Young Washington Review: A Powerful Historical Epic

Introduction

Young Washington is an intriguing drama which chronicles the life of George Washington before becoming a legendary figure.

Young Washington is directed by Jon Erwin and it explores the early military career of George Washington.

The movie is set from 1753 to 1755. Washington transitions from being a surveyor to a commanding military officer.

During this journey, Washington experiences failure, peril, social challenges and hard decisions. This is quite an interesting era for a historical movie.

For most people, Washington is known for being a revolutionary and the first president of America.

Fewer still have any idea of the novice young commander who came before the historical figure of George Washington.

Young Washington thus has a chance of portraying a more humane version of George Washington. The movie does not feature a ready-made hero just waiting to be discovered.

Rather, it features a novice young man full of ambition and drive to make his mark in the world.

This point is key in analyzing the film. He is not depicted as a person who does everything right. He makes mistakes and pays for his mistakes.

Washington fails before he is able to achieve anything. Thus, the main theme of the film is development and not perfection.

Washington becomes a leader thanks to what he goes through. The film also explores the social world that Washington is attempting to enter.

He is often looked down upon by members of the British establishment and upper class because of his absence of proper family lineage, formal English education, and noble financial background.

In essence, being an American colonist, George Washington is subjected to class arrogance on the part of royal officials who consider provincials to be rough and lesser beings.

Additionally, George Washington is deprived of his status among elites due to the downfall of his status after the death of his father and is compelled to earn respect from the fringes of the elite society.

This attitude towards him is seen in his professional sphere of life where he is continually denied a British military commission.

This adds an interesting aspect to his quest. He has to earn his reputation through accomplishments, not by default.

This helps make sense of his ambitions. It also lends the movie a good topic regarding social status.

Unfortunately, Young Washington does not always do enough with this concept.

However, this offers an interesting visual portrayal of Washington’s early years.

It starts out a little slow, but becomes much more compelling once Washington gets into his first taste of military combat.

This leads to an imperfect but captivating historical narrative.

A Young Man Before the Legend

It is one of the strongest qualities of the film that it chooses to open the movie with the humble background of George Washington.

Washington is not presented as the completed national hero. What the audience meets is a character who is uncertain about his own future.

It makes Washington very approachable. While he is ambitious, ambition doesn’t mean success.

Though he is a beginner, he is willing to learn. He seeks acknowledgment, but he must earn it.

This gives a richer character rather than just portraying Washington as a natural prodigy. The movie knows that historic persons tend to become godly.

It is through portraits, monuments, and history books that they turn out to be. Washington, young as he is, tries to do the opposite.

This takes us back to Washington at the start. Here we have the young man before the legend has been fully built up around him.

This helps provide the story with a good sense of development. The audience sees the qualities developing, not just stated to already be there.

His self-assurance comes from experience. His leadership comes from his responsibilities. His resilience comes from his failures. That is arguably the film’s strongest character idea.

Washington and Social Class

Another important thing is the place that Washington occupies in the colonial society. It can be seen from the film that birth and social standing might greatly affect one’s opportunities.

Washington belonged to a decent family, yet he did not belong to the aristocracy. Thus, he had to make his way through the world which was ruled by other, established families.

This is one more layer to his ambitions. Helping us see how he became who we would know him as.

It is not merely a question of seeking an adventure for him. He wants to create a reputation and establish himself.

He must show that he deserves a place along with those who possess higher social prestige. This aspect makes his association with people like Lord Fairfax (Played By Kelsey Grammer) very important.

Lord Fairfax is the embodiment of a privileged world. Washington is coming into this environment without the benefits of inheritance.

His aspirations can therefore be viewed in both a personal sense and a social sense. Washington wants to advance himself but he wants to be acknowledged as well.

Washington is certainly not portrayed as some poor and destitute outsider. Washington is shown as an educated young man moving through the ranks above him.

This theme could have been taken into account even further in this movie. The social class makes an excellent reason for Washington’s commitment.

The movie could also add more conflict between ambition and jealousy. However, in this movie, most attention is paid to the positive aspects of Washington.

Nevertheless, it does contribute to the understanding of this person’s personality. This movie helps to see that greatness did not give any privileges. Washington had to earn his status.

Themes and Character Development

The most prominent theme in Young Washington is development through challenges. This film does not claim that George Washington was born as a flawless leader.

He develops into one through various trials in life. His failures are significant as they add value to all his future accomplishments.

One of the greatest failures in the film is the defeat at Fort Necessity. George Washington fails at an early age in his military career.

This loss questions both his confidence and credibility. The movie does not erase his failure from his story.

Rather, the movie uses the incident in developing his character. This method is far better than making Washington always emerge as the winner.

In this case, we can say that the story recognizes an aspect of leadership. It is often said that leaders learn from failure rather than success.

Washington’s defeats make him question his capabilities. They make him realize the implications of leadership.

These help make the subsequent scenes involving the army more meaningful in the film. The viewers have witnessed Washington failing.

Thus, they know that his later bravery comes from experience. Duty, sacrifice, perseverance and faith are other themes portrayed in the film.

These topics are certainly important for the filmmakers. They easily fit into the movie about military command.

Yet, there are moments when the movie is a little bit too direct.

Some scenes in the movie tell viewers what conclusions they are supposed to draw from the story about Washington.

The movie might have had a more subtle way of delivering its message. Its themes are generally connected to the story.

However, there are moments when the message becomes more obvious than necessary. The film is strongest when its values emerge through Washington’s actions.

Is Washington Presented as a Hero?

It would be unfair to say that Young Washington simply idolises its central character. The film clearly admires Washington, but it also allows him to fail.

That makes a significant difference. Washington is ambitious and inexperienced. He makes decisions that do not always work.

He suffers a major military defeat. He faces situations beyond his experience. He must learn from people around him.

Such flaws ensure that he can never become a perfect hero.

The movie should thus be regarded as more sympathetic than blindly admiring. Its aim is to help people realize the reason behind Washington’s reputation.

But it also shows how he earned this reputation. He was faced with both failures and successes in his life.

It makes the character more realistic. However the film could still have explored his weaknesses more deeply.

Sometimes his mistakes are viewed as merely stepping stones to greatness. This is somewhat comforting.

However another more intricate story could have explored the repercussions of his ambitions. Was he sometimes blinded by his ambitions and as a result was his judgment clouded?

Nevertheless, the movie never pretends that young Washington was flawless. This is a vital aspect.

The Story and Its Pacing

Pacing is one of the major shortcomings of the movie. There is a lot of time spent in the first part introducing Washington and his surroundings.

History plays an important role, but it is not always engaging. A lot of information needs to be consumed by the viewer.

Some initial parts may look more like history preparations rather than storytelling. It was definitely the biggest drawback I had while watching the movie.

The beginning takes time to establish its characters and circumstances. However, the emotional stakes are not immediately strong enough.

The film becomes considerably more engaging once Washington’s military career develops. The conflict becomes clearer.

The danger becomes more immediate. Washington’s decisions begin affecting other people. The story finally develops a stronger sense of momentum.

The later sections therefore feel more confident. The transition from exposition to military conflict is particularly noticeable.

Once the action begins, the film has a much clearer dramatic purpose.

The battles also serve to create a better background for character development of Washington. It is not about making progress anymore.

He has to make decisions which may result in death. That makes his character development a lot more interesting.

That is why I think the movie was slow in the beginning but became more fascinating as it went along. That is, in my opinion, a proper evaluation of the movie rather than its criticism.

Direction and Visual Style

Young Washington is directed by Jon Erwin as a modern historical epic. This film is obviously made for the audience of today.

It blends the elements of history with those of modern cinema. This provides it with dynamism and grandeur.

Moreover, Jon Erwin understands that it is important to make the frontier look threatening. Characters exist in a large and uncertain terrain.

Environment often looks much larger than the humans inhabiting it. It makes a good pictorial symbol for Washington’s circumstances.

Washington is a young man coming into a world that he doesn’t fully know about. Heroic imagery is used in the scenes that are very crucial for Washington.

In some cases, it works well. Sometimes it becomes a little too obvious. It is obvious to the audience that Washington will become an important part of history.

Sometimes, there is a feeling that the filmmaking tries too hard to make the audience aware of it. However, Erwin manages to keep his visual identity through most of the movie.

In military scenes, his directorial skills work especially well. The action feels more immediate and the storytelling becomes less dependent on exposition.

That is where the film’s visual ambitions pay off most successfully.

Kristopher Kimlin’s Cinematography

Cinematography by Kristopher Kimlin is one of the strongest aspects of the movie. Photography provides a sense of scale to the frontier.

Widescreen shots accentuate the magnitude of the environment. Both Washington and his comrades seem dwarfed against such environments.

This helps generate a sense of isolation. At the same time, it adds to the danger that the characters are facing.

The frontier is much more than just an aesthetic background. It becomes a vital element of the narrative.

The natural beauty contrasts with violence in an efficient way. Peaceful landscapes may transform into scenes of chaos.

This contributes to the sense of disruption and fear caused by the fighting. The cinematography plays an essential role in the big military action scenes.

Wide shots set the tone for the battlefield. Close-ups take the viewer closer into the chaos. The smoke, gun fire, and action provide an element of uncertainty.

As such, the photography plays an important role in establishing the atmosphere of the film. The photography also makes the era believable.

The movie does not appear as a contemporary tale that is only draped in old clothing. Its setting appears authentic and appropriately rough.

This does not guarantee complete historical accuracy. However, it does create a convincing visual interpretation of the period.

The Battle Scenes

Among the most impressive things about the movie are the battle scenes. They offer something that the slower beginning may lack.

The action feels grand and dangerous. The directors also realize that the eighteenth-century warfare had to be chaotic.

The vision is hindered by smoke and movement. The gunfire makes everything unclear on the battle field.

This particular sequence of the film works exceptionally well. It provides the movie with the most powerful series of action sequences.

At the same time, it puts Washington into a historical disaster. His survival becomes an exciting and defining part of the story.

The sequence is definitely aimed at a modern audience. It incorporates fast-paced editing and intensified imagery.

This sometimes makes the movie move away from historical accuracy. Still, it works as an efficient cinematic narrative.

The battles appear very dangerous. These battles help the audience appreciate the pressures under which Washington had to operate.

The movie does an excellent job in converting the history of warfare into drama. Those looking for full tactical accuracy may have some objections.

Nevertheless, those more interested in dramatic historical movies will surely appreciate the battles.

The Performances

Franklyn-Miller William has the most challenging role in the movie. This is because he is supposed to tell the story while playing the role of a culturally very important person.

He adds youthful spirit and sincerity to Washington. Even his physical appearance fits the evolution of the character as a soldier.

This works especially well when the character is under pressure. Washington becomes believable when he is forced to take tough decisions.

There will be moments where the explanation that comes with the script becomes too heavy-handed. This is partly because of issues with the writing.

At times, there is not enough emotional depth in the script. In spite of that, Franklyn-Miller does create some credibility for the character’s development.

Mary-Louise Parker is able to create the warmth of authority as Washington’s mother. This is an essential connection to Washington’s childhood years.

The role could have been developed further. The mother-son relationship has considerable dramatic potential.

Kelsey Grammer lends credibility to Lord Fairfax. Grammer makes the perfect foil for Washington’s youthful ambitions.

Fairfax embodies an existing social environment that Washington wishes to join.

Andy Serkis lends intensity to General Braddock. Serkis imbues Braddock with authority and self-confidence. This makes a great contrast with Washington’s evolving military knowledge.

Ben Kingsley is especially good in the role of Governor Dinwiddie. He displays great intellect, moderation, and gravitas.

Washington’s interactions with other characters become more interesting due to his presence. However, the cast of supporting actors stands out as one of the film’s advantages.

The disappointment is that a number of characters could have been developed further.

Historical Authenticity

The movie succeeds well in terms of creating an authentic eighteenth century atmosphere. This is due to the costumes, environments, and landscapes.

The frontier atmosphere is properly conveyed by depicting its tough conditions. The same holds true for the army world.

Nevertheless, it must be emphasized that historical atmosphere does not equal historical authenticity.

There are some instances in which the film exaggerates on some incidents and facts. This is normal for a long feature film about history.

The key point is whether the alterations affect the main story. They really don’t. The main story of the early military career of George Washington stays the same.

The film doesn’t concentrate so much on the historical accuracy. The film wants people to see how Washington evolved.

This goal has proven quite effective. Perhaps the best historical component is that the film acknowledges that Washington was a learner.

He was not at all the skilled commander that he would eventually become. In other words, he was a young officer trying to establish himself.

What Worked and What Did Not

What really worked well was the central theme of the film. Washington’s growth through failures is far more intriguing than his success.

The fact that the director chooses to look at his roots is also quite significant. Without having any legacy, he has to make his own way through success.

The visual aspect of the film is also a big success. The camerawork of Kimlin gives an element of scale and atmosphere.

The action scenes add excitement and energy to the movie. The acting is also very good for the film.

Washington gets sincerity from Franklyn-Miller, and the supporting actors add gravitas. The pace of the film is still the main problem.

The start of the film takes too much time to create energy. The film sometimes explains its ideas in a direct way, which can be too sincere.

The supporting characters could get more attention. The movie presents a number of intriguing relationships, but they are not all developed thoroughly enough.

Another point of view could be offered regarding the historical correctness. The historical context itself is good enough, but some aspects of it are definitely dramatized.

This does not mean that the movie is bad in any way. It just means that it has to be taken as an interpretation of history.

Overall Verdict

Young Washington is a fascinating historical piece that becomes even more intriguing as the plot develops. The slow start of the film might be boring at first; however, the war scenes become more exciting.

The biggest advantage of this film is that it shows how Washington was when he was young and was not yet matured enough.

He was ambitious and brave, but at the same time he had no experience and made some mistakes.

The cinematography of Kristopher Kimlin offers the film an excellent scope, and the battle scenes deliver some of its best visuals.

The acting, in general, is superb, especially by William Franklyn-Miller and the cast of veteran actors.

Nonetheless, there are flaws in the film. The theme of some aspects is quite straightforward, and some of the supporting characters needed more screen time. The film’s historical accuracy also sometimes comes second to the story itself.

In any case, Young Washington emerges as an inspiring depiction of a young man learning from failures and difficulties.