The Last Legion

While not exactly in the same league as the visually dazzling "Excalibur" and saddled with cheap looking CGI effects, this Anglo-Italian co-production has quite a bit of fun finding a direct path from the fall of Rome to the birth of Arthurian legend.

The film is nothing to be ashamed of (especially if you're Kingsley). But it's as if everybody involved knows what the deal is.

When a movie wants to be sold as a spectacle, it had better deliver something more spectacular than this.

Second-rate sword-and-sorcery saga.

This might have made a good children’s film.

Seriously hampered by glaring inconsistencies of tone and intent, and often feels like a series of highlights carved out of a much longer epic.

The Last Legion offers guilty-pleasure fun in a cheesy, very De Laurentiis way (much like 1976's Mandingo rip-off Drum), but, in the end, it's just not a very inspired or well-conceived film, despite Kingsley's strangely endearing turn as the proto-Merlin.

I really liked this movie. It's not the best, but it's a good time. An adventure film that starts in Rome and then goes north into Britannia. A few familiar faces from other productions are nice to see. I haven't read the book, so I wasn't expecting anything in particular other than "there will be a legion involved somehow", and there was a legion involved somehow, so it delivered on that much. If you like fantasy adventure sorts of stories but don't take things too seriously then you can probably enjoy this film.

This appears very much like a TV show that may be shown about 7-8pm on a weekend. It features Colin Firth and John Hannah as romans and Ben Kingsley as Merlin. Its certainly cheesy but its not entirely unwatchable, just rather unremarkable. The cinematography is ok, not awful but certainly not great either and the special effects are somewhat poor. Overall its an ok film but no more really, so I wouldn't specifically recommend it as such, no.

Pretty bad attempted epic that is marginally enjoyable if not taken seriously.

Not even the cheap Chinese knockoff of Gandalf can save this thing. I don’t even know where to begin with this film, because 'The Last Legion' was an unbearable experience. It had been a long time since a movie made it this hard for me to get through it. Before the first half hour was even over, I was already checking the clock, wondering how much longer I had left. I was bored, disconnected, and I even fell asleep. The only part that lifts off slightly is the final half hour; everything before that feels like a chore, watched purely out of obligation because I hate leaving movies unfinished. I wasn’t angry or fascinated — just completely indifferent. There isn’t a single scene burned into my memory. I’d only recommend it to people who genuinely have nothing better to do than waste two hours of their time. It works as a sort of prequel or reinterpretation of the famous King Arthur legend and the sword in the stone, a story that fascinated me as a kid. But here, I couldn’t care less about any of it. I don’t find any meaningful message or compelling reflection beneath the surface; what you get instead is action, battles, sword fights, and, of course, the attractive woman whose sole purpose is to fall for the male lead. If there’s any idea to be found underneath it all, it’s this simplistic notion that a king rules simply because he is king, whether or not he actually has the ability to lead. At the very least, none of the cast actively annoyed me, but I also can’t say anything genuinely positive about them. Nobody stands out. They all feel interchangeable — the same character with different faces. The performances aren’t a complete disaster, but they’re painfully lukewarm. There’s no grandiosity, no meaningful character arc worth remembering. Maybe Thomas Brodie-Sangster deserves a slight mention, because despite being so young and trapped in such a terrible film, he manages to retain a bit of dignity on screen. Doug Lefler tries to make something out of a script — a terrible one — written by far too many hands. There are a few isolated scenes that are watchable thanks to the director’s intentions or the way they’re staged, but the awful, abrupt editing completely destroys them. There are no surprises. And if this production had a budget, it certainly doesn’t look like it was put to good use. Everything feels limited, oddly ambitious in the wrong ways, and completely devoid of personality. Not even that cheap Chinese knockoff of Gandalf brings any charisma to the table. As I mentioned in the previous paragraph, the editing is what truly kills the film. It’s disastrous: abrupt cuts, constant jumps, and pacing so frantic that it feels like it’s tearing the narrative apart instead of building it. The story never flows naturally, and it’s obvious that key shots or transitions are missing to better connect the sequences and time jumps. On top of that, the visual effects are best admired from a distance so you don’t notice how rough they really are. A film this bad can still **** together a few mildly positive points despite being riddled with flaws. Almost nothing works, but with enough patience, resignation, and a massive act of generosity, it can be watched. I, for one, won’t be repeating the experience.

Those who've read the book of Valerio Massimo Manfredi will probably agree that the movie had too many differences compared to the novel. The movie felt like if its balances were misplaced. Too many changes, too many lame dialogues, very bad combat scenes. And inexistent characters. Those were present also in the book, but the movie lost even the best element of the literary original: all the valuable information about the Roman era... Disappointing.