Spartan phalanx', execute some moves worthy of an American college marching band.The fine score by noted conductor Raymond Leppard is marred by tinny recording and bad mixing. Kudos to the creator of the closing credits, nicely done in Medieval illumination style. And Peter Blythe, best known to me as Soapy Sam on the RUMPOLE TV series, breaks that wishy-washy mold completely in his role as a wild-haired, screaming barbarian.Perhaps my ho-hum response is partially due to the fuzzy print which appeared on American cable this past week. But even with crisper visual outlines, the story and execution of ALFRED THE GREAT would still be too fuzzy for a good rating.

I liked this. Set in England in the 870s it tells the story of one of the great Kings in history. Hemmings does a great job as the complicated cynical Alfred who wants to be a priest but is forced into becoming King because his leadership qualities are badly needed against the marauding Danes. Hemmings Alfred is a formidable character but he's refreshingly no Hollywood hero. The battle scenes are excellent when you consider this was made on a low budget way back in 1969. There's a great aerial shot of a battle focusing on Alfred who's just come from the monastery to answer his country's call, giving off the impression that while he might prefer to be a holy man of letters, he can still effortlessly slide into the battlefield in an I can take or leave this manner. Hence his greatness.

Alfred the Great is not really a sweeping epic, nor is it a blood stained sword-wielding blockbuster. It's quite a quiet picture, with lots of talk, lots of emphasis on the lovely background landscapes, and a degree of fair amount of precision in terms of costume and weaponry.At the beginning, young Prince Alfred is moments away from turning his back on his duty as the future monarch and is preparing to become a priest. However he is persuaded to forsake these religious ambitions when a Danish invasion force start massacaring people on the coast. He leads the armies of Wessex and Mercia against the invading Danes, and in so doing he earns the first and only label ever to be proclaimed upon a king of England as "somebody the Great".Generally, the film is a bore. However, that gives the impression that it is a complete failure, which in all honesty is probably a bit unfair. Hemmings gives a notable leading performance, York is in uncommonly good form as the main Dane, and there are a couple of bloodily staged battle sequences. Alfred the Great is definitely a missed opportunity, but it remains watchable thanks to a handful of worthwhile moments.

Have seen this film a few times, so I guess it is worth revisiting. Almost inevitably, perhaps, with films of this historical genre, one's sense of period tends to be more 20th century than 9th. Arguably compares favourably with the much later Braveheart - although, here again, some of the fighting scenes lacked conviction. Of course, always worth watching to see Edith (Sinead Cusack in her film debut).