In a sentenceAndrew Garfield deserves a rebellion with fewer people jostling the camera
In medieval England, a reluctant rebel known as Ploughman (Andrew Garfield) becomes involved in the Peasants’ Revolt. The rebellion challenges a society divided by wealth and power, with King Richard II (Woody Norman) on the throne. John Ball (Jamie Bell), Wat Tyler (Cosmo Jarvis) and Alyce (Thomasin McKenzie) are among the figures in a struggle between the people demanding change and those who govern them. Paul Greengrass writes and directs, with Stephen Dillane as Simon Sudbury, Tom Hollander as Sir Robert Hales and Katherine Waterston as Joan of Kent.
Plays from YouTube when you press play; nothing loads from them until then.
Paul Greengrass’s historical drama has a persuasive lead in Andrew Garfield and a convincing medieval setting. Its relentless action is harder to recommend: the movement does too much of the storytelling.
The Uprising is a decent historical action film with a persuasive lead and a serious problem with pacing. Paul Greengrass approaches the Peasants’ Revolt through physical disorder, putting the pressure of rebellion ahead of an orderly account of it. That is a reasonable choice for a story about people denied power and determined to take it. But across 128 minutes, his insistence on keeping everything urgent makes too much of the film feel much the same.
Andrew Garfield gives Ploughman enough reluctance to make his involvement in the revolt feel consequential. His dignity makes it possible to care about the rebellion without requiring everyone involved to be straightforwardly heroic. Garfield supplies much of the emotional continuity that Greengrass’s screenplay struggles to sustain, though the crowded ensemble too often competes with him. Katherine Waterston, as Joan of Kent, is sharply chilly, providing a useful contrast to the agitation around her.
Pål Ulvik Rokseth’s handheld photography brings the fighting close, with all the uncertainty that entails. At its most effective, the unstable frame makes a crowd feel difficult to control; elsewhere, it becomes difficult simply to follow. We found the fight scenes wearing, because the shaking made it harder to read the action and kept us at the same pitch of alarm. The aerial views provide welcome distance, and suggest that a clearer view need not make the violence less disturbing.
Nikolaj Danielsen’s production design makes medieval England look convincingly difficult to live in, although the emphasis on mud eventually becomes monotonous. The dirt helps establish the rebels’ hardship without requiring the dialogue to explain it. Volker Bertelmann’s score helps sustain the tension, and is effective on its own terms. What the film needs more urgently, however, is a quiet stretch in which its characters have room to become distinct.
William Goldenberg’s editing is energetic, yet the film needs more changes of pace than it gets. Sequence after sequence arrives with comparable force, so the sense of events developing begins to fade. Greengrass the writer has not given the action a strong enough dramatic progression, and the contemporary relevance of inequality cannot supply one for him. Too often, another stretch of action takes the place of time spent with the people involved.
Historical action films do not owe us a lecture, and Greengrass is right to avoid treating the rebellion as an illustrated lesson. There is moral complexity here, and a welcome sense that violent upheaval will not become tidy merely because its grievances are recognisable. But characters need time to make choices that carry some weight, and the film’s hurry too often works against that. Much of the work of making those choices matter falls to Garfield.
This remains a reasonable choice for anyone drawn to historical rebellion, with performances and period detail worth the patience it asks for. The pace is the caveat, and it is a substantial one. Frequent movement does not make this an easy evening. If handheld action already wears you down, even Garfield is unlikely to change that.
The reviews split almost evenly, with as many critics recommending The Uprising as dismissing it and several sitting in between. Where they agree is on Andrew Garfield, whose lead turn as the reluctant rebel is praised even by those who dislike the film around him, and on Katherine Waterston’s cold supporting performance. Most also credit the muddy recreation of 1381 England and the parallels Greengrass draws with present-day anger at inequality.
The fight is over the handheld camera. Admirers find it visceral and documentary-like; detractors, among them The AV Club and /Film, call it nauseating and a poor fit for a medieval battlefield. Several also object to the film being sold as a Robin Hood origin story, which The New Yorker and Collider say muddles what it is trying to do. The spread is wide, and the reasons vary: The Hollywood Reporter admires the craft but finds the relentlessness exhausting, while The Wrap blames a weak ending.
Greengrass delivers a dumb, relentless, visceral and cathartic eat-the-rich epic full of bloody spectacle and handheld fury, evoking Fury Road more than straight history. It boils the blood effectively despite some oversimplification.
Read the full review →Greengrass successfully transplants his signature shaky-cam style to a medieval setting, delivering a visceral, documentary-like take on the Peasants’ Revolt that highlights contemporary parallels. Strong performances, especially from Andrew Garfield, anchor the messy but thrilling narrative of inevitable revolution.
Read the full review →Greengrass turns the Peasants' Revolt into a bold 21st-century populist statement that doubles as a fictional character's origin story. The review highlights its unapologetic approach to class themes.
Read the full review →The film is a watchable historical epic that effectively links 14th-century peasant struggles to contemporary issues of pandemic aftermath, inequality, and distrust in leadership. It benefits from strong performances by Andrew Garfield and Woody Norman, though the shaky-cam style is distracting outside action scenes and the coda feels like a lazy attempt at uplift.
Read the full review →The critic praises the film as a rough-and-tumble chronicle of the Peasants’ Revolt with bracing moral complexity and energetic action sequences. Greengrass prioritizes visceral battles and historical upheaval over extensive dialogue.
Read the full review →The critic finds Greengrass’s dramatization of the 1381 Peasants’ Revolt a mixed achievement that holds interest intermittently through its focus on the logistics of revolt and its echoes of contemporary anger at inequality. He praises the performances and the film’s grim tone but faults the director’s signature style for feeling scattershot and applied rather than organic, along with conceptual confusion over the story’s relation to Robin Hood legend.
Read the full review →
Peterloo · not reviewed yetPolitical anger gathers among ordinary people, with more room to hear them.
The Battle of AlgiersStreet fighting and collective resistance, filmed with unnerving clarity and mounting pressure.
Army of Shadows · not reviewed yetResistance becomes a series of difficult decisions, with little comfort in heroism.
The Wind That Shakes the Barley · not reviewed yetPolitical convictions strain personal loyalties in a rebellion given time to develop.
Seven SamuraiFarmers organise against violence, and the action never forgets who needs protecting.
Free account
Two lists that know where things are streaming, collections you can share, your own score beside ours, and Discover that remembers what you have seen.
