#123movies #fmovies #putlocker #gomovies #solarmovie #soap2day Watch Full Movie Online Free – It is the year 1215 and the rebel barons of England have forced their despised King John to put his royal seal to the Magna Carta, a noble, seminal document that upheld the rights of free-men. Yet within months of pledging himself to the great charter, the King reneged on his word and assembled a mercenary army on the south coast of England with the intention of bringing the barons and the country back under his tyrannical rule. Barring his way stood the mighty Rochester castle, a place that would become the symbol of the rebel’s momentous struggle for justice and freedom.
Plot: In the year 1215, the rebel barons of England have forced their despised King John to put his royal seal on the Magna Carta, a seminal document that upheld the rights of free men. Yet within months of pledging himself to the great charter, the King reneged on his word and assembled a mercenary army on the south coast of England with the intention of bringing the barons and the country back under his tyrannical rule. Barring his way stood the mighty Rochester castle, a place that would become the symbol of the rebel’s momentous struggle for justice and freedom.
Smart Tags: #13th_century #england #knight #castle #king #templar #magna_carta #medieval_times #year_1215 #warrior #middle_ages #rampart #gore #templar_knight #mutilation #torture #castle_keep #siege_tower #catapult #violence #sword_fight
|6.1/10 Votes: 40,388|
|6.1 Votes: 481 Popularity: 11.915|
Forgive the historical inaccuracies and it’s an enjoyable film
I am not an expert on the period this film covers but reading reviews on here and then reading up on the period it is clear that it is not historically accurate. I can see why this would upset some people but for me watching a film is just pure entertainment not a history lesson so it is not something that concerns me too much. The fact that someone makes a film about a specific period in history may, as it did with me, make them get the facts for themselves.
As for the film itself it is nothing if not entertaining. The plot is made clear and therefore unlike some historical action films you actually get to know what’s going on and why. In a nutshell a small band of knights have to defend a castle against hordes of King Johns men something along the lines of Zulu. There is a fair bit of tension and the fights are bloody and brutal.
The acting is nothing special though I thought Paul Giamatti was good as King John. The camera work is at times annoyingly shaky especially during the battle scenes but there is also some nice scenery in the few quieter spells.
Ironclad might fail historically but it does succeed in entertaining and that ultimately is what counts.
OK, But is Jonathan English… English?
…And here’s what I mean: The movie is absolutely watchable (if you are a fan of historical action, medieval theme and hack n’ slash of course). The Battle scenes are shot perfectly. Costumes are not 100% authentic, but not so fantasy-driven as other “historical” movies tend to create these days, but: In places the movie raises the question: did the director any historical research prior to arm his team with cameras and lights or not at all? How, being English, is possible to not know own history if not in details, than at least to some degree? The case here is not about “artistic freedom”, that sometimes demands to sacrifice realism or fact to make an art better. The inaccuracies occur here in places, where there aren’t any necessity of them.
The rip-offs from the other movies were obvious as well. I don’t know whether the authors really did intend to make “medieval magnificent seven” but if they did, they failed. Each character in Magnificent Seven is someone you deeply care. Someone you deeply know. Someone who you never forget. Each of them is unique.
Here: They are seven as well. They have one womanizer. They have on guy who throws knifes. They have one unexperienced youngster who asks for the trouble. They have one huge guy who chops wood when the group is approaching him… But that’s it. That’s where similarities end. Neither of these characters have any charisma.
Out of two main villains, one plays it’s part really good, while other has not much to do except swinging the huge Axe.
Templar – the main protagonist of the movie, is played well as well… but again, his character is cliché as well and not as deep as writers could have imagined. (No fault of the actor here. He worked with what he had).
Plot is simple and somewhat unrealistic. 7 heroes, together with random 11 soldiers are guarding the castle from thousands of bad guys. (One English king and whining Danes who run at the first sight of blood among their ranks.
Bad guys need castle so badly because it’s on the strategic spot on the English map and if King who regrets signing Magna Carta wants to rule autocratically once again, he must take it at all costs.
Here you will need all your suspend of disbelief to not raise the questions such as: why the rebels have sent only 7 men with questionable reputation to hold such an important spot…
Overall, like I said in the beginning of this review, the movie is watchable. If you’re looking for some good action, blood and gore, you’ll get what you paid for. If you’re history buff though and easily offended about historical inaccuracies, you can avoid this one.
Original Language en
Runtime 2 hr 1 min (121 min)
Genre Action, Drama, History, Romance, War
Director Jonathan English
Writer Jonathan English (story & screenplay), Erick Kastel (screenplay), Stephen McDool (first screenplay)
Actors James Purefoy, Brian Cox, Kate Mara, Derek Jacobi
Country UK, Switzerland, USA, Germany
Production Company VIP 4 Medienfonds, Rising Star
Sound Mix Dolby Digital
Aspect Ratio 2.35 : 1
Camera Panavision Genesis HD Camera, Panavision Primo Lenses
Laboratory Molinare, London, UK (digital intermediate)
Film Length 3,335 m (Portugal, 35 mm)
Negative Format 35 mm (Kodak Vision2 200T 5217, Vision3 500T 5219)
Cinematographic Process N/A
Printed Film Format N/A