Hércules

Someone had the incredibly stupid idea of showing Hercules' infamous tasks within the first five minutes and then tell a somewhat conventional story of antique battles and rebellion. The Rock is a charismatic hero and his team works, too. Without this cast this movie would have fallen to pieces. As it is, the action is decent, the result entertaining enough and thankfully it doesn't take itself too seriously. But still, whoever came up with this simplistic plot should be smacked over the head.

Firstly, the film has a slow start. We see almost motion comic footage of Hercules doing his 12 labours in slideshow form, with Hercules face hidden in silhouette. So I felt a little cheated. Then we have a scene which tries to set up what makes this version of the main character different than any other version we have seen before. I wont give it away, as its basically what the film is about. But it tries to play with our knowledge of him.

It doesn't ignore the back story of his wife and kids, but glosses over those parts until it becomes necessary to divulge that information. Again, i think it would have been better to see it, rather than be told what happened. I knew his history and so was wondering if they would portray this properly. Instead they do something to set-up a villain for the end which I wont give away. Just know that they do tie up all lose ends as needed, but a prior knowledge of who this character is and what he has done does help the viewer understand his motivations and his life up to this point.

Its when the big war starts that you really sit up and start paying attention. Somehow watching the Rock talk doesn't interest you, but when the fighting starts with the epic 200 people battle sequences, you suddenly see where the budget went, the fights are fantastic!

What is really great is how Hercules and his band of merry men (and woman) use smarts to outwit the enemy rather than simply use strength each time. That was clever. From the moment of that first fight the film moves up a notch and becomes excellent entertainment.

Its a historical film and tries to be serious about its overall message. Dwayne does a good job but he's not going to win any awards for this. The other cast members actions are predictable and sufficient. But don't really add much to the plot. They could have been written out and it would have changed nothing.

The running length is long enough to feel satisfied and not so long that it overstays its welcome. The plot twists you see coming a mile away but at least it tries to do them. Other than one characters actions near the end which was so obvious it was stupid to include.

In conclusion, its worth watching. It takes it times to grab you, but once it does it doesn't let go. There are a few stretches of how strong Hercules is, but not enough for you to hate it. The 3D has its moments, but like most films I would rather have watched it in 2D as I don't think it made a major difference and its more comfortable not having to wear those glasses with my head upright the entire time.

Of the two Hercules films released in 2014, this one is the far superior of the two. The other being the awful 'The Legend of Hercules', with Liam McIntyre as its sole saving grace. 'Hercules' was very flawed and was very misleadingly advertised, but it was decent.

Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson is a charismatic and likable Hercules, and much closer to what Hercules should be like than the disaster that was Kellan Lutz in 'The Legend of Hercules'. He is not a "great" actor, but there is something appealing about him here, he does look more comfortable than some of his other performances (he has come on a lot since 'Doom' for example) and he has fun with his one-liners.

Rufus Sewell in a different role is amusing, and even funnier is a scene-stealing Ian McShane, although his material is basically a big running joke it's a very funny line and remarkably doesn't wear thin or become repetitive. John Hurt very rarely gives a bad performance, many performances of his are magnificent in fact, and while he has been better he is good here. Ingrid Bolso Berdal is a striking and strong presence as Atalanta.

Mostly, 'Hercules' looks good, looking more of a cinematic release than the straight-to-DVD-schlocky look of 'The Legend of Hercules'. It's beautifully shot and while one is reminded of '300' the editing is not as stylised or as indulgent. Costumes and sets are much more tasteful and easy on the eye. There is an appealing over-the-top-ness with the odd embracing of the cheese factor without being too ridiculous, and the darker moments do have tension and emotional weight. Love the chemistry between Johnson, Sewell and McShane, and it is definitely the film's strongest asset. What there is of the action is exciting enough, and the music is fitting and pleasant even if not mind-blowing.

Brett Ratner's direction is a bit routine however, and the story, while with good moments and at least it is clear what it's trying to be, is generic and over-familiar. The script is not as bad as that of 'The Legend of Hercules', but does feel underwritten and clunky, while of the characters the only really interestingly developed ones are Hercules and Amphiarius. The rest are stock, especially the villains, who are poorly played.

Joseph Fiennes in particular is catastrophically bad to the point of unintentional comedy. The special effects are a little weak as well, rather artificial.

All in all, nowhere near as bad as expected. Not in terms of advertising, it was actually pretty intriguing but those wanting a proper adaptation of the legend will find themselves short-changed (the only resemblance really is in name only), but more in correlation to how much 'The Legend of Hercules' stunk and there was the worry that 'Hercules' would be as bad or worse. Luckily, while still heavily flawed, it is much better. 6/10 Bethany Cox

(58%) A movie that could have quite easily dipped into crap territory is saved by well directed and plentiful action, good production values, Mr Johnson being a perfect leading man, John hurt calling Hercules a "filthy bastard" and "Atalanta" (bow-girl) looking uncannily like Nicole Kidman from the early 90's. The fact that it doesn't take itself too seriously is a benefit, but I'd have liked the script to be a little stronger and the humour to be sharper, as it does stop this from being a full recommendation from me. That said it's still a decent little watch that gets better as the plot thickens in it's second half, but before that arrives it's just a little too dumb to grab my full attention.

A lot of people went into this movie with expectations that this would follow the mythology, and I think that's what let them down. However, as an artistic representation of not only the myths, but a possible truth behind the myths, this was an entertaining watch.

I'm only vaguely familiarly with the mythology, but I know enough to know the way it was represented. This film represents that mythology in a different way - more genuinely believable, and less fantastic - but blends the original mythos in in a way I found very interesting. A lot can be forgiven for an intelligent, new look at an old story, and I don't think this film needs to be forgiven very much at all.

The story was fairly well rounded with a some light/moderate complexity to it which was nice, and it was much less far-fetched than I thought it would be. The acting was - in general - excellent, with only one or two instances where I thought it was a bit too cheesy or overdone.

Dwayne Johnson was fantastic; having seen him in several films I was expecting a less solemn, more caricatured, performance. But he was excellent, and I have gained a little more respect for him as a serious actor (though I wouldn't cast him outside head-bashing quite yet).

Overall an underrated movie in my opinion, and definitely worth a watch if you like a good story.