Movie review: “The Eagle”

** ½

(PG-13, 144 Minutes)

“The Eagle” can be summed up into one word: Disappointment. Other than “A Guide to Recognizing your Saints” and “Battle in Seattle," I have never been a fan of films that Channing Tatum has starred in, such as “She’s the Man," “Step-up," “Fighting," “Dear John” and “G.I. Joe." Still, I thought I would enjoy “The Eagle," (despite Tatum being in the lead) because films depicting ancient events have always appealed to me, and because it was directed by Kevin Macdonald. He directed “The Last King of Scotland” (a film I considered one of the best of 2006) and the underrated thriller “State of Play." In this case, "The Eagle” is filled with many disappointments, and Macdonald’s direction doesn't prevent there from being many let-downs during the action and excitement sequences; the characters are dull and the film just drags on for a good 114 minutes.

At the beginning, there is a back-story to the following events. It is said that a Roman Legion, known as the Ninth Legion, went into enemy territory in Caledonia (which is now present-day Scotland). But they mysteriously disappeared and never returned and were never heard from again. This led to the construction of Hadrian’s Wall that cut off Caledonia from the rest of the known world. (The 2010 British film “Centurion” explains in greater detail about the event.) So I guess in retrospect “The Eagle” is almost like a sequel to that film. Those events take place in 117 A.D. and now we fast-forward to 140 A.D. where we are introduced to a young Roman general named Marcus Flavius Aquila (Tatum). He is the son of a Ninth Legion soldier who disappeared in Caledonia. When his uncle, Aquila (Donald Sutherland), tells him about his father’s eagle-shaped statue that represented his legion, Marcus must go into enemy territory to retrieve the precious statue and redeem his father’s legacy. Joining him is a Scottish slave Esca (Jamie Bell), who is chosen because he speaks the native language. Marcus is warned that he may not come back alive, and that Esca cannot be trusted.

Despite my negative reaction to it, I have to say that this film was beautifully shot. The panoramic shots of those English and Scottish landscapes made the film look gorgeous, and there were also good dark grim shots as well. I also found this film was mixed with such a well-written score and sound, which made the film all the better to look at. Unfortunately, that’s the only thing I admired about this picture.  The fights scenes in this movie are short and not really that exciting, but I can give them full credit for not making it a Computer Generated Imagery (CGI) fest. Director Macdonald actually took the time to create realistic stunts, and used fast-paced editing, unlike the movie “300” where all the fight scenes were CGI. I’m not criticizing the movie “300” per se, because I did enjoy it, but it had an overabundance of CGI.

Besides the short fight scenes, there were also many letdowns in this movie on an excitement level. Whenever you think something good is going happen it just ends as quickly as it started. When Marcus and Esca ride off for the first time, I figured at least something mildly interesting would happen. But instead they just embarked on the slow process of getting to Hadrian’s Wall. When they actually get to Caledonia, one of the local people gets mad at the Tatum character, so you would figure that something exciting would happen, but that quickly ends right after it started because he knocks him out.

This film is rated PG-13 and it is rightfully so — the bloodshed, gore and torn limbs are just a half second shot or not seen at all. If this had been an R-rated film it would have been a lot more dark, gritty and believable of the time period than as it is portrayed now.

The only real suspense and grit comes toward the climax, but this film is just a bore that you won’t care about it because even the ending doesn’t last long enough for you to be impressed. I’m not saying this film is entirely bad, because there are a few things that are admirable as I stated above, but this adaptation of Rosemary Sutcliff’s novel is just not a satisfying entry into the “sword and sandal” genre. If you want a better historical epic than this one, then see “Spartacus,” “Gladiator," “King Arthur," “300” or “Braveheart." Unlike this movie, you can enjoy the exciting fight sequences and get a lot of tender emotion in its storyline. In the meantime, I will wait for TNT to show “Gladiator" or “Braveheart” for the umpteenth time, and feel more satisfied.