Lack of good storyline.

n my opinion it was a great movie with some interesting elements, even though having some plot holes and the ending probably was just too messy and crammed together, but still fun to watch and not your casual movie that is similar to all other ones.

It was OK. I don't see why everyone loves it so much. It wasn't very smart or deep or well-directed.

The movie really just wants to entertain people.

It's 1380 England. Norman barons have ruled for 300 years. Both the church and state work together to maintain the absolute rule. Nicholas (Paul Bettany) is a monk who had an affair with a married woman and must go on the run. He witnesses a group of traveling performers kill a man. Martin (Willem Dafoe) explains that their leader was old and begged to be killed. Nicholas is taken into the troupe. They arrive in a village where a woman is sentenced to hang for murdering a boy with testimony from monk Simon Damian (Ewen Bremner). Their performance fails to get much of an audience. Martin decides to make up a new play based on the boy's murder but they soon discover more to the story.I like this murky ugly world of the medieval traveling entertainers. The story is a bit too complicated and a bit too talky. I do like the heated debate about creating a story not from the bible. The cast is full of first rate talents. The acting is superb. The problem is that the movie is juggling too many balls. In addition to the mystery, Nicholas is haunted by the constant flashbacks. The cast is so full of great actors that it's a scramble to follow everybody. This is a movie in need of some trimming.

An intriguing morality tale, set in a dirty, grubby-looking version of medieval England. There are shades of HAMLET here in the story of a brutal murder and a group of touring players who reenact the event in a bid to uncover the murderer. The tropes and events that play out are all very familiar, and it's fair to say that the characters are more interesting than the story.Paul McGuigan has assembled an eclectic cast, and it's hard to fault any of the central players. Paul Bettany, as the tormented ex-priest lead, is given the chance to get his teeth into a meaty part, while Willem Dafoe embraces a typically kooky part with real vigour. Brian Cox is all gruff gravitas, Tom Hardy catches the eye as a cross-dresser, and Gina McKee is ever underrated. Watch out for a spellbinding cameo from Vincent Cassel, who can do no wrong.THE RECKONING is a gloomy, doom-laden production, but its realism and focus on the nitty-gritty of human existence gives it the edge over similar-looking but sillier face, like the Hollywood supernatural adventure outing SEASON OF THE WITCH.

The film pairs the director Paul McGuigan with lead actor Paul Bettany once more; Bettany was the star, though not the lead name, of McGuigan's 2000 film 'Gangster No 1', Bettany's breakthrough role.Set in medieval/feudal times the film's plot pits the poor people, the serfs, against the noble elite, the lords. The conviction of a woman, set to be hanged, for the murder of a boy is the backdrop to a travelling group of actors of the Royal Court arriving in the hamlet to stage their uninspired morality plays based on scenes from the Bible. In their midst is a priest (Bettany), who is on the run for a crime of his own. Inspired by the murder the actors decide to stage a play of their own creation. Their enactment leads to the discovery that the condemned woman is not guilty of the murder. What follows is a series of reckonings in which there is an ultimate reckoning for the priest.The film cast is an eclectic one (American, British and Spanish) with many well known and fine actors. Not all are well employed though Bettany, Dafoe (dodgy regional English accent aside) and Elvira Minguez (who plays the wrongfully convicted mute Martha) give strong performances. Bettany and Minguez are especially good, playing their respective roles with passion and emotion. For any Bettany fan this is highly recommended as he does what he does best - look beautiful whilst combining cynicism with earnestness.The mood and feeling of the medieval period, sometimes described as the dark ages, is really well captured and there is a strong sense of austerity, chilliness and mystery/menace throughout. The director uses lighting well: an early scene, illustrative of this, shows Bettany cutting his hair to rid him of the emblematic hairstyle of a priest. A blue filter is used conveying ice and water metaphors for the cold existence of a priest now cast out. Moments like this make the film quite compelling viewing.The film is rather ambitious trying to show religious collusion with corrupt politics, man's struggle with God, injustice, the lot and politics of being an actor in this era as well as ordinary moral torments. It possibly would have been more effective if the director had focused on just one of these themes.I can imagine this gaining cult status in time not least for the scenes in which Dafoe practises Ashtanga Yoga poses.

I really like Paul Bettany and Dafoe is either wonderful or awful depending on the role, but always worth watching. I also think Barry Unsworth, author of the book on which this film was based, is a superb writer. So when I came across this movie, I was anxious to see it, and in some ways it did not disappoint.It was well acted. Paul and Dafoe were both good, and the supporting players were convincing. The script was weak, however. The villain was so heinous he was almost a cartoon and the motives of our hero (Bettany's character) we muddled at best. And although the villagers certainly looked like I would imagine 14th century serfs would look, they seemed to have enough leisure time to worry about social injustice and working together for a better life (when they were not searching for roots and twigs, no doubt).It would have been a far more interesting movie if it had concerned itself with the trials and travails of the traveling players instead of trying to be an action/suspense film.