Eagle of the Ninth

[GreenScar]

FILMING has now started in Hungary on Roman adventure The Eagle of The Ninth.

It stars Channing Tatum, who is in current release G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra; Jamie Bell (Defiance, Jumper); and Mark Strong (upcoming Sherlock Holmes and Robin Hood).

Shooting entirely on location in Scotland and Hungary, it is being directed by Kevin Macdonald and written by Jeremy Brock, both of whom worked on award-winning The Last King of Scotland.

Brock adapted the screenplay of The Eagle of the Ninth from Rosemary Sutcliff's classic novel of the same name.

The Eagle of the Ninth is set in second-century Britain. In 140 AD, twenty years after the unexplained disappearance of the entire Ninth Legion in the mountains of Scotland, young centurion Marcus Aquila (Tatum) arrives from Rome to solve the mystery and restore the reputation of his father, the commander of the Ninth.

Accompanied only by his British slave Esca (Bell), Marcus sets out across Hadrian's Wall into the uncharted highlands of Caledonia - to confront its savage tribes, make peace with his father's memory, and retrieve the lost legion's golden emblem, the Eagle of the Ninth.

Donald Sutherland portrays Marcus' uncle Aquila, who has retired in Britain; Strong is Guern, an ex-soldier who holds crucial information about the Ninth.

The project is a collaboration between Focus Features and Film4, which gets UK broadcasting rights as part of the deal.

[Lord_Stewie]

We have a date for this film:

Focus Features has announced the release dates for its 2011 films. The Eagle of the Ninth has been pushed back from September 24th to February 25, 2011. The film is a Roman epic adventure directed by Kevin Macdonald (State of Play) and starring Channing Tatum of Jamie Bell.

Source.

[Col. Zombie]

So this is coming out this weekend? Is anyone actually planning on watching this? I'm going to assume that since no one has posted here since October and this thread only has two posts, that nobody's really interested.

I find it so awkward that they picked Tatum to play the part of anyone during Roman times. The guy has this "I be of da streets yo" accent and we're supposed to buy that this clown is a centurion? I want to stick a knife in my ears everytime I hear him speak, not to mention his dead eyes and wooden acting.

The movie itself looks terrible, but surprisingly it's sitting at 88% on RT (with only 11). I don't plan on watching this, just curious about what everyone else thinks.

[CZAR]

Yea people continue to hate on Tatum who will become a great actor in my eyes. This site just hates on him. I think this film will be very good and will be a day one buy for me when it drops on blu. Got Em!!

[toddly6666]

Originally Posted by CZAR

Yea people continue to hate on Tatum who will become a great actor in my eyes. This site just hates on him. I think this film will be very good and will be a day one buy for me when it drops on blu. Got Em!!

It's like talking about a chimpanzee transforming into a gorilla...or a gorilla transforming into a baboon. Channing Tatum is a monkey, not an actor.

[CZAR]

Originally Posted by toddly6666

It's like talking about a chimpanzee transforming into a gorilla...or a gorilla transforming into a baboon. Channing Tatum is a monkey, not an actor.

Umm ok thanks for your educated and mature input! Got Em!!

[Holmes]

Early reviews are solid. Both trades (Variety, the Hollywood Reporter) gave it a thumbs up.

I have faith because it's directed by Kevin Macdonald. Dude made One Day in September, Touching the Void, The Last King of Scotland, and State of Play. He knows his way around a movie camera.

As for Channing Tatum--we'll see. Maybe he'll pull a Heath Ledger and transition from flavor-of-the-month hunk (10 Things I Hate About You, A Knight's Tale) to compelling actor (Brokeback Mountain, The Dark Knight).

[Col. Zombie]

Originally Posted by toddly6666

It's like talking about a chimpanzee transforming into a gorilla...or a gorilla transforming into a baboon. Channing Tatum is a monkey, not an actor.

That's hilarious. I busted out laughing when I read this!!

You do bring up a good point. He might do a good job in a movie if he were playing a retarded monkey.

[toddly6666]

Originally Posted by Col.Zombie

That's hilarious. I busted out laughing when I read this!!

You do bring up a good point. He might do a good job in a movie if he were playing a retarded monkey.

Ha! Thanks! If there is ever another Planet of the Apes film, i'll be first to recommend Tatum for lead role, but for non-Planet of the Apes films, I dont recommend him.

[Variable_Star]

Originally Posted by CZAR

Yea people continue to hate on Tatum who will become a great actor in my eyes. This site just hates on him. I think this film will be very good and will be a day one buy for me when it drops on blu. Got Em!!

Tatum has potential, but unfortunately he's selected some truly terrible projects, among them a hopelessly formulaic, soppy romance film (Dear John) and an action film where he plays a character so one dimensional he made Steven Seagal look like Daniel Day Lewis (G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra). To be fair, the painfully unfunny Damon Wayans was unquestionably worse in that one.

Still, Tatum was surprisingly solid in Fighting and Stop-Loss, and I particularly enjoyed his brief but memorable cameo in Public Enemies. I actually wished his character had been in the film a bit longer. Based on this, and the fact that I generally love films like The Eagle (Centurion, Valhalla Rising, etc.), I'm reasonably certain I'll be in the theater for this one.

[CZAR]

Originally Posted by Variable_Star

Tatum has potential, but unfortunately he's selected some truly terrible projects, among them a hopelessly formulaic, soppy romance film (Dear John) and an action film where he plays a character so one dimensional he made Steven Seagal look like Daniel Day Lewis (G.I. Joe: The Rise of Cobra). To be fair, the painfully unfunny Damon Wayans was unquestionably worse in that one.

Still, Tatum was surprisingly solid in Fighting and Stop-Loss, and I particularly enjoyed his brief but memorable cameo in Public Enemies. I actually wished his character had been in the film a bit longer. Based on this, and the fact that I generally love films like The Eagle (Centurion, Valhalla Rising, etc.), I'm reasonably certain I'll be in the theater for this one.

Man now this is a write up I can appreciate. Hatin on someone just to hate without is ignorant but I can dig what u wrote. I actually liked Dear John however and thought he did a very good job with it. I also liked G.I. Joe but u have to remember that is a summer popcorn flick and it wasnt up for an oscar but highly enjoyable. It was also Marlon and not Damon in the film by the way.

I am glad u gave him and Fighting a positive review because I love that film and thought it was underappreciated. I havnt seen Stop Loss but really want to. My friend absolutely dreads Tatum but loved his small part in PE which I also havnt seen yet. I think Eagle will be a very good film with a very good performance from Tatum. Got Em!!

[Offender_Mullet]

It's just called The Eagle now.

I'll watch it, but Channing Tatum, ugh. If people who crapped on Centurion end-up raving about this, then there's something wrong with people's brainwave functions.

[Holmes]

Ebert gave The Eagle a positive review.

"The Eagle" is a rip-snorting adventure tale of the sort made before CGI, 3-D and alphabet soup in general took the fun out of moviegoing. So much does it evoke the energy of traditional sword-and-shield movies that I had to bring the term "rip-snorting" out of retirement; it's rarely needed in this era of sleek technology. Here we see for the most part the actual actors trekking through real locations, instead of quasi-animation. [...]

"The Eagle" has two strengths. One is that it is interested in its period, and what kinds of Romans and barbarians might have lived then. The second is that is really comes down to the relationship of Marcus and Esca, who risk their lives for each other but remain conscious that they are master and slave, and never become buddies. I suppose it is a negative strength that there are no major female characters; this is not the sort of world where women would be expected, and the insertion of romantic interest so obligatory in lesser movies would seem awkward here.

"The Eagle" is rated PG-13, and that’s about right. The blood and gore is kept to a reasonable level, and the battle scenes are about heroism and strategy, not special effects. "The Eagle" attempts to create characters with some dimension and complexity. During Donald Sutherland’s interlude as the wise uncle, it provides some notion of the function of empire, then and later. And Tatum and Bell do a good job of sculpting the heroes to a fairly human scale and not indulging in foolish poses against the horizon. The movie goes a little over the top in finally showing us the Eagle, but what can you expect?

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/...IEWS/110209982

[CZAR]

Originally Posted by Holmes

Ebert gave The Eagle a positive review.



http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/...IEWS/110209982

Nice! Do u know how many stars he gave it? Got Em!!

[Variable_Star]

Originally Posted by Holmes

Ebert gave The Eagle a positive review.

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/...IEWS/110209982

Awesome! Thanks for sharing. I respect and often agree with Ebert's assessment of movies, so this is good to hear. So far, out of 35 reviews, it's only at 51% on Rotten Tomatoes - not enough for a consensus yet, but it's split pretty even so far. Still, I'm almost positive I'll enjoy this one, based on Ebert's comments.

Originally Posted by CZAR

Nice! Do u know how many stars he gave it? Got Em!!

He gave it three stars.

[Holmes]

If this stays above 40% on RT, I'd be tempted to say it has good reviews. Just because of the delayed release (to February no less) and the "Channing Tatum?! As a Roman soldier?! UGH!" factor which is clearly prevalent... If it stays above 55%, I'll be thrilled.

What Ebert describes is exactly what I'm hoping for from this film.

[Variable_Star]

Originally Posted by Holmes

If this stays above 40% on RT, I'd be tempted to say it has good reviews. Just because of the delayed release (to February no less) and the "Channing Tatum?! As a Roman soldier?! UGH!" factor which is clearly prevalent... If it stays above 55%, I'll be thrilled.

What Ebert describes is exactly what I'm hoping for from this film.

Same here! I get your feelings about Rotten Tomatoes too, often the critics are much too harsh on certain films. I mean, I enjoy a slow-moving, thought-provoking film as much as the next critic, but I'm not so pretentious that I cannot admit enjoying films like Commando or The Running Man.

[Holmes]

Certain movies also suffer from a critical pack mentality, I think. Like, I wouldn't call Edge of Darkness a great film by any means, but it was annoying how so many reviews seemed to spend more time reviewing a certain actor's recent history than the film Martin Campbell actually shot.

Or reviews for potential Oscar contenders that seem more interested in reviewing the movie's Oscar viability than its actual quality. A reactionary line like "Wow, this might prove too trippy for older Oscar voters!" really seems out of place in a piece of film criticism.

[CZAR]

Originally Posted by Variable_Star

Awesome! Thanks for sharing. I respect and often agree with Ebert's assessment of movies, so this is good to hear. So far, out of 35 reviews, it's only at 51% on Rotten Tomatoes - not enough for a consensus yet, but it's split pretty even so far. Still, I'm almost positive I'll enjoy this one, based on Ebert's comments.



He gave it three stars.

Ok cool. yea i dont trip to much on critics but obviously Ebert is the critic of all critics although I dont always agree with him like The Lovely Bones. Got Em!!

Originally Posted by Holmes

If this stays above 40% on RT, I'd be tempted to say it has good reviews. Just because of the delayed release (to February no less) and the "Channing Tatum?! As a Roman soldier?! UGH!" factor which is clearly prevalent... If it stays above 55%, I'll be thrilled.

What Ebert describes is exactly what I'm hoping for from this film.

Yea man I just hope critics give real reviews and arent biased like some people who go into a film hating sumthin before seeing it thus meaning they probably arent gonna like it anyway based on prejudging. Got Em!!