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.

Nikolas (Paul Bettany) is a 14th (or so) century priest with a guilty conscience. Guilty of adultery, he exiles himself to the countryside and casts his lot with a group of itinerant theatrical players lead by Martin (DaFoe). Though Nikolas has no discernible acting talent, the troupe begins to grow attached to him, especially as he develops an interest in the mystery of the disappearance and death of several young boys in a small town the players have come to visit. Nikolas exhumes the corpse, attracting the attention and ire of the local magistrate, and discovers a cover-up and conspiracy which his conscience can not allow to go unexposed. Since the courts, the local law enforcement, the church and the local nobility will not listen, Nikolas must plead his case to the citizenry. The troupe takes up the task using their well honed talents.This is a very clever, well written, very well filmed, carefully planned piece of historical fiction. The medieval period is portrayed with far greater accuracy and sensitivity than the usual contemporary film affords, though its cleanliness is a bit absurd, the set is magnificent and reminiscent of Herzog's talents in creating a historic context. The language of the film is also as authentic as it could be without resorting to archaic tongues few would understand. The acting is exceptional, though a couple of Bettany's soliloquies were a little predictably presented (he seems to do a lot of this sort of thing) with DaFoe and Gina McKee providing especially touching and intense performances.The acting and strong script combine to make The Reckoning as good as a character study as it is as a dramatic mystery. It is not, however, a fast paced thriller and will undoubtedly disappoint those used to the style of mystery currently in vogue - that is guns-a-blazin' sex and violence-decorated kill-fests. If you're not in the mood for a slow-moving but intense film experience, avoid The Reckoning. If you want to be immersed in a different, but very real, world, and experience a contemporary issue through the eyes of those who live in that world, see it.

I suppose there is an audience for a movie like this in an age when educated people boldly deny evolution as a valid scientific theory in favor of Biblical creationism. However, I cringed throughout. The vastness of wasted talent in this movie is the only impressive thing about it. All of them stumbling through its muddled morality mush of pseudo-Christian, homophobic, anarchical nonsense, set in a Medieval period which could not have possibly hosted these events. It would have been more believable if it had been staged on a distant planet with old Star Trek TV sets. Paul Bettany manages to escape with a small amount of dignity by delivering his corny speeches with Shakespearean zeal and by dying quite well. Vincent Cassel has no aptitude as a 1950s-style homosexual villain. It seemed his heart just wasn't in it to his credit. Another turkey that somehow got off the ground in a world where many swans never get their wings.

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.