Ironclad

Ironclad, being a story based on the great Magna Carta and evolves around the 13th century England lives up to a general level of expectation. The action scenes are quite graphical and depicts the real intensity of ancient warfare where men fought sword-to-sword and man-to-man (unlike the hide-and-strike guerrilla ware fare) and shows the inhuman side of a men when its a game of life and death than the rosy sword taps you see in some movies. The background scores are also up to a good standard and supports the build up of momentum and emotion throughout the show. However, the movie fails utterly in its story. The decision to hold Rochester with 10 heads is a suicide mission to any man. And most of the roles are not balanced enough. The camera work could have been a bit less shaky which in turn could have improved the battle scenes. All in all its an average movie which could give you a below par satisfaction if you do not watch it with too much expectations. Cheers

Don't even bother to read reviews that blabber on about historical inaccuracies. Once again - I should just copy & paste my mantra - merely some historical names used but all the facts have been changed creating a NOVEL FAIRY TALE meant only to entertain. And it is indeed entertaining, especially if you like this genre of kings, and swords & old Britain, etc. I enjoy this genre, and I don't use movies to gain an education in history and neither should anyone else. This movie is a little bit 'B'ish at moments, but overall it's well done and the cast is pretty great. I think Brian Cox can do no wrong anyway. He's Scottish so he's the bomb in my movie world. Giamatti was well cast here and many more. Enjoy movie night with this one.