Les derniers guerriers

In an unnamed empire, a lord is being killed for political reasons and the greed of a competitor, his private army disbanded, his lands divided among the other nobles. A year later, his retainers, all loyal followers of the code of the warrior, take revenge.

This is actually a real and very famous and influential event that happened in Japan in the 18th century, also known as the Ako incident. I found it funny that the ending of the movie was changed to suit Western sensibilities, but the gist of the film is the same nonetheless.

The acting was good, with a real nice cast, the directing was good and the entire feel of the movie, from cinematography to costumes, helped get me in the atmosphere of the story. I felt the music was a bit too bombastic for the scenes, but it was also nice.

Bottom line: a UK and South Korea coproduction, it feels different than an American movie, and in a very good way, but it is not an exceptional film. Perhaps its greatest merit is the acting and the rather faithful depiction of the incident. The ending ruins that a bit, but not by much.

Usually my tastes align pretty much with the score than MetaCritic (and RottenTomatoes) gives for a particular movie. This is one of the few exceptions to that rule. I disclaimer: I am Japanese and live in Japan, and have a sweet tooth for old school Japanese dramas (not just the masters like Kurosawa and Juzo Itami) and styles that some people might not have the taste for. Note that in Japan this movie is getting good reviews -- but that's probably due to the Japanese director and the Japanese actors in it. However, there is a lot of Korean influence (according to the credits) in it as well.

If I was to pick anything wrong with the movie, the second act, which builds up the twist to the third act and the obvious final battle, was a little too obvious to me, and those familiar with this type of drama, even Clint Eastwood's old masterpiece, "Unforgiven", will probably recognize the device right away.

The combat scenes were very well done and while choreographed, there was a minimal of "you must suspend your disbelief" type Matrix-like line-and-wire acrobatics (there was some though).

Finally, the movie doesn't wimp out with a Hollywood style "Happy Ending." I'm not going to tell you if it's a good ending or not... I'm just saying that they didn't choose the ending that would have marketers would have preferred. Good for them.

The first thing you look at when you consider to watch a movie are usually the actors.

Clive Owen, Morgan Freeman and upcoming Norwegian actor Aksel Hennie(Known from 'The Martian', 'Hercules' and 'Headhunters') are some of the actors this movie can offer.

As for the story. It's not the deepest story, but in this movie I feel that it's not rally necessary. The movie is a typical knight movie with some factors of the Asian samurai (But it works) and is ended with an epic battle no man can dare say is boring not original.

I really liked it. 8/10

It's odd that a medieval fantasy movie with respectable cast nearly flies off radar. Last Knights is not an epic tale, in fact the plot heavily resembles that of 47 Ronin and considering even Keanu Reeves' journey is inspired by multitude of per-existing works, this plot is unoriginal at best. The pacing is slow, creating a rather bloated runtime. Still, the cast as well as cinematography produce nice atmosphere, especially in latter half, just making Last Knights a moderately enjoyable popcorn flick.

Raiden (Clive Owen) is a commander with a dark past, he was taken by his lord Bartok (Morgan Freeman) and granted opportunity to lead the knights. As a man of integrity Bartok openly opposes Minister Gezza Mott (Aksel Hennie), this doesn't end up well for him as he loses his land and riches, amongst other things. Thus the tale of coping and possible vengeance begins. The premise is far too predictable, more so if you have watched 47 Ronin, the screenplay almost mirrors one another.

Clive Owen has the rugged commander look, but he doesn't seem engaging. I can't help but seeing the solemn Keanu Reeves' persona as neither of them barely exhibits any meaningful expression. Morgan Freeman is as dependable as ever, he's charismatic and does pretty much what one expected. As for the villain, Aksel Hennie performs admirably. He does seem corrupt, conniving and slightly paranoid. The script gives him ominous vibe that audience would love to hate.

Supporting cast is oriented towards the mix of European and Asian, props for the casting department to pull off the eclectic assemble. They also have some experience in action movies and TV shows overall, so it's not all obscure faces. The setting puts emphasis on hybrid culture, architectures and costumes appear to be from ancient Persia with an oriental touch. It's a quaint atmosphere and presents a few lavish set pieces. Cinematography uses grayish filter for most of these areas and outfits, in exception of certain characters or definitive environment which are more vibrant.

While it looks presentable, the plot may deter some audiences. Its script tries to engage with intriguing lines, and it's mildly successful. Unfortunately, the film spends more than half of its runtime stuttering to find its rhythm. This is made worse by the outdated screenplay, the plot devices are not only foreseeable, they are also heavy-handed in execution.

The last act fares better as it offers more polished action sequences, although there is no surprise twist to be had here. Last Knights is made from tired elements of the genres, it doesn't do enough for a fascinating spectacle. However, with a presentable graphic and production design, it's barely sufficient for a light watch.

I am compelled to write my first review after 4 years on IMDb due to the bad reviews by critics. First off, I completely enjoyed this movie. I loved the initial setting which took about an hour which others complained to be too long but I felt that laid a good foundation for the plot to continue.

The second half could've been better but I'm not complaining. This was much better than Ridley Scott's Robin Hood when compared to a medieval story. What lacked in this movie was more character development and overall depth to both the story and characters. The details of storming the castle are also just gone through quickly without any importance. I feel like this could've been a 3 hour saga of excellent medieval story had the director gone with it. A fully developed story with multidimensional characters would've been perfect. Both Clive Owen and Morgan Freeman gave wonderful performances and as someone who loves their movies I felt satisfied just to see them in these particular roles.

Overall, don't miss this one just because of some harsh critic ratings. I felt entertained and this is one movie which did not let me down at all when compared with other medieval stories of the past few years.