Attila

Rating:
Summary: Causes interest, but is flawed
Review: Attila the Hun, greatest of all Hun warriors, man who brought the Roman Empire to its knees. Driven by a force beyond his own, a profesy to conquer the world, a man of principles and ideals... well,... not quite...

The DVD portrayal of Attila is far from the historic truth about this man. The Huns were a barbarian people, they fought and won by performing terrible atrocities which would make Hitler look like a mere, petty criminal. The Huns were cruel and savage, and Attila was no exception.

The movie gives us a "BraveHeart" like portrayal of Attila. And eventhough the movie does arouse curiosity and bring one of the most influential figures of his time to light, this movie must be balanced by historical truth...

Rating:
Summary: Pretty good for an action movie
Review: Attila was a good movie.I saw it on the USA channel.This movie had good acting ecspecially by the main chacracter Attila (Gerard Butler).There were some good fighting scenes.Though some of the movie you could was made for cable.I would recommend this movie to anybody who like Braveheart,Gladiator or Ben Hur.This is a four star movie.

Rating:
Summary: Well, it's only a TV mini-series....
Review: Bah! To call this a great masterpiece, what a bunch of crap! I think that this production is just a notch better than your average "Xena" or "Hercules" TV episode. B-class actors such as Power Booth (when did he last appear in a good movie..???). I admit that the newcomer Gerard Butler had his shiny moments of classy acting but still....yak! And once again we see bad choreographed battle scenes involving roman legions (a roman legion consisted of at least 4000 troops, and they are not even close to that here...). If you know just a little bit of roman warfare you would know that they started the close combat with actually THROWING their spears (pilum) at the enemy not charging with them. They should someone who knew roman history WELL! All the castles and houses looks cheesy to me, fake! Just look at the castle siege scene, it look like paper "stone blocks" and it it coz they used modells to make that scene! Not even close to Gladiators stuff. And why is that there is always so clean and shiny cloths in these mini-series, did they have washing machines that always removed the dirt, I mean comon there should at leaste be some stains here and there, right???! This problem also pops up in the B-class Hallmark production, Cleopatra mini-series as well. Ok, I did give this movie a weak 3 star. Here's the good stuff. Some scenes are very well done and the music through out the hole movie is the only thing worth calling a masterpiece. As said before the lead actor Gerard Butler (Attila) will probably rise to be a moviestar. And then there is the stunning Simone Jade Mackinnon who plays both N'Kara and Ildico character. She total blew me away with here beauty! If you think you recognize her you have probably seen her in Baywatch (1999-2000). So if your looking for a roman / historical movie with good acting, grand surroundings and large battle scenes don't bother, just grab a copy of Gladiator or Fall of the Roman Empire. Then again if you fancy Xena tv-episodes with average acting and ok battle scenes this is a sure bet. The DVD is also pretty good, including some stills, trailer and a "Making of..."

Rating:
Summary: Attila - Excellent TV epic movie
Review: Do you love films like Braveheart? Well, this is another great addition to the loosely history based battle epic movie genre.

When I watch movies like this, I always wonder how they will make it different from past movies like Braveheart. Unlike Braveheart, Atilla the hun is not a nice character. He is an extreme womanizer, a warlord, and sometimes irrational. This makes it hard to cheer for a happy ending, because both sides are somewhat evil. Also unlike Braveheart, this movie is alot deeper in story. It's not just good guy versus badguy till one is dead.

Usually the only TV movies I like are HBO movies, because they are the higest quality. This is a USA network film and it's one of the most impressive TV productions I have ever seen. The use of special FX to create Roman cities and giant armies are as good and better then some Hollywood films. Infact I didn't even know they used special FX till I saw the making of the film documentary "also contained on the DVD". The cast is also solid.

casting=4.5 stars
acting=4.5 stars
ending=4.5 stars
Directing and Editing=5 stars
storyline=5 stars
replay value=4 stars

OVERALL= 4.58 stars out of 5
The movie starts out somewhat cliché, but gets better and better as the movie progresses...

Rating:
Summary: OK for a TV Miniseries
Review: Gerard Butler plays Attila as the king of the Huns with a sensitive side and as a visionary. The movie is entertaining but is light on historical and anthropological accuracy.

The film isn't faithful to history in its depiction of the Huns. The Huns cared for little else than their nomadic existence; ride your horse free, kill and plunder whatever you come across. Very much like Genghis Kahn's famous quote almost eight centuries later, what was best in life for the Huns was to crush the enemy; see them driven before them; take their cattle; and hear the lamentation of their women. Butler's performance fails to show that ethos. His performance is forced and his dilemma is partially due to a poor script; this is made all too obvious in his apologetically soft and withheld exclamation, "We should rule the world!" The movie would have held more sway if it would have depicted the Huns for what they really were, Asiatic nomads, supreme cavaliers, and masters of archery who plundered their victims by either outright pillaging and massacre or exaction of tribute by threatening the latter. The Huns must have been barbaric indeed if they could even bring the still very barbaric Gothic tribes of Northern Europe to submission. Another fearful element of the Huns is that they were godless heathens who didn't share the Christian values of many Germanic tribes or their Roman rulers: as such, notions of respecting the sanctity of the church, sophisticated diplomacy, or sparing innocent civilians, was quite foreign to them.

On the Roman side, Powers Boothe as Aetius is probably one of the better performances in this film but its nothing to brag about. The mannerisms and culture of Rome depicted are stereotypical. The movie tries to create an impression of Rome as a pagan and decadent state but Christianity had significantly taken its hold since it was made the official state religion by Constantine almost two centuries before. The ritualized orgy depicted in the film was therefore out of place. The costumes were also either a mix between futuristic or more of the early empire and late republic.

In terms of historical accuracy, the battle scenes were obviously under a limited budget. The actual battles involved far more than the few hundred shown in the film and both the legionary tactics and equipment were horribly out of date by several centuries. The tactics of the legions had shifted to the extensive use of cavalry while infantry had been relegated to marginal uses. The age of the legendary Roman infantry with pilum and gladius was a thing of the past.

The movie was a brave attempt and not too bad for a T.V. miniseries and, in that context, deserves three stars. Definitely something worth renting.



Rating:
Summary: An Honorable Television Attempt
Review: Gerard Butler plays Attila as the king of the Huns with a sensitive side and as a visionary. The movie is entertaining but is light on historical and anthropological accuracy.

History shows what the film doesn't. The Huns cared for little else than their nomadic existence; ride your horse free, kill and plunder whatever you come across. Very much like Genghis Kahn's famous quote almost eight centuries later, what was best in life for the Huns was to crush the enemy; see them driven before them; take their cattle; and hear the lamentation of their women. Butler's performance fails to show that ethos. His performance is forced and his dilemma is partially due to a poor script; this is made all too obvious in his apologetically soft and withheld exclamation, "We should rule the world!" The movie would have held more sway if it would have depicted the Huns for what they really were, Asiatic nomads, supreme cavaliers, and masters of archery who plundered their victims by either outright pillaging and massacre or exaction of tribute by threatening the latter. The Huns must have been barbaric indeed if they could even bring the still very barbaric Gothic tribes of Northern Europe to submission. Another fearful element of the Huns is that they were godless heathens who didn't share the Christian values of many Germanic tribes or their Roman rulers: as such, notions of respecting the sanctity of the church, sophisticated diplomacy, or sparing innocent civilians, was quite foreign to them.

On the Roman side, Powers Boothe as Aetius is probably one of the better performances in this film but its nothing to brag about. The mannerisms and culture of Rome depicted are stereotypical. The movie tries to create an impression of Rome as a pagan and decadent state but Christianity had significantly taken its hold since it was made the official state religion by Constantine almost two centuries before. The ritualized orgy depicted in the film was therefore out of place. The costumes were also either a mix between futuristic or more of the early empire and late republic.

In terms of historical accuracy, the battle scenes were obviously under a limited budget. The actual battles involved far more than the few hundred shown in the film and both the legionary tactics and equipment were horribly out of date by several centuries. The tactics of the legions had shifted to the extensive use of cavalry while infantry had been relegated to marginal uses. The age of the legendary Roman infantry with pilum and gladius was a thing of the past.

The movie was a brave attempt and not too bad for a T.V. miniseries and, in that context, deserves three stars. Definitely something worth renting.

Rating:
Summary: Thoroughly entertaining - forget silly "inacuracy" argument
Review: Having read many review on how inaccurate this film were, I decided that I'l have a go myself anyway. Being a fervent student of classical civilisation myself, I thought - that wasn't a bad film at all. I agreed that the film is not 100% accurate but not to the point that Attila had conquered the Roman Empire. The film did well to put all historical element together and added some "spice" that would make the film interesting to the general audience.

We all knew that Attila is not a handsome hunk, But try to put yourself in the director and producer perspective. Could you really find an actor of Attila description in the film industry. No, you couldn't even if you wanted to. I you want one you would have to import directly from Mongolia, and I doulbt that the Attila would speak at all during the entire film. Also, it is not economically viable to use any person as such, the film just won't sale. The film-makers are not trying to make a documentary. They are making films, and film suppost to by enjoy as novel, not histoy book.

I doulbt that the legend of King Arthur and his Knights as we know is historically accurate. Nor wizard do play quiddich!! The film "King Arthur" (2004), which base more along the line of historical account, is no better than any other "historical inaccurate" film before it. At the end of the film, my sister who have no interest whatsoever in ancient history asked me for some historical background and asked to borrow some book on the subject of Attila and the Roman Empire. I felt that the film-makers could say "mission accomplished".

Rating:
Summary: The death knell of the Roman empire.
Review: Here is a wonderful movie that mixes fact & fiction, sometimes telling factual events in a fictional way. All in all, however, it is a film that is well done & well worth viewing.

It is a fact that Attila did set foot inside the walls of Rome as a guest. However, it is false that he was the guest of Flavius Aetius while both were grown men. As a matter of fact, as a boy the two were "exchanged." Atilla lived in Rome while Flavius Aetius lived amongst the Huns. It was then that Attila swore that he would return one day not as a guest of Rome, but as its conquerer.

It is dubious that Attila obtained a liking for the hot baths of Rome during his youthful sojourn in the city. By all accounts of the period historians, the king of the Huns lived a very simple and Spartan existence, despite the excesses of his officers and his extravagant wealth. Gerard Butler also portrays a bit more of a debonair and "GQ looking" Atilla than I ever imagined the historical Atilla. However, that is forgivable. After all, this is Hollywood, right?

It is a fact that Valentian III personally murdered Aetius (bad idea) in 454 A.D. As someone supposedly told Valentian, "With your left hand, you have cut off your right hand." Also, the Romans did sign a treaty with the Visigothic king Theoderic I to aid in fighting the Huns. This was a reversal from earlier times when the Romans and Huns ganged up on the Visigoths. This is recounted accurately in the film.

All in all, this was an extremely good effort. It is very hard to display the dwindling years of an empire's hegemony in 3 short hours. This movie does an excellent job with the material at its disposal. The battle scenes are fairly well done, and they even pull off a passable battle of the Catalaunian Plains in the climactic sequence. However, the armies are a bit undersized; it quickly becomes evident that the film's budget did not have the resources for an extensive use of extras. But, the battle scenes are well choreographed & do show off the "tortiose" formation of the Legions.

After the death of Attila, Rome held on to her supremacy for a few more decades before finally seeing her empire fade into the darkness. Rome was one of the greatest and most long-lasting empires the world has ever seen. It was people like Atilla and Shapur who helped push it over the precipice. As such, Atilla became one of the most feared, hated and respected men in all of history. Herein lies his story.

Rating:
Summary: A Diving Board
Review: I found this movie very interesting and feel that it was done very well. I love period/historical movies and so thought I would give this a try. I missed it when it was on tv. The acting was good and the characters were well developed and I felt like I wanted to know more about this part of history. That is why I titled my review "A Diving Board". This movie made me realize that I didn't know much about these events and so I started doing some research. Through the research I found that there were some flaws in the history, but a lot of it was correct. I didn't like the ending with Ildico. I felt like it was a very abrupt ending that I was not ready for. All in all it was an entertaining, educational movie that I highly recommend.

Rating:
Summary: Yowzah!!!
Review: I hate to say this, because I know that it will pale incomparison to all the other reviews BUT, you if your a warm blooded female..its hard not to be drawn to the alpha-male Gerard Butlers Atilla.Whew..he is sexy. The movie is awful, but sometimes you don't buy a movie for its plot right?