A bad mix of History and legend

Rating: 4/10 (1 March 2009)

"The Last Legion" tries to tie in the last Caesar with the legend of King Arthur. The legend of King Arthur has been for a longtime been linked to the Romans. The latest linking is that Arthur was a Roman soldier who commanded Sarmatian cavalry men in Britain against barbarians. Anyway "The Last Legion" mix in historical characters with mythology. Very rarely is a movie very accurate in telling historical events, mixing in legends you know that historical facts are out the window.
The movie begins with the naming of a young boy as the new Caesar, Romulus Augustus. Soon Barbarians invade Rome, kills the boy's parents and capture him. Of course there's treachery involved, I mean what's a Roman story without a good backstabbing? However there are a few soldier who will support the new Emperor no matter what. And they set out to rescue him and take him away from the clutches of the evil barbarians, hoping they could take him to the 9th legion or 'the last legion' in Britannia.
The movie's premise no matter how ridiculous, has the making of a good action adventure fantasy, but out right the movie misses out on that. First off a good fantasy film must have a good dream like quality in the cinematography and the lighting. This movie is too bright, specially in the outdoor scenes. It has none of that dusky look that makes fantasy films look more like a dream. The action is pretty decent but the ones with the female warrior just seems too choreographed. The sets have that crumbling look as befits the waning days of the Western Roman Empire.
The acting was not all that bad Ben Kingsley did a decent job as the Ambrosinus, he plays it with enough playfulness as a role in a movie like this requires. Kevin Mckidd makes a decent villain although I wish his performance was a little more over the top because the role required. The big surprise for me is Colin Firth, long have I dismissed him just like American producers have as the bland good looking guy in the movies who rarely if ever gets the girl. Here he's very good as the commander, he shows a quiet strong and authoritative presence plus he gets the girl, Aishwarya Rai. I don't know how her part got in the movie? She's just not the least bit believable as a female warrior, she doesn't have that ferocity that Lucy Lawless as "Xena the Warrior Princess" had. And as for her being the most beautiful woman in the world, I'll take Diane Kruger anytime.
The screenplay really doesn't explain too much to us, particularly the reason the commander and his soldiers remained royal to the young emperor. Neither did it explain why the boy became the new Caesar. Historically the boy's father completed a successful coup d'etat and made him a figurehead while dear old dad became the power behind the throne. The movie doesn't even give us a line lamenting the end of the Western empire.
The movie just fail on so many level and I put the blame squarely on the the director, producers and the writer. What they made is an action adventure pretty much like the ones from the 60s starring Steve Reeves