More for Less

Rating: Null/10 (30 April 2011)

I like a good "historical" film and I'm not picky about whether it's historically accurate or not. (It never is, it's about entertainment and storytelling. Get over it.) So I like Centurion even though it has faults and is bloated and overlong but this impressed me so much more especially bearing in mind Ridley Scott's budget was at least a hundred times more than the one for Centurion. In fact Scott has got really flabby with his work recently - I hated Robin Hood with a vengeance. My suspicion is that Marshall is driven to produce more for less because of budgetary constraints.
I did have difficulty sympathising with the Romans in this film because every instinct I have is fully behind the Picts. Yes we make a joke about "what have the Romans ever done for us?" but in my case I really hate the Romans. I guess it's part of my racial heritage. Nevertheless the actors do a really good job of appearing to be decent guys and they do win you over, sort of.
Cinematography and the score are both excellent too and deserve a mention. This isn't your typical big budget action film made for a zillion bucks in Hollywood. It was made relatively cheaply in the UK and it's all the better for it. (Not something you'll hear me say often as I generally hate modern British films and glad to see the back of the Film Council. In this case though it was taxpayer's money well spent!)