ATHENS, present day: crippled by Greece's economic crisis, the city faces one of the worst crime waves in Europe. Gangs of armed men pour into the country to take advantage of the chaos and... See full summary »
The movie follows 3 Japanese friends from embarking on Yamato, the world's largest battleship, until it's sunk 3 1/2 years later on April 7, 1945 on it's way to Okinawa to stop American advance at the end of WWII.
Gathered together by young Hubert (Tom Rhys Harries), a small band of hired swords gather inside his families castle intent on holding off evil Celtic Tribesmen hell-bent on revenge for the death of their leaders' son: a young mercenary named Guy (Tom Austen) whose soul is wracked with guilt over the atrocities he has committed during the days and years after the great battle of Rochester Castle and his burgeoning feelings for Kate, his cousin (Roxanne McKee), ; battle-hardened mercenaries such as Berenger (David Caves), who fight not for God and country for money and bloodlust.Written by
Warner Bros. UK
Movie opens with Italian recap left off from Ironclad (2011). Roughly translated: Five years after the siege of Rochester Castle and the sedition of the rebellion against the King. The England is at peace, but to the country's contentions they raging conflicts. The Scottish clans, the loss of their lands and the race, they attack English castles and villages places on the borders. Without being able to rely on the help from the Crown, the English lords are left alone to defend their possessions and must avail themselves of the aid of every man to be found, even the weak, the humble and how many are willing to fight for little change. See more »
In the epilogue, Hubert states that his cousin Guy later went on to fight in the Hundred Years War. This would not have been possible because the film is set in the year 1221, but the Hundred Years War took place between 1337 and 1453. Guy could not have taken part in those wars unless he lived to be over 140. In addition, the term Hundred Years War was first used by 19th century historians. See more »
Despite its doubtful historical veracity and not being highly memorable, I found Ironclad an entertaining medieval action film. The sequel, Ironclad: Battle for Blood, tried to repeat the formula, but the result is a poor movie, because of its weak screenplay, bad performances and insipid direction. There are various bloody battle sequences in this film, but the abuse of the hand-held camera ends up ruining them and becoming them a parade of incomprehensible images with cuts every half a second which avoid the spectator to follow the flow of the action. The actors feel totally feigned and not credible at all in their roles, and the screenplay is uninteresting and full of clichés. On the positive side, the landscapes and castles in which Ironclad: Battle for Blood was shot are truly impressive. Nevertheless, that wasn't enough to rescue this film, and I can't recommend it, because it bored me pretty much.
7 of 8 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this