Nearly 50 years on this film needs to be judged by the message it contains. It is very dramatic but it's inaccuracies and omissions strip it of any meaning - for example the total missing out of the escape of Charles and the Second Civil War means that the reason for Cromwell insistence on his death looks like vengeance devoid of necessity. In a day when the tyrants look to seize power in the Western World in the name of the people afain, this film offers no insight. The people having got their electoral victories face the same issues of lacking any clue what should replace what they have torn down. It could say a lot, but manages to say nothing of value. Want middling battle scenes great, otherwise a poor use of an afternoon.

Despite the eponymous title, writer/director Ken Hughes forgot to include a single piece of insight into what made British martyr Oliver Cromwell tick. Instead we have a mediocre battle of wills between Cromwell (Richard Harris) and King George I (a very uneasy looking Alec Guinness). Harris would have us believe that Cromwell spent all his time either yelling at the top of his lungs about how miserable England is or muttering anti-Catholic notions to no one in particular. He doesn't so much as act as he does recite his dialog. Guinness, with goofy looking hair (both on his head and chin) seems to be working in a different film, a satire of a David Lean epic perhaps? Hughes mounts several chilly battle scenes, virtually all via long-shots so there's never any sense of danger or, frankly, excitement. This is film with a lot of pomp and very little circumstance. The supporting cast is large and includes the likes of Robert Morley, Charles Grey, Timothy Dalton and Dorothy Tutin (infusing a lot of life into her few scenes as Guinness's unpleasant wife, Queen Henrietta Maria). Well known ham Patrick Wymark hams it up mightily as the Earl of Strafford.

You have to look at this film as it is, excellent acting, superb costumes and at brief moments, some wonderful landscape shots. Its description of our history a little simplistic (but at least not in 'lets dumb it down for the American market' terms!) to to fully embrace the facts really does need a lot of staying power, I mean have you read S.R.Gardiners three or is it four volume work on 'History of the great Civil War'?. Trust me this concise version is more preferable.Prince Rupert was indeed a vile German nephew of Charles, ask the 'brummies' of that period, so him being deported was a most enjoyable ending, as was the verbal insult to him being a 'foreign mercenary' by a parliamentarian at first battle.But you know really, right at the end when you listen to Cromwell talking of creating schools and University's for the people; to create a democracy and be their own Government... its still holds up today, such stiring stuff. Churchill wanted to name the 'Spitfire' after Cromwell, he had to settle for the Tank in stead.

Altogether I felt that this film was rather enjoyable, well put together and was very helpful at developing my understanding of Cromwell as a figure and the events that surrounded him. I believe Richard Harris performed his role very well too as a decisive, passionate, and capable Oliver Cromwell; this is how I envisioned him. Though in parts some of the historical content is distorted in order to make it more dramatic for audience satisfaction (such as the inclusion of Cromwell in the arrest of the five MP's) I think despite its flaws it shows an good representation of the key events involving Oliver Cromwell in mid 17th century England.