Thursday, September 29, 2011

Ironclad

***DISCLAIMER*** The following review is entirely my opinion. If you comment (which I encourage you to do) be respectful. If you don't agree with my opinion, that's fine. To each their own. I am just sharing my opinions and perspective. Finally, the reviews are given on a scale of 1-5. 1, of course, being terrible. 2, being not great. 3, being okay. 4, being good and 5, being epic!

Ironclad - 2 out of 5

Ironclad surrounds the true life events of King John attacking Rochester Castle after the King signed the Magna Carta and ultimately went against his word and tried to reclaim his land. However, a few Templar Knights held off the King and his army. Sounds awesome, right? Well, it is. Except the film version of these historic events weren't so full of awe.

"Wait a second...is that man not wearing any pants?"

This disappointed me because there were two very large reasons I wanted to enjoy this film. Number 1) Right after being a ninja, pirate and a cowboy, I want to be a knight. Granted, above all others, I want to be a Jedi Knight but I'll take up jousting and save busty maidens from their towers while wearing chainmail. Secondly, this movie has a terrific cast. I mean Paul "Freaking" Giamatti plays King John! How could this movie fail?

This is the film's bad guy and he is FABULOUS!!!

Well, first and foremost, the characters all lack any real depth. Aside from stars like Giamatti, Brian
Cox, Jason Flemyng and Charles Dance (who were all great in the movie, by the way) no one really had a character and, for the life of me, I can't remember most of them even having names. The true focus of this film was the battle scenes and the true focus of those was gore and blood. I mean it's cool seeing a dude's head pop open like a ripe melon but if I can't even recall the name of the man wielding the weapon that split the faceless bad guy's lid, what's the point?

Is that Gareth from The Office or Legolas' odder brother?

There's nothing special about Ironclad. Sure there's some blood and guts but the battles are sloppy and look like they were choreographed by middle school kids messing around with their parent's camcorders. And yes, there are some great actors in this movie but with a slow moving story and lifeless plot, their talent is completely wasted. Even getting to look at the incredibly sexy Kate Mara for two hours in a fair maiden's outfight isn't enough to give this movie a shot. In fact, if it wasn't for the good actors and the fact that the set dressings are actually pretty decent and look the era, I probably would have given this a more deserving 1 out of 5.

The movie wanted a Hugh Jackman type but couldn't afford the Hugh Jackman price tag. So they got this guy.

1 comment:

  1. Thats too bad. I wanted to see this. :o) Oh, well. You saved me a couple hours.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.