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
The only upside is the ludicrous technology used by the Goths to destroy the gates at the beginning