the eagle

[pendragon]

has anybody seen the t.v. ads for the eagle? or the movie itself? looks cool! i would like to see reveiws on this one.

[Graham Sumner]

Reviews by RAT members are just below your own post Jonathan.

However if you want less accurate equipment biased opinions, you can view the reviews on the Internet Movie Database (IMDb).

Overall everyone on there seems to think it is an enjoyable film with a very authentic look!:roll: :wink:

It has yet to be released here in the UK.

Graham.

[Narukami]

Here is a link to the review on the Ancient Warfare web site:

http://www.ancient-warfare.com/cms/magaz...omans.html

I have yet to take my grandson to see it -- but he was excited by the trailer so the film is speaking to the adolescent demographic.

:?

Narukami

[Graham Sumner]

As I have not seen the film yet David I was wondering what your thoughts would be as to how the film would have worked out if Tatum and Bell had played each others roles?

Graham.

[Narukami]

Now that's an interesting question Graham. :!:

I think Bell might have done very well as the Centurion Marcus, but I am less certain that Tatum could have pulled off the role of Esca.

During the rehearsals for Kiss Of The Spider Woman the director had Raul Julia and William Hurt switch roles and they both say it helped them to understand not only the other character but their own as well. Of course these are two excellent actors, particulalry Julia. It is not an unusual acting exercise to do so, and I wonder if The Eagle's director considered it.

While I do not think the acting was as bad as some reviewers have opined, I also think the director was woirking with a much stronger cast in his previous film (The Last King of Scotland) than he is in The Eagle.

Good question, worthy of some more pondering ... :?

:wink:

Narukami

[Vindex]

Well, I didn't read the other thread on the book itself which had strayed into the movie review as I wanted to wait until I'd eventually seen the movie and sadly I saw it this evening (very late DVD release!).

I loved the books - all three of them - although I like the Lantern Bearers best but oh dear...as a representation of the book not good (that whirring noise you can hear is Rosemary Sutcliffe turning in her grave, poor woman!)

It started quite well...reasonably accurate to the book (I wont get into the kit/weapons argument, I'm not that brave/stupid!). But once across the Wall it went rapidly downhill.

Never really thought of the Northen Britons as Mohicans before...quite novel in a what-am-I-smoking-today sort of way. To be fair I thought the villa scenes were quite well researched and the fort and Wall crossing had a certain authenticity about them.

But overall I think I may, actualy, prefer Centurion! Just as well I didn't go to a theatre to see it as I burst out laughing when the "ghost" of the Legion appeared hock:

If you then look at the film as taking an idea from the book, then fair enough. Vaguely entertaining; probably well acted for the most part and at least there was a representative horn on the saddles used :wink: (although one assumes the stirrups were there as insurance for the actors demanded it).

Sadly I was just waiting for Jamie Bell to start tap dancing his way out of the Headquarters/Praetorium after the dreadful spectre of the sequel inspired by the "What next?" questionhock: Not fair of me to type cast him, really, as I thought he had matured as an actor but the noble savage and the struggling Roman really wasn't a theme of the original book at all and an unnecessary side swipe at Empire and all it stood for. (Whichever Empire the Director was thinking of).


Probably put the dvd on Pre-Loved as "watched once"...or add it to drinks mat collection.

[Robert Vermaat]

(that whirring noise you can hear is Rosemary Sutcliffe turning in her grave, poor woman!)

Rotating at 10.500 turns per minute, poor woman indeed! No one was there to protect her work.. :-(

But once across the Wall it went rapidly downhill.

Actually, it went uphill.. geographically. :mrgreen: The story went down the drain when Marcus woke up in Calleva (woke up? Why was he transported there insted of to an army facility, or better, inside the fort itself, argh..). Most people were cut from the story, the heart of the book went with it.

But overall I think I may, actualy, prefer Centurion! Just as well I didn't go to a theatre to see it as I burst out laughing when the "ghost" of the Legion appeared hock:

Actually, I liked Centurion until the 'legion' with it's gung-ho legate was destroyed, moving without any scouts (but for that lady Pict-soon-to-turn-traitor-as-anybody-could-see-right-from-the-start) along a single road. By burning bushes no less! Come ON! Nah, for me it's still Gladiator with all it's historical quirks.

Vaguely entertaining.

Not even that. heart-wrenching. Even for a movie about Roman Britain it had but little to add.

[Narukami]

Actually, I liked Centurion until the 'legion' with it's gung-ho legate was destroyed, moving without any scouts (but for that lady Pict-soon-to-turn-traitor-as-anybody-could-see-right-from-the-start) along a single road. By burning bushes no less! Come ON! Nah, for me it's still Gladiator with all it's historical quirks.

Not only did the Legion have no scouts (other than the Ninja Pict) they were acting like holiday tourists or Boy Scouts on a weekend outing, randomly setting up their tents among the trees. No Marching Camp? No "moat or stockade?" to quote Olivier as Crassus.

And speaking of Olivier ... I'll still take Spartacus, with all of its historical quirks. To my mind, no film has captured the might and the majesty of Roman Legions in the field quite like the final battle scene in Kubrick's film. Yes, that battle does finally devolve into standard Hollywood Ancient Battle Chaos, but the beginning, as the legions march onto the field, looks great. (And this scene done before the advent of CGI that allowed Lucas and Jackson to field armies with thousands of Clone Troopers or Orcs as the case may be.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgywD3XJaWU

:wink:

Narukami

[Vindex]

And I wont even begin to talk about scouts riding white horses; honest guv'nor, not a word...

Actually, I watched Centurion again and it was better than The Eagle like I said...but not by much.

Yup - love that battle scene from Spartacus. But who can afford that many extras these days? And for some things CGI just doesn't cut it..

[Niedel]

Just saw Spartacus again on the big screen yesterday, and Kirk Douglas was there in person. A memorable day.

[Vincent Pompetti]

Never really thought of the Northen Britons as Mohicans before...quite novel in a what-am-I-smoking-today sort of way. To be fair I thought the villa scenes were quite well researched and the fort and Wall crossing had a certain authenticity about them.

I agree.The Northern Briton looks like an heroic fantasy tribe.And I don't understand why the briton slave is so kind with the roman, it seems a buddy movie, but quite pleasant to see. I prefer "Centurion" anyway

[FlorivsVirilis]

Having seen both films I have to say that I prefer Centurion as well; the legionaries looked better (at least their seg was metal!), as did the Picts. The 'seal people' look ridiculous in the Eagle. What I did like about the Eagle, however, was the dark and gritty atmosphere, and I think the music helped that a lot. Also, I liked the fact that they did make an attempt at displaying the discipline of the legions. I had to laugh though when they randomly formed a testudo.

Another thing as well that was quite interesting in The Eagle was (what seemed to be) an attempt to portray auxiliary troops on the wall. I don't recall seeing auxiliaries in any Roman films save the eastern archers in Gladiator.


Will there ever be a film where Roman soldiers look satisfactory? Those involved in Hollywood just seem to totally disregard the evidence that is out there. I do hear a lot of people say to me 'oh well, it's only supposed to be a film'. But if it has a historical context they should at least make an effort to produce the most accurate representation of the time possible. Do historians and re-enactors etc. even get consulted about these films?

[john roberts]

And speaking of Olivier ... I'll still take Spartacus, with all of its historical quirks. To my mind, no film has captured the might and the majesty of Roman Legions in the field quite like the final battle scene in Kubrick's film. Yes, that battle does finally devolve into standard Hollywood Ancient Battle Chaos, but the beginning, as the legions march onto the field, looks great. (And this scene done before the advent of CGI that allowed Lucas and Jackson to field armies with thousands of Clone Troopers or Orcs as the case may be.)

Ah, for the good old days when you could just cross the pond and hire the entire Spanish army. And it was cheap!

[Graham Sumner]

Hi

Not CGI but early camera trickery. The second wave of Roman troops are simply a repeat of the first wave matted. The film-makers give the game away in the publicity booklet for the film which shows a still from the battle scene but with the entire second wave of the Roman army missing! They had a lot of extras but not that many but yes, they were using Spanish troops as extras.

Auxiliary archers and infantry appear in the 1980's production 'AD Anno Domini' the sequel to Jesus of Nazareth. The gear in this series was pretty good and it looked like movies might actually start using decent kit. Sadly then came the nineties with virtually no Roman type productions at all. By the time of 'Gladiator' the improvement in accurate equipment and sets appears to have been forgotten and the process started again!

One of the 'Auxiliary' helmets appears as a Gladiator helmet in the BBC documentary on the Collosseum. Apparently according to the extras on that DVD it was found in a warehouse in Tunisia along with other movie gear some of which is clearly from 'The Fall of The Roman Empire'.

Keeping on thread in the reconstruction scene of the famous view of Hadrian's Wall in 'The Eagle' I realised you can see Marcus and Esca riding towards the Wall. This would mean the milecastle they are approaching must be milecastle 37 which is on a cliff edge and therefore not the best choice to ride out of!

Graham.

[Nathan Ross]

Against my better judgement, I borrowed a DVD of The Eagle yesterday. It wasn't as bad as I'd been expecting - although that isn't saying much... At least it was better than Centurion...

The fort at the beginning was okay (if a bit small), the villa scenes were quite nice (even if, once again, the Romans were not allowed to recline at dinner like decent people, but had to sit around on benches like barbarians :x ). I even quite liked the 'seal people' village - the huts looked quite lived in. The seal people themselves were, hmm, interesting - not very formidable-looking though, and there were only about twelve of them anyway...

But the story just went all wrong. Throwing away the novel is one thing, but to replace it with such a mess of cliches and nonsense is just idiotic. For the last third of the film the director was clearly making it up as he went along. How, for instance, was Jamie Bell supposed to have gathered that gang of old bikers/legionaries after a couple of hours running about in the woods? What were Tatum and the Mohicans doing all the while? How did the evil Mohicans suddenly acquire the boy, when he'd been left back in the village? And so on. In any other movie genre this sort of thing would be laughed off the screen, but in 'ancient history' the rules of reality don't apply...

To have taken a subtle, mature novel for children and turned it into a clumsy childish movie for adults is no achievement.

The DVD does have some bonus features though - including their original ending (even worse, if possible, than the one they finally used) and the director's commentary, during which he notes, for example, his amazement at discovering that the Roman navy in Britain was recruited entirely from Iraqis!... :roll: