Eagle of the Ninth

[Monkey]

Originally Posted by Variable_Star

Well said! As far as action scenes are concerned, what irritates me the most is when the direction is so frenetic and the editing is so disjointed that you cannot even tell what's going on. Also, I'm not a particular stickler for realism in movies, but I actually prefer it when the blood is dialed down - especially when the blood is added via CGI. Case in point, I love the film Red Cliff, but I was actually laughing a bit at the incredible amount of CGI blood fakery that permeated the action sequences.

Watch Spartacus (2011) TV show on Stars, from netflix. You can tell what is going on, lots of blood, lol. The dialogue is so bad that it is entertaining.

[CZAR]

Originally Posted by Variable_Star

It seems common for users to pop in on the threads of films they don't like just to slag them off. I don't quite understand that either. It's one thing to have an intelligent discourse, but entirely another thing to make your entire contribution to a thread as something like this: "This movie was boring, the acting was bad, and I wouldn't own the Blu if it was free!" If you're going to have a go at a film, give some specific details. In my case, I simply avoid the threads of films I dislike, because I know I have nothing interesting/useful/helpful to contribute there.

Yea man its ok if u dont like certain films but give mature opinions about it other than thread bashing. Got Em!!

Originally Posted by Monkey

Watch Spartacus (2011) TV show on Stars, from netflix. You can tell what is going on, lots of blood, lol. The dialogue is so bad that it is entertaining.

Spartacus is a fantastic series! Got Em!!

[Variable_Star]

Originally Posted by Monkey

Watch Spartacus (2011) TV show on Stars, from netflix. You can tell what is going on, lots of blood, lol. The dialogue is so bad that it is entertaining.

I'm looking forward to HBO's Game of Thrones, which is premiering April 17. The promotional material that's been released so far looks extremely promising. In the meantime, I'm probably going to see The Eagle sometime next week. I'm hoping it doesn't disappoint either!

[Monkey]

Originally Posted by CZAR

Yea man its ok if u dont like certain films but give mature opinions about it other than thread bashing. Got Em!!



Spartacus is a fantastic series! Got Em!!

I've watched the first two and by Jupiter's

[Show spoiler]

I love it as well

Don't have HBO but would like to check that show out as well when it hits.

[Offender_Mullet]

Originally Posted by CZAR

Ok well when u do view the flick go in with an open mind or else u wont like it regardless of how good it is. I see that everyday also and that is plain silly. Why watch a film u know u will hate regardless. I never understood that. Got Em!!

People can give a one or two-word opinion on why they do/don't like a film or whether they might be/might not be interested in a film after viewing a trailer (otherwise they wouldn't make trailers at all). There's nothing wrong with that. Whether or not they're doing it to just threadcrap is in the eye of the beholder. Not everyone is a lengthy blowhard and doesn't need to be in order to have an opinion about anything, especially a piece of entertainment.

I actually find it silly when people become all "deep" with hilariously over-analyzed over-bloated ramblings about a movie (i.e. something that isn't real). People always try and trick you into thinking they're smarter than they really are, but that's just me.

Here, I'll explain more about my lack of geek boner interest in this flick: I was interested until I viewed the trailer, which made it look like nothing more than a pretty carbon copy of Centurion (i.e. 9th Legion and kooky painted peeps yo). Give me something more than that. Make me want to use my hard-earned moolah and pay for a ticket. The last thing anyone wants is to feel like you're watching the same movie twice, just with different people.....and the trailer is going to the the absolute first thing that'll either tell your brain "yes" or "nooooo". And the funny thing is most people will not give it a chance if the trailer has turned them off.

I remember reading about this movie a long time ago (I think this and Centurion were announced relatively close to each right?). I do love films set in this genre. That being said, I hope I'm wrong....even if the lead actor is a tool.

[Decado]

Originally Posted by Holmes

I'm bothered by this post-Gladiator/300 angst over a PG-13 rating for an historical action film.

And I'm bothered by the fact that some people accept movies shot for PG-13 that depict battles where grown men hack at each other with swords and axes (the point being to show a battle without showing...violence) :/

Let's consider one of the all-time great films of this broad "genre"--Lawrence of Arabia. Rated PG. Has several incredibly exciting sequences in it. Or Kubrick's Spartacus. Or Master and Commander. Or even Ridley Scott's Robin Hood, which, while fairly disappointing in general, boasted several very cool action sequences.

Those examples are precisely why I don't want PG-13 battles. I like Master and Commander. It is the only PG-13 historical epic I like...but the most visceral aspect of every battle in the movie was watching wood splinter. Doesn't really cut it. The battle scenes in Robin Hood were a joke and if Scott can't do it, I doubt anyone can. As for older "classics", the battle scenes just ruin it for me. Can't watch them any more.

I'm not saying The Eagle is going to hold a candle to Lawrence of Arabia, Master and Commander, or Spartacus, lol, but my point remains: sequences can still be great without oodles of stylized arterial spray. If they're well-staged, shot and cut in an exciting way, and serve to advance the plot/characters, they'll do the trick.

I might agree to an extent if that was your point, but a movie needn't go even close to that far to get an R-rating. Noticeable blood/wounds at impact is about all it takes, and AFAIC, PG-13 battles simply don't look believable (even in there "heroic" context) and it is so damned obvious what the director is doing it kills the experience.

[Variable_Star]

Originally Posted by Offender_Mullet

I was interested until I viewed the trailer, which made it look like nothing more than a pretty carbon copy of Centurion

I agree, I'm often disappointed by film trailers, even (or perhaps especially) regarding films I love. A recent example is the trailers for True Grit, I thought they somewhat misrepresented the film. On the other hand, I thought the theatrical trailer for Children of Men was excellent. As far as The Eagle is concerned, the only problem I have is that the trailer gives away too much, especially with relation to Jamie Bell's character. It's good to setup the story, but not so great when the first hour is spelled out for you!

Of course, the unfortunate thing is that the director almost never directs the trailer for his or her film, these are typically contracted to outside companies while the film is still in production.

[Decado]

Originally Posted by Holmes

It seems a bit unfair to suggest an action sequence can't be "good" (exciting, well-shot, able to advance the plot) without extreme gore.

It's unfair to assume that an R-rating means "extreme gore" (which indicates more than what is necessary). :\

I don't, however, think it is unfair to believe/expect that powerful battle scenes in this context would require an R-rating. Battles are bloody. These guys aren't having a tea party.

[CZAR]

Originally Posted by Offender_Mullet

People can give a one or two-word opinion on why they do/don't like a film or whether they might be/might not be interested in a film after viewing a trailer (otherwise they wouldn't make trailers at all). There's nothing wrong with that. Whether or not they're doing it to just threadcrap is in the eye of the beholder. Not everyone is a lengthy blowhard and doesn't need to be in order to have an opinion about anything, especially a piece of entertainment.

I actually find it silly when people become all "deep" with hilariously over-analyzed over-bloated ramblings about a movie (i.e. something that isn't real). People always try and trick you into thinking they're smarter than they really are, but that's just me.

Here, I'll explain more about my lack of geek boner interest in this flick: I was interested until I viewed the trailer, which made it look like nothing more than a pretty carbon copy of Centurion (i.e. 9th Legion and kooky painted peeps yo). Give me something more than that. Make me want to use my hard-earned moolah and pay for a ticket. The last thing anyone wants is to feel like you're watching the same movie twice, just with different people.....and the trailer is going to the the absolute first thing that'll either tell your brain "yes" or "nooooo". And the funny thing is most people will not give it a chance if the trailer has turned them off.

I remember reading about this movie a long time ago (I think this and Centurion were announced relatively close to each right?). I do love films set in this genre. That being said, I hope I'm wrong....even if the lead actor is a tool.

I can feel that. Atleast u went out of your way with some real backing to your opinion so its respected. Tatum is gonna change your mind watch! Got Em!!

[Variable_Star]

Originally Posted by Decado

As for older "classics", the battle scenes just ruin it for me. Can't watch them any more.

To each his own, definitely, but it's a shame to write off classics like Lawrence of Arabia or Spartacus just because limbs aren't being severed and blood isn't splashing about the screen.

[Offender_Mullet]

Originally Posted by CZAR

I can feel that. Atleast u went out of your way with some real backing to your opinion so its respected. Tatum is gonna change your mind watch! Got Em!!

Wait a minute, I thought Denzel was your man-crush?!?! You've downgraded to Tatum?

[CZAR]

Originally Posted by Offender_Mullet

Wait a minute, I thought Denzel was your man-crush?!?! You've downgraded to Tatum?

I like a few actors. Denzel is the greatest actor of all time in my book. Tatum to me is a good up and coming actor that I liked immediately. Got Em!!

[ArmyOfDarknessAW]

This looks ok to me. I doubt I will go to the theaters for it but I will definitely rent it. It's nice to see Jamie Bell in another movie and Channing is ok though he is a bit wooden.

[Decado]

Originally Posted by Variable_Star

To each his own, definitely, but it's a shame to write off classics like Lawrence of Arabia or Spartacus just because limbs aren't being severed and blood isn't splashing about the screen.

It didn't bother me too much with Lawrence of Arabia because it wasn't really a war film.

Spartacus...yeah, just couldn't do it. Shame or not, that's just the way it is.

Oh, and one reviewer more or less sums up my contempt for battle scenes in modern-day PG-13 historical epics (RE: The Eagle):

"Not every Roman action film needs to be as gory as Centurion, but it does call attention to the fact that a majority of the cuts seem designed to avoid the brutal violence."

That is what I spend the majority of the time thinking when I was watching the Robin Hood battle scenes. The rest of the time I was thinking "Kate looks silly in armour".

[Variable_Star]

Originally Posted by Decado

It didn't bother me too much with Lawrence of Arabia because it wasn't really a war film.

Spartacus...yeah, just couldn't do it. Shame or not, that's just the way it is.

Oh, and one reviewer more or less sums up my contempt for battle scenes in modern-day PG-13 historical epics (RE: The Eagle):

"Not every Roman action film needs to be as gory as Centurion, but it does call attention to the fact that a majority of the cuts seem designed to avoid the brutal violence."

That is what I spend the majority of the time thinking when I was watching the Robin Hood battle scenes. The rest of the time I was thinking "Kate looks silly in armour".

That's cool, I respect your opinion. Regarding Robin Hood, I can even agree with you. The film felt overlong, somewhat miscast, and the action sequences were on the whole disappointing. I did entirely enjoy the impressively mounted climatic coastline battle, but it was much too brief to save the film. Scott is my favorite director, I own almost all of his feature films, but I suppose even the greats have their misfires along with the classics! I'm still going to buy Robin Hood...but only when I can get it for less than $10.

[TheZoof]

I thought it was really good. Enjoyed it quite a bit. It is a slower pace then some would expect however well done.

Go see it.

[CZAR]

Originally Posted by TheZoof

I thought it was really good. Enjoyed it quite a bit. It is a slower pace then some would expect however well done.

Go see it.

Nice! This will be a day one blind buy for me for sure. Got Em!!

[thelittleprince]

Watched The Eagle today and it was a very interesting movie, story-wise. It's not Gladiator scale-wise in terms of production values and the fight scenes definitely were toned down for PG-13 rating. I give it 3/5.