Review of The Legend of Hercules (2014) by Leanne D — 14 Aug 2014

Here you see, we have a story about a strong, noble, and morally upright man. He is the surrogate son to a powerful ruler, and has a brother figure who is seen as weaker, is insecure with himself, etc and is jealous of the other and is tortured by the fact that he cannot win the approval of a parent.

When it looks like the hero is going to cause problems, the bad guys arrange an attempted assassination that they think succeeds, with the hero unknowingly surviving and being made a slave where he is sold to a man as an arena fighter and becomes undefeated in that field.

Eventually winning his way to the capital of the kingdom he once served where he makes a grand entrance winning a match nobody expected they could, forming something of a revolution as they fight, and seeking to take down the men responsible for all this, who declare martial law.

With his surrogate brother pushing himself on the local princess who is in love with the lead hero. Add in other more specific bits like the bad guys blackmailing a character into giving them information on the hero's plans by the threatening the life of their kid (leading to the hero's capture) and a scene with the evil brother giving up on trying to win over the leading and lady and outright telling her he is going to have her and conceive an heir, and it all seems particularly shameless.

Now you pretty much know what this movie is. It's what you would get if you had had the Sci-Fi (oh wait, now it's "SyFy", because poor literacy is cool I guess) Channel had made Ridley Scott's acclaimed epic "GLADIATOR".

(Which I hope that synopsis made obvious) It's visual style feels near directly ripped from Zack Snyder's "300", the presentation of the characters of Hercules and Iphicles feel like they are channeling (aside from Maximus and Commodus that is) Thor and Loki from the Marvel Studios films (Kellan Lutz at times feeling like he's actually doing a Chris Hemsworth impression), and my dad even amusingly pointed out that at a point it also seems to draw heavily from Kevin Costner's "ROBIN HOOD: PRINCE OF THIEVES" of all things.

Now harkening back to previous films is nothing new, and doesn't make or break a movie in of itself. Even "GLADIATOR" itself took strong influence from swords and sandals epics from Hollywood's golden age.

Namely "SPARTACUS", "BEN-HUR", and "THE FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE". However it in spite of that also manages to tell it's own story and tell it extremely well. With its own themes, ideas, and characterizations/character arcs.

Making for an all around great film. This movie by comparison just feels very cookie cutter in how it's put together. The story feels very rushed, with a number of plot points feeling under-developed.

Top that off with what consists of mostly poor acting, dodgy what looks like TV level CGI, as well as cheap looking sets and costumes and you are left with what is mostly a sour film experience. So that begs the question of whether or not there was anything I liked in this movie.

Well, I was hoping that it would be a lot more funny than it was. With a 3% here on the Tomatometer I was hoping we'd get a hilarious disaster of "PLAN 9 FROM OUTERSPACE" proportions, but alas it wasn't aside from a few moments.

The biggest being how fake the Naemean lion looks. Scott Adkins, who plays the film's lead villain, is amusing in an ironic way. As they not only try to make him look like Gerard Butler's Leonidas, but he tries to desperately act like him as well.

Going so far as to try to shout all his dialogue ferociously. (I mean come on man, even Gerard Butler reigned it in every one in a while. haha) A couple of the action scenes can admittedly be serviceably entertaining in a bare-bones sort of way, but they're nothing spectacular.

(Like say the ones in the films this is clearly channeling) However the slow-mo is abused to no end, and not used with the same level of technical ability as someone like say Zack Snyder. If I were to try and grasp at straws for anything good to say about this movie I guess I could bring up that Gaia Weiss is pretty easy on the eyes, but let's face it.

This is Hollywood and that's almost always the case at this point. Add on the fact that her performance is pretty bad however as well. (LOL, sorry I just couldn't resist) Anyway, what is easily the best thing about this film is Liam McIntire, who plays Hercules' closest friend and ally throughout the film.

(Best known for being the second guy to play Spartacus the eponymous lead of the Starz television series, which I admittedly have not seen at this time) He gives a legitimately good performance and has a likable screen presence.

Giving a lot more effort than the film feels like it deserves, or that most others in the production did. So at the end of the day, I'd say you can easily skip this one. As the guys over in the Spill Crew put it, the film feels like a Direct-To-Video mockbuster that was actually released in theaters.

As if to ride the wave of a bunch of other swords and sandals films that came out this year ("300: RISE OF AN EMPIRE", "POMPEII", and of course most obviously "HERCULES" starring Dwayne Johnson) to try and make a quick buck.

It's too lazy, uninspired, and done in a sub-par fashion to recommend, but is not so in what can be seen as a campy/ironic way. Though keep in mind that this is of course all just in my own opinion.