Review of Ironclad (2011) by Lordpenney — 07 Jan 2012

A brutal film that pulls very few punches, particularly in its portrayal of violence. Although this might be to the films detriment.

This picture is brimming with action scenes. Lots of action scenes. So many that it you start to feel that you've just seen this sword choreography ten minutes ago. Thankfully however, most off these scenes do contain at least one memorable sequence, but this does not excuse director Jonathan English's apparent arch-nemesis; shakycam. The first two action scenes in the film are rendered impossible to watch due to an easily exited cameraman who took every opportunity to zoom-in-and-out whilst maintaining all the slight of hand of a paranoid 'tickle-me Elmo'.

However, it must be pointed out that the shakycam does gradually subside, even if it doesn't completely disappear, along with the violence. At the start of the film we are exposed to some brutal scenes that don't cut away; this is in contrast to the third act of the film which seems to not be as explicit as the start as it develops a habit of implying violence and showing aftermath. These scenes of implication are actually more effective that their brasher predecessors, although it is probably due their contrast.

The acting is exactly what you came for; its not going to win any Oscars but it does convey enough appropriate emotion in order to allow the plot to trundle along. James Purefoy does seem to be doing all he can in a role that doesn't provide him with much emotive acting to do, but it still makes an awkward chemistry with love interest Kate Mara.

All in all, if you are looking for Shakespeare, why did you even consider watching this film? But if you want something cool to watch with a few mates, then you may want to give this a try if you've already seen 300.