Plantiana Yawn. Poorly Filmed Snooze Fest.

StunnaKrypto Self-important, over-dramatic, uninspired.

Doomtomylo a film so unique, intoxicating and bizarre that it not only demands another viewing, but is also forgivable as a satirical comedy where the jokes eventually take the back seat.

Dana An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

antoine-charb Let's be straight to the point and let's be honest...Boring.The story is not appealing and it was a story from other stories. It's getting old.The cgi was awful.Well known actors were not at their best.Dialogue was cheesy and not interesting.From these reasons, the movie is meh.Other than that, it's the same feeling I had watching it like watching the adventures of Sinbad: alright and for everyone. Even the visual effects are the same quality...

clanciai Most people behind this film are Italians, and you can tell that from the design: theatrical almost operatic story, colorful staging, great imagination, playful development of characters and story, florid fabulation and great joy of epic story-telling - most of the production names are De Laurentiis. All this makes up for not a bad movie at all. In fact, the story is not incredible, although utterly untruthful, and both Ben Kingsley and Colin Firth make credible characters and performances enough. Focus is though on the boy, who is the only thoroughly splendid character, both as an invention, the type and his development and acting. What actually happened is unknown, but both Odovakar and Romulus are historical figures. In the film the events of Romulus' abdication occur in 460 after having been emperor for no more than a year, while it actually happened in 476 but is historically correct. No one knows what happened to Romulus, however - his fate is lost in history, and his young character and mystery is like made for legends. Odovakar did not remain king of Rome very long, being soon overthrown by Theoderic the Great of the Ostrogoths. Vortigern, the awful villain of the film, did exist but remains a rather doubtful character - in the film he is grossly exaggerated to fit the role of a supreme villain, a tyrant of great paranoia and cruelty, while some sources name him the discoverer of Merlin. A great epic adventure film made on a great epic story, in brief, a worthwhile entertainment with the positive consequence that it must raise your interest in the darkest medieval history.

Peter Pluymers I expected an entertaining costume movie about Romans, but after a while it looked rather like an "Asterix and Obelix" soft-action movie. The only bright spot was the appearance of Aishwarya Rai Bachchan. The Romans should worship her. What a divine body.The movie was of a high "Bud Spencer" level with Goths flying around in the sky, after which Mira appears gloating. Then there was Thomas Brodie-Sangster who had the same facial expression the entire film (excellent performance when you take that in mind). Kingsley starts as a nicely played counselor/teacher/philosopher (beautiful scene in the beginning of the film), but slowly evolves into an irritating magician. Him being Merlin was a complete surprise and a sign for me to start rolling my eyeballs.I didn't care whether the film is historically accurate. I was hoping for an entertaining movie, but got a faint pathetic historical epos with men in skirts.More reviews at http://opinion-as-a-moviefreak.blogspot.be/

angetay I was very disappointed in this film. Given the brilliant cast, I thought it would be well worth watching. How wrong I was! It's a shame as the film had so much potential - which is probably what the cast thought. What a total waste of acting talent! The fault is most certainly due to the director who lacked vision. The film lacks any form of direction and does not seem to know what its target audience is. Is it a historic action film? A family film, perhaps? Neither as it happens. Just a mish-mash of genres trying to please everyone and pleasing no-one.Despite a good story to build upon the film just seems a bit aimless and lack-lustre. The cast had not been given any proper direction and the screenplay itself also left little room for character development. The result of this is that there was no empathy for any of the characters who seem quite one dimensional.However, it was the bad editing and camera-work which I found to be the the most off-putting. Clips were cut far too short with no lingering moments for emotion to be portrayed. Even the camera-work was sometimes shaky. Given the beautiful scenic backdrops the cinematography could have been amazing. Instead the cameraman chose to do middle-shots almost throughout. The whole thing just seemed a bit amateurish.In my view what could have been a really good film with great potential was ruined by a total lack of direction and inability to use the cast to their full potential.