Rob Roy (1995)

Simply Perfect

A brilliant film that helped define a genre

In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

A well-researched, carefully made period film which tells of the struggle of a good, honest man (Rob Roy, Liam Neeson) against powerful, evil rogues (Cunningham, Tim Roth and Montrose, John Hurt) who have unjustly wronged him. It is set in early 18th Century Scotland.The problem is that Montrose and Cunningham are far more interesting, witty, fun, and entertaining to watch than Rob Roy, who is portrayed here as a bland, unrealistically perfect hero gifted with the beautiful, loving wife and two adoring children.If we were ever shown Rob Roy getting angry at his wife, yelling at his kids, or indeed demonstrating any kind of human failing - greed, malice, selfishness, anger - there might have been a chance to feel sympathy towards him. Instead he basically walks though the film as the empty "good guy" avatar.So it's a very unbalanced movie, with memorable, exciting and deeply human villains that you long to see more of, and a boring hero with no discernible human personality you don't care about.Watch this for the duels, especially the final one, and Tim Roth's captivating performance as Cunningham. If only Rob Roy had been written and played to the same caliber as Cunningham - the battle presented as between two equals, both flawed and both resourceful - this movie would have been catapulted into 10/10, classic for the ages territory but alas it was not to be.

It's 1718 in the Scottish highlands. Rob Roy MacGregor (Liam Neeson) is a honorable man who tries to lead his village and extended family. The society is changing as honor loses its meaning. He borrows money from Lord Montrose (John Hurt) to buy cattle, but his man McDonald (Eric Stoltz) is ambushed by Montrose's evil henchman Cunningham (Tim Roth) with the help of scheming Killearn (Brian Cox). Cunningham has debts to pay. Rob Roy is given all the blame as McDonald is assumed to have run away with the money to America. Montrose offers consideration if Roy Roy bares false witness against Duke Argyll. He refuses and Montrose hunts him down. He must battle to keep his honor, avenge his wife Mary (Jessica Lange) and save his people.The legendary Rob Roy is brought to the big screen. I don't really care about accuracy. It's simply a great epic about honor, love, and family. Liam Neeson is dripping with stoic goodness. Jessica Lange is nobility and dignity. Tim Roth is wonderfully villainous in his controversial performance. All of it leads to one of the most compelling duel ever seen on film. The meaning and its effects goes beyond a simple action scene.

"Rob Roy" came out in 1995 with a couple other heroic swordplay films: "Braveheart" and "First Knight." I rank "Rob Roy" on a par with "Braveheart," even though the two films shouldn't really be compared since "Rob Roy" focuses on the conflict of individuals in Old Scotland and "Braveheart" focuses more on whole armies battling.WHAT WORKS: First of all, the location cinematography of the Scottish Highlands is breathtaking (far better than "Braveheart"). Liam Neeson and Jessica Lange are fine in their parts as Rob Roy and his wife. The sword-fighting (between individuals) is perhaps the best ever in cinematic history. The film also possesses a completely realistic vibe -- no anachronisms or campy humor here; the pic really helps one realize what life was like in rural Scotland 300 years ago.What works best, to my mind, is Tim Roth's outstanding performance as Rob Roy's foppish-but-deadly nemesis. This is truly a villain you love to loathe. The Roth character (I forget his name) is so over-the-top foppish that he appears effeminate; but this is only a disguise as he's actually a ruthless master swordsman. Surely this is one of film's top villains ever! (It doesn't sound right to say "good villain," does it?).WHAT DOESN'T WORK: The story itself doesn't have a lot of drive from beginning to end (unlike, say, "Last of the Mohicans" [1992]). One's attention may wander at points. Of course this may not be an entirely bad thing in light of the schizophrenic editing of many films post-"Armageddon." (In other words, the leisurely pace can be refreshing).WHAT MAY OR MAY NOT WORK FOR SOME PEOPLE: There are aspects of extreme sexual brutality (a rape scene) and vulgarity (a man shoves his fingers up a woman's nightgown); as well as overt love-making -- definitely material not appropriate for children. There are also overt scenes of, believe it or not, urination; many may regard this as needless, but (for me) it helped drive home the point of what every-day life was like back then (e.g. Where do you pee if you're living in a shack out in the hills? Or, in the middle of the night, if there's no upstairs bathroom?).The story's lack of drive prevents "Rob Roy" from attaining true greatness in my mind, but the positive aspects noted above definitely achieve greatness. Certainly worthy of one's DVD library.GRADE: B

surprising that it made 28mil, as it was blown away by Gibson's braveheart, the more comic book version; Rob Roy is more raw, more interesting, better shot, better locations, but missing a screenplay that is entertaining; those defects are not helped by over the top fop tim roth who it is difficult to imagine even lifting a sword, and more so by jessica lang, who as her looks faded or something happened to create tiny little beady eyes, reverted to the quivering hand at the mouth and possibly tears school of acting; neeson is workmanlike, OK; john hurt nicely bizarre- though you should check him in his early penguin movie; all in all understandable that it faded under braveheart