A Última Legião

THE LAST LEGION is a semi-realistic historical fantasy based on a novel by popular Italian historical novelist Valerio Massimo Manfredi. It's a story that attempts to merge both Roman history and Arthurian legend, and although it's not always entirely believable, it does have a fast pace to take your mind off the unbelievable bits.

One of the worst things about this film is the cheap and cheerful direction, which makes it look like a B-movie. I wasn't surprised to find out that director Doug Lefler cut his teeth on both HERCULES: THE LEGENDARY JOURNEYS and XENA: WARRIOR PRINCESS, because THE LAST LEGION looks a lot like those shows and has the same kind of shaky, bloodless action scenes.

However, the film does have a great cast going on it with nearly ever role in the film occupied by familiar faces. GAME OF THRONES fans are in for a particular treat with parts for Iain Glen, Nonso Anozie, Thomas Brodie-Sangster, James Cosmo, Robert Pugh, Alexander Siddig, and Owen Teale. SPARTACUS: BLOOD AND SAND star John Hannah plays virtually the same role as in that show, and ROME's Kevin McKidd is the bad guy. The major roles are claimed by Colin Firth, who never really convinces as an action hero, and Ben Kingsley, reliably entertaining as the wise old sage. Meanwhile, Bollywood actress Aishwarya Rai plays the token female role, unbelievable in the fight scenes but heavily sexualised throughout, much like Keira Knightley in KING ARTHUR. THE LAST LEGION isn't a great film, but it's a passable time filler and just watching all those familiar faces filled me with joy.

The year is 460 A.D., Rome is weak and a new child emperor is crowned. Rome soon falls to the Goths, and the emperor is taken prisoner. All that's left is a handful of men who are obligated by duty to rescue him. The men are led by Aurelius (Colin Firth) and the emperor's mysterious former guardian Ambrosinus (Ben Kingsley). They travel to Britannia to find The Last Legion that could be counted on to be loyal to the emperor.

From there, it becomes ridiculous and tries to tie in another legendary story. Whole sections are rushed or skipped. The action is passable but lack drama. There are many plot holes. Logic is thrown out the window. They bend over backwards to try and close this story loop. It's more awkward than poetic as may be hoped.

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.

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).

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!