Druids

Rating:
Summary: Great potential, but never lives up.
Review: When I first purchased this movie, I thought it had the potential of being like Braveheart. Unfortunately, the cast was weak, the music was inappropriate (ethereal new age tunes), the battles were boring, and the filming was poor (slow motion camera tricks for no reason at all). Save your money and move onto another film, or if you're interested in still buying the movie, look for my copy in the Used section.

Rating:
Summary: Shouldn't have read the reviews here, maybe...
Review: ... Bleah. I read the reviews here first, and maybe I shouldn't- the movie was ruined after that. Wooden acting, strange wigs (can you believe his hair when he's supposed to be young? that rat's nest?), very bad editing.... Ugh. The story does not flow- it's impossible to follow what's happening. And yes, Caesar has a German accent! EEK! Really, don't bother with it, it's pointless. :P

Rating:
Summary: Huh? What the.........?
Review: I can't believe I watched the whoooole thing. Unlike a movie such as, "The Attack of the Killer Tomatoes," which was so bad it was good, "Druids," is just plain bad! As far as historial accuracy, I can't comment, as I rented the movie to possibly learn a little about that period of history. Well, I learned a little all right. Very little!
The people who liked this movie obviuosly knew something of this historical period and were able to fill in the gaps of this, all over the map, choppy and confusing film. I was only able to tell that time had past by the growth of Lambert's hair. Like Christopher Walkin(sp?), neither has ever had a good hair day!
I am not real familiar with Lambert's career, but he must have a following. He is probably a very nice man, but I find his voice to be like, fingernails on a chalkboard and his acting/characters blah! He has made many movies and for some reason I feel like I should like him, but this movie has convinced me I don't need to feel that way anymore. I have enjoyed the, "Highlander," films a lot, but because of Adrian Paul, not so much C.L., but, a Highlander movie wouldn't be right without Lambert, as well as A. Paul.
Unless you can watch this movie as a punishment for not taking out the garbage or forgetting your anniversary, don't bother!
The main characters, weren't, the rest, who knows! The movie was edited to death by a very confused person.
I am glad to have read the rest of the reviews here to see I was not just, not seeing things!

Rating:
Summary: Gaul's Greatest Hero On Film (it could have been better)
Review: I've been a Celtic history buff my entire life, but it's taken me three decades to come to a very sad conclusion: the subject of Celtic antiquity will probably never be given a proper BIG SCREEN, BIG BUDGET treatment (which is quite surprising, given the fact that Hollywood is an American town and roughly half of all European-Americans are of Celtic descent...please see my review for the Hammer "classic" The Viking Queen). Braveheart doesn't really count, because it's from the late medieval period, but...

...on with this production. The GOOD Points: 1) The plot follows the account given in Caesar's book "The Gallic War" (De Bello Gallico) very closely; 2) Some of the dialog is taken right out of "The Gallic War" ("The only thing that the Gauls fear is that the sky itself will fall on them", and a few other lines); 3) Klaus Maria Brandauer (as Caesar) gives the best performance in the film (if you can get past his very thick German accent); 4) Max Von Sydow (a superb thespian) plays the Druid advisor to Vercingetorix, and his enthusiasm for the subject matter shows (but he was not given anywhere near as many scenes as he should have got); 5) the costumes, weapons, and hairstyles are right on; 6) Christopher Lambert (being a Frenchman) was a great choice for the role, BUT...now the BAD points: 1) The dialog that DOES NOT come from Caesar's account (which is the bulk of it) is incredibly wooden and stupid; 2) the budget was so low that the battle scenes pale in comparison to gang fights ("We've defeated three Roman legions!" exclaims Dumnorix, but I've seen more combatants in playground rock fights...the dearth of extras was a big minus); 3) the New Age, "world beat", "hip", "exotic" music is simply not appropriate for this movie...some real folk music from any of the Celtic cultures (Scottish, Welsh, Breton, Irish, etc.) would have fit much better...death metal probably would have worked much better, but the music and singing I heard in this production was so obviously of non-European origin that it distracted me and lessened the enjoyment of the viewing experience!; 4) the whole film looks like it was shot in the same field around a "re-created" Gaulish fort that I've seen in at least two documentaries on Vercingetorix...folks, we're talking bargain basement budget here; 5) Lambert, playing fierce Vercingetorix, does almost no fighting here...he mostly walks around fields covered with dead bodies with an outraged look on his face; 6) Why was this movie released under the title "Druids" in the USA when the film does not focus on druids at all? Sure, there are a couple of druids in the movie, but they play a minor role...it must have been a ploy to get all of the crystal gazing, tarot card reading, herbal tea sipping, Enya listening, history denying New Age freaks to rent the video...this makes about as much sense as making a movie about the Crusades and simply calling it "Priests".

All in all, a "so so" movie. I applaud the fact that a movie with this subject matter was made (it's about freaking time), but in a film with a catastrophically low budget, even the best actors can't save it...Hollywood is only interested in cranking out films about "hip" and politically correct themes apparently, and most of them SUCK, not surprisingly.

Rating:
Summary: Sad Miss
Review: I didn't have very high expectations from this movie, given the current lack of respect for history that is prevalent in films such as "Elizabeth", but even those low expectations weren't met.

The best thing I can say for it is that the costuming of the Celts looks pretty authentic (also like the costuming in "Elizabeth"). It would appear that the costumers for recent historical movies, with a few exceptions, have more respect for history than the writers, directors and producers. This is a contrast with the past, where there was more respect for the facts (albeit not 100%) while the costumers couldn't have cared less.

The acting is wooden, even from good actors, and the casting is odd (Julius Caesar's opening line is a scream, since this son of Rome says "Vhere iss zhe druid?" in German accented English) the story is told in a confusing fashion and delves into silliness frequently. About the best thing in the movie is the costuming and the use of Celtic battle horns. I saw and heard the recording of one for the first time this summer at the National Museum of Ireland and I'm pleased to see and hear them used here.

Conclusion--Don't waste your money.

Rating:
Summary: Interesting, not exactally like Julius told the story....
Review: This is a fun work of historical fiction. The performances do not suffer from translation, and the ideas and concepts are historically supported by the histories. The story moves well, and ends at a good point.
The title is less than accurate, but not horrible. The Roman military uniforms are 100+ years out of date, coming not from 60 BC but from AD 50+. Why can't they find an actor who looks like Julius Caesar? The movie is a fun addition to your library, and not any worse than the latest version of Cleoparta when it comes to actually researching period costuming. The Gallic costuming was very good.

Rating:
Summary: Very disappointing
Review: The only good thing I can say about this debacle is that is not as bad as "A Knight's Tale". Complete disregard for history, not to mention poorly written and horrible editing. However, the worst thing about this travesty is Christopher Lambert's wig during the beginning scene when they deserately try to convince us that he is a teenager. Definately don't buy this movie! If you are a fan of any of the actors you will be disappointed in their performance and if you are looking for a good historical drama you will be mislead. Only watch this as a freebie!

Rating:
Summary: Braveheart no more...
Review: It is a crime against modern cinema that this movie did not get theatrical distribution in the United States. Even so, internationally it has been to theatres across the globe and brought in a very successful bank, I hope to see more of Jacques Dorfmann in english in the future, though I understand in this film each scene was filmed twice, once in english and once in french.
DRUIDS is the story of Vercingetorix, the Gaul who united the tribes to give Big Julie Caeser the most trouble the Romans ever had.
Historically the only account we have from the Gaul Wars are from Julius Caesar himself, and even he admits Vercingetorix was an amazing leader. As for accuracy, this movie does stay away from the legend of Vercingetorix's beheading, which is fine with me, and it seems the essentials are all there. It seems other reviewers can't understand the movie, since some complaints are that the war is condensed, but it's obvious to me that time passes by the montage scenes and how Vercingetorix's hair gets longer and such, but, I guess that's too complex for some.
The story of Vercingetorix himself in the movie is of course mostly guessing and made up. His relations with the Druids I think may have some merit, though I'm not sure. Max Von Sydow plays the mysterious Arch-Druid, who is the Merlin to Vercingetorix's Arthur.
The movie is a marvel to look at, terrific scenery and great sets, some marvelous shots of the Roman Army and one great scene of Vercingetorix returning to the Druids to find only his skilled mentor left are the peaks.
The music is also great, and during the final quarter of the movie plays almost constantly as the end unfolds.
Max Von Sydow steals the scenes when he comes in throughout the movie, Klaus Maria Brandauer is subtle and harsh as Julius Caeser, Ines Sastre does fine for her part, and Christopher Lambert conquers the performance of his life as Vercingetorix, from his other two epics(Greystoke: Legend of Tarzan and The Sicilian) this shines far and beyond as his best performance, from beginning to end.

Rating:
Summary: dissapointment
Review: This movie was a dissapointment to say the least. From watching the jazzed up previews, one would compare this movie to Braveheart, but from the first scene, the reality of this movie's abusurdity sets in. I actually thought after viewing the first scene, that this movie was made for children. But, after watching a few more, I realized that it is just bad. First, there was the editing. The scenes are either too short or too long. And it looks as if the movie has been dubbed! Second, the acting. I didn't expect much from Christopher Lambert.. but from the rest of the normally wonderful actors, I was sadly dissapointed and shocked.
This movie is based on a book, and the book is actually quite good...but this just makes a mockery of it.

Rating:
Summary: Roman History...the New Age Way
Review: I also must admit having been bitterly disappointed by this film, as much for its glaring historical inaccuracies as for the almost incompetent editing and direction and the ludicrous scripting.

There are so many things wrong with this film's version of 1st century B.C.E. Roman history. The Roman presence in Gaul's far too developed in this film; instead of just beginning to consolidate their territory after years of warfare, the Romans have managed to get to the point of building regular roads and infrastructure--after only eight years, from 60 to 52 B.C.E.! In one of the film's silliest scenes (of very, very many), Caesar invites Vercingetorix and other chieftains of the Gauls to a trinclinium-style banquet, where he shows them a map of their next military target--Britannia! He hopes to organize a mass Gallic invasion of the Britons to the north. "Such barbarians!" exclaims the very hammy Klaus-Maria Brandauer as Caesar,"They even paint their faces blue!" All of the Gauls then dutifully laugh. Obviously, Caesar has a new plan after his last excursion, sans any Gallic help, two or three years earlier. But why take along a known rebel against Roman rule? There's also a cringe-inducing scene involving half-clad, mostly younger Gallic women distracting several cohorts of the Roman legions by removing parts of their clothing. Meanwhile His Royal Hamminess, Klaus-Maria Brandauer, stands by and just stares vacuously and smirks intermittently.

...But, truly, the *worst* part of the film would be the attempt to turn Vercingetorix into some kind of Celtic New Age guru king, a kind of ancient Richard Gere mystic. With all of the historical accuracy of an average "Xena" episode, his mentors are this druid-woman-warrior and Max von Sydow as, best I can tell, as Merlin the Gaul (who's probably pining for his glory days when plum roles such as Ming the Merciless came his way). The film ends on the historically ridiculous note of having the narrator tell of V.'s sad end in Rome after being used as a human trophy, and proclaims that he was an "inspiration" to his descendants. His descendants? Where? In Brittany? Last I checked, the Franks pretty much cleared Gaul of most of its Celts.

Watch this film only if you have time and brain cells to kill.