River Queen Movie
Storyline
TAGLINES PLOT SUMMARY
An intimate story set during the 1860s in which a young Irish woman Sarah (Samantha Morton) and her family find themselves on both sides of the turbulent wars between British and Maori during the British colonisation of New Zealand.
| Samantha Morton | Sarah O'Brien |
| Kiefer Sutherland | Doyle |
| Cliff Curtis | Wiremu |
| Temuera Morrison | Te Kai Po |
| Anton Lesser | Baine |
| Rawiri Paratene | Boy |
| Stephen Rea | Francis |
| Wi Kuki Kaa | Old Rangi |
| Mark Ruka | Hone |
| Tyson Reweti | Tommy Boy |
| Grayson Putu | Young Wiremu |
| Nathan Passfield | Boy (7) Years |
| Laura Coyte Douglas | Theresa |
| Julie Ranginui | Old Puhi |
| Brandon Lakshman | Timoti |
| Vincent Ward |
6.30 out of 10 (355 votes)
Visitor Reviews
River Queen: Like a lost bi-polar puppy dog...
posted on 26 May 2009Apart from the beautiful imagery thanks to New Zealand cinematographer Alun Bollinger, this film is not worth seeing.The storyline is so fragmented and lost that it's hard to know what is going on at any given time, and just when you think you're following then the direction changes again, like a lost bi-polar puppy dog.The musical score is awful, relying too heavily on extremely emotive pieces that try to force the audience into feeling a certain way, as if the instruments were acting as an emotions queue sheet — 'feel sad here'; 'feel shocked here'; 'feel scared here'. On top of that, the repetitive samples used over and over again leave the audience on the verge of laughter.Gone are the days of silent film, where musical instruments were the sole portrayal of voice — but you wouldn't think so while watching River Queen.The voice-over was so over-utilised that one has to wonder if this film really even needed any accompanying imagery. It could have easily been a radio play although even then it would be hard to follow the story.And the stolen ideas from Jane Campion's The Piano are too obvious to overlook. Not only are the beach and forest shots almost identical to those in The Piano — perhaps some of this comes down to Alun Bollinger's camera work on the latter — but the voice-over feeling and levels too are strikingly close. And who could forget when Holly Hunter's character has her wings clipped, in the form of her index finger being cut off by Sam Neill. Does it remind you of when Wiremu has his 'trigger finger' amputated, and surprisingly too with an axe? I thought so.All in all I cannot recommend this film for viewing, unless you wear some ear-muffs and just go with the scenery in mind.
Dude..... Kiefer Sutherland is in this!
posted on 14 Apr 2009Wait... wait... wait... wait... wait... wait..... WHAT!? This movie is terrible, absolutely terrible. 1. The only reason Kiefer Sutherland is on the cover is to sell it to Kiefer fans, only to have their hearts broken. He kills one guy, gets shot, and dies before half the movie is over, not to mention he was only in the first 10 min and then disappeared until the point which he died...WHY put him on the cover if his character BLOWS. 2. Where are the EPIC battle scenes promised in the preview on the back cover? 3. It was way too confusing, i mean whats up with the girl? She had to narrate the movie to TRY to get our attention, she failed! 4. If Kiefer dies in a movie..... it fails. Now I am going to go watch 24..... THIS MOVIE FAILS!
A troublingly good film, trying too hard
posted on 11 Mar 2009I grew up in New Zealand, and have some knowledge of the land wars there of the mid-1800's, which continue in different ways right up to the present. I have also been on the Whanganui river, a mysterious and beautiful place. These are the historic and geographic backgrounds for this tantalizing film. Last nite I watched the Brazilian release of the film with English subtitles and language track. The plot issue of the film is simple: in the midst of the Maori/British conflict over land use in the late 1850's, a young Pakeha (in this case Irish) woman (Samantha Morton) becomes pregnant by a young Maori. The growing boy is, in turn, kidnapped by his Maori grandfather. (the boy's father has been killed). The central issue of the film is the mother's search for her son, and whether she will stay and live with him in Maoritanga, or be able to return with him to her British world. Morton (who plays Sarah) has the difficult task of acting out her conflictedness between her Pakeha world and the Maori world of her son. Many reviewers have been critical of her "limited" emotional portrayal, forgetting that not all women live with their emotions on the outside of their life. She is, after all, the daughter of a military surgeon, who has herself become a healer which requires her to suck it up and do what has to be done. Keifer Sutherland (who plays the Irish soldier Doyle)plays a limited part in the film. He appears to have been included as the star-magnet for production finance and audience appeal. Director Vincent Ward gives us great location shots from the central North Island area of New Zealand - mostly long-lens river shots, a few gorgeous aerial shots, supported by action shots in the battle scenes. This film is a period-piece, and has to be seen from that perspective. e.g. it may seem strange that Sarah could find a bridal dress in good condition in a hut the middle of nowhere, unless it is remembered that in that period,such an item would have been the treasured possession of the woman of that hut. (I thought it would have been in a trunk and not hanging up.) Or, again, the chief having intercourse during a battle would not have been symbolic; such an interpretation has lost sight of the period of the film. The film is rushed and disjointed in places, but at 114 minutes long, Ward may have felt he was working against the clock. In spite of that, Ward has captured the anguish of a mother who has a terrible decision to make. He has also drawn attention to the difficult ambivalence of the Maori's themselves who had to decide which side of the land war conflict they were going to be on; which resulted in Maori fighting Maori. In spite of its weaknesses, I found this to be a film that captured much of the difficulty of its period, and many of the choices that had to be made.
Very enjoyable
posted on 08 Jan 2009I don't get why people want to spend their time nit-picking here about a movie. This film, like many, is obviously a labour of love and in this case, it really shows... who can fault that? I like estimate my own enjoyment of a film in how I feel walking back to the car... and how contemplative I might feel on it an hour later, a day later.This film did it for me. Is it an accurate depiction of events? probably not. Is there artistic license? Abundently so... but it all has the ring of authenticity. The acting was earnest, and mostly pretty good I think. Good enough for me to enjoy the characters, feel something for them, and be suspended for the duration of the story.No, I tell a lie there... there were moments when I was transported from the story, but that was when I was lifted by the sheer beauty of some of the scenes. When Sarah is dressing for a dying Doyle, when Boy is washing the blood of his mother's tattoo in the run-off from a cliff face. The action seemed a kind of dance, often enhanced by the slow motion effects. The colours and textures were delightful and added to a tapestry, an overall artistic effect that surely must be the point of creating a work of art like this.To criticise an interpretive work of motion art on 'accuracy' is like telling a Picasso that he can't draw.Bravo Mr Ward, cast and crew.
Another Aotearoa Masterpiece
posted on 20 Oct 2008This movie played 2 nights ago on TV and I must say, I thoroughly enjoyed it. I remember back when it first hit the Silver Screen and all the negative reviews and bad luck during the making of the film, and couldn't see what all the fuss was about.The War scenes could have been better, yes. Otherwise it was good to see how our Ancestral history was portrayed on a screen. That said, the negative reviews I see on here tells me that you (whoever you's are) know nothing at all about NZ History. Yes the English wiped out a lot of the Maori people, and the Maori the same to the English (Trench Warfare started from the Maori People) and in the end the Crown won with a Treaty, but still the fighting carried on. Not all tribes signed.... but anyways, all I want to say about one of the comments I read was, the Pakeha (White Man) were Brutal, and spread their Disease - And the Maori's were Cannibals. They used to eat the heads of the Tribes which they fought against before the Pakeha came here. The Pa was beautiful also, I see them in the backdrop of Charles Goldie's Paintings, and once again was good to see on the screen, as no more exist here in NZ.
A huge disappointment
posted on 14 Oct 2008For weeks I had been looking forward to seeing this movie only to find myself hugely disappointed after wards. In my opinion, the only good thing 'River Queen' had going for it was the amazing scenery used as backgrounds. The story line was all over the place, Samantha's character Sarah was very difficult to understand and what on earth were all the many close ups of her face for? It brought absolutely nothing to the story-if there was one at all!A better actor for the part of Boy could also have been selected, to me it sounded like he read his lines straight of the script while shooting his scenes.Overall, a real shame as it could have been such a good movie.
if you like a good story and the national geographic channel this is for you
posted on 22 Sep 2008excellent movie ! a great story that keeps you riveted in your seat ! i also enjoyed the great cinematography of the New Zealand country , and the original New Zealand people . as the story follows an Irish woman who falls in love with and becomes pregnant by a native man ,the viewer is absorbed in the drama of the struggle of two mighty human civilizations . i think the scene where the native chieftain is making love to his newly acquired beautiful young wife while his tribe is engaged in a bloody battle against the European settlers is pregnant with symbolism .also when the Irish woman sneaks out of her home with her fellow-countryman to be with the brother of her dead boyfriend and the adopted father of her son only to come back to find that her Irish friend has died , i think that was an unexpected twist in the woman's story ,i thought she would eventually marry her Irish friend especially after she appeared to "lose" her son again, after finding him, to the savage ways of his father's people . i think overall, it was a great watch .I strongly recommend it .
A wonderful story with too many facets.
posted on 18 Sep 2008Peter Thompson, on this morning's Sunday show, gave River Queen a very favorable review; the review's timing was perfect because last evening Diane and I watched this new Kiwi film and drove home with mixed feelings about what we had just seen.Thompson's reviews are usually spot-on for us but in this instance we are still not sure. Yes, Vincent Ward's story was superb: huge amounts of recognizable human drama, multidimensional characters, a gigantic historical background and everything framed by New Zealand's natural beauty. Vincent's direction accentuated each of these elements; he made great use of the land's physical beauty as well as the beauty and uniqueness of the individual Maori people. This last comment will take on meaning with the watching of the film because certain Maori characteristics play a huge visual as well as plot role in the film-perhaps unexpectedly for some viewers more than others. Alun Bollinger's cinematography beautifully captures Ward's shot selection; it is impossible to leave the theater and not have been captivated by the physical beauty of the New Zealand landscape.I think the question must be asked: If I thought the film was so good, why did I only give it a rating of eight? The answer goes to the heart of why Diane and I were both uncomfortable with this superficially great film and that lies in the script, the third leg of Vincent's stool. We both thought the script was overly choppy; there were too many small pieces of story stitched together. I thought the film was too jumpy and that resulted in my concentration moving too quickly from one scene to another. I suppose that is just a matter of cinematic taste particular to one person and should not be used to paint an entire film.River Queen is definitely worth seeing. The subject matter alone is worth the effort, with excellent acting by all concerned and magnificent scenery beautifully captured in thee film. The film must indeed be judged highly.
Proud to be Maori!
posted on 27 Apr 2008This film was great as i'm still buzzing about the movie weeks later recommending it to heaps of others. For a New Zealand film it was wonderful, it really showed how beautiful New Zealand is and identifies how Our Maori people are unique and watching it makes me feel even more proud to be Maori. Boy (Rawiri Pene) was cool as thats exactly how i would say our Maori boys are like, he really did us all proud and has a big future a head of him. I liked the way they showed how smart, cunning and clued on the Maoris were during the war. All the critics need to remember how little New Zealand is compared to other Countries and at least the most important people believe in the movie and thats all that matters.
An intense and unforgettable movie experience about a mother's search for her lost son, at a time of wars over land and racial misunderstanding.
posted on 15 Apr 2008The best movie of Vincent Ward's unparalleled 25 year career. To his always uniquely beautiful images (filmed by Alun Bollinger, one of New Zealand's greatest cameramen) he adds an enthralling story not only about a mother's search for her lost son, but also about a time of violence in 19th Century colonial history when Maori and Pakeha were inextricably mixed on both sides of a war about land and racial misunderstanding. Moving performances by the great Maori actors Cliff Curtis and Temuera Morrison and by Samantha Morton. Sensational action sequences should give this epic production the widest appeal to general audiences, as well as providing a huge range of historical topics for further debate.
Beautiful but disappointing
posted on 28 Jul 2007River Queen attempts to pack a complicated, sweeping, historical narrative into just under two hours. There are some breathtaking battle scenes and the Wanganui scenery is beautifully captured. However, the film did suffer from some poor leads - Samantha Morton (Sarah) especially came across as unconvincing. There seemed to be an indecisiveness about how the role should be played - as a helpless waif tossed by fate or as a strong, determined character with a clear view of her destiny. Kiefer Sutherland's character - Private Doyle - seemed to be pointless and for the most part - unintelligible. Keifer's Irish brogue needs a little polishing. On the other hand, Cliff Curtis, Temuera Morrison and Rawiri Pene (as Sarah's son "Boy") were well rounded and believable.The last 20 minutes of River Queen came across as particularly compressed and rushed. It seemed as if they decided they had to tie up all the loose ends before 120 minutes were up. E.g. How on earth did Wiremu know how to find Sarah and Doyle? No explanation and very unsatisfying.I did go to this movie with an open mind. I hadn't read or heard anything much apart from its troubled production. What I experienced was a mish mash of New Zealand history, beautifully photographed but ultimately disappointing.
Reverse racism
posted on 16 Jul 2007A good example of reversed, politically correct racism where white men are presented as senseless brutes who're only there to be massacred and their aboriginal adversaries as noble heroes, superior both in their appearance and abilities. Apart from making the story overally dull, this also prevents the neutral viewer to identify himself with one or the other side - it's just too simplifying. The repetitive score is incredibly annoying (as is the voice-over), the characters lack any depth and the viewer is soon lost between questions like "who is this character" and "what the hell is that supposed to mean". Photography is wonderful, though, and on the whole there's a lot of atmosphere to it but nice shots of misty landscapes alone don't save this movie. The DVD box uses Kiefer Sutherland as an eye-catcher. In fact, his character could have been played by anyone else because it's basically just an empty shell (like most non-Maori characters), and disappears anyway around halfway the film. But if you are eager to see Jack Bauer in a kilt, that's your kind of movie...
A possible Classic, spoilt by it's Direction and Production technique
posted on 20 Feb 2007Reading through most of the other reviews, I tend to agree with most of the comments. The one thing that I would add is the disjointed way the movie has been Directed and Produced. I think that some of these new wave movie makers think that they are being clever using unusual (sometimes jerky) camera angles, and flitting from one scene to another. It goes down well with these movie festivals, and with some of these Indie type critics, but it spoils the movie for me. I noticed in the reviews, one comment saying that none of this movie makers films have become blockbusters. This would maybe prove my point, as the film has that 'rushed to finish' feeling that makes you wonder why such a beautiful film appears to be lacking a smooth flow. As for the comment about Kiefer Sutherland being a big name to put on the poster, I would bet he cringed when watching the final cut. This is a story with real potential, spoilt by trying to be different in it's production. Worth watching, but not many would come back for a second view.
Thoroughly enjoyable and engrossing film
posted on 25 Jan 2007Boy did I enjoy River Queen. The scenery was stunning, the acting superb, the story brilliant, and the music was a hauntingly beautiful match to an incredible film. I always thought it would be great if a film was set during the Maori wars that was similar to Michael Mann's "The Last of the Mohicans". Well this it, with shades of Joffe's "The Mission" to boot.River Queen grabs you and draws you into a world that you only learned about in history books. It does not take sides but portrays the beautiful and the ugly in both sides to the conflict. The chemistry between the main actors is powerful and moving and keeps the people of the story to the fore, stopping them from being engulfed by the powerful images of the war.I always thought it would take our own Peter Jackson (should be Sir Peter) to make a film of this quality in New Zealand and about New Zealand. But I take my hat off to Vincent Ward. River Queen demonstrates that there is an amazing depth of movie making talent in this small country that time and again punches way above it's weight.
Samantha Morton
posted on 24 Nov 2006K, I haven't seen the film yet... BUT - SO looking forward to it! I'd just like to make note of the dramas around the filming of 'River Queen' Samantha Morton 'sick', production stops. Vincent Ward fired - thankfully Alun Bollinger replaced him, so his artistic vision wouldn't have been altered drastically - until post-production, or until Samantha Morton left the country. Rumours going around about Morton being the reason Ward was fired. Ward evades questions on Morton. In selling the film, various stars comment on the ... ('special-ness, treatment, issues) in working with Morton.General Consensus around the country is that Miss Morton is Never going to work in this country again Hurray Vincent Ward. Long Live Vincent!
Bloody boring.
posted on 03 Sep 2006Set in the mid 1800's when the British is clearing New Zealand outback wilderness to establish colonies. The daughter of a British army surgeon, Sarah(Samantha Morton), falls in love with the son of one of the Maori leaders. The Maori is an indigenous tribe and a dangerous people for the Europeans to deal with. By the time Sarah's child, which she calls "Boy", is born, his father is dead. By the age of six, "Boy" is kidnapped by his father's family and Sarah will begin her search for him with a man(Kiefer Sutherland),who is deeply in love with her.Two-time Oscar nominee Morton is definitely the star of this movie. Sutherland is a total waste. Also starring are: Cliff Curtis, Stephen Rea, Temuera Morrison and David Rawiri Pene. This movie is rated R for some sexual content and violent battle scenes. I find the title RIVER QUEEN very misleading and the DVD cover with Sutherland only and making you believe he is the leading star should be a crime.
Something for everyone
posted on 29 Jul 2006I just saw River Queen today. It's not as bad as the critics are saying. But it's not as good as it could have been. The acting from the leads is good, Cliff Curtis proves how world class he is and it's great to see Temuera Morrison doing some acting again. And as unpopular a view as it might be I thought Samantha Morton was very good. The cinematography is amazing and at times breathtaking. But (come on you knew there was a but.). The voice over is just really annoying and seems to state the obvious when I'd rather the actors just be allowed to show us. I also found the first half hour or so really hard going, it seemed disjointed and felt more like a long short film. The action sequences were well done and captured the battles well without doing the shaky hand held camera work that everyone else is resorting to these days. Overall the film is worth a look I'm sure everyone will get something out of it.Note, If your a fan of Kiefer Sutherland. He's really just there so they can put his name on the poster there are plenty of local actors that could have played that role.
An absolute waste of time!
posted on 25 Jun 2006This is by far one the most boring movies I've ever seen! And if you don't believe me go ahead and watch it for yourself.The movie starts of slow, the storyline makes no sense at all. People fighting doesn't make any sense. I could not make sense of what they were talking during the movie (in most cases I didn't even bother) It does nothing to keep you watching the movie, the only plus point would be the cinematography. New Zealand looks awesome. Everything else just plain sucks.The actors try their best to keep us awake, but unfortunately you will go to sleep instead.Do us all a favor, even if this gets on "On Demand", Don't WATCH IT!
Spoiler warning
posted on 20 May 2006River Queen's sound recordist should have been fired, in this day and age there is no excuse for poor recording on the set. Mumbling voices was the end result, and the cinematography was average to fair at best. The story had potential and I feel sorry for the overseas actors who must have known they were on a turkey shoot while they were filming. Its obvious that the movie was suffering from el cheapo budget syndrome, and the scene where Temuera is procreating inside the house while a battle rages outside is just too stupid for words. I noticed a few shortcuts taken on the Maori protocol side of things, but this was probably due to movie length time restraints etc. All in all I wasn't impressed with this movie, the Whanganui river has many beautiful spots but this movie gives us a cold, drab and claustrophobic image, with none of the beauty. The movie needed more sunshine and better camera angles, less on screen confusion, better sound recording, and more thought needed to be put into what the movie goers would be seeing on the big screen. Hats off to all involved though for completing what must have been a very difficult shoo. I have the utmost appreciation for anyone who can make a feature film, sadly I did not enjoy this one.
- 1
- 2
Beautiful but dumb
posted on 23 Jul 2009As the above suggests, I was ultimately unimpressed with this movie. It is lovely to look at, the scenery is lush, but the detail of the story, in particular the characters, are totally unbelievable. Films don't have to be believable, but films like this, with a political edge and social commentary do. Similarly, I have no problem with commercialism as such, but once again, films like this shouldn't be making casting decisions purely based on box office draw. This is absolutely the case with Sutherland, who is frankly rubbish as Doyle. His accent was far from authentic, but he fell into the biggest trap of all, his accent IS his performance and we end up with a caricature of Irishness with no personality outside of his nationality (harping on about Cromwell doesn't exactly help expand his character either but that's not Sutherland's fault) and I find it totally implausible that anyone involved thought he was the best man for the job. All in all, this is a clear case of commercial interest over quality and when you're trying to be The Mission, this kind of this wrecks your chances of success.Speaking of accents, there were a couple more problems, one being the striking modernity of Boy's accent which acted to dispel the feeling of being transported to another time. More surprising was Samantha Morton's much lauded Irish accent, which was variable to say the least. Her voice meandered between strong north and soft south, even in the voice-overs, where I would've expected any such discrepancies to be picked up.However, these are minor gripes compared to the motivation and actions of Sarah. She never seems at home with the English, and almost instantly at home with her son and his tribe, the dilemma between the life she knew and the life she if offered just seems like a no-brainer. Perhaps a lot has been lost in editing, perhaps this was meant to be a three hour film or a mini series where these things could've been fleshed out, but I can only judge what I've seen.Now the biggest problem, Sarah's (Morton) relationship with Doyle (Sutherland) is incomprehensible. The fact is that her affection for him is not conveyed in any way until her having to choose between him and her son, the conflict she goes through at this point was frankly ridiculous and killed the movie for me. As you may have guessed. this movie didn't work at all for me, but it is not notch to look at, you really won't see anything more stunning in terms of scenery, there are some good performances and, my wife liked it.