Review of Assassin's Creed (2016) by Dante V — 31 Jan 2017

Always a pleasure to see Michael Fassbender and Jeremy Irons, however the film adaptation of Assassin's Creed really failed to incorporate many key elements that made the games popular.

An important fact that must be brought to light about the Assassin's creed franchise is that it only gained attention and popularity with the release of Assassin's Creed II which followed Italian assassin Ezio Auditore. Now, I am not critical of this film because Ezio is absent but because our lead assassin Aguilar is quite uninspiring and the character development in this film as a whole is poor.

Ezio became a pop cultural icon because he was well-developed; a character with whom audiences became emotionally invested. Conversely, Aguilar was a character we only slightly got acquainted will. Even Callum Lynch the main character was relatively unknown by the end of the film.

I found myself bored on a few occasions, but this film is definitely not without its strengths. Where this film falls short with story and character development, it compensates with great visuals, costumes, sets, and action sequences.

I have read some pretty nasty reviews of this film, but is it all really that bad? No I don't think so, just uninspiring. Great film to watch if you are bored, but if your time is limited, skip it. The Assassin's Creed games didn't take off until the sequel. Similarly, maybe we will be surprised in the sequel to this film... if there ever is one.