Attila (2001) User Reviews

History more interesting

[arabianights-books · 7/10 · 8 May 2006]

Presumably the writer of this mini-series had to read the history of Attila and Aetius before he could change it into the pap presented. You would think it would have been easier to leave as written, and certainly more interesting.

Just to give one example. After the battle and the death of the Roman ally King Theodoric, this movie has Theordoric's son insisting of leaving immediately to fight his brothers for the throne, and thus depriving the Roman general Aetius of the strength to decisively destroy Attila. Thus a mildly interesting and fairly predictable plot as far as it goes. The historical reality is that Aetius advised the son to leave to take care of his brothers as he was insisting on revenging his father against Attila. Aetius preferred not to destroy the Huns as his and Rome's whole strategy at that time had been to play groups such as the Huns off against other barbarian tribes that had entered or threatened the Empire. To my mind a more interesting development.

Of course it might have taken slightly more effort to get this idea across to viewers but the effort would have been a far more memorial series which the poor sets and acting could never achieve. While I can understand budget limitations that make good sets and hordes of extras difficult I cannot understand the almost perverse need to change history even when the original is much more interesting.

An amusing watch just the same but disappointing that for the cost of another writer it could not have been so much better.

Good introduction to history

[labucher · 8/10 · 26 January 2005]

While this movie may not have been historically accurate, for me it gave me an introduction to a character I have always found fascinating. And what else is the internet good for but looking up a history to find out the facts that the movie was based on.

Because it was a made-for-TV film, and USA at best, you could expect a watered-down version of the main character. I was impressed with all the acting in this movie. Surprised to find Tim Curry but happy to see Powers Boothe, who I respect as an powerful actor. He didn't really have the chance to live up to his potential in this film.

I am taking offense to some of the comments made about Gerard Butler. Yes he is a hunk. But what first drew me to him was his ACTING PRESENCE in other films like Reign of Fire and Timeline. Atilla may not be the springboard for greatness but I believe his talents will soon be showcased in more powerful films.

I viewed Atilla because I wanted to see more of Gerard Butler THE ACTOR and I was not disappointed. I also got to learn more about an historical figure who always intrigued me. Do not peg me as a star struck, fanatical female. I learned long ago that just because someone has looks does not necessarily mean they have talent. Gerard Butler belongs in a class with Jude Law and Russell Crowe.

I would recommend this film for the entertainment value it is and if you want to learn more about Atilla, go to the internet historical sites and get your fill.

"The Romans have done great things but their time is past. What they have done, we can do. We should rule the world!" - Attila

[Cat-Squire · 8/10 · 6 February 2005]

After witnessing the destruction of his village and the death of his father, Attila successfully escapes with his life and is picked up by his uncle, who is king of a group of Huns. Attila grows up to be a strong warrior who has his mind set on invading and, consequently, taking over Rome. The deceitful Roman General Flavius Aetius goes to Attila's village to seek help from the Huns and suggests to Attila's uncle that Attila is to be taken to Rome with Aetius when the battle is over. Aetius is impressed with Attila and takes him under his wing. But when Bleda, Attila's brother, murders their uncle, Attila returns to his village and fights his brother for the throne, and then sets his sights on Rome.

This movie was really enjoyable, although some of the acting was rather stilted. The top actors were Powers Boothe as Flavius Aetius, the excellent Scotsman Gerard Butler in the role of Attila the Hun and, although not having very much to do in the film, only in it for 2 scenes, was Tim Curry who is, as always, terrific and amusing.

This is not a film full of gore, but it survives without it. The action scenes are good and liven the film up a bit but it does not have an excess of gore like other historical battle films.

Thoroughly enjoyable and highly recommended. 8/10 from me! As always, your faithful Scotsman, Cat §quire

Not historical, mildly entertaining

[macman-8 · 4 June 2001]

WILDLY historically inaccurate, with some dialogue that will no doubt bring chuckles, this little mini-series still manages to be entertaining. Whether that is due to the acting and action or the goofs made by the producers remains to the individual viewer. What's wrong with this little movie? Let's start with the Huns and their king, Attila. The Huns were a Turko-Mongol race, short, swarthy, and usually with a somewhat bowlegged stance that came from fighting, riding, eating, and even sleeping on horseback. Attila himself was described by many contemporary historical sources as short, squat, a very thin wisp of a beard on his chin, and a flat nose. He was also middle-aged at the time of his great conquests. This army and king as represented in the movie are all basically Caucasians. People, there ARE Turkish/Asiatic actors and extras out there for hire .... and all the women swooning over Gerard Butler in these comments need to balance this with historical fact. The comment that only a "good looking" person could have united/led so many is very amusing - apparently no one has taken a close look at Hitler, Mussolinni, Stalin, or Winston Churchill for that matter. Also, the costumes of these Huns look like Avars, not Hunnish culture. Let's take a look at the Romans - the Empire of the fifth century was VERY different from the empire of the great caesars ... yet the uniforms and civilian dress of the Rome shown here looks no later than the time of Septimius Severus. Sorry, but the horse-hair helmets and leather skirts of the military tribunes were long past - the Romans of this time were wearing breaches and what was left of the legions was highly barbarized and calvary-emphasized. The togas of the civilians had become much more coarse and simple by that time, also. The Empire was basically Christianized by then, too - yet this miniseries depicts paganism as rampant. Another problem was that there just weren't enough extras to make the battles scenes believable. The Huns formed "hordes" - and these were not patrol-sized groups of a hundred horseman riding around - historians show these armies numbered nominally around 60,000. And the main battle - somewhere near modern Chalons or Troyes - the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains - had the combatants numbering somewhere between 300,000 to half a million. Showing this battle to be between a couple of hundred men was anticlimatic in the extreme. Good camerawork could have avoided this ... see BRAVEHEART, FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE, SPARTACUS, or CLEOPATRA. Although many may have felt some of the violence was too much in this film, the reality was FAR worse - Attila was mild to those who submitted, but the mass slaughter the Huns committed in battle was rivaled in pre-20th century only by the Mongols of Genghiz Khan. Some cities in Italy were so destroyed that the next generation couldn't accurately find where they existed. Having said all this, I liked the film as a piece of entertainment and taking certain ludicrous errors into consideration, recommend it as a nice diversion. The DVD is nicely authored in 1:77:1 and has some decent extras.

Good but definitely TV flavour

[cassandr-3 · 7/10 · 17 February 2005]

In a nutshell, I really liked this miniseries; Gerry Butler kicks serious ass in every way which I'll get into later, but first I have to tear apart the bits that bugged me or made me die laughing from corniness.

Acting:

Okay, is some of the acting in this movie mind-numbingly cheesy and bad or what??? I almost had to skip right past all the scenes where it's just Aetius and the emperor, even if it meant missing the exposition.

Powers Boothe: his acting improved somewhat when he shared scenes with Gerry - they had a really good on-screen rapport - but otherwise, - nuh-uh! The way he drops the poisoned wine goblet, it's so unnatural and stiff looking, I snert every time I see it!

Simmone Jade McKinnon: I appreciate that doing accents is difficult - but, ADR anyone?

Costumes:

• N'Kara's peasant girl outfit when we first see her - every other woman in the village is wearing layers of furs and burlap and sh*t, yet our girl is wearing the swimsuit issue "Hun summer gown", revealing most or all of her thighs and cleavage. And don't get me started on that 80's wave hair with the roots showing.

• how much money did they spend on this? And they couldn't afford real silk velvet for Alice Krige? It's so obviously polyester stretch velvet. Which, um, wasn't invented yet in 400 A.D. (Well, at least they said A.D. and not C.E.).

• Honoria's sexy blue bath outfit - yeah, it's nice, it looks hot, but uhhh, corsets weren't invented yet either!

• That Ismay/Titanic guy's Victorian neckerchief under the Roman robes - what the ...?

Scenes:

• the "N-Kara almost gets killed but Attila spares the hottie" scene - this makes me laugh so hard every time.

HUN DUDE: "But her sword was the bloodiest..."

ATTILA: "And she's the sexiest piece of a$$ this stinking village has ever seen. Don't you know every other woman in the village is wearing layers of furs and burlap and sh*t? So what's your POINT!!!! Shut UP!!!! Don't you know I'm still a virgin? Geez!"

• the "other guy dies drinking the poisoned cup meant for Aetius and Attila" scene - watch this one over a few times. The goofy double take the guy does when he sees Aetius after having just had a sip - cracks me up so badly. This is right before the "Aetius flings the poisoned cup away from him dramatically having just escaped death" moment (see above Powers Boothe).

Okay, now for the good stuff.

Gerard Butler - I like the look - I didn't think I would, as I saw his Dracula audition first with this look and thought it was way out there, but it's perfect for this movie.

I love that he did most/all of his stunts.

As always with Gerry, tons of range of emotions and believable reality to his performance. The guy was obviously born to be an actor - he's such a pro with only his own experience to draw on.

Of course the beefcake shots rock my socks off no end, but I won't bore you with the details, you know 'em already. If I had to pick a favourite, it would be the scene of him practising archery on horseback shirtless. Yum.

I also really liked Pauline Lynch. The look she gives him after teasing him about the red-haired woman is so poignant. I feel like her. 'Here's this amazing guy that will never notice me, the crazy toadstool'.

I really liked Steven Berkoff too - nice subtlety to his acting - lots conveyed with just a look or a nod.

It doesn't bother me that this is totally historically inaccurate (except for the costumes) - it's a fun ride. I like all the horseback riding and sword-waving, and I thought they did an excellent job filming the horseback duel between Attila and Bleda. The soundtrack has some nice touches too.

Definitely worth buying the DVD!

Epic portrayal about Attila , including court intrigue , romances , treason and impressive battles

[ma-cortes · 7/10 · 30 July 2017]

Attila's feats in the Western and Eastern Roman Empires with a lot of historical incorrectness . This Attila" (2001) miniseries by Dick Lowry boasts a good cast , such as Gerard Butler as Attila the Hun , Powers Boothe as Aetius , Simmone Mackinnon as Ildico and Red Rogers as Valentinian . It deals with Attile from when in childhood he saw how his his parents were killed , as well as his kingdom , until death , and is set during the waning days of Roman Empire , as the barbarian Huns are making their way toward Europe . A valiant warrior named Attila (Gerard Butler) violently assumes Hun leadership confronting his brother Bleda (Tommy Flanagan) . But this is not enough for him , Attila seeks to create an empire and he will stop at nothing to accomplish it . In an attempt to quell a Hun invasion , ambitious Roman General Flavius Aetius (Powers Boothe) attempts to form an alliance with the eastern Roman emperor Theodosius (Tim Curry) and Visigoth King Theodoric (Liam Cunningham) scheming against their mutual enemy . While Attile attempts to march against Rome but this plan backfires , and it soon becomes clear that a violent confrontation between all three armies awaits . Against the ravaging hordes of Attila stood a warrior's might and a people's faith! . Against his ruthless pagan lusts , the power of a woman's love!

This is a spectacular TV series full of historic inaccuracy and being well starred Gerard Butler as Attila . It results to be an epic adventure yarn set in 5th-Century about the chieftain Attila the Hun who joins the warring clans under his banner , as he was a leader of the Hunnic Empire , a tribal confederation consisting of Huns , Ostrogoths , and Alans among others , on the territory of Central and Eastern Europe , while Roman Empire is bristling under the leadership of cunning General Aetius and of the incompetent Caesar Valentinian . This spectacular movie contains action , breathtaking battles , thrills , romance , hokey historical events and the crowed scenes of the Huns are impressively made . Big production design , lavishly produced , brilliant photography and rousing soundtrack as you'd expect from a big-budgeted TV movie at the time . There takes place a fictitious battle of wits and wills between Attila/Gerard Butler and Aetius/Powers Boothe . Gerard Butler dominates with his bravery this historical adventure , while Valentiniano , being grumpily performed by an overacting Reg Rogers . Great support cast provide some solid secondary interpretations such as : Alice Krige , Liam Cunningham , Kirsty Mitchell , Jonathan Hyde , Steven Berkoff , Tommy Flanagan and Andrew Pleavin as Orestes . Colorful and glimmer cinematography by Steven Fierberg . Evocative as well as thrilling musical score by Nick Glennie-Smith . The motion picture was professionally directed by TV series expert , Dick Lowry, though it has some flaws and historical mistakes .

The picture is partially based on historical events about Attila , Marciano , Valentiniano , Pulcheria and emperor Teodosio . During his reign , Attila was one of the most feared enemies of the Western and Eastern Roman Empires . He crossed the Danube twice and plundered the Balkans, but was unable to take Constantinople . His unsuccessful campaign in Persia was followed in 441 by an invasion of the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire , the success of which emboldened Attila to invade the West. He also attempted to conquer Roman Gaul (modern France) , crossing the Rhine in 451 and marching as far as Orleans before being defeated at the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains . He subsequently invaded Italy , devastating the northern provinces , but was unable to take Rome . As Attila marches across Empire to Rome and things look bleak for the weakened imperial forces . Emperor Valentinian III sent three envoys , the high civilian officers Gennadius Avienus and Trigetius , as well as the Bishop of Rome Leo I , who met Attila at Mincio in the vicinity of Mantua and as the conqueror had an awe of the power of the Christians' God , he obtained from him the promise that he would withdraw from Italy and negotiate peace with the Emperor . Finally , Aecio vanquished Attile in Chalons . He planned for further campaigns against the Romans but died in 453 . After Attila's death his close adviser Ardaric of the Gepids led a Germanic revolt against Hunnic rule, after which the Hunnic Empire quickly collapsed .

Other films dealing with this historical character are the followings : ¨Attila¨(1953) Pietro Francisci with Anthony Quinn , Sofia Loren and Henry Vidal as general Aecio . ¨Sign of the pagan¨(1954) by Douglas Sirk with Jack Palance , Jeff Chandler , Ludmilla Tchérina , Moroni Olsen . And ¨The Nibelungos , vengeance of Siegfried¨ (1967) by Harald Reinl with Herbert Lom as Attila .

Average epic and also historically inaccurate !!!

[elo-equipamentos · 7/10 · 26 May 2019]

Presented as a series this overlong epic fails to tell Attila's story, the early part is totally correct, when under King Rua he was raised and becomes a leader later, but as shown in the picture never went to Rome, he meets Falvius Aetius when he had a brief exile between the Huns, the agreement with Emperor Theodosius who has to pay a heavy tribute in gold to avoid Attila's attack at Constantinople, given enough time to rebuilding the City's walls, while Attila gathered all Huns tribes at his command and swept the Balkans and central Europe, then Rome make a deal with Theodoric to struggles against Attila at Orleans that appears on the picture, Theodoric dies on battle, and the German barbarians went back leaving Romans at Attila's hand, the movie is surrounded by mysticism over a lost sword that will prove that Attila was the chosen one, witchcraft were expose over such old legends, his death as appears on movie has two different versions, they chosen the most plausible, despite had a strong and valuable casting the production itself is of low quality, the buildings are quite fake, the battle weren't enough convincible, anyway an average production!!!

Resume:

First watch: 2009 / How many: 3 / Source: TV-DVD / Rating: 7

Entertaining

[russem31 · 7/10 · 6 March 2006]

For someone who is a history buff, especially of the period this movie, Attila, is trying to portray (roughly 430 AD to 455 AD), I was happy to finally see a Roman Empire movie specifically about this period. Most Roman Empire movies before were either of the Julius Caesar or Marcus Aurelius periods (i.e. Gladiator). That said, there are a lot of historical inaccuracies (due to budgetary constraints for example, they used August era Roman costumes), but I was willing to overlook that because of the filmmakers' attempt to try to represent the widening cultural differences between the divided Western and Eastern (Byzantine) Roman Empires (the empire divided in 395 AD) - a good example is showing the Western Emperor Valentinian III as portrayed as a Roman in Augustus era Imperial regalia whereas the Eastern Emperor Theodosius II is accurately portrayed in more Oriental Persian influenced garb. Ironically, the actor that steals the show is not the title character Atilla but Powers Boothe, Flavius Aetius, also known by his nickname, the last Roman. Again, while there are many inaccuracies, this movie is entertaining for showing a period of Roman history (during its decline) that rarely is explored. A 7 out of 10.

A Romanced Story of Attila the Hun in a Great Epic

[claudio_carvalho · 9/10 · 11 August 2003]

"Attila" is a romanced story of Attila the Hun (Gerard Butler), since his childhood, when he lost his parents until his death. The screenplay shows his respect to the great Roman strategist Flavius Aetius (Powers Boothe, with his usual face of 'bad guy'), his loves, the gossips, intrigues and betrayals in Rome, all of these evolved by magic and mysticism. Attila certainly was one of the most evil man along the story, but the screenplay shows him as a great leader, strategist and lover. If you decide to forget the story and attain to the plot itself, you will see and enjoy a great epic movie. The underrated Gerard Butler has another magnificent performance. My vote is nine.

Title (Brazil): "Atila, o Huno" ("Attila, the Hun")

One of the greatest heroes of our civilization

[Lady_Targaryen · 7/10 · 24 March 2006]

''Attila'' is one of the epic movies I like the most. I only don't give a higher vote for this movie, because I found that the story, after N'Kara's death, became quite boring and without the same climax as before. Not to mention that Ildico being identical to N'Kara, and poisoning Atilla doesn't help to make the story excellent for me. Atilla never was a king as well.

I like to see,anyway, Gerard Butler in one of his best roles, and I need to say that I never saw him so handsome in all my life! The long wavy black hair and the skin tanned really suited him well!

The story of this movie is basically concentrated in Atilla's life, showing some important things that were happening in Roman Empire at the same time Atilla was becoming one of the best Hun's warriors. We have inaccuracies and factual errors, but even so, a good epic is always welcome!

This is just bad

[vikcy · 1/10 · 29 February 2004]

Ive read some of the comments above, almost everything is said, but being a Hungarian - one of the few nations who keep Atilla in high respect - a nation descendant of the Huns, this period of our history always interested me. First the spelling. I dont have a problem with Attila, thats how the world uses it, he was Atilla or Etele among the Hungarians, Etli for Germans...does not matter, it derives from the Turk-Hungarian word ata-father. What is the main problem in this film is the portrayal of the Huns. Just to point out the most annoying and untrue stuff. Huns attacking on foot ? Huns charging mindlessly with swords ? Cmon guys, we researched their exact warfare, strategy and tactics by now, and this is NOT that

May not be accurate but still good!

[paristeri · 10/10 · 28 March 2005]

Admittedly, this movie may not be accurate, however it did encourage me to look up the actual history..Meanwhile, it was my first introduction to the actor Gerry Butler, for which I am very thankful..I look forward to watching other movies he makes..This movie as well as the subsequent ones, ie Phantom of the Opera, Timeline, Dear Frankie, even Dracula 2000, I think show how much this guy puts into his roles.. I feel he shows real depth to whatever character he portrays- heh- he made me sympathetic to Attila the Hun! Actually I read somewhere that they still celebrate Attila's Birthday in Hungary.. If one puts the story in a historical perspective I believe one could make an argument that our History might have been different if he had prevailed.. The Roman Catholic influence was not all roses..

Best Gerard Butler Movie

[shamza007 · 7/10 · 3 November 2018]

As expressed clearly in the headline, this is my favorite Gerard Butler. Prior to this movie i disliked him as i hated his role and disliked the movie 300. However, this movie completely changed my perception of him and became a big fan of him instantly. His acting and his role as the lead character of this movie is superb. This series is a hidden gem. Also i loved the role of Powers Boothe in this movie.

Hollywood, once again, steps into their own tangled web...

[EvilTommy · 4/10 · 6 April 2003]

There was just too much left out or made up on this one. The acting was fairly descent given the stunted script, but history went right out the window. Example: When the King died, Attila allowed his brother to rule for 13 years, before he came to power. You need drama, agreed, tension, absolutely, but there's an old adage that goes, 'Truth is stranger than fiction.' It seems they couldn't decide how much of a hero or villain to portray the main character as in the show. I never really cared about Attila and his personal problems but rather was more interested in the doings of the diabolical Roman. They should have called it 'Flavius' since he had all the good lines and was portrayed by an aggressive Powers Boothe. He took over every scene. I liked Reg Rogers as the quirky Emperor Valentinian as well. Typically, the battle scenes depicting the Roman army devolved into a massive one on one brawl, rather than the disciplined tactics that gave Rome their empire. I was not pleased at the end of the four hours - they killed you with commercials - and regretted the time wasted.

Why does Hollywood rewrite history, when the truth is more interesting?

[hughdwilson · 22 April 2006]

The factual errors in this movie are quite simply astounding. It's shameful. Shame shame shame. Great acting at times, especially from Boothe, but the screenplay is appalling.

1. Attila and the Huns were Turkic, not Caucasian. Contemporaries descriptions of him painted him as a Mongol. Flat nose etc. Genghis Khan traced his lineage to the Huns.

2. He and Flavius Aetius were both hostage exchanges as children. Attila spent time as a child in Rome, the same time Flavius was with the Huns. That could have made for an interesting film.

3. Attila jointly ruled with his older brother (who I believe was from the same father? Ruga was both mens uncle) for a fair while, building the empire together, before he allegedly killed him and ruled solo.

4. Aetius and Attila became friends when Aetius spent a brief exile with the Huns. Why leave that out?

5. this is what wikipedia says about Honoria's situation and the dowry etc:

"However Valentinian's sister Honoria, in order to escape her forced betrothal to a senator, had sent the Hunnish king a plea for help—and her ring—in the spring of 450. Though Honoria may not have intended a proposal of marriage, Attila chose to interpret her message as such; he accepted, asking for half of the western Empire as dowry. When Valentinian discovered the plan, only the influence of his mother Galla Placidia convinced him to exile, rather than kill, Honoria; he also wrote to Attila strenuously denying the legitimacy of the supposed marriage proposal. Attila, not convinced, sent an embassy to Ravenna to proclaim that Honoria was innocent, that the proposal had been legitimate, and that he would come to claim what was rightfully his."

more truth is found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attila_the_Hun

I wish Hollywood would learn that truth is more interesting than finding fabled swords and screwing around with what actually happened.

This is a lame film with bad dialogue, terrible motivations for the protagonists (I'm just starting to build my empire" puhleeeeez!!!), and zero credibility. What a shame. So much potential yet again wasted.

A perfect rainy afternoon viewing

[moab-is-my-washpot · 7/10 · 6 June 2006]

What more could one ask for on a cold and rainy afternoon than an engaging historical epic with some saucy looking men in muscle defining outfits? I'm not so sure about the historical accuracy of the film, but as I'm an early modern historian I'm not going to get all indignant on this issue. I leave that to the classicists. Instead I shall report that I sat there enjoying the scenery, wondering how the story would unfold and would Powers Boothe (the best baddie in the business) get it in the end and how did Gerard Butler get to be so yummy. It is a well done flick, beautifully filmed, competently acted by all, (including Australian Simmone Jade Mackinnon) and just a pleasant viewing indulgence for a lazy Sunday afternoon.

Entertaining

[bsinc · 6/10 · 21 March 2002]

I enjoyed this movie mainly because I thought Powers Boothe was really good and his character contributed a great deal to the movie in whole. And because some women were really attractive. But that's it. As far as historical accuracy is concerned I'm not the right person to ask, but some actors were badly cast, especially the boy playing young Attila who brought absolutely no believability to his character and made me switch to another channel untill he grew up. Also I think that Gerard Butler has a speaking impediment(is that the right expression?)which bothered me at moments, but it wasn't drastic. A good 4 hour entertainment with some good actors and some great women. 6/10

Good but too rushed.

[allykat_d · 7/10 · 1 February 2001]

Part I was excellent, part II seemed very rushed especially towards the end. I know a little bit about Attila the Hun and after the battle of Chelon (sp?) he went on to conquer many more towns before retreating. It is not known if he retreated due to the Pope's entreaty or because he wanted to winter his troops in his own homeland. In part II he's suddenly back at his palace getting married. It was an abrupt switch and had me confused. Otherwise I thought the acting was excellent. Powers Booth was wonderful. I'm surprised he hasn't done any voice acting, what a great, deep voice. Until this show, I've never seen Gerard Butler and the man certainly has charisma. Although I enjoyed the eye candy, I had to wonder if Attila was *really* this good looking. ;)

-Ally

Better Than Average Sword and Sandal

[arthur_tafero · 6/10 · 5 August 2018]

This Attila version is about in the same league as the Anthony Quinn and Jack Palance efforts, but with better production values. Butler, who plays Attila is not quite up to Quinn's acting ability or Palance's screen presence, but he does benefit from having a much better supporting cast; especially Powers Booth, who does some of his best work. The battle scenes are well done, and reminiscent of Spartacus (especially the rolling fire bit). There is some question about some of the siege battles of the Huns, who were primarily a calvary unit; not big on big machinery, like catapults and middle-ages machines. But the film's the thing. And it is watchable and well-paced, so it is entertaining. Enjoy the carnage.

A great romp!

[dmcmillan01 · 10/10 · 15 May 2005]

Who cares if Attila isn't accurate historically? Who cares if Powers Boothe's acting is stilted. Who cares if the costumes are "out of period?" The fabulous scenery is worth the watch. And so is watching that fantastic Scottish rogue, Gerard Butler, playing a powerful Attila. Wish that the real Attila was as sexy, fair, and fabulous as Gerard. The ladies are also good to look at, and do a credible job of acting. The young lady who plays the "witch" is unusual and quite interesting in her part.

The difference between life in Rome and life where Attila lives is striking. From cool marble hallways and communal baths to ragged huts and river baths, it makes you realize just how advanced Rome was in those days.

Gerard Butler, however, was the strength of the series. He has that rare quality that makes it difficult for most people to take their eyes off him. His eyes are chameleon's, changing from penetrating, to loving, to laughing, and back again. Sometimes brown, sometimes hazel, sometimes a stunning green, they appear to change with his moods.

This is an actor to watch. His star is definitely rising.

Dotty McMillan

Epic, entertains wonderfully, but has no respect for historical truth.

[filipemanuelneto · 6/10 · 1 November 2020]

I saw this two-episode TV mini-series condensed into a film that was about three hours long. I don't think I lost much. There is little point in talking about the script because the lives and achievements of Attila, the great leader of the Huns, are known and one only has to consult a good encyclopedia to get a sense of what he did. What we have to understand is that this mini-series is fiction, so it is quite far from the reality of the facts.

Historically, Attila was a powerful leader who, for twelve years, co-ruled the Huns with his brother Bleda, who he will assassinate just later, probably for power. So it seems to me that the relationship between the two brothers was cordial and collaborative for much longer than the series showed. Together, both will transform the Huns into a terrible fighting force that, in the name of gold and wealth, will turn against the Roman Empire in a campaign of terrorism and blackmail: the Huns extorted very high sums of gold to spare the Roman cities, erasing those that resisted from the map. When they conquered a city, they massacred the entire population, looted everything and set fire to what they left behind. The city of Constantinople itself was surrounded. In 451, when the Roman general Flavius Aetius finally defeated the Huns in the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains (at the head of a coalition of Western Romans and Visigoths), Átila takes revenge by invading Italy in a campaign of annihilation to which the Romans escaped only because the Plague infected the Huns and forced them to withdraw. According to Prisco's account, Attila was a dedicated family man and had even built some Roman model baths in his home... but he never wanted to be an emperor or builder of empires. He was a destroyer and a looter, whose interest was to obtain the maximum wealth in the shortest time, at the expense of as many enemy lives as possible. The more corpses, the better for his reputation.

Despite being imaginative and creating a completely wrong and romantic idea of Átila, the series is good in that it entertains the audience very well, with a lot of action, romance, betrayal and intrigue, in addition to incredible battles and a pleasant epic sense. Of course, we are also entitled to some hotter scenes, with Roman orgies highlighted. Sex sells, doesn't it?

The cast is led by an effective Gerard Butler, in the role of the Hun. He showed that he feels at ease, knows how to lead and uses all his charisma to do so. Powers Boothe gave life to his nemesis, general Aetius, the last great Roman general, and was equally happy in his effort. Simmone Mackinnon seems underutilized in the role of Ildico and appears very little, despite the protagonism he receives at the end. Tommy Flanagan looked good and Alice Krige was pleasantly calculating in the role of Galla Placidia, but Red Rogers is weak and somewhat histrionic and Kirsty Mitchell is overly sexualized. Liam Cunningham and Kate Steavenson-Payne also did an interesting job in discreet roles.

Technically, it is clearly a job for the small screen, as can be seen from the way cinematography and visuals were handled. However, it is a work thought in great and has the word "epic" written everywhere, especially in the battle scenes, in the soundtrack, in the grand and detailed scenarios and finally in the costumes, which come to seem somewhat out of place as that could perfectly be used for more backward chronologies of the history of Rome. But who said that this series respected historical truth?

Don't think it's accurate history

[mmereos · 3/10 · 27 May 2003]

I didn't realize this was a made-for-tv mini series until after I rented it. I seemed pretty entertaining, but it was 3 hours long. It reminded me of a cheezy show that one would see on lifetime network; lots of over-dramatization ,and a story to be told.

After the movie I looked up the history of Attila and wasn't surprised at all that much of the story in the movie was fabricated.

We want more of Gerard Butler

[mariav · 10/10 · 15 February 2001]

I watched "Attila" quite by accident and I was so glad that I did because I didn't know Gerard Butler existed. His performance as Attila was captivating. The entire production was immensely entertaining and I watched it as many times as it was on the USA network. I had heard of Attila, the Hun, but was not very interested to learn about him, but this movie changed that because he became alive for me.

Needless to say, we want more of Gerard Butler!! I wanted to find out more about him on the web, but there was next to nothing. I would love to see a bio. ....And those eyes!!!!!

Not bad...

[SerpentMage · 7/10 · 8 December 2002]

I bought the DVD recently and thought, why not. It was beside the Scorpion King and made the choice for Attila the Hun. Man am I ever glad that I did. There is no comparison between this and the Scorpion King. This movie was actually very interesting. A long one, with 3 hours of play time. But it was worth the watch. Some people commented about the acting, but I thought it was interesting nonetheless. How close is the entire movie to the truth? Just like any movie that wants to make a real life story more interesting.

Would I recommend this movie? Yes if you are in the mood to sit down for 3 hours and watch history in action. After the movie I decided to some more research and found out that Attila is the "straw" that broke the camel's back and started the dark ages.

Terrible! It is not a historical drama!

[vic441 · 1/10 · 17 September 2001]

Over the past few years I ask myself a question who produces and directs movies like that which pretend to be serious historical epics, but rather remind Batman and Robyn type of thing. There are so many mistakes in this movie that it will take me a few days to list all of them. Just a few:

The story starts in 400 AD and ends with Atilla's death in circa 454 AD. In the movie Atilla visits Rome, which he never did and no mention whatsoever of Gothic invasion of Alarich and fall of Rome in 410 AD. Roman army (and public too!) pictured in costumes of say 100 AD (which still would be wrong). In all Hollywood movies with Roman theme they make the same mistake over and over again by showing helmets with fethers, rectangular shields, etc. All this was completely out of use in Roman army by about 200AD and by 400AD Roman army consisted mostly of barbarian hired soldiers and scale armour with round shields (with a lot of christian motives on it) were largely in use. To show Roman army as they did in the movie is like showing US Army in WW11 in Revolutionary War uniforms. Decisive battle shown in the movie with 200-300 hundred extras was perhaps the greatest battle in the ancient times where by some accounts over 500,000 warriors took part. Roman side was represented not only by legions and Goths, but also but Allans and other tribes friendly to Rome. Atilla and Hunnes were most definetely asian in origin, not picture-like Caucasian as they shown. etc, etc, etc. Anyway, if you just want to relax with a few beers and watch guys with the swords chasing each other, then this movie is OK. If you are after a serious historical drama - don't waste your time watching it.