General Evaluation – Bad News for Ivan’s Fans
*Note on the screenshots December 2019: We have access to material in better quality meanwhile and will exchange the pictures at some point*
Here is our evaluation of the utterly disappointing way Ivan’s character Lord Scrope in The King has been treated by the editors (explanation for why we think he has been edited see below):
If you were considering watching this film mainly in order to see Ivan as Lord Scrope, do not waste over two hours of your life. They have cut his whole story out – whatever that might have been – and only left ONE WORD for him to say that is not of any significance at all. 
Ivan’s Lord Scrope right after receiving the keys of Harfleur and his “Venez!” to the commander of the city after his surrender
BUT he has just received the keys to the city of Harfleur after their surrender, so no, he is NOT just a “prisoner guard” as someone on Twitter suggested, he is still a lord as you can see below.
Despite all the bad signs in advance, it has been hard for us to imagine that those in charge would deprive their work so completely of the appeal of an actor as charismatic, versatile and highly skilled as Ivan.
And we are not alone as you can see from the first public remarks below:
We will hopefully be able to show you all the material of Ivan and his character that is left in one place soon – it is not that much, after all.
Behind-the-scenes shots may become available as well. And if you want to join our campaign to convince Netflix to add Ivan’s scenes to an extended version or the bonus material on disc, then see the links shared below.
A Huge Amount of Cutting
In our opinion, it is obvious for several reasons that Ivan’s character Lord Scrope has fallen prey to fundamental editing and his scenes are part of a huge amount of cut scenes. Hence, Ivan is not alone but his part has been affected badly so that there is basically nothing left for us to enjoy (or for him to show his skills).
Of course, we are utterly displeased with these editing decisions and hoping for an extended version and/or bonus material if DVD/Blu-ray discs should come out.
To support our plea to get Ivan’s scenes added to a disc, please, send a message to that effect to Netflix via the chat function on this page:
You do not need to log in – if they ask you to do so and you do not have an account, you can just skip that. If you have a Netflix account, however, it might be helpful to show them that you are a paying customer to add some weight to your feedback.
When you have submitted your message, please, wait for your chat partner’s reaction and ask them to pass it on as a feedback to their research team. To our knowledge, this is the best way to give feedback to Netflix.
If you want to help us with a campaign on social media, then go to this tweet and add a “like” and a comment that you support our plea:
You can do the same with our comment on Instagram to this post:
Here is the evidence that points to the editing like a spotlight and the reasoning behind our conclusions:
The Cutting of Ivan’s Lord Scrope
*SPOILER ALERT*
1- Ivan had been listed on IMDb to play Lord Scrope since at least June 2018. That could have been pretty awesome as this man, historically, was a favourite confidant of Henry V and also involved in the famous Southampton Plot to overthrow this same king – or was he not? We do not know as historians are still marvelling what his motivation for that would have been.
But instead of a well-known lord who was singled out for an especially humiliating treatment around his execution, likely because of his prior closeness to the king, and whose story could have given Henry‘s character additional depth, we get to see him basically as a „background decoration“ of sorts: never being addressed by any of the characters, even less by name, and only saying one single word in the whole film – and that is not even in one of the multiple council scenes in which he is oddly hanging around and making everyone wonder who this guy is and what the hell he is doing there.
In one council scene, he is even positioned at a central spot between Joel Edgerton (Falstaff) and Timothée Chalamet (Henry V) and it looks like he is about to say something but then there comes – nothing.
As he is the ONLY character in all of these scenes who is obviously important enough to attend most councils and is one of the lords, yet never speaks a word and never is addressed or introduced in any way, it is clear that there is a huge hole of missing context.
In addition, if it had been the original plan to never mention the character’s name in the film, then there is the question of why Ivan would have been listed as playing Lord Scrope.
(The Southampton Plot has not been in the original concept, by the way, as Ivan’s Lord Scrope accompanies the king to France while in real history he had been executed way before that due to the Southampton Plot – also, Cambridge is executed in a different context and the Earl of March does not even exist in the film.)
2- The actor has been kept around during much of the filming as is also visible from the remaining scenes where he is still present – we have counted 9! It is unlikely that a production would make the effort to get an established and popular actor on board for a part that sounds promising to the wider public and then to waste the money just to have him sit around as a decoration. So that is probably not what his part was supposed to be.
3- It is even less likely that an actor of Ivan’s calibre would have signed up for such a negligible part. Ivan is far beyond being in need of that and we have not seen him being pushed into the background that much in any production of the past ten years or more – not even before his rise to greater international fame with Vikings in a comparably big film like Dark Shadows starring Johnny Depp where Ivan still played a very small part.
And we are not alone with this line of thought:
Ivan is one of the well-known actors in this film and is also credited under the title (if in the last possible spot). That points to a much larger part than what has been left of him as a role that can barely count as a speaking part would probably have been mentioned only in the credit roll.
Besides, Ivan’s popularity rank on IMDb showed him steadily directly beneath and sometimes even above Tom Glynn-Carney (who is credited fourth, more on that see below) while most of the actors of other minor characters who had still more lines and screentime than Ivan in the end ranked significantly below him.
Hence, it was to be expected that the screentime and importance of his character would be situated somewhere in the middle, in the lower half of the notable characters.
4- Even though this last argument is not completely conclusive, it is totally clear that a great amount of editing has taken place on the material in the first part of the film and throughout as other actors have been affected by this as well albeit not as badly (see below).
Ivan appears right in the second scene of the film where the reason for the Percy rebellion is given and he only reappears suddenly and without any mention or explanation after the king has decided to pardon those who have been incarcerated by his father.
Therefore, it is very likely that the story of Ivan Kaye‘s character Lord Scrope originally has been connected with the Percy rebellion in some way – especially since he does not look too happy during this scene as far as we can discern it despite the blurring.
Also, Ivan’s Lord Scrope is one of the eight lords in the inner circle of Henry IV (right in the second scene) and the only one of them – except for the rebelling Percys – who is not shown on the side of the king or the princes during the three scenes pertaining to this rebellion.
![The.King.2019.1080p.WEBRip.x264-[YTS.LT].mp4-00006_hochskaliert](https://ivankayesource.files.wordpress.com/2019/12/the.king_.2019.1080p.webrip.x264-yts.lt_.mp4-00006_hochskaliert.png?w=1086)
![The.King.2019.1080p.WEBRip.x264-[YTS.LT].mp4-00007_hichskaliert](https://ivankayesource.files.wordpress.com/2019/12/the.king_.2019.1080p.webrip.x264-yts.lt_.mp4-00007_hichskaliert.png?w=1086)
Ivan’s Lord Scrope also is the only one of these lords who is missing during the coronation banquet which takes place BEFORE Henry V decides to pardon the enemies of his father, yet he suddenly retakes his place amongst the lords and also reappears in the inner circle of Henry V after the pardon.
![The.King.2019.1080p.WEBRip.x264-[YTS.LT].mp4-00008_hochskaliert](https://ivankayesource.files.wordpress.com/2019/12/the.king_.2019.1080p.webrip.x264-yts.lt_.mp4-00008_hochskaliert.png?w=1086)
This leads us to the conclusion that he might actually have been THE single elaborate example of disgrace and pardon in the film which would have been very appealing to see, not to speak of helpful to establish some actual sense of a relationship betwen Henry V and the lords who have already served his father.
It would also explain the subdued air of Lord Scrope’s appearances in the council scenes as he has already got a taste of disgrace and is probably grateful to have survived. (That might be the reason why it was even possible to cut him out although we do not know if this impression is due to further cutting of these same scenes.)
Yet we never get to see any of this because the rebellion itself has been shrunken down to two scenes on the battlefield where Prince Henry butts into the operation of his brother Thomas (Dean-Charles Chapman) and kills Hotspur Percy (Tom Glynn-Carney) in single combat to avoid a battle.
Tom Glynn-Carney thus has four rather short scenes all in all before his character Hotspur is killed. Dean-Charles Chapman has it even worse with three scenes before his character is reported to have been killed in battle.
It is very unlikely that these actors would have been happy to accept a role with that little screentime either. Nonetheless, both actors are credited in the cards under the title. But with these remarks, we have already stepped into the more general cutting of scenes for which see the next paragraph.
Additional Evidence for the Cutting of Scenes in General
1- There have been rumours back in spring 2019 about struggles with the editing of the film. This was just an unconfirmed rumour and there were hints pointing to it being false (like incorrect information about the whereabouts of people involved and the like) but after watching the film, we think that part of it might have been true.
2- At the start of the film, we see a scene where Hotspur Percy (Tom Glynn-Carney) confronts the old king Henry IV (Ben Mendelssohn) and then leaves the room, followed by the king’s remark that Hotspur will go into rebellion against him. Ivan is present in this scene in the background
As mentioned above, the next stage after a short scene with the king is that the rebellion is already over, settled by single combat. Tom Glynn-Carney off. Next, we hear Henry being informed that his brother Thomas (Dean-Charles Chapman), the king’s designated heir, has been killed in a battle. Off Dean-Charles Chapman. Then: Death of Henry IV and coronation of Henry V.
Given how extremely slowly the following events are unfolding and how slow-paced each and every Chalamet scene is, it is striking how fast the film rushes through anything up to Henry V’s accession to the throne.
As Tom Glynn-Carney and Dean-Charles Chapman are among the well-known and fairly popular names of this film, the same argument as for Ivan holds true for them as well: It is highly unlikely that they would’ve signed up for roles THAT small.
Still, Tom Glynn-Carney’s credit appears as number 4, directly after Sean Harris, which may point to a contractual claim to this spot as the scenes he has left in the film would place him rather in the vicinity of Andrew Havill (Archbishop of Canterbury) and Dean-Charles Chapman and certainly not so far ahead of Robert Pattinson. Therefore, it is likely that his part has originally been bigger as well.
Together with the striking change of pace and the lack of elaboration on the Percy rebellion, it is obvious that a lot of material must have been cut out right at the start of the film, probably in order to shorten it down as it still has a runtime of more than two hours.
It looks like those in charge, feeling forced to make the film considerably shorter for whatever reasons, have come to the conclusion that they can dispose of the introductory part of the film that covers the end of the reign of Henry IV and that only the scenes have to be left that are indispensable for central parts of the protagonist’s characterization and those that are absolutely necessary to understand these scenes.
Congrats to Tom Glynn-Carney and Dean-Charles Chapman for having had the good luck to be needed for driving home the point that Prince Henry disagrees with his father about the necessity of warfare against his own subjects, doesn’t like unnecessary bloodshed, is courageous and a good fighter and not as vain as his brother!
3- Aside from this, further glances at the credit order let it appear probable that more material has been sacrificed throughout the rest of the film as well.
Lily-Rose Depp has something like three scenes of which only one is somewhat longer and focussed on her character, yet she is credited fifth, right behind Tom Glynn-Carney, while Thomasin McKenzie has only one longer scene that serves no other object than to make Henry aware of the probable unreliability of his lords, yet she is following directly after Lily-Rose Depp in the credits.
Robert Pattinson (the dauphin) and Ben Mendelsohn are credited afterward, followed by Andrew Havill (Archbishop of Canterbury) and Dean-Charles Chapman.
Yet Robert Pattinson has a far bigger role in this film than Tom Glynn-Carney and Thomasin McKenzie – although it is not even close to Edgerton and Harris. Havill, on the other hand, has quite a couple of scenes and is certainly more prominent in this film than Thomasin McKenzie.
As the order of credits has to do not only with the importance and prominence of the role played in a film but also with the deals that have been made with the agents and fixed by contract, this suggests the following:
- Pattinson probably was supposed to have only a couple of brief appearances from the start, so his position in the credit cards remained as originally intended. For otherwise, it would have been a downgrade in comparison to e.g. Glynn-Carney and McKenzie that is not explicable on the basis of the published material.
- Glynn-Carney and McKenzie were very probably supposed to have much more screentime than is currently left but their credits seem to have been kept in place, possibly to avoid trouble. Otherwise, there is no reason why they would have been credited above Pattinson and Mendelsohn.
- Havill may have profited from the fact that his role now is pretty prominent in relation to those of many of the first-billed actors which probably was not the case originally. But he could have held this spot in the credit cards from the beginning.
- Judging by the number of council scenes in which Ivan’s character is still present and by his public profile in relation to Havill, it is probable that Ivan’s credit would originally have been placed in a similar spot, yet, in contrast to Thomasin McKenzie, he did not retain a single scene that would have justified keeping it there. Still, his credit appears at the end of the cards which might have been a compromise solution.
Summary
Therefore, all in all, it is highly probable that Ivan’s Lord Scrope was originally supposed to be one of the lords close to King Henry IV who then would have joined the Percy rebellion for some reason (as he does not look happy at all when Hotspur confronts the king as far as it is discernible) or he might have been accused of being on their side.
As he disappears for a while then and reappears after Henry V’s pardon, he might have been incarcerated by the old king and then released by the young king’s pardon which could even have been shown originally as he seems to be the only lord in the inner circle who has been affected. This would also explain his somewhat subdued demeanour in what is left of him in council scenes as he probably would not have wanted to get into trouble again.
However, he is in the inner circle of the young king as well, so we have to assume that there have probably been other council scenes where he might have spoken that have likewise fallen prey to the cutting or that the existing scenes have been cut down. It is not very convincing that he would be the only lord who would never be addressed or say a word in the council.
We can only imagine what we have missed due to these unfortunate developments and hope to get to see at least some of Ivan’s deleted material as a bonus feature on the discs. To support our plea to Netflix to actually add these scenes, please, see the instructions above or just go to Netflix Support and submit your feedback through the chat!
You can skip the “sign in” screen if you are not a member and it would be good to make sure your request is passed on as feedback by waiting for the response of your chat partner. Many thanks in advance!
Here is the link again: https://help.netflix.com/
For the social media links, see above.
Ivan Kaye Source 