Review:The Eagle of the Ninth by Rosemary Sutcliff

[Robert Vermaat]

If The Eagle widens interest in Roman history or finds a new readership for the author of the book upon which it is based, it will be no bad thing.

In that aspect you are absolutely right. It would only have been better if this great book had been supported by a great movie. But indeed, you can't have it all I suppose.

[Graham Sumner]

Hi

Spoilers ahead.

Some very good points raised by both Robert and Alan.

I always love Roman movies, in fact I owe my own interest in Roman history to watching one as a kid and you should all know by now which one I mean. Generally I enjoy them all, good and bad and no matter what the reviews, will always find something worthwhile.

And so it was with the 'The Eagle' which I saw last week. However watching the film something else happened which has never happened before in all my years of watching Roman epics. in the cinema I actually had to stifle a yawn and was even in danger of nodding off at some point!

It did start off at a cracking pace and I was engaged up to when they crossed through the Wall. From then on sadly the film went downhill and never recovered. The chief fault I thought was that the protagonists were just not frightening enough. One was left to wonder why they were such a threat and why the Romans had to build a wall to keep them out. They looked so impoverished and undernourished! As for reasons unknown they looked like Huron's what they really needed was a great mean looking character actor like Wes Studi in charge with his band of warriors from 'The Last of the Mohicans' who could put the fear of god(s) into you.

While mentioning religion it was a nice touch that in the film Roman mythology is treated with the same respect as it was in 'Gladiator'. Perhaps a sign of the times, as worship of anything other than the Christian God was always treated as something of a joke in earlier epics.

As it was some time since I read the book I could live with many of the changes and could see that in order to keep up with the pace and fit it all in to the running time some things and characters had to be left out. Furthermore even if the screenplay stuck exactly to the book then there would be the inevitable comments that the basic story of the loss of the ninth is not accurate in the first place. A bit like even if the ships are correct as soon as Ben-Hur steps aboard as a galley slave it all goes wrong. However considering it was apparently unsafe for any Roman to live north of the Wall the book did give a convincing explanation in that Marcus adopts the disguise of a Greek Ophthalmic physician to travel around safely.

Of course the other main change is that the Eagle does not end up under a floor at Calleva but is returned I think to the Legionary Headquarters at Eboracum, I was not clear on that point.

Equipment wise, apart from the ubiquitous arm bracers and leather lorica segmentata and the lead characters obviously modern socks, there are some good things on show. Pila with weights, some decent belts, swords and daggers, no doubt courtesy of advisor Lindsay Allason-Jones but blink and you will miss them, you need to study the stills to actually see them! Finally a centurion with a transverse crest and mail shirts with convincing brown wool cloaks and tunics worn by the Auxilia on Hadrian's Wall.

That brings up another point. Marcus is appointed the new Centurion commander of a Cohort of Gaul's, sorry I forget which one. Nevertheless I think I am correct in saying that on several occasions he prays that he does not want to disgrace the honour of his Legion or Legionaries and that the costume department clearly mean the soldiers under his command to look like classic romans i.e Legionaries. However neither a legion or a cohort for that matter could fit into the replica fort-let which apart from the absence of corner towers is rather nice and somewhat disconcerting looks uncannily like a re-construction I have just completed myself! As Robert mentioned the ditch a thorn hedge would have been a better and more accurate obstacle but that would disobey the golden rule that there must be a fire in a Roman battle somewhere!

As in all Roman films, budget constraints mean that as soon as anyone leaves anywhere they travel across country, whatever happens to the roads! Otherwise there are some nice sets but just as with the accurate equipment blink and you will miss them.

Finally it would seem that the old BBC TV series has been lost in their great video purge of many years ago. Having just been amused rather than impressed watching old episodes of Dr Who perhaps that is not such a bad thing and so the TV series will remain a fond distant memory. Nevertheless from the rare images I have seen the kit was no better, indeed a lot worse and doubtless there were wobbly sets too. Perhaps one day it will be remade and like the new Doctor Who given a decent budget.

Graham.

[Narukami]

Graham, Robert and Alan -- excellent reviews and comments, you put my own modest review to shame with your cogent and well thought out comments. :oops:

At the risk of repetition, I will quote again the comments by Kurt Vonnegut concerning books adapted into films:

"There are only two American novelists who should be grateful for the movies made from their books. I am one of them (for Slaughterhouse-Five). The other one? Margaret Mitchell, of course."

All of us have said, more than once, that even poor films about ancient Rome are better than no films about ancient Rome (the film, The Last Legion being the exception) and as poor as The Eagle or Centurion might be on several grounds, they do serve the purpose of engendering interest in this period of history. However... At this point in film history, we can and should be doing better, both in terms of historical accuracy and cinematic art.

The Eagle may not be a bad film, but it is not a particularly good one either. I suspect this film got 'green lighted' because the director's last film won both critical praise and an Academy Award, the source material is from a best selling novel, and he promised to bring the film in under $20 million. Even though box office returns have only been fair, ($26 million vs. $25 million in production & distribution costs) the film will eventually turn a profit with DVD, Blu-ray and broadcast sales. (Too bad they did not think to turn out some toys & games -- I'd love a collection of Imperial Roman Action Figures.) :roll:

I will take exception with Starship Troopers -- the only improvement that film made on the original book was the more complex Bug evolution, otherwise the film was really rather poor (well, except for the shower scene -- ah the joys of a co-ed army). A better film version of Heinlein's book was done by James Cameron, although he titled it Aliens. :?

But I digress.

If nothing else, The Eagle has served to fuel some interesting discussions, and I have learned much from these exchanges. My thanks gentlemen.

:wink:

Narukami

[Robert Vermaat]

Finally it would seem that the old BBC TV series has been lost in their great video purge of many years ago.

A few shots here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-odksQ73I8

[Niedel]

To chime in, too: I didn't like The Eagle. The preview looked cool, the movie was one thing, however, that is inexcusable: It was boring. I also think the main premise was just plain wrong: They tried to make a children's book (that also appeals to adults because it's simply well-written and also because it's a classic and they probably read it as kids=nostalgia) into a movie for adults, which didn't pan out. The relationship between Esca and Marcus wasn't really working. Why would they become friends? The changes from the book were numerous, and normally I don't mind it if a movie has to implement changes for dramatic reasons, however, I found the changes they made were random and simply bad. An interesting character like Guern was turned into only one of a whole gang of survivors (Spoiler: who magically appear at the end just like in that terrible Last Legion movie), Marcus was simply a boring character, no development, the struggles with his injury/being retired from the army etc. were not clear at all, they left out the part of his eye doctoring which makes it really unconvincing that he could scope out the wilderness behind Hadrian's wall without being found out, etc. The action scenes were the usual quick-cut/can't see anything kind which are really getting old, unless there is a reason (immediacy/feeling like you're in the battle like in Saving Private Ryan). I also disagree that a bad movie about Rome is better than no movie at all. With movies like this (and the terrible King Arthur, Last Legion etc.) which all turn out to be flops, it actually makes producers think twice about touching Roman subjects anymore. I think the success of "Gladiator" has run its course, unfortunately. I'll be happy if I'm wrong and they make a whole plethora of movies about Rome, maybe including some good ones, but I don't think this one helped at all. Too bad, since I like the director and tought he might be the right one to make an interesting movie out of this topic. I also want to stress that I didn't just not like it because I like the book. Just look at the reviews, it was universally panned, and most critics didn't even read the book/probably hardly knew it was based on a (minor classic) book.

[Nathan Ross]

I also disagree that a bad movie about Rome is better than no movie at all. With movies like this (and the terrible King Arthur, Last Legion etc.) which all turn out to be flops, it actually makes producers think twice about touching Roman subjects anymore. I think the success of "Gladiator" has run its course, unfortunately

This would be a good thing if it saves us from the possibility of Mel Gibson's threatened Boudica movie...

On the other hand, does anyone know what's happened to John Boorman's film of Yourcenar's Memoirs of Hadrian? It was supposed to start shooting back in 2008... Surely that would be one novel adaptation they couldn't balls up... :roll:

[Niedel]

Memoirs of Hadrian: The latest references I found were from 2008. On some newer sites it still says "in preproduction", so I wonder if it will ever get made.

[Kai]

It does not tell much, but to me it was the best Roman-themed movie in years. Then again, that is not much of a feat with competition like the Last Legion (the book was equally crappy btw, being as unpleasant as historically flawed).

Anyway, I may add a minor but interesting observation I made about the use of armour in the Eagle: It presented a new theory concerning the leather vs. metal musculata debate!
The movie actually uses both for a centurion, and while it is probably a bit of a stretch already having a centurion with a musculata, the interesting idea is that he uses the leather musculata for ‘light duty’ (garrison service) and the metal one for ‘heavy duty’ (high intensity combat).
Not that I am convinced here, but it is some idea to toy around with.

[KET]

Some good has come of the movie - it reminded me of a wonderful book I hadn't read since I was in High School back in the 70s. I have bought a new copy and reread it. As much as I'd love to go see the movie, I fear the changes. Perhaps I'll wait until it shows up on "On Demand"...

[Longovicium]

I watched the movie when it came out a few weeks ago and was on the whole a little disappointed with it. I won't go into details as it is subjective thing really but the up side was I went out and ordered the 'Eagle' trilogy - I remember reading it when I was a kid and much preferring the 'The Eagle in Winter' by Wallace Breem (again subjective, I know!) but thoroughly enjoyed the first in the trilogy - 'The Eagle of the Ninth' - and actually found it superior to many Roman army fiction novels written in the last few years. In fact, to call it a children's novel, is a massive understatement. This work is mature and detailed in a way that many 'adult' novels only aspire to.

So curiously enough through a poorly made film, I have re-discovered a book I read as a child but didn't rate and now value it as an adult reader.

[mcbishop]

Well, I liked the film, but for Brits who haven't tried the book, Amazon have a special offer on the Kindle edition - only £1.05 during their ebook sale. And before the luddites get too excited, I have three copies (an Oxford paperback [the much-loved first copy], a Puffin paperback [for everyday enjoyment], and the Kindle edition [for when I don't want to lug loads of dead-tree by-products with me on my travels]). Even if you don't have a Kindle, you can use their reading app to enjoy it on your iPad, iPhone, Android phone, windoze or linux pc, Mac etc etc.

Mike Bishop

[Robert Vermaat]

@ Kai:

It does not tell much, but to me it was the best Roman-themed movie in years. Then again, that is not much of a feat with competition like the Last Legion (the book was equally crappy btw, being as unpleasant as historically flawed).

It does tell a lot actually, about Roman-themed movies at least.
I’d say you are doing the book a great disservice by calling it ‘crappy’ and comparing it to something like the ‘Last Legion’- both are totally different. For one, Eagle of the Ninth was written half a century ago, and historical theories were not the same as today. That can’t be said about the last Legion, which is only a few years old and disregards just about everything we know about the period in which it’s set. Rosemary Sutcliff, on the other hand, always kept in close touch with historians and archaeologists.
As to it being ‘unpleasant’, I assume you are referring to The Eagle of the Ninth, not to Last Legion (about which we are in agreement), you are trampling on the very book that launched me into loving History, Rome, and finally re-enactment.

@ Kevin:

Some good has come of the movie - it reminded me of a wonderful book I hadn't read since I was in High School back in the 70s. I have bought a new copy and reread it.

Well, we agree on that! Renewed interest in the book is a very good result of this movie.

@ Francis:

thoroughly enjoyed the first in the trilogy - 'The Eagle of the Ninth' - and actually found it superior to many Roman army fiction novels written in the last few years. In fact, to call it a children's novel, is a massive understatement. This work is mature and detailed in a way that many 'adult' novels only aspire to.
So curiously enough through a poorly made film, I have re-discovered a book I read as a child but didn't rate and now value it as an adult reader.

My sentiments exactly!

[Kai]

@ Kai:
It does tell a lot actually, about Roman-themed movies at least.
I’d say you are doing the book a great disservice by calling it ‘crappy’ and comparing it to something like the ‘Last Legion’- both are totally different. For one, Eagle of the Ninth was written half a century ago, and historical theories were not the same as today. That can’t be said about the last Legion, which is only a few years old and disregards just about everything we know about the period in which it’s set. Rosemary Sutcliff, on the other hand, always kept in close touch with historians and archaeologists.
As to it being ‘unpleasant’, I assume you are referring to The Eagle of the Ninth, not to Last Legion (about which we are in agreement), you are trampling on the very book that launched me into loving History, Rome, and finally re-enactment.

You can calm down, I was referring to the book "L'ultima legione" by Valerio Massimo Manfredi when calling it crappy. The whole section in brackets deal with it. Manfredi was an archaeology professor btw, it did not stop him from writing this...

[Narukami]

For those who may have missed The Eagle in theatres...

The film will be released on DVD & Blu-ray on June 21st. The discs will contain both the theatrical and an "unrated" version. Presumably the unrated version will contain additional footage that might enhance the story, but I would doubt The Eagle will suddenly become a better movie.

The current review on Amazon (for the Blu-ray edition) calls the film a "solid adaptation of the novel" a sentiment I think most here would take issue with. That said, I have a feeling The Eagle will enjoy healthy sales on DVD & Blue-ray no doubt putting it into the profit column.

DVD

http://www.amazon.com/Eagle-Channing-Tat...al_recs_83


Blu-ray

http://www.amazon.com/Eagle-Blu-ray-Chan...=pd_cp_d_1




:wink:

Narukami

[Narukami]

Today The Eagle was released on DVD and Blu-ray, and as is common now, Focus Features used the social media to trumpet the release.

http://www.facebook.com/TheEagle

Although most of the posts are of the "great film" and "I just love Tatum" elk, there was a post by Museum Replicas hawking their exclusive license to sell costume and prop items based upon the film.

This line on their site caught my attention: "Just as the production strived for authenticity and accuracy in their depiction, we are bringing you screen-accurate swords and armor from this epic film."

As the Chinese told us, a picture is worth a thousand words -- judge for yourself. :roll:

http://www.museumreplicas.com/g-27-the-eagle.aspx

hock:

Narukami