24 May 2012

Dont waste your time, read the book instead

This review is from: The Eagle (Amazon Instant Video) I know a book has to be abridged for film, but they made some really bad choices here. Basically they took the book, ripped its guts out, and stuffed it full of cotton candy. And 'UNRATED?' This version clearly says PG-13. Don't waste your time, read the book instead, or watch 'Centurion.' And I was really looking forward to this . . .

23 May 2012

Great Cinematography, but Poor History

Overall, I really enjoyed what seemed to me to be the authentically artistic (but not historical) character of the movie. Mostly that meant not including standard movie cliches, and having an inspiring story, a complicated plot with no true good guys or bad guys, and good action. By cliches, I mean specifically that I really appreciated the lack of a gratuitous sex scene, and the lack of a scene where the good guy is almost beaten, kneels on the ground, the bad guy swings, and at the last second the good guy jerks up and kills the bad guy. The fighting in this movie is actually good. But I deducted two stars because of the historical problems. While there is an ancient Roman Republican tradition of Roman fighting prowess, and this movie suggests a great conflict between that republican martial tradition and the developing bureaucratic and soft elites under the empire, this movie doesn't do anything to portray the natives of the Island of Britain in an historically accurate way. The setting of the movie is in the 2nd century AD, but Gaelic-speaking Scots-Irish didn't arrive in Scotland from Ireland to establish the Dal Riata until the 5th century. In the 2nd century here were no Gaelic-speakers in what is now Scotland, and there never have been any in central Britain where "Gaelic" speaking supposedly Esca came from. His tribe, the Brigantes, spoke an ancient ancestor of the Welsh/Cornish languages, a completely different branch of the Celtic language family from Gaelic. The people north of Hadrian's Wall were the Picts, and we have no idea what type of language they spoke - The strongest hypothesis is that it wasn't Indo-European at all, just like Basque & Etruscan were not Indo-European. It's extremely unlikely that Esca could have spoken with the people north of Hadrian's Wall, and there's a 0% chance that either he or they were speaking Gaelic.Come on. Can script-writers and movie producers check Wikipedia? Could they at least hire a linguist and an historian to both do some fact checking if the movie people didn't want to take a couple hours to read up online about the actual cultural and linguistic landscape of the time period and area that is the movie's setting?

22 May 2012

Major Disapointment

This review is from: The Eagle (DVD) I have to say that I have been a fan of this book since I was 14, I am now 37. Warning major spoiler alert : From the beginning to about Marcus's surgery followed the book decently well. I liked the scenes of the Roman camp life, and Uncle Aquila's house. At this point, the movie went completely astray. The major themes of the book are Marcus trying to figure out what to do with his life, his friendship with Esca, his dream of buying back his family farm, etc. The movie completely ignored the friendship he developed with Esca, as well as Esca's manumission ( being set free). The recovery of the Eagle wasn't a random snatch and grab, it was very carefully planned and executed. I won't even start about the Legion re-assembling.

darren-511

22 May 2012

Could have been so much better... (Spoiler ALERT)

After watching the Eagle I felt compelled to make a list of a few 'no,nos" that should be avoided when spending $25 million of someone else'smoney. I know how hard this job is so Kevin please accept thesecriticisms in the manner they are intended; to make us all better atour craft. Here's what I liked: The opening- very Terrance Malick. Thecinematography and the choice of locations- good job with Scotland. Iliked the fact that little CGI was done; Boreman did it all in camerawith Excalibur.Here's what I didn't like: (SPOILER ALERT) 1.) Consistency- if you're going to represent another language thenkeep the language consistent. I realize we can't watch the film inLatin but at least give everyone the same accent. (Remember thedisaster of Kevin Costner in Robin Hood.) 2.) Camera work- (this is for you Kevin). Be careful with yourcoverage. If you're going to pay homage to Malick make sure the youfollow his pacing. What makes Malick great is he makes you wait. Don'trush to the establishing shot- tease the audience. Let the v.o. carrythe scene and allow your DP to love his job. 3.) Dialogue vs. visual: Upon entering the garrison for the first timeMarcus tells the commander that the latrine is not properly working.What are you trying to tell me? Is Marcus a stickler for command andrules? Why not show that he latrine is a problem. Marcus also wants tore-enforce the walls with pitch and spikes. Why not have Marcus surveythe garrison instead of just putting his clothes away. Always keep yourvisuals consistent with your script. All of it is meant to tell ussomething so be careful what you convey. In the opening battle the local horde are attacking. Why? We know of noreason for the attack other than to demonstrate Marcus' bravery andabilities which lead to his acceptance by his fellow soldiers . I likedthe fact that Marcus is vindicated but isn't there more to this storyline? For me, this is where the film begins to break down. Marcus'acceptance by his men is lost because these soldiers were never seenagain. Why? If you're going to open with something that significantmake it pay off later. Here's where I thought the story was going- the tribal leader leavesthe battle field then emerges with ROMAN chariots- chariots that Marcusrecognizes. Where did they come from? Only the Romans put blades ontheir wheels so were they captured? Could this be a lost chariot fromthe ninth? I wish it had been because that would have propelled Marcusto search for the eagle. Instead we get this ambiguous drive that onlylives in his memory.4.) Other Tongues- if you're going to use other languages in a filmthen be careful not to allow to much time to go by before telling theaudience what is happening. From the trailer I knew that themaster/slave role would be reversed but I was left wondering about thenuances of the Esca/tribe relationship. The explanation doesn't have tobe exposition but it could have been used to further the plot of Esca'sloyalty. 5.) Finding the village was very "Apocalypse Now", minus the Apocalypseand no compelling tribal leader, a la Marlin Brando. Who was the chief?I ask this because when Marcus kills him he sees his father's ring. Ilove that plot point but the father doesn't have the ring on in Marcus'first remembrance of this father. Marcus asks him, "Why do you have myfather's ring?" The chief tells in only a language that Escaunderstands. This is probably the largest gaff in the film because heasks Esca a second time in a different scene what the chief said.Everyone is waiting for the moment that Esca tells him and it nevercomes. How could this have been missed? Any first time filmmaker knowsto never set the audience up like that and not deliver. This was notsome artistic choice, it was a major gaff. 6.) Time and Space- Upon Marcus and Esca's escape from the village,Esca is confronted with the little boy and whether or not to kill him.I like this scene so I'm really confused by the decision to have himkilled in the river bed by the Tribal guy. Let recognize the scene forwhat it is, it's to differentiate between good and evil. Esca andMarcus are good, the tribal warrior is bad. There was no reason for theboy to be brought to the river bed and executed in front of the Marcusand Esca. First, it was impossible to get the kid there, for thatmatter if was impossible for Esca to round up the remaining soldiers inthe same amount of time. Secondly, his death was for the audience notEsca and Marcus. Just have the "bad" tribal warrior kill him in histent. 7.) Continuity- If your main character is living in a field for weeksmake sure his beard grows. 8.) Casting & Roles: Donald Sutherland, the uncle, he doesn't arriveuntil minute 23 and leaves before the 3rd act. He's only relevant forfunding so use him wisely. Denis O'Hare, why? There are so many Britishactors that could have done this role.Two final thoughts. One, the script is all over the place, people enterand leave and are never heard from again. A copy of "Save The Cat"would have saved this film from box office ruin. Secondly, and thisgoes for all filmmakers, make sure you hire a script supervisor with araging case of OCD.

ghasl1

21 May 2012

Gets silly halfway through movie

When I saw this movie I didn't expect much on the account of theactors, first watching few minutes into the movie it was apparentlynoticeably that the romans had American accents which is a bit clichéfrom what they usually sound in roman films 'english accent' but thatdidn't bother me too much. Halfway through the film it was good withthe battle scene against the celts but in the other half it was gettingstupid.When he went to retrieve the Eagle standard he encountered a hostiletribe and that ruined the movie because the natives were all slender,skinny people, coated themselves with white powder, had hair that wasneither mohawk but placid from head down and had weapons like caveman.From that description they looked like the Na'vi from Avatar, none ofthem looked old enough to be warriors but in their adolescence age itwas like watching Lord of the Flies. What got more stupid was that thesurvivors of the ninth legion (all now veterans) happened to engagecombat with the white powder natives, it's unbelievable so many veteranromans were killed just by a few adolescent teens with weapons thatwere no match to theirs. There was one thing they never clarified and that was what the chieftanlast said or who he was, before the roman killed him. It was nevermention again, so it leaves a question unanswered. Overall I considerthis a B Grade movie so don't expect too much from it although morecould of been done. It was a snatch and grab eagle with natives in hotpursuit for them, they could of at least made the tribe more warlike.

mdazl

21 May 2012

Surprisingly Awesome!

The Eagle wasn't desperate or overly ambitious— it was exactly whatyou'd want from a tale of friendship and adventure! I'd been preparedfor a ten minute opening montage educating us on the socio-politicalclimate of Roman-occupied Britain, but I was pleasantly surprised withthe character focused introduction. I know it's a little unaware, but Ididn't go see this movie for historical accuracy, or to be beingpreached to about the triumphs of the human spirit. It's a very simplestory, but epic in its presentation. You get swept into their journeyto find the lost Eagle and restore honor to Marcus's family. There areseveral graphic (but never gory) battles, and a memorable relationshipevolving through the movie. The casting was on the money; it was a treat to see O'Hare (RussellEdgington from True Blood), and Sutherland as Marcus's caring uncle.This is undoubtedly Channing's best work— he is completely believableas a leader but not infallible as we find out early in the movie whenhe is injured. Jamie Bell was brilliant as Esca; he has a lovelytortured look about him, with just a hint of unpredictability thatmakes him seem dangerous. I won't give it away but he has multiplereasons to want Marcus dead, which makes their friendship socompelling. As for the (apparently huge) Bromance issue, it's made even moreobvious by the absence of a female lead, which I'm fine with. If thereisn't a well developed female character, then I'm grateful we werespared the token hot-girl who contributes absolutely nothing to theplot (other than to offset any male bonding that goes down later in themovie). The Eagle didn't need that; sexuality was never a characterdriving theme. There's definitely love and respect between Marcus andEsca, but don't expect them to have any chick flick moments. I only saythis because some of the more clumsy interviewers have been harping onit, and it's tacky. Obviously if Channing and Bell ever did do a gaythemed movie, I'd be thrilled/elated/first in line, but I'm not callinggay every time I see two guys next to each other having emotions. Iguess people are going to see what they want to see— they're bothreally good looking guys risking their lives for each other, I get it. At the end of the day, the only thing I found lacking were parts of thedialogue, especially in the beginning. That's just nit-picking though.The Eagle was leagues above movies like Troy and Alexander in terms ofheart, however don't go in expecting Gladiator-esque material. It mayas well have been a classic sports flick, and the Eagle their Superbowltrophy— there's something distinctly American about it. You willhowever end up caring about the characters, which to me, makes a movieworth watching.

pennington7727

20 May 2012

Horrible movie!

This is one of the worst movies I have ever seen. You have a mixture ofAmerican and British accents in the Roman army and I swear at anymoment the guys were going to walk around the corner and go toStarbucks! This movie was another day at the office and just a paycheckfor the writers, director, and the actors. They could have googled"Scottish Picts" and "Roman Legion" and come up with something betterthan this. The "Picts" (or "Seals" as they are depicted in thismovie)are more like the bad indians in the "Last of the Mohicans" andthe Roman soldiers are like whining little kids. Most of the movie isboring and slow and just inaccurate. I really looked forward to seeingthis, but it just disappointed in every way. The very last scene whenthe two main characters are walking out, I was thinking "there goesBatman and Robin" and laughing to myself. Bad and stupid are mycomments for this movie. Also, I want my money back lol.

texas celt

20 May 2012

Part History Channel, part Hollywood Fantasy

The first twenty minutes of this movie is pure History Channel fare, a fairly accurate portrayal of what life must have been like for a Roman soldier in occupied Britain. After that Hollywood takes over and it gets a little weird and a more than a little melodramatic. The introduction of the seal people--a Celtic tribe that sports Mohawks and wears fairly stylish sealskin garb--is a special touch of the bizarre. The natives all speak Scottish Gaelic, which is a noble effort on the of the movie makers, if not strictly accurate (and why in these movies don't the Romans ever speak Latin?) Overall, reasonably entertaining especially for the "sword and sandals" fan.

MLDinTN

18 May 2012

An adventure drama, not action movie

This movie really wasn't that great. First, you think it's going to bean action adventure since it's about Roman soldiers, but there islittle action. And what action there was was a disappointment. Thebattles are shot with a jerky camera, so you can't even tell what ishappening. Plus it must have been rated pg-13 since you don't see anyswords piercing chests or throats slit. It's just implied.Then Channing Tatum is miscast as the heroic Roman soldier. He lookstoo much like a pretty boy to be a roughed up soldier. He plays MarcusAquila, a Roman soldier whom is looked upon as a curse since his fatherlead a troop that lost the Eagle into enemy hands. He wants to eitherfind the eagle or win glory on the battlefield to restore his familyname. His instincts help the Romans defend their fort during anighttime attack and that earns him respect. However, in a later battlehe suffers major injuries and is discharged from the army. Afterrecovering, him and his slave, Esca, head north in search of the Eagle.They encounter some mean warriors and meat a group covered in ash. Escaspeaks their language which keeps them alive and then it's like a hounddog hunting a rabbit as the 2 try to return south and being chased.FINAL VERDICT: The action scenes are not that good, so that's why I sayskip it.

jasjhooty

18 May 2012

Fast paced action

Though not historically accurate, this film is a solid piece of work.The story moves along at a fair pace & although predictable isthoroughly enjoyable. Both main stars hold their own and there is aclever twist that keeps you guessing towards the end of the film.I thoroughly enjoyed it. The cinematography is stunning and reallyshows off the British Isles in all of its glory.This film is much better than Centurion which has a similar plot, butmanages to become very muddled and inconsistent. Kevin MacDonald thedirector shows his pedigree here by pulling off a tight well executedaction flick on a limited budget.I highly recommend this film to all action lovers who have a harkingfor well made Roman era films.

daniel cann

17 May 2012

Gripping Action

Set in Ancient Britain in 140AD, director Kevin Macdonald with the helpof the dramatic and rugged scenery of Northern England and theHighlands of Scotland attempts to tell the story of the unexplaineddisappearance of the entire Roman Ninth Legion. With a screenplay byJeremy Brock adapted and inspired by the 1954 novel by RosemarySutcliff 'The Eagle of the Ninth' this film version has a goodpedigree. The legend has already been covered by a 1970s televisionseries as well as the film 'Centurion' from 2010.This version has a different plot and focus. Channing Tatum is youngcenturion Marcus Aquila who has recently arrived from Rome to his postin Northern England. With the help of British slave Esca (Jamie Bell)he sets off on a seemingly suicidal mission (and personal quest) tosolve the mystery of the disappearance of over 5,000 Roman soldiersunder the command of his father some twenty years earlier.After leaving the outpost and border of the Roman Empire, Hadrian'sWall, the two find themselves in the uncharted highlands of Caledoniawith the constant threat of ambush and attack from the local tribes.Marcus is obsessed with honouring his father's name and retrieving thehugely important symbol: the lost legion's golden emblem, the Eagle ofthe Ninth.I have always enjoyed historical epics so viewed this as a fan of thegenre. Even with my bias and goodwill towards this film I found myselfsoon engrossed in the action and the story. The locations are used tofantastic effect, it is clear that this really is Northern England andScotland and not Californian foothills doubling in! The cinematographyplays a vital part in making the film have an authentic look and feel.The film is also moody, gritty, grimy and atmospheric. When the AncientBritons lay siege to a Roman fort there really is a palpable sense offoreboding and dread. The action sequences and the battles areexcellently handled and got my pulse racing.The culture clash of the 'civilised' Romans and the so-called 'savage'Britons is handled well. Both sides display mutual distrust and lack ofunderstanding towards one another. It is true and accepted fact by mosthistorians that most Roman soldiers were unhappy to find themselvesposted to Ancient Britain with its harsh weather conditions andunforgiving landscape, not to mention its hostile pagan inhabitants!Hadrian's Wall was considered the end of the civilised world and theextent of the Roman Empire. To venture beyond and into Caledonia wasthe modern equivalent of being an astronaut walking on another planet.This film is based on what might have happened and should not betreated as a history lesson. Sutcliff's novel is a work of fiction andis purely speculative. This should be enjoyed on a purely entertainmentlevel. With good support from veteran actor Donald Sutherland asMarcus' uncle, Mark Strong as Guern and Tahar Rahim as the Seal Princethe film works well as it explores themes such as friendship, loyaltyand honour.Purists may baulk at the casting of Tatum as a Roman Centurion but Ithought his performance was on the money as an anxious and accomplishedson wanting to learn about the fate of his father and to honour hismemory. North American accents are still preferable to sitting throughtwo hours of subtitled Latin and Gaelic for my tastes! Yes there are afew ridiculous moments and belief and credibility do get stretched onoccasion but as gripping action and entertainment this works very well.If you like historically set adventures then you will enjoy this.

aaron esmonde

16 May 2012

No Hollywood gloss effective Legionnaire piece

An injured Roman soldier is haunted by the loss of his father's legionand Aquila (eagle). Guided by his British slave he goes on a journey tofind out what happened to his father and search for the Eagle to redeemhis family name. However, beyond Hadrians Wall are dangers he neverthought existed.With a flurry of sub-par DTV Roman themed films since Gladiator (2000)The Eagle is less grand but just as effective as Centurion (2010). Thestory borrows a lot from the Neil Marshall's effort but Scot' directorKevin Macdonald manages to stage it differently and keep it fresh andfast paced. The cast are all effective and despite Donand Sutherland odd absence inthe final quarter both leads- G.I Joe's Channing Tatum and Jamie Bellare on top form. There's some tension and camaraderie between them.There's also enough battles, swordplay and blood to keep the meateaters happy.The Eagle is well shot, gritty, dirty and wet with some fantasticscenery and great costumes. It's far superior and more grounded thanThe Legion (1999) even with it's dubious casting choices, debatable andalthough welcomed Sutherland seems out of place and Bell feels tooyoung. That aside, if you like the time period and the concept, Romansbattling Brit's and Scottish Warriors without the Hollywood glossyou're in for a treat.

marcp1996

16 May 2012

Best Channing has ever been.

As a massive film fan I was a little apprehensive of watching thismovie because the lead actor was Channing Tatum and he hasn't done alot of good films, but in this on he was brilliant he has never doneanything better than this. I think he done this well because he reallyconnected with his character Marcus Aquila, who was a young Romansoldier to do and retrieve the eagle that is father lost north ofHadrian's wall (Scotland). Jamie Bell was the best out of the twobecause he made believable that this could of actually happened. Andthey both made the sword fighting look like it wasn't planned.Overall I think the actors were brilliant, the director Kevin Macdonaldwas brilliant and the story was great. So I would advise anyone who isinterested in Romans or violence to watch this film.

Jacob B

15 May 2012

Fun, Action-Packed, and Meaningful

While this is an action movie, and deserves to win no Oscars, it wasvery enjoyable., and contains more depth than I expected.The Eagle is not just an action movie. The interplay of relationshipsis done well. The master-servant, father-son, and soldier-nationrelationships are emphasized, but at its core this movie is the storyof a friendship between two very different men.The fight scenes are well done, although not perfect. The acting maynot be the best ever, but it was competent and I wasn't distracted bypoor dialogue or acting. The setting is beautiful, filmed in the wilds of Scotland. It felt veryreal, capturing the vast mystery of the ancient British Isles. I recommend this to any fans of historical fiction movies, or those whoappreciate action movies even if they don't involve gunfights.

Fad64

13 May 2012

Flawed but great to look at

So there are a few plot holes and the American accents of somecharacters are abysmal, but that aside, what a pretty looking movie!The cinematography was excellent and over all, for it's budget,costumes and sets wise I think they did a very good job. The Scottishscenery too is used to very good effect. It doesn't escape me that forthe most part, those slating this film struggle to form a coherentsentence, and are apparently unaware of the use of paragraphs...or areblatant homophobes. Guess what I'm trying to say is that it's mostlyidiots or history buffs that don't like The Eagle, but for the rest ofus, damn does it look good on screen. As modern historical films go ittrashes the likes of Scott's Robin Hood and Black Death, and holds it'sown against Gladiator I think. Even the wife really liked it.

oneguyrambling

12 May 2012

Hardly Gladiator-lite, this is pretty good stuff.

In 120 AD 5000 soldiers in the 9th Legion of the Roman Empire wentwalkabout and never returned. Vanished. Taking their gold totem withthem, the Golden Eagle.Now a generation later a new Centurion comes to lead a small remotegarrison in the South of Britain. He is Marcus Aquila (Tatum), the sonof the much derided leader of the 9th and what must be said a strangePR choice by the human resources department.Marcus is nonetheless a good soldier and a proud leader, even if hismen feel he is a bad omen and less than capable.Marcus wins some instant credibility when his instincts help averttragedy at the hands of vicious assailants in a night-time raid. Thefollowing day they return anew to wreak havoc and Marcus manages tounite the troops and have them utilise their training to save severalfurther lives.It is in this battle that Marcus received life threatening wounds thattook many months to recover from. Upon recovery he is told that notonly was he cited for bravery, but was given an honourable dischargefrom armed services for his injuries.Not a bad career for what seemed to be about a week's work.It is fair to say that Marcus took the news of his prematureretirement… reluctantly. But this was merely set the stage for what wasto follow.In the initial period of Marcus' civilian life he spent much time withhis Uncle (Donald Sutherland), freed a slave named Esca (Jamie Bell)and heard rumours that the Eagle symbol was sighted in the North in theforbidden zone, where bloodthirsty tribes of enemies awaited.So off Marky-Marcus – bung leg and all – and new buddy and tour guideEsca go, deep into hostile territory to regain something that is onlyrumoured to even exist.It soon becomes evident though that while the environment isparticularly perilous for Marcus it might be quite familiar stompingground for young Esca.The Eagle moves along quite deliberately and isn't quite the dizzyingGladiator-like ride the trailer might have you believe, in fact it ismore reminiscent of Braveheart in tone. There are really only a few bigbattle scenes and aside from the finale they appear more in the earlysequences.But that isn't to say that the film lacks action or is immature, therea couple of scenes – one in particular springs to mind – that arepretty brutal and harsh going, but remain realistic and true to thestory.Tatum is stoic and determined as Marcus Aquila and Jamie Bell is fineas the reluctant slave acting out of honour. Donald Sutherland slums itas the Uncle, never even bothering to try any accent other than hisown. Actually it is worth noting that in the early scenes the Romansoften speak in clearly American accents and the invading British arethe ones that require subtitles! Final Rating – 6 / 10. I didn't expect much at all from The Eagle, itwas a throw in at the DVD shop that I watched to kill time, but farfrom the expected Gladiator-lite crap I found a reasonable mismatchedbuddy period drama with some grim elements and effective sequences.Josh's boy might not be the new Arnie, but he is a damn sight betterthan a bunch of pretenders to the throne, at least for now.

morrelle

12 May 2012

What a load of tosh, dont waste your money

I'm only giving this 3 because of the spectacular Scottish scenery.Seriously, this was the biggest load of old nonsense I have seen in along time. What were the Last of the Mohicans crossed with N'avi doingin Scotland 2000years ago?!?!? I haven't read the book, but it soundslike it is a good thing the author is no longer with us, poor woman isprobably spinning in her grave. Awful characters and a ridiculousdialogue. Complete nonsense, do not watch this movie. The legion of theninth is a good enough story not to have been turned into this tripe.As one of the other reviewers kindly pointed out how come thosedefending their homeland were the 'bad' guys? American imperialistsmasquerading as Romans.

11 May 2012

Gladiator this is not...

(Possible Spoilers)-Updated 8/13/11Granted "Gladiator" wasn't the most original movie either but it was quite a grand sweeping epic. "The Eagle" is not so much epic, as its an epic fail. The story takes place in the early 2nd century where 20 years ago a group of 5,000 Roman soldiers lead by the father of Marcus Aquila (Channing Tatum) disappeared in the highlands Caledonia along with the golden eagle emblem that represented the group called The Ninth. After defending a fort and the soldiers he was assigned to lead, Marcus sets out into the highlands with his slave Esca (Jamie Bell) to retrieve the eagle and restore his father's name and of course to find out what happened to him and his group of soldiers. Of course if you've seen the trailers you know these two encounter an evil tribe known as the Seal People. The whole movie is pretty predictable along with lots of stale acting, lame dialogue and very boring fights. A lot of the bad acting comes from Channing Tatum, who was fitting in G.I. Joe, but doesn't have the chops for these types of movies. The dialogue is very bland I mean you don't ever feel like the actors really seem to care, though I admit Bell does at least a halfway decent job and Donald Sutherland is his usual self as Marcus' uncle.One thing I will say is the movie does have good cinematography, its well shot and looks good. There is a decent story here but it gets marred by the bad acting and lack of interesting characters. Apparently the book was much better, which honestly doesn't suprise me. Some may like "The Eagle" but I was honestly bored as I didn't feel drawn into the story (the main one or side stories for that matter) and I was checking the clock a lot to see how much time it had left. * out of 4 stars.

eddee-3

11 May 2012

Truly dreadful

Just back from seeing this load of rubbish and I cannot believe some ofthe reviews on this site. It makes me wonder whether someone in thestudio had one of their lackeys write some of this stuff in order toget people to pay to watch it? Channing Tatum has all the acting skillsof a fencepost. End of story. The slave(another fine actor..ho-ho)starts off by spitting hatred at Marcus Flatulence (the Romans hadafter all invaded his country and his father had to slaughter hismother to prevent her being raped etc) and then ends by being the bestof friends? I half expected them to go for a beer! At one point Ithought that I was watching the Last of the Mohicans. Who the devilwere these Seal Tribe from North Britain? Did any of these tribes( wasit supposed to be Clans?)have Mohican haircuts? I've never seen anyevidence in any literature to say that they have.I doubt very muchwhether anyone made any attempt at checking facts. The script was astinker! If you haven't seen it...don't bother.

donnarogers4433-278-100055

11 May 2012

The Eagle

I'm a history buff and I found this movie to be very interesting. Thestory is based on a true fact(the Ninth Legion along with 5000 mendisappeared in the Highlands without a trace). I liked the way it waspresented. No foul language in this movie. It contained some verybeautiful scenery from Scotland and Romania or Hungary. I liked thefriendship forged by Marcus, a Roman, and Esca, a slave. They clickedas master/slave and developed respect for each other. I have watched itmany times on cable and never fail to see something I missed the lasttime I watched it. I also caught the change in horses and thought theyacquired them from the Rogue Warriors they encountered. My sisterrealized the horses changed before that encounter. The introduction ofthe Seal people was an interesting addition. I thought the Picts werethe ones who painted themselves blue to scare their enemies. Also likedMark Strong's performance as Gern. He has a very commanding voice.Would like to see him in more films. It is a definite addition to mymovie collection, when it becomes available. Channing Tatum and JamieBell were great in this movie. I think both of them will have longcareers in the movies. Would like to see them in other films together.Loved the ending.