Loading...

Plot:

Circa 460 A.D. Mira was born in a warrior-family in Kerala, India, was well versed in martial arts and self-defense, so much so that she was recruited by the Spanish royalty and re-located to Constantinople. From there she was instructed to assist Roman Commander Aurelius to plan the escape of 12-year old Romulus Augustus Caesar from a prison in Capri after his parents had been killed by the leader of the Alliance in turmoil-stricken Rome that has seen the deaths of five emperors in five years. Mira, Aurelius, and a Priest, Ambrosinius, along with a handful of loyal soldiers were successful in the escape plan and deliver Romulus to Roman Senator Nestor. What the crew do not realize is that their task is not over yet, for Nestor is all set to betray Romulus, leaving them with no alternative but to flee to Britannia, where they will be forced to confront a seemingly invincible Vortygn, whose main aim is to obtain a powerful sword that was meant for defense and defeat, and also ensure the death of Romulus at any and all costs.

Also Known As: Последният легион, Ostatni legion, A Última Legião, Posledná légia, Son Lejyon, Die letzte Legion, La última legión, Viimane leegion, De sista krigarna, La leyenda de Excalibur, Poslednja legija, Η τελευταία λεγεώνα, Paskutinis legionas, L'ultima legione, La dernière légion, Az utolsó légió, Ultima legiune, Последний легион, Viimeiset soturit, Poslední legie Czech, The Last Legion, I teleftaia legeona, Posljednja legija

Leave a Reply

No Comments

  • david-lowe
    david lowe

    I was hoping for a Gladiator type movie… what a piece of crap.Do not waste your time/money with this movie… it had : 1 – A bad story that made no sense 2 – An incredibly boring dialog 3 – Completely non-believable story 4 – Historically inaccurate 5 – Horrible inappropriate music 6 – Bad fight scenes 7 – No characters you could relate to 8 – Cheesy costumes and cinematic effects 9 – Miscasting 10 – The “lovers” had no chemistryI only wish I could give this a 0 out of 10 and gotten my $3.00 DVD rental money back. Trust me, 1 1/2 hours on the pot tackling diarrhea is preferable to watching this movie.

  • benjamin-harrington
    benjamin harrington

    this movie was bad, and by bad i mean terrible. In response to other reviews about this movie, first of all, I wasn’t expecting a CGI laden gore-fest, in fact i wasn’t expecting anything at all, and i was still disappointed. the actors, i have nothing against them and i like (most of) them, were not suited for this type of roll, come on, Colin Firth as an action hero? doesn’t work. The plot was OK, I’ve seen worse, but the CGI effects for the great city of Rome were horrible, and the history was awful also. What kind of historian was backing them on this movie, that let the soldiers go from a semi-plausible Hadrian’s wall to a 13th century castle, in 460 AD? and what kind of decision is it to then go from there, BACK to Hadrian’s wall because it’ll be easier to defend??? apart from actors being miscast, the plot being weak, the history sucking and the CGI being downright awful i guess you could say its a good movie, or even just decent.The only upside is the ludicrous technology used by the Goths to destroy the gates at the beginning

  • judy-wheeler
    judy wheeler

    Well the plot is the same of Manfredi’s book. The young kid Romulus is the last of Roman emperors. When Rome is sold to barbarians, he must go away to Britain to save his life, protected by his most faithful bodyguards. There, the last battle for the honour of Rome will begin, starting also the myth of King Arthur. This plot is not bad, and quite interesting, but is the only good thing of the movie. Characters are quite stupid, most of the dialogues are silly: the hand fight, the “seduction” of the captain, the finding of the sword, the attack to the Emperor’s palace (and twenty barbarians conquer all Rome???). This, mixed with quite bad action scenes (all the fights are awful, there’s no contact, in fact most of the time you can see the space between the bodies!!), worse special effects (Ambrosius throwing fire) and the worst of all is the historic facts: When was a LIberty Statue in Rome? Why the Emperor’s palace is 3 metres far to the forest? It was not in the middle of Rome?? When there was huskies in the Roman Empire? (at the British town) Why the swords had no blood after beating an enemy?? (well, in the last battle they had…) In addition to this, the thing that upsets me more is the fact that the movie pretends to be good! It exhales an aura of: “I’m telling you the truth” that makes it irritating! It is almost insulting, doing something so bad, and indeed present it as a master piece.

  • zeki-gutknecht-harloff
    zeki gutknecht harloff

    I went to see this movie only because it had one of the Bollywood leading lady – Aishwarya Rai. I knew the movie had poor ratings and did not expect much from it before entering the theatres.The story is about the blood line of Julius Ceaser – a young child Romulus Augustus (Thomas Sangster) whose parents are killed, kingdom overthrown and he imprisoned. His personal guard Aurelius (Colin Firth) joins hands with a couple of his own guards and Mira (Aishwarya Rai) and with the help of a sorcerer Merlin (Ben Kingsley) rescues the child and defeats the enemies.The movie is stupid to say the least, as if we are seeing some B-grade movies of 70s. It has good sets, and excellent actions; but the screenplay and dialogues are a big let down. Overall the casting is very poor. Colin Firth huffs and puffs to fit the role of a warrior guard, and so overacts Thomas as a child emperor. Ben Kingsley – what are you doing in this movie? As a moral guardian of the young emperor Ben Kingsley still sounds like Mahatma Gandhi when he opens his mouth and says some philosophical and thoughtful things. Aishwarya was okay. To make her look like an Indian beauty the make-up artist put layers of brown shining dusk on her face and body. She performed her role with commitment, but over-expressed herself in violent actions scenes.For director Doug Lefler, this was his second ambitious project and that too with historic setting. I should say that the quality of details in expensive sets and costume etc. was finely done. The action scenes were good but not up to the mark of great directors.So what was positive about this movie? I think it is a good entertainment for children and family. It does not have a heavy complicated story, and gory of sex and violence – that is normally seen in such movies. It is a clean entertainer in that way.(Stars 4.5 out of 10)

  • colleen-middleton
    colleen middleton

    In 460 AD, the Goths leaded by Odoacer (Peter Mullan) invade Rome; kill the parents of the Caesar Romulus Augustus (Thomas Sangster) and send the boy and his tutor Ambrosinus (Ben Kingsley) to a prison in Capri. The govern of Constantinople together with Senator Nestor (John Hannah) send the warrior Mira (Aishwarya Rai) to help the loyal commander Aurelius (Colin Firth) to rescue Romulus with a few soldiers that have survived the attack and bring him to Constantinople. They succeed in their mission but when they return, they discover that they have been betrayed by Nestor. Without any other alternative, they navigate to Britannia to meet the last Roman legion, but they have a huge surprise.”The Last Legion” is a delightful adventure absolutely underrated in IMDb. The story recalls those classic adventures of Errol Flynn or Douglas Fairbanks Jr., with good plot and no gore and a wonderful cinematography, indeed a great family entertainment. My vote is eight.Title (Brazil): “A Última Legião” (“The Last Legion”)

  • dawn-gilmore
    dawn gilmore

    The movie is actually pretty good. I saw it as a sneak preview today, so i didn’t know which movie they would be playing. But when it started I knew it would be a movie for me, cause I usually enjoy fantasy movies.Don’t expect anything too epic though. The acting is OK, but doesn’t excel at any point. But it’s good enough. The story is good, but sometimes somethings just don’t make sense. Things just happen for no apearant reason at all. But it must be said: this movie actually has some really funny parts. You’ll laugh a lot actually, even though it’s not a comedy. Especially the ending… You really aren’t expecting ‘that’ to happen (go see the movie and you’ll see what I mean)Well, overall good movie. Had a nice time watching it.7/10 stars

  • valda-alksnis
    valda alksnis

    I must say that it isn’t every day that you get to watch 60 Million go down the tube but this movie had a nice cheesy script, decent actors but i put all the blame on the director. As one said above, if Ridley Scott would have put his touch to it – surely it could have potential.Instead, the directing is so amateurish i thought i was watching Clash of the Titans 2 with the same wardrobe even the silly golden mask on the evil character.. which was beyond cheesy.But the hardest part is to imagine where did all those 60M go?? it wasn’t the sets, the sfx were too unrealistic to be expensive unless for a mere video game, but maybe the actors got paid millions. Aishwarya was hot and probably the only eye candy but if it cost 5M perhaps it would all make sense.It just goes to show that any good movie requires a director that can turn the script into a moving story and get great performances but this film looked like a miniseries for abc.. just painful to watch on the big screen. i just hope Lefler doesn’t take the helm of anymore movies – i honestly didn’t notice one decent close up shot and i agree the costumes were on target but they still looked right off the rack as if everyone went to a halloween costume store, and the sets unrealistically clean, it was not Switzerland but roman and English who didn’t have street cleaners every day…and all the beginning roman sets make the movie look like it was shot in the 70s – one isn’t sure they ramsacked a simple temple or all of Rome.And I agree, the child was horrible…esp the beginning shots on the roman statue – yikes.. i could go on and on but it is pointless..And to those that feel this movie is worth 10 bucks.. sorry but i would feel cheated even more but luckily for me it was almost free. I give it a 3 because i wanted to see lovely Aishwarya who did a great job in her fighting sequences and too bad she didn’t have more lines..at least there would have been some beauty on the screen.Save your money and just watch the trailer, and wait for it as a freebie, and even than you’ll be terribly disappointed unless you have a great sense of humor than maybe it will become a B movie cult classic – the second most expensive after Waterworld.. at least that had good action shots.

  • jacqueline-burnett
    jacqueline burnett

    Although I didn’t have any idea what to expect from this movie, I was greatly disappointed. It was like a Hallmark feature but worse. I think they had every chance to make this a very interesting and exciting story but spoiled it with a weak storyline and dull special effects. It seems as if they took a pretty good story and turned it in to something they could package and deliver fast, because of the big Rome hype after several bestselling books and TV-shows. It feels as something you’ve seen before and hoped to never see again. Pretty poor acting witch I think comes from pretty poor directing and script. All and all a waste of time

  • hazel-harrison-hughes
    hazel harrison hughes

    Generally speaking I dislike gore, superfluous sex (between the sheets) and am not especially fond of special effects. In my opinion it is a big plus, if a movie can do without these. At the other hand I enjoy sword and sable fighting – think of Erroll Flynn or the French musketeer movies. Finally the period of the late 5th century, with the fall of the Western Roman Empire, is highly fascinating.This movie is not an untold story. It is historically completely inaccurate, something like president Bush being in charge during the Vietnam war, with Franklin Delano Roosevelt being his political opponent. As examples I will only take two points. Odoaker took over power in 475, not in 460. Wulfila died around 383.Really, I like retelling or even reinventing legends. But I don’t like utter nonsense. Clearly 6 years was not enough yet to write a decent script. Even then, if the story was told in an interesting way, the directing was skillful, I might have forgiven. But no. In the beginning ancient Rome was used as a background. It was unrealistic like cheap epic movies from the 50-s. Ben Hur got it much better. And the story? The director hardly takes time to show the emotional struggle of a young boy being the mightiest person in the world. It better could have left out. Now it is just one of the many scenes, which remain hanging in the air.Odysseus-6 is completely right about the actors, so I will not repeat it. I am sorry, several old sword and sandal Italian B-movies are better than this one. Every director degrading the highly talented and skilled John Hannah to a wooden amateur like this, should be put on a black list. One has to pay full attention, then one can pick a few moments, where the actors get the chance to act – for instance the scene, where Odoaker decides to keep the boy alive. I can imagine a savage barbarian behaving like that. Problem of course is, that the real Odoaker already had spend several years in Rome and was not a barbarian anymore …. He was quite a popular ruler in Italy, after almost 75 years of incompetent Caesars.I will just wait for someone filming Mary Stewart’s Crystal Cave or a book of Rosemary Sutcliffe. These authors show, that historical drama can have roots in hard facts.Surinamese TV showed the movie at midnight, so alas I cannot ask my 12 years old son, if he was entertained. I was hardly.

  • lawrence-simpson
    lawrence simpson

    Because it’ll feel like at least ten hours. Wow, I read the reviews before seeing this movie/ thing. People hated it. People liked it. I decided those who hated it were bitter, angry people who should lighten up and enjoy life. To those people, I apologize for thinking that. You were right. This movie seems to crawl from place to place without vision or energy. It’s an epic stitched together with dull talks from actors who will take their paycheck and hope they can bounce back after this. It does feel small budget. It also feels like the editor was told to put this together so families could watch it and then just decided not to try anymore. So not only does it drag, but the fight scenes are more like pushing and shoving scenes. But there was a technique employed that was clever. In it, we see someone throw something (an axe for example), we cut to another actor’s reaction (“That’s bad. I’m awake, right?”), then see the weapon lodged in a person’s body. I think they did this three times, a great example of how well this was conceived.If you don’t understand what makes some movies bad and others good, check this out. It really will help you appreciate the good stuff.

  • katherine-collins
    katherine collins

    Folks, in the same way as the previous poster, I disagree strongly with all the negative posts.The most important that needs to be made when you’re watching this movie, as in many such movies, is that it didn’t start off as a movie script – it’s based on a book. That means that all your usual movie expectations are left hanging, but with good reason!Simply because the movie isn’t chock full of special effects, unnecessary sex and callous bloodshed doesn’t make it a bad movie by any means – and if you’d like to say that it does, you need have a good think about what you’re looking for in a movie!

  • daniel-boyd-md
    daniel boyd md

    This movie didn’t feel like it should be on the big screen more like a miniseries. The plot goes nowhere, it is just so confusing, seems like a huge rip off on King Arthur.I really like historical movies but if your going to make one (Historical Movie) then the script writers should have done some research. The entire lookand feel of this movie comes off more like a fantasy adventure the Romans don’t look, act or even dress like Romans nor are they even armed liked Romans. The main character carries a long sword rather than the short sword favored by roman legionnaires. The list goes on and on it is ridiculous.I waited in impatient anticipation for this movie to say i was extremely disappointed would be an understatement. The fight scenes were dull the acting more so, as for colin firth as an action hero well seriously you gotta be kidding me.6 years to write this movie hahahaha thats the funniest thing i have heard in a while, they should have just googled the historical facts and the story would have been much more accurate, fun and bearable to watch.The potential of this movie was huge and it was all wasted, terrible casting, horrid script, music (atrocious), acting (dull) and poor camera work all add up to a terrible movie.To be honest my recommendation is to wait for this to get to free to air television.After reading a few posts i hvae decided to add more to this post, the entertainment value has nothing to do with special effects and gore, it comes down to the actors making the characters believable and drawing the viewer into the story. It has nothing to do with Gore (I watch horror movies for that), but if your going to have fight scenes and battles do them right. As for objectives well a movies main objective is in the main “to entertain”, my son was as confused as I was with the story he walked off halfway through and I was 5mins behind him. As a movie I say once again this movie fails on all levels, it is neither entertaining, educational or emotionally engaging, seemed more like a pathetic effort by all involved with the making of this film.

  • martyn-davis
    martyn davis

    I watched The Last Legion with some hope, but not that much and was still disappointed. What starts as a huge CGI filled epic, goes into a weak,empty story with not the best acting,action and a terrible story.The acting talents and chances of a good film as so badly wasted and in parts the film seems to not know what it wants to be.Action film, Epic historic tale, kids adventure and even comic farce, which was a huge mistake.Its empty and totally soulless.The ending is so bad, so very very bad that Myself and a friend sat stunned.lolIts such a great shame that the main star of ROME the TV series was anywhere near this film.Rome it totally superior in every way. If you want a well written,acted and totally realistic version of Rome, see ROME don’t waste your time on this.

  • pani-angelika-pietryga
    pani angelika pietryga

    The movie starts with an interesting theme, but quickly turns into one cliché after another.I liked how they linked the Arthurian legend to the line of Caesar. How ever the Standard group setting in Sword and Sorceror movies soon kicked in. Complete with the girl pretending to be a man, the Black guy(unexplained) in the middle of a foreign country, the battle weary soldier, the wise-old man and the child they must all protect. The acting by the Goths was laughable as well as the main villain. It’s like they took a movie written for children and tried to add violence at the last minute. I say it was a waste of time and a disappointment

  • kaique-costa
    kaique costa

    Somehow I missed the trailers and promotion of this film. Normally I see most movies like this right away, but I didn’t get to see this one until just yesterday.If you are going in looking for a historically accurate film then you are waisting your time with ANY Hollywood movie. But this one doesn’t have anything that ruined my suspension of belief at all. One of my biggest pet peeves is when a movie misses something obvious (Like Romans using stirrups on their horses, yes I am looking at you Gladiator!) but this movie didn’t have one of those.The fighting styles that they gave the characters, while flashed up for filming, were believable for the cultures that they came from (A Roman Cataract using Japanese sword techniques! Come on King Arthur!) and while I wouldn’t rank the fight scenes anywhere near anything done by Wu Ping, they again don’t take away from the story.Now the story its self is where I have some problems. They seemed to rush it most of the way. I almost wish that they had made it a mini-series on TV just so they could have told the whole thing. I think that there is some missing story that I would like to hear, like the origins of the villain and where he got his scars and what not.Anyway, just don’t go into it with any expectations and I think that you will enjoy yourself for an hour and a half.

  • april-wilcox
    april wilcox

    The “original” theme running throughout this movie is a fairly direct copy of Manon Lescaut by Puccini. Unusual to hear something so blatantly used without attribution.I’m sort of torn about things like this, I know it’s just entertainment, as the Arthurian legends certainly were, and have some value just as that. However it’s a shame to see Roman history, which is rich enough on its own two feet, now being turned into this sort of thing also, with magic swords and secret powers and so on. The history is so strong and interesting without adding that.

  • stacey-romero
    stacey romero

    Well, i just read the previous comment and i can’t say I’m quite happy with it 🙁 I mean, the movie was not that bad at all!! Everything was in the right place: the music, actors, the plot and all… No, really… I just don’t get why he said (I mean that guy) the actors were bad. They were just brilliant! Well, maybe to watch this movie u gotta have a sense of humor because many scenes in it were quite funny. Ben Kingsley, Colin Firth and Thomas Sangster were really good it seemed to me. Well Aishwarya Rai could of acted better probably… But anyways I reckon there are so many really bad movies and I don’t think this one is just watch-it-once-and-then-forget-it film! Besides, the whole thing was real: I mean the castle, all the decorations, they shot it on location, and if you see throngs of people running on the battlefield you know this is all real! I guess u gotta appreciate it because they could of made in on computers… I mean, it’s such a rare thing nowadays… Speaking about the plot… Yeah, maybe it’s a bit naive and even silly (remember this when you watch the final scene) but overall it was quite dynamic and everything. Finally it was Dino De Laurentis production, they’ve been writing the script for 6(!) years so do you really think they didn’t notice it was crap or something? Well maybe it’s not that great compared to ‘300’ but it’s good enough anyway My conclusion is: you gotta watch the movie especially if you like Colin Firth, Ben Kingsley or Thomas Sangster or if you like adventures. And it seemed to me it’s a kind of a teen movie rather than a serous one (i suppose it’s for people of 12-25). And one more thing to say: though it’s a historic movie (and i really hated history at school!!!) somehow i liked it and I’ve seen enough movies to tell a good one. Enjoy!

  • thomas-sanchez
    thomas sanchez

    I just got done watching this movie. And I must say, if you really want to see this movie, save yourself an hour and a half, and just watch the trailer. The trailer is really as good as this movie gets. I’m sorry, I had high hopes for this movie too. I’m a big fan of medieval and roman films, but this one really just falls short on everything. I would say thats its worthy of being a sci-fi channel original movie, but I don’t don’t want to insult the sci-fi channel (Seriously, they have tons of aliens and monster, don’t tick them off. You will get eaten.)This movie falls short on pretty much every account. Casting was awful. I’m a fan of Sangster, he was great in Love Actually, but he’s not yet strong enough to be a leading man. Firth, with his quirky charm, should stick to romantic comedy. He’s much better at fumbling through a confession of love than being an epic hero. The plot, dialog, acting and directing were all horrible. I kept sitting there thinking how it could have been done better, only to come to the realization the best thing to do would be to throw out everything and start over from the plot outline. The sets cheap and generic. They would have done better dusting off set pieces from Ben Hur(1959). Costumes were pulled from every generic Barbarian/Roman stock wardrobe or Halloween store. Perhaps one of the most distracting things was the music. I think the composer is sleeping with one or more of his trumpet players because thats all we heard. Trumpets playing as they hide, Trumpets sounding during the battle, Trumpets here, Trumpets there. Couldn’t get enough of them.At best this movie is a rental to watch at home. When you’re alone. In a windowless room. Don’t invite your friends over, they will make fun of you. I’m sorry if this sounds cruel, but, like the parent of a child failing kindergarten, I’m simply trying to express my disappointment for a film that could have been so much better. Its just sad.

  • fedotov-fortunat-iosipovich
    fedotov fortunat iosipovich

    There are many adaptations and versions to the tale of King Arthur and his Knights of the Round Table, with Merlin the sorcerer, and of the magical sword Excalibur, some versions which set it into stone, while others, handed out by a lady in the water. The Last Legion is essentially touting a story about the beginnings of Excalibur and how it took to the former. However, it took a long route to tell this story, going all the way back to 400-something AD, a time where Rome is in turmoil.Actually Rome is in turmoil ever since Julius Caesar got killed by friends, Romans, countrymen. In a time where generals scheme to usurp the throne and politicians of the Senate are corrupt as hell, it’s little wonder why one of the best and most loyal generals Aurelius (Colin Firth) gets recalled to protect the rear of the new boy-king-god-Caesar Romulus Augustus, played by Thomas Sangster (the kid in Nanny McPhee and Tristan and Isolde). Naturally the enemies spring a surprise attack, and our merry men have to flee Rome, and journey to Britain to regroup with the 9th Legion (henceforth also known as the Last Legion), bringing in tow a seer Ambrosinus (Ben Kingsley), and a lady warrior in Mira (Aishwarya Rai).Like most medieval stories with elements of magic or involving the higher powers from Mount Olympus, The Last Legion does away with the sorcery portion, like what Troy and King Arthur had done, opting instead to focus more on reality, and what possibly could have been done without divine intervention, or fantastical assistance. Thus this makes Kingsley’s role a little redundant, and relegates him into a fortune teller rather than an all powerful wizard, despite his garb looking a lot like Gandalf’s. While it could have gotten away with its material given 10 years back, unfortunately the stakes in the genre have been raised, and everyone’s expecting a spectacle of huge armies battling in hand to hand combat, with its combatants having some form of fancy killing moves. The Last Legion pales in terms of providing that level of detail and spectacle, and chose instead to provide unsophisticated battle scenes, or swordplay that is a tad too uninspiring. Most of the fanciful moves were reserved for Aishwarya, but even that too began to become repetitive. Not even her booby trapped enhanced short sword offered anything we’re never seen before.With characters you don’t really care about, what made it a little unbearable amongst the good guys, was the totally hokey, unbelievable romance between Rai and Firth’s characters. It doesn’t mean that having characters from the opposite sex means they find each other irresistible and want to get into each other’s pants. There is absolutely zero chemistry and zero buildup. One minute they’re allies, the next they’re admiring each other’s swordplay, and then, the bed beckons. And if the villains justify what kind of heroes we get, then it’s a no brainer that they are bland and devoid of any interesting notion. World domination seems to be their only objective, and both the Romans and the British (using the term loosely here) villains are merely caricatures. As I said, while The Last Legion might have worked if it’s released 10 years ago, this movie can’t justify it being made now. It’s suitable at most for that DVD rental for a lazy afternoon, but nothing more, and only if you’re in dire need of some, or any, form of entertainment.

  • luna-lopes
    luna lopes

    This is a nice production with an average budget, great sets and thundering battles about the fall of the Roman Empire. Although the complete Roman Empire decline and fall took centuries, by the end of fifth century it was simply a battleground for warring rival Caesars and Barbarians chiefs. The Germans gather, take over and pull down the Roman gates. The Goths commanded by Odoacer(Peter Mullan), king of Herulos, invade Rome(476 AD), assesinated Orestes(Iain Glen), father of emperor Romulus Augustulos (Thomas Sangster). The young Caesar is sent to Capri along with his preceptor Ambrosinus(Ben Kingsley). A motley group of soldiers led by loyal Aurelianus (Colin Firth) are assigned by senator Nestor (John Hannah) to free him. They’re accompanied by a beautiful Indian warrior named Mira (Aishwarya Rai). Without another alternative, they travel to Britannia to meet the last legion, located near the Wall of Adriano; but they’re pursued by relentless barbarians (Kevin McKidd, James Cosmo). Although the Romans had partially withdrawn from Britain and its politics essentially dissolved into chaos. Later on, it’s thought that a minor war lord, probably named Artos, did his best to maintain civilization and Christianity in the west of England.This is a larger-than-life production with good direction, interesting scripting, and enthusiastic performances place this far above the usual empty-headed historical spectacle. Several action scenes are outstanding with spectacular battle images and thrilling fights. Unfortunately, on small house screens much of the splendor will be lost. You will be left with the wooden Colin Firth and the gorgeous Aishwarya Rai in a love story that was underdeveloped due tho the film’s emphasis on spectacle. The picture packs colorful cinematography by Pontecorvo and evocative musical score by Patrick Doyle. The flick is professionally directed by Doug Lefler, who previously made ¨Dragonheart , a new beginning ¨. Rating : Good, it’s a nice extravaganza well set in ancient Rome, done in great scale and praised for its action sequences.

  • inkeri-koivisto
    inkeri koivisto

    There was a lot of potential in this story about the fall of the Roman Empire and how the last Roman Emperor became Pendragon, father of King Arthur.Unfortunately the entire thing is reduced to a very poor TV movie, and although the weak screenplay plays its part, this film is really case study for anybody who wants to know how abysmal directing, excruciatingly poor cinematography, bafflingly bad editing and over used scoring can take a cast that for the most part is award-winning, (with the exception of the dreadful man playing the villain) and make them look worse than community theater.It is clear from the outset that the director has not got the first clue what he is doing. The actors have been given very little guidance. They deliver their lines, but are given absolutely no room to emote. Any moments where these world class actors would be looking thoughtful, or considering what they’re saying with gravity is all edited out of the film, and the interchanges in dialogue are spliced so close together, there is never a moment where scenes are alllowed to breathe. It’s all edited and directed at schlock B grade television pace. Add to this the fact that the cinematographer is obsessed with mid-shots and 2 shots and a composer who doesn’t know when to shut his orchestra up, and you something that is barely movie of the week material.

  • monica-washington
    monica washington

    As others have said, I don’t know why people are giving it bad reviews… The movie was good, entertaining and very family orientated( No Gore/blood – no nudity ). Granted, its no Troy, 300 or King Arthur, so if your looking for some epic battle with plenty of digital effects then this isn’t for you. Having said that there were plenty of fight scenes just no massacre. Its not a movie you will buy but for a one off rental its good enough to entertain the family for the night, so grab a popcorn, sit down, put ya feet up and relax while you watch another tale unfold!The kids will love it!

  • jamie-petty
    jamie petty

    After reading through the comments, I was floored at how many people totally missed the point of the film. This is a tale of legend, and it tells it quite well.For those who commented on the historical inaccuracies of costumes, armor etc., they are completely wrong, the costumes are accurate to the late period, (ask a recreator, we know). And yes, the long sword was in use by the Roman Army for a very long time. Late Imperial cavalry-length Roman blades were around 26 to 27 inches in length as opposed to the standard legionary 22 inch Gladius.Anyway, as I said in the beginning this is a film about a legend. Do you think “Gladiator” was a true story? Yet it swept the Oscars. It is what it is, and after two viewings, I still have found no fault in the story, the acting or the direction. Historical fact and cinematic storytelling are to a certain degree mutually exclusive. No matter how hard you try to stick to facts when creating historical fiction in any medium, be it books or film, you will inevitably come across the necessity of a compromise between what can be established as “fact” (and even there period sources of the time are questionable) and what suits the story. In other words, you can be accurate to a fault, so to say, and have a story that reads – or visualizes – like a lead balloon, or you can alter the so-called “facts” to suit your purpose and create much more – and far more visually compelling – drama.I guess some people just need to find fault to make themselves feel superior.(Possible Spoilers) As for the story line… The concept of a Roman link to the Arthurian legends is not a new one. Mary Stewart’s “The Crystal Cave” was the first book that introduced me to the concept, and since I’m a Western Civilization teacher, I’m fascinated by the histories and legends that have risen from what is known as the “Dark Ages” of Europe.All and all, “The Last Legion” is a great film. I recommend it to any SCAdian, recreator, Pagan, Wiccan or Dark Ages history freak.P.S. It was certainly better than “King Arthur” starring Clive Owen.

  • bhnddaarii-ysh
    bhnddaarii ysh

    I can understand why some people may be disappointed watching this movie, especially if they were expecting a CGI laden gore-fest. If you do not expect this then you should not be too disappointed.I think the negative comments go too far. It never pretended to be anything other than an action/adventure movie from the beginning (so why compare it to hardcore historical stuff), it was funny, mixed up a few legends, and had a very simple but nevertheless entertaining story.This light hearted and enjoyable movie provides well-paced entertainment that would be suitable for a teenage audience (perhaps 10+) but can also be enjoyed by adults.There is no gore, sex, or swearing, and whilst the fine cast will not win any Oscars for their performance, they did a fine job in fulfilling their roles, given the movies objectives.This movie does what it says on the tin and does it well. A fine example of how a movie can be enjoyable without every scene being covered in blood (although I enjoy those movies too).

  • rita-castro
    rita castro

    Reading the back cover of the DVD and seeing that Colin Firth and Ben Kingsley are given top billing, I expected an intelligent King Arthur story. Well, it really wasn’t either, although I did find it entertaining. I must not have read the description carefully enough. No matter; overall, it was fun but just a little too silly. I’m beginning to wonder about the discernment of some of these actors, how they can play such intelligent roles for a film or two and then revert to something like this.Anyway, the story is really a Roman empire one, not a King Arthur story. We only see the tie-in to the later in the last few minutes of the film, in the epilogue. This action story is all about the last Caesar, a small boy, and the last legion that fought as Rome had now been taken over by the Goths. The Roman Empire had come to an end.Mixed in with that tale was the famous “excalibur” sword. We see the origins of that and how it eventually got into the hands of King Arthur. But, once again, that is only explained in the final minutes. However, the sword is used by the good Roman general who protects the last Caesar from the Goths, who want him imprisoned for life, or killed.What made the story interesting, at least for me, was the chase-scene type atmosphere of a small band of heroes protecting a little boy, fleeing the bloodthirsty Goths until they could mount some sort of counter-attack in the north in Brittania. That, and the pretty computer-generated scenery and action stunts, kept it interesting. However, don’t look for credibility in those action scenes and expect the typical political-correctness of today (i.e. where a woman beats up hundreds of men and the good guys of all colors prevail despite ridiculous odds).Some parts of this will leave you shaking your head in disbelief. You will feel you’re watching a kids’ film at times. However, if you want an hour-and-a-half of decent escapist fare, and can put your brain on hold for that time, it fits the bill and will at least entertain you.