I mean it's not terrible, as long as you don't mind being lied to about history, and possibly missing out on THE MOST interesting parts of her life. If you do watch it... do yourself the favor of doing a little research after it's over to learn what actually happened to her... that's the fascinating part.
21 Reviews
Fascinating Biopic on Kristina Queen of Sweden
t-dooley-69-38691630 July 2016
Kristina inherited the throne of Sweden at the age of six when her father dies in the religious wars that gripped Europe in the Seventeenth Century i.e.; fighting Papism. Her father had brought her up as a prince and she was accustomed to manly pursuits. Taken under the wing of Chancellor Axel Oxenstierna played brilliantly by Michael Nyqvist ('100 Code' and 'Europa Report').
She however has a mind of her own and is taken by the new thinking and philosophers of the time like Rene Descartes all of which are rejected by the austere Protestantism that her country has fought for. She also is a bit opposed to marriage and the many courtiers that come 'a wooing' her. Contrastingly she is enamoured with a certain Lady in Waiting and soon is breaking with more than one convention in pursuit of what she really wants.
Now this is a pan European production but is mainly in English with a tad of German and French. The acting is all top notch and the period detail is spot on too. This though is a personal view of the woman rather that a wider view of European politics and so is told on a smaller canvas than I was expecting. That said it is thoroughly watchable and is a noteworthy production – I wish it had been in Swedish though but English is now the Lingua Franca it would appear – so this is one that should appeal to lovers of modern European cinema who like a bit of spice in their lead roles.
She however has a mind of her own and is taken by the new thinking and philosophers of the time like Rene Descartes all of which are rejected by the austere Protestantism that her country has fought for. She also is a bit opposed to marriage and the many courtiers that come 'a wooing' her. Contrastingly she is enamoured with a certain Lady in Waiting and soon is breaking with more than one convention in pursuit of what she really wants.
Now this is a pan European production but is mainly in English with a tad of German and French. The acting is all top notch and the period detail is spot on too. This though is a personal view of the woman rather that a wider view of European politics and so is told on a smaller canvas than I was expecting. That said it is thoroughly watchable and is a noteworthy production – I wish it had been in Swedish though but English is now the Lingua Franca it would appear – so this is one that should appeal to lovers of modern European cinema who like a bit of spice in their lead roles.
A biopic drama or a fictional love story?
alexmateiblagojevic3 January 2018
This film is laughable. First off, let me just say that there is something very exotic looking about the actress portraying Queen Kristina. This "Malin Buska" actually seems talented for the role, good show of emotions paired with masculine undertones and dominant-aggressive behavior. There is also something very attractive about her being fluent in many languages, and her ever-so slight accent when speaking English.
Ebba Spare, on the other hand, otherwise known as "Belle", seems way too submissive in nature (even though she is a servant) and deserved more lines throughout the entire script. After watching the movie I barely remembered she was even in it until I read the cast again. But she looked more of like a doll on display rather than a living, breathing character. Kristina's advances towards her were very cringey.
The whole movie seems rushed and much too fast-paced for my liking, or anyone's, for that matter. The message is pretty clear, but the delivery seems like they were given only a single evening to rehearse all of it. Felt a lot like a costume play, not a genuine royalty presentation such as it was done in Magnificent Century (Turkish) and The Tudors (British), and while these two were a televesion series, they should provide a role model for how all monarch-based flicks should appear and be viewed as. Also, as a side note, I think the way Kristina cut her hair near the end of the story was absolutely horrific and truly don't think that kind of a transition was necessary.
All in all, an excellent story put into a less-than-mediocre visualization of all the "issues" going on in pre-Industrial Scandinavia. By no way is this the performer's fault, it's the directors producers that tend to nullify the end result of such a glamorous, touching story. But honestly, pretty actressess don't cover up the obvious peresence of spoiled and unskilled movie-making.
Ebba Spare, on the other hand, otherwise known as "Belle", seems way too submissive in nature (even though she is a servant) and deserved more lines throughout the entire script. After watching the movie I barely remembered she was even in it until I read the cast again. But she looked more of like a doll on display rather than a living, breathing character. Kristina's advances towards her were very cringey.
The whole movie seems rushed and much too fast-paced for my liking, or anyone's, for that matter. The message is pretty clear, but the delivery seems like they were given only a single evening to rehearse all of it. Felt a lot like a costume play, not a genuine royalty presentation such as it was done in Magnificent Century (Turkish) and The Tudors (British), and while these two were a televesion series, they should provide a role model for how all monarch-based flicks should appear and be viewed as. Also, as a side note, I think the way Kristina cut her hair near the end of the story was absolutely horrific and truly don't think that kind of a transition was necessary.
All in all, an excellent story put into a less-than-mediocre visualization of all the "issues" going on in pre-Industrial Scandinavia. By no way is this the performer's fault, it's the directors producers that tend to nullify the end result of such a glamorous, touching story. But honestly, pretty actressess don't cover up the obvious peresence of spoiled and unskilled movie-making.
compelling history
SnoopyStyle11 February 2018
In 1632, protestant King Gustav of Sweden is killed on the battlefield. His daughter Kristina is the heir. Europe is engulfed with the conflict between Protestants and Catholics. Chancellor Axel Oxenstierna (Michael Nyqvist) takes Kristina away from her mad mother. In 1644, Kristina (Malin Buska) takes the throne. Axel's son Johan is desperate to marry her but she lusts for Countess Ebba Sparre (Sarah Gadon). Her love of the works of noted Catholic René Descartes and her pursuit of peace endanger support from the court.
There is a chance that this is hampered by history. This should be a queer love story but it has more than that which keeps it from taking off. It struggles to put the drama over the history. Swedish actress Buska is fine but she is limited. It's compelling history but it's less compelling cinema.
There is a chance that this is hampered by history. This should be a queer love story but it has more than that which keeps it from taking off. It struggles to put the drama over the history. Swedish actress Buska is fine but she is limited. It's compelling history but it's less compelling cinema.
I expected more...
vivaldi-bgd4 January 2016
The super-interesting trailer for The Girl Kind promised more than was really in the movie. It's kind of an open and unfinished story on multiple levels - Kristina's reign regarding the military campaign, country reforms and her personal life. All these important stories were merely touched in the movie. We never got to see whether or not Kristina actually reformed anything in Sweden at the time, the military campaign was also very vague and her relationship with the Countess deserved much more.
I indeed expected more to be seen between the two ladies in terms of chemistry and storyline. Though they shared enough time on screen, the relationship is missing a lot. We could only get a glimpse of Buska and Gadon's potential in a few scenes where they showed subtle, unspoken affection between the two characters. It's a pity the director did not use more of their talent to tell a very personal story of Kristina and how deep the relationship with Sparre must have been. There is enough historical evidence to confirm Kristina's sexuality. A character so passionate about knowledge, philosophy and art surely must have been even more passionate about the affairs of the heart. It's a pity only the dark side of it was depicted in the movie. In spite of this movie being about Kristina, obviously a lot of her is embedded in Sparre's character. Unfortunately, Sparre's side of the love coin was left unexplored.
I indeed expected more to be seen between the two ladies in terms of chemistry and storyline. Though they shared enough time on screen, the relationship is missing a lot. We could only get a glimpse of Buska and Gadon's potential in a few scenes where they showed subtle, unspoken affection between the two characters. It's a pity the director did not use more of their talent to tell a very personal story of Kristina and how deep the relationship with Sparre must have been. There is enough historical evidence to confirm Kristina's sexuality. A character so passionate about knowledge, philosophy and art surely must have been even more passionate about the affairs of the heart. It's a pity only the dark side of it was depicted in the movie. In spite of this movie being about Kristina, obviously a lot of her is embedded in Sparre's character. Unfortunately, Sparre's side of the love coin was left unexplored.
Terrible
ekoconnorarchive14 March 2021
Terrible. One dimensional characters. Complete focus is on her desire for another woman. What a waste of time. An hour and a half of my life watching this movie, gone. And the portrayal of rene Descartes is abominable.
Caught between the national duty and a personal affair.
Reno-Rangan4 August 2017
A biographical film set in the 17th century about the queen of Sweden. If a film was made based on the real means it has to be something very important thing to tell us like about the person or the historical events surrounding that person. It is a good film to learn the history of that part of the world if you do not belong there, and even for the natives with less knowledge about it. Multi- nationally produced film with a decent cast and production in the English language despite a Scandinavian tale.
Besides, it is also a lesbian theme and one of the oldest real account I have seen in a film. Even today, not the whole world accepts it with the open arm. So on that perspective, I was curious about the film. Not to know how the film was made, but how they are, the real people dealt with such sexual concept in those days. Particularly, how the people around reacted to it. On that topic, the narration was not explicit. That means watching it expecting one of the best among its kind is a disappointment. But the film offers more from other angles of importance.
After her father's death, the young Kristina was trained all her childhood to be the next ruler of the Sweden. When she came of age to take the crown, her aim is to mark the presence of Sweden all over the Europe. She's a fine sword woman, but also very interested in philosophy and art. But she has never been so confused as one day when she felt something for a woman in her court. She begins to learn more about it from an expert and on the other side, her duty to the nation and its people seems not getting better. How the fate of Sweden and her personal life collides covered in the remaining parts.
❝I know how to set a bear trap, how to clean a musket, but I don't know how to place my lips on yours.❞
The film was not received well. Critically failed, but it was not that bad if you ask me. Yes, it was boring in parts, due to lack of progression. There's lots of things happened in the story, yet seems was not enough to impress its viewers. Especially switching between national duty and personal affairs strongly collides. Thus leaving both the subjects behind half baked. The real events took place for decades was put into a hundred minutes film did not justify. It's particularly about picking the right story segment to add in the screenplay and the some of the parts looked fine, but not the overall film.
On the other hand, some people might find it a propaganda. Protestants, Roman Catholic, I don't know which way it leans, but started with one way and ended with another. So it could be the end that counts. On the humanitarian ground, morally, all looked fine to me. So if that's what made this film to become prey, then it's a totally wrongly judged. Otherwise the film is acceptable for being a biopic, telling the truth. Of all the kings and queen of the world we learnt about, Kristina is different and one should know about her for that. I feel she was very modern and modern in the wrong century.
Born in the royal family, had all the power, it's very sad how her fate has changed at the end. But that's not the end of her tale. There's more to reveal, though this film covered only that takes place in the Sweden and being the ruler. I'll be happy if a sequel was made to tell her latter life and self-discovery. I'm sure it would be more a philosophical, but some people might raise the voice propaganda. Since this flick did not do well, that's not going to happen, I guess.
One of the reasons I wanted to watch it was Sarah Gadon. She was in one of the main roles, but had a less preference. The other actress was really good and she was almost in every frame of the film. It might not be the best film to represent the LGBT, but it had its share and definitely a decent film from all the other angles. Should have been better, that's what those who saw it would say and so am I. Once watchable, but it does not have quality to I say the word, recommended!
6/10
Besides, it is also a lesbian theme and one of the oldest real account I have seen in a film. Even today, not the whole world accepts it with the open arm. So on that perspective, I was curious about the film. Not to know how the film was made, but how they are, the real people dealt with such sexual concept in those days. Particularly, how the people around reacted to it. On that topic, the narration was not explicit. That means watching it expecting one of the best among its kind is a disappointment. But the film offers more from other angles of importance.
After her father's death, the young Kristina was trained all her childhood to be the next ruler of the Sweden. When she came of age to take the crown, her aim is to mark the presence of Sweden all over the Europe. She's a fine sword woman, but also very interested in philosophy and art. But she has never been so confused as one day when she felt something for a woman in her court. She begins to learn more about it from an expert and on the other side, her duty to the nation and its people seems not getting better. How the fate of Sweden and her personal life collides covered in the remaining parts.
❝I know how to set a bear trap, how to clean a musket, but I don't know how to place my lips on yours.❞
The film was not received well. Critically failed, but it was not that bad if you ask me. Yes, it was boring in parts, due to lack of progression. There's lots of things happened in the story, yet seems was not enough to impress its viewers. Especially switching between national duty and personal affairs strongly collides. Thus leaving both the subjects behind half baked. The real events took place for decades was put into a hundred minutes film did not justify. It's particularly about picking the right story segment to add in the screenplay and the some of the parts looked fine, but not the overall film.
On the other hand, some people might find it a propaganda. Protestants, Roman Catholic, I don't know which way it leans, but started with one way and ended with another. So it could be the end that counts. On the humanitarian ground, morally, all looked fine to me. So if that's what made this film to become prey, then it's a totally wrongly judged. Otherwise the film is acceptable for being a biopic, telling the truth. Of all the kings and queen of the world we learnt about, Kristina is different and one should know about her for that. I feel she was very modern and modern in the wrong century.
Born in the royal family, had all the power, it's very sad how her fate has changed at the end. But that's not the end of her tale. There's more to reveal, though this film covered only that takes place in the Sweden and being the ruler. I'll be happy if a sequel was made to tell her latter life and self-discovery. I'm sure it would be more a philosophical, but some people might raise the voice propaganda. Since this flick did not do well, that's not going to happen, I guess.
One of the reasons I wanted to watch it was Sarah Gadon. She was in one of the main roles, but had a less preference. The other actress was really good and she was almost in every frame of the film. It might not be the best film to represent the LGBT, but it had its share and definitely a decent film from all the other angles. Should have been better, that's what those who saw it would say and so am I. Once watchable, but it does not have quality to I say the word, recommended!
6/10
Not even good as historical fiction
rich73542 December 2022
What is there to really say about this dreadful movie? It's about a fictional queen who just happens to have the same name as a real queen. So, the writers decided to gloss over history and give us a vision of their alternate reality. I have no problem with that, if they had, in fact, given us a good movie.
Instead, what we see is a plodding narrative that meanders along at a snail's pace. Was Kristina of Sweden a lesbian? Who knows. While a handful of historians think so, their is no actual proof; and the majority dismiss the idea for that reason. But, again, presenting her as such would not be an issue if the story had been written to be engaging and interesting, rather than drab and lifeless.
I can only recommend this to folks who enjoy bland historical fiction.
Instead, what we see is a plodding narrative that meanders along at a snail's pace. Was Kristina of Sweden a lesbian? Who knows. While a handful of historians think so, their is no actual proof; and the majority dismiss the idea for that reason. But, again, presenting her as such would not be an issue if the story had been written to be engaging and interesting, rather than drab and lifeless.
I can only recommend this to folks who enjoy bland historical fiction.
Interesting and boring...
Irishchatter13 December 2015
Warning: Spoilers
I wouldn't consider this the best movie I've ever seen but it was quite interesting about Queen Christina and her lesbian affair with Ebba Sparre, her lady-in-waiting. I suppose, it was rather interesting to go deep into her short term as a leader of Sweden. I never even heard of her before until today, I saw this movie. I reckon if you live in Sweden, you would know who Queen Christina is.
I have to say Malin Buska is a good Swedish actress in this, she reminds me of Kirsten Dunst with her beauty. I liked in the film that herself and Sarah Gadon relationship were in a dangerous love together. It does make the film feel powerful and so Victorian! Although I didn't like in this film that the scenes dragged on and this film is nearly 2 hours, it should've been an hour and 16 minutes. It would do rightly and earn 10 stars.
If you like watching Victorian then you'll like this!
I have to say Malin Buska is a good Swedish actress in this, she reminds me of Kirsten Dunst with her beauty. I liked in the film that herself and Sarah Gadon relationship were in a dangerous love together. It does make the film feel powerful and so Victorian! Although I didn't like in this film that the scenes dragged on and this film is nearly 2 hours, it should've been an hour and 16 minutes. It would do rightly and earn 10 stars.
If you like watching Victorian then you'll like this!
Really disappointed with this one....
grandeleonardo-8070923 December 2021
Warning: Spoilers
Going in, reading the title, the... sketchy less promising summary of the film, I guess I should've have expected much, but I really wanted to like this. It has every a good potential queer story can offer for a historical drama, and the main character is a flipping queen! So many chances at good storyline, and gender empowering moment in history - a queen struggle at power, social status, free-thinking during the time of religious autocracy. And most of all, the queen is gay, and cannot separate her duty and personal interest. It was a perfect duality for our main character, but did the writer needed to ruin something that they could tackle less black and white, and more gray.
The main character was really unlikeable, which is a problem because she is written to be this charming and intelligent and witty queen, clever enough to charm her subject. But boy did she did the opposite. PLAIN MEAN. She was awfuly, demanding and showing none of the class. I guess the point being she's breaking the gender stereotype, but we mustn't forget her time period, when she is alive and the social upbringing. Somehow she turned out far beyond her time. Which could be interesting, if she'd be more likeable as a character.
And the romance felt very forced. Romeo and Juliet-y. And her majesty felt rape-y. How she's manipulating her lady-in-waiting to spend time with her... (take her clothes off in front of her). And none of the date or the fluff or the attempt at flirt. It just happened?? Blasphemy! :'(
I really wanted to like this. But worst of all, the queen abandoned her duty and ran, after being caught. Historically bonker. All that potential ruined. I'm disappointed.
The main character was really unlikeable, which is a problem because she is written to be this charming and intelligent and witty queen, clever enough to charm her subject. But boy did she did the opposite. PLAIN MEAN. She was awfuly, demanding and showing none of the class. I guess the point being she's breaking the gender stereotype, but we mustn't forget her time period, when she is alive and the social upbringing. Somehow she turned out far beyond her time. Which could be interesting, if she'd be more likeable as a character.
And the romance felt very forced. Romeo and Juliet-y. And her majesty felt rape-y. How she's manipulating her lady-in-waiting to spend time with her... (take her clothes off in front of her). And none of the date or the fluff or the attempt at flirt. It just happened?? Blasphemy! :'(
I really wanted to like this. But worst of all, the queen abandoned her duty and ran, after being caught. Historically bonker. All that potential ruined. I'm disappointed.
beautiful film about a very interesting person
d-vanderleer28 December 2015
Watching the score of this film here on IMDb I was not very eager to watch this film. I did anyway and did not regret any minute. Of course a lot of aspects a persons life disappear in a movie of 2 hours. But a film should be watched as a separate piece of art. And this piece is simply beautiful and enjoyable! I had never heard of Kristina of Sweden before, and I really like being introduced to her. Very interesting person in history. And certainly not only because she loved women, because that is of all times. Her ideas and curiosity made a change in history. That is what triggered me to find out more about her. And the low score here triggered me to write a review. This film deserves much better!
Clunky
derek-duerden31 March 2022
Despite some good elements (e.g. The costume design and cinematography), I really expected to enjoy this a lot more.
Firstly, the score often felt really over the top, and the beginning a very rushed attempt at scene-setting (and where did the young Kristina acquire an American accent???).
Once it settles down, I started feeling "OK - it's not too bad" but then it would break into melodrama and/or further rushed scenes such that the pacing was very confusing. I don't know if the director shot 4 or 5 hours of footage and this is the result of some questionable editing, or if there is another reason, but it left me feeling that I wanted to see a better film about this very interesting character.
Firstly, the score often felt really over the top, and the beginning a very rushed attempt at scene-setting (and where did the young Kristina acquire an American accent???).
Once it settles down, I started feeling "OK - it's not too bad" but then it would break into melodrama and/or further rushed scenes such that the pacing was very confusing. I don't know if the director shot 4 or 5 hours of footage and this is the result of some questionable editing, or if there is another reason, but it left me feeling that I wanted to see a better film about this very interesting character.
It's ok...
Kira70927 February 2023
It's okay. I only watched it because it was in my Hulu watchlist and was expiring. Also I'm a huge dyke.
The acting was fine, the set design was fine, the costuming was fine. This film was just fine.
As a lesbian myself I felt like the whole queerness was lacking in authenticity. Like how a straight guy writes sapphics. Some scenes also felt really panders and for the male gaze.
There were also some scenes that were pretty meaningless and seemed only for padding out the runtime.
If you are like me and are restricted to only watching titles PG-14 or under due to strict parents. I guess this could work. If you are looking for quality queer film for queer folk, then you should probably find something worth your time.
The acting was fine, the set design was fine, the costuming was fine. This film was just fine.
As a lesbian myself I felt like the whole queerness was lacking in authenticity. Like how a straight guy writes sapphics. Some scenes also felt really panders and for the male gaze.
There were also some scenes that were pretty meaningless and seemed only for padding out the runtime.
If you are like me and are restricted to only watching titles PG-14 or under due to strict parents. I guess this could work. If you are looking for quality queer film for queer folk, then you should probably find something worth your time.
Fascinating and thought-provoking, though incomplete
I_Ailurophile21 May 2021
I don't suppose for one moment that 'The girl king' entirely corresponds to known historical records, or the most reasonable approximation that researchers can reach. But it is immediately engaging, and entertaining, with swell performances.
Historical fiction is a wondrous genre. To seize on particular events or figures, and most typically further hone in on specific characteristics thereof, allows for more concrete storytelling - though also may especially risk running afoul of historical accuracy. And then there's the inevitable question of how well the narrative stands on its own merits.
This much is certain: Queen Christina had very particular ideas about life, Sweden, and her rule. She was nonconformist, even, in her interests and ideals, and faced great opposition from many angles. 'The girl king' excels as it conveys these notions about her character. Where it succeeds, much credit lies with Michel Marc Bouchard's screenplay, certainly. Mika Kaurismäki's direction is very capable, but it's the writing here, I think, that truly captures the spirit. The film centers Christina, and the portrayal is written as very dynamic and believably lifelike.
And where the film succeeds is also absolutely to the credit of star Malin Buska. She bears distinct poise in her stature, and a pointed assertiveness in her delivery, that gives Christina an astounding willfulness and force of personality. I immediately want to find more of her films to watch; if 'The girl king' focused even more on her, specifically, it may well have benefited.
Moreover, particularly with that spotlight, some obvious themes are presented. This is a movie that puts across readily apparent notions, through Christina's beliefs and struggles, of feminism; gender nonconformity; pursuit of one's aspirations, and perseverance thereof; rejection of dogma, tradition, and norms; and elevating and encouraging others. Further, there's a sense of acknowledgement of and support for science, education, queerness generally and sapphic love specifically, and broadly upending expectations.
There's a lot that 'The girl king' wants to say, do, and be - after all, Christina was an interesting, complex, complicated person. That ambition is tempered somewhat by the fact that we're watching a picture about people in highborn classes, and by the rigidity of a time and place that was locked in conflict between competing, deeply restrictive, and unyielding religious doctrines.
The greatest difficulty with this movie, though, is simply an issue familiar to plenty of other works of historical fiction. How does one condense 22 years of sovereignty into a 100-minute feature? Christina's general disdain for gender norms are specifically noted at the beginning of the movie--but then not again until the end. Christina's immediate interest in Countess Ebba Sparre (Sarah Gadon, demure but delightful) is given progressively greater screen time - yet we still get more scenes of supporting characters discussing that burgeoning relationship, and their concerns about it, than we do scenes of Christina and the Countess together. And even this is then subsumed as the plot swings toward the queen's personal interests or governmental hopes, or clashes with advisers or prominent religious figures, or an underlying conspiracy, or, or, or.
And so it goes: foci of the narrative come and go, or are mentioned then dropped quickly, to make room for others. To be sure, most movies try to cram a similar variety of aspects. Here, it just feels like nothing is given adequate time in the screenplay to be fully developed. There's an ongoing sense of something missing.
I like 'The girl king.' I love Buska's performance, and the way Christina is written here. However speculative or historically accurate it may or may not be, I think the movie does a good job of stirring interest in such a multifaceted figure. It just seems like the picture tries to do too much with not enough time.
With the caveat that it's not entirely fulfilling, 'The girl king' is enjoyable, and keeps us watching to the end. I think it's worth watching, bearing in mind simply that the portrait we get of Christina, Queen of Sweden, is inevitably incomplete.
Historical fiction is a wondrous genre. To seize on particular events or figures, and most typically further hone in on specific characteristics thereof, allows for more concrete storytelling - though also may especially risk running afoul of historical accuracy. And then there's the inevitable question of how well the narrative stands on its own merits.
This much is certain: Queen Christina had very particular ideas about life, Sweden, and her rule. She was nonconformist, even, in her interests and ideals, and faced great opposition from many angles. 'The girl king' excels as it conveys these notions about her character. Where it succeeds, much credit lies with Michel Marc Bouchard's screenplay, certainly. Mika Kaurismäki's direction is very capable, but it's the writing here, I think, that truly captures the spirit. The film centers Christina, and the portrayal is written as very dynamic and believably lifelike.
And where the film succeeds is also absolutely to the credit of star Malin Buska. She bears distinct poise in her stature, and a pointed assertiveness in her delivery, that gives Christina an astounding willfulness and force of personality. I immediately want to find more of her films to watch; if 'The girl king' focused even more on her, specifically, it may well have benefited.
Moreover, particularly with that spotlight, some obvious themes are presented. This is a movie that puts across readily apparent notions, through Christina's beliefs and struggles, of feminism; gender nonconformity; pursuit of one's aspirations, and perseverance thereof; rejection of dogma, tradition, and norms; and elevating and encouraging others. Further, there's a sense of acknowledgement of and support for science, education, queerness generally and sapphic love specifically, and broadly upending expectations.
There's a lot that 'The girl king' wants to say, do, and be - after all, Christina was an interesting, complex, complicated person. That ambition is tempered somewhat by the fact that we're watching a picture about people in highborn classes, and by the rigidity of a time and place that was locked in conflict between competing, deeply restrictive, and unyielding religious doctrines.
The greatest difficulty with this movie, though, is simply an issue familiar to plenty of other works of historical fiction. How does one condense 22 years of sovereignty into a 100-minute feature? Christina's general disdain for gender norms are specifically noted at the beginning of the movie--but then not again until the end. Christina's immediate interest in Countess Ebba Sparre (Sarah Gadon, demure but delightful) is given progressively greater screen time - yet we still get more scenes of supporting characters discussing that burgeoning relationship, and their concerns about it, than we do scenes of Christina and the Countess together. And even this is then subsumed as the plot swings toward the queen's personal interests or governmental hopes, or clashes with advisers or prominent religious figures, or an underlying conspiracy, or, or, or.
And so it goes: foci of the narrative come and go, or are mentioned then dropped quickly, to make room for others. To be sure, most movies try to cram a similar variety of aspects. Here, it just feels like nothing is given adequate time in the screenplay to be fully developed. There's an ongoing sense of something missing.
I like 'The girl king.' I love Buska's performance, and the way Christina is written here. However speculative or historically accurate it may or may not be, I think the movie does a good job of stirring interest in such a multifaceted figure. It just seems like the picture tries to do too much with not enough time.
With the caveat that it's not entirely fulfilling, 'The girl king' is enjoyable, and keeps us watching to the end. I think it's worth watching, bearing in mind simply that the portrait we get of Christina, Queen of Sweden, is inevitably incomplete.
A beautiful film about a lesser known historical period
tallard12 December 2015
I caught this film entirely by accident, with zero expectations or knowledge of the subject matter. I am unqualified to speak to the historicity of the events. But if it is close to historical events, what a beautiful film was made of it. Dealing with politics and religion and feminism, it is a rare little gem.
Christina, the Queen (actually "King") of Sweden from 1632 (age 6) until 1654, was tutored by a unique man, and grew up to be a young woman with curiosity about the world and a taste for life, she shook the institutions of the day, with an unkind mixture of success and failures. The film is mostly in English with a little French (accompanied by subtitles), the actors do a fine job, and I really appreciated the makeup team's subtle approach. I might have appreciated a script less focused on romance and more on personality and accomplishments, but then again, in our 20s, hormones can dominate all.
Christina, the Queen (actually "King") of Sweden from 1632 (age 6) until 1654, was tutored by a unique man, and grew up to be a young woman with curiosity about the world and a taste for life, she shook the institutions of the day, with an unkind mixture of success and failures. The film is mostly in English with a little French (accompanied by subtitles), the actors do a fine job, and I really appreciated the makeup team's subtle approach. I might have appreciated a script less focused on romance and more on personality and accomplishments, but then again, in our 20s, hormones can dominate all.
The King has spoken
ccorral41910 January 2016
Palm Springs International Film Festival- Film Review: The Girl King. Director Mika Kaurismaki and Writer Michel Marc Bouchard bring to the screen the tale of Sweden's 17th-century monarch Kristina, who takes the thrown at the age of six and later assumes the power over her country at the age of 18. The fact that she is a woman now reigning of the country run by men, takes a back seat to her desire to change her country from war and division to a society of peace. While this battle to turn her people around is fought by many, there is an underlying need/call for her to marry and producer an off-spring. Yet, with many a handsome suitor at her taking (including Lucas Bryant and François Arnaud), Kristina (Malin Buska) has eyes on her lady-in-waiting Countess Ebba Sparreat (Sarah Gadon). For a film that is relatively unknown (except in the Gay/Lesbian arena), this small film is produced with excellence, featuring terrific acting, period piece costumes, intriguing dialogue and storyline that keeps the audience waiting to see what Kristina will do with her life. Small independent films that pack a wallop like "The Girl King" are what Film Festivals are all about.
magnificent
paulalar19 March 2016
To me, this film is brilliant. From the start to the end; it shows perfectly and transmits who was Queen Kristina from Sweden and what she wanted for her and her country. The film respects the century rules in which the film is set; the plot is just wonderful because it doesn't just portrays who was this awesome woman but also stays in what she went through, with everything: her sexuality, her ideas being different from what she has been taught, her desire for being more than just a queen ruling her kingdom marrying a man and having kids; her not accepting what everyone else thought was the best for her, because only she knew what was the best for her and her life. it not only portrays her life but portrays a brilliant, strong, wise, well written fictional character, who was not afraid of being different: who was not afraid of what other people thought about her, who did what she could in a kingdom full of people who didn't had other beliefs that what they believed about, who had a lot of knowledge and still was desiring for more; in a century where the full concept of lgbt people didn't even existed she fought till the end for what her heart felt, and in my opinion that was everything to me. This film is good in many ways: if you would like to know a little bit more of history; if you would like to know an incredible woman that maybe you didn't knew before because they never spoke to you about this in history class; if you would like to watch a good story with a great plot and storyline; if you would like to watch girl on girl representation on just the xvii century (yeah, lesbians and bisexuals existed in the xvii century. it is not something of now, just in case someone forgets). I watched it with hoping of some good cinematography and I ended really happy because it exceeded my expectations in everything. Kristina was awesome in every aspect and I really appreciate that there's a movie about her and her life with so many good details, with people that existed in the real life almost 400 years ago, with no twisted stuff that maybe she didn't do. It portrays exactly what she was and what she did (further the idea that it still is a movie and not a documentary so there's things that are only of the film, but still it keeps her essence and her attitude; her likes and dislikes; her curiosity and her greatness.) Definitely a movie to not miss. Excellent.-
Queen Christina flees convention and patriarchal power
maurice_yacowar5 January 2016
Warning: Spoilers
Mika Kaurismaki's Queen Christina of Sweden (Malin Buska) is tall, beautiful, and without a hump on one shoulder, but otherwise she's a fair representation of the historic figure. In her restless spirit, intellectual appetite, impatience with the patriarchy and her lesbianism she's a much more accurate representation than Rouben Mamoulian's (Garbo in Queen Christina, 1933).
Of course Kaurismaki opts to revive the 17th Century Christina story now because it's a sharp reflection of our times. I don't know how Swedes or Finns will see their lives in this film, but much of it rings clear for North America and Europe today. The film bristles with pertinence, like the male advisor's "Peace doesn't fill our coffers" and her "Austerity is sadistic."
Christina's advocacy of peace, culture, the arts, make her a model for modern leadership. In her refusal to accept male authority, especially not to allow any man to claim her as a field he can plow for his pleasure, she is the prototypal feminist. Sadly, the contemporary also limns through her ultimate defeat by the male authority and their rejection of her same-sex passion as "deviance." Her male counsellors conspire against her, drive off her beloved, and drive Christina into madness, until she escapes.
We're still hung up on the questions she poses to Descartes: what is love, how do we deal with it, how can we free ourselves from it. We still crave the freedom to define our own destiny and escape our inherited structures and strictures. If we've moved beyond Descartes' assumption that our emotions have a physical source, we continue to build upon his confidence in empirical evidence and in the essential use of reason.
But another Cartesian statement propels the film: To find the truth we must abandon everything we have learned or assumed and establish a new understanding of our world. This is the triumph of discovery over habit, reason over delusion, freedom over "destiny." This is how this Christina constantly flies in the face of what she has been taught and what is expected of her.
Her escape is ironic. Her advisors having long insisted she marry to produce a clear heir to the throne, she now proclaims one suitor her son and bestows upon him her royal authority. With a quarter of the treasury she departs to Rome, where she converts to Catholicism and enjoys the life of secular culture and stimulation she has craved. As one counsellor bitterly observes, having rejected all her male suitors she settles into life under the authority of the Pope. The last shots, however, play her as exulting in openness, freedom and the light the Swedish court and "thinkers" denied her. She abandons her throne and power to recreate herself in Rome.
Now, here's the crowning irony. Mika and younger brother Aki Kaurismaki are famous for acerbic contemporary stories about inarticulate, hard drinking, ugly and lugubrious losers, steeped in 1950s rock and roll. Nobody in a blind test would guess The Girl King is a Kaurismaki film. But here the director does what his heroine does and what her healthiest mentor, Descartes, prescribed. To find the truth, to see how Queen Christina reflects upon our current reality, Kaurismaki discarded his customary period, his familiar genres and his signature style, then and bathos — to make something completely new. And true to our day as it is to his subject's.
Of course Kaurismaki opts to revive the 17th Century Christina story now because it's a sharp reflection of our times. I don't know how Swedes or Finns will see their lives in this film, but much of it rings clear for North America and Europe today. The film bristles with pertinence, like the male advisor's "Peace doesn't fill our coffers" and her "Austerity is sadistic."
Christina's advocacy of peace, culture, the arts, make her a model for modern leadership. In her refusal to accept male authority, especially not to allow any man to claim her as a field he can plow for his pleasure, she is the prototypal feminist. Sadly, the contemporary also limns through her ultimate defeat by the male authority and their rejection of her same-sex passion as "deviance." Her male counsellors conspire against her, drive off her beloved, and drive Christina into madness, until she escapes.
We're still hung up on the questions she poses to Descartes: what is love, how do we deal with it, how can we free ourselves from it. We still crave the freedom to define our own destiny and escape our inherited structures and strictures. If we've moved beyond Descartes' assumption that our emotions have a physical source, we continue to build upon his confidence in empirical evidence and in the essential use of reason.
But another Cartesian statement propels the film: To find the truth we must abandon everything we have learned or assumed and establish a new understanding of our world. This is the triumph of discovery over habit, reason over delusion, freedom over "destiny." This is how this Christina constantly flies in the face of what she has been taught and what is expected of her.
Her escape is ironic. Her advisors having long insisted she marry to produce a clear heir to the throne, she now proclaims one suitor her son and bestows upon him her royal authority. With a quarter of the treasury she departs to Rome, where she converts to Catholicism and enjoys the life of secular culture and stimulation she has craved. As one counsellor bitterly observes, having rejected all her male suitors she settles into life under the authority of the Pope. The last shots, however, play her as exulting in openness, freedom and the light the Swedish court and "thinkers" denied her. She abandons her throne and power to recreate herself in Rome.
Now, here's the crowning irony. Mika and younger brother Aki Kaurismaki are famous for acerbic contemporary stories about inarticulate, hard drinking, ugly and lugubrious losers, steeped in 1950s rock and roll. Nobody in a blind test would guess The Girl King is a Kaurismaki film. But here the director does what his heroine does and what her healthiest mentor, Descartes, prescribed. To find the truth, to see how Queen Christina reflects upon our current reality, Kaurismaki discarded his customary period, his familiar genres and his signature style, then and bathos — to make something completely new. And true to our day as it is to his subject's.
History or Fiction? I'm not sure, but it was a good film
storeyonastory31 August 2017
I have absolutely no knowledge of Swedish history, so I'm not sure how accurate this telling of Christina - Sweden's 17th century Queen - is. However, I do know that I thoroughly enjoyed this story. What a fascinating character Christina is. It's such a shame that most of what we know about our history has been written by zealots, bigots and fear- mongers. So it's hard to know a historical figure's true story.
There were some movie-type issues, but overall it was a good film. I'm not sure why it has received such a crummy IMDb rating, because I truly think it worth watching. It left me so emotional: angry and sad and thankful. And has definitely given me a thirst to learn more about this woman.
There were some movie-type issues, but overall it was a good film. I'm not sure why it has received such a crummy IMDb rating, because I truly think it worth watching. It left me so emotional: angry and sad and thankful. And has definitely given me a thirst to learn more about this woman.
Very enjoyable!!
possibilitynow20206 February 2022
Loved how the silliness of the battle between Catholic and Protestant faiths are seen with the backdrop of Descartes philosophy. Loved the idea/depiction of a leader out to cause peace through the pursuit of knowledge while a bunch of silly men try to win her hand to gain her power. Sorry to see so much of the promotion and commentary is about her sexlife ... women are SO much more than who they sleep with.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
