I knew when I began watching this movie that it could go either one of two ways: a really cool medieval slasher with good effects, a decent script, and some cool actors; or a terrible medieval slasher with blah effects, a totally unbelievable story, and bad acting. What I wasn’t expecting was a strange combination of the two.
The movie “Ironclad” is based on the events following the signing of the Magna Carta. Even after King John had signed the famous document into law, he continued to rule as if nothing had happened. This angered some of the barons who had helped fight the King in the first place, thus starting a series of military disputes.
Only loosely based on fact, but it never really tries to be a documentary-style movie. For those of you who do care about the history, it is supposed to be set up around the Siege of Rochester Castle during the First Barons’ War in 1215. But it isn’t really that important.
The moderate amount of talent that is there is too spread out to do more than move the plot along. Paul Giamatti is really good at yelling, though.
Not very good at all, with the exception of the fighting scenes. It screws up from square one: too many shots in one scene, too over-exposed, bad angles, etc. Almost hard to watch sometimes.
Great fight scenes with pretty good special effects. They don’t shy away from the blood and gore that was readily available in most medieval battles. The sound is pretty good as well and serves to accent the on-screen violence. The siege effects with relation to the castle were passable, and definitely good enough to bring the scale of the battle into wider view.
Wasn’t all bad, wasn’t all good. Really landed somewhere in between.
The first recommendation to pop into my head would be for a guy’s-night-in setting. Beer, chips, and plenty of violence!