In thirteenth-century England, a Knights Templar and a few of the Barons men fight to defend Rochester Castle against the tyrannical King John.In thirteenth-century England, a Knights Templar and a few of the Barons men fight to defend Rochester Castle against the tyrannical King John.In thirteenth-century England, a Knights Templar and a few of the Barons men fight to defend Rochester Castle against the tyrannical King John.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
6.144.9K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Featured reviews
Tip top medieval English gore-flick
This hack and slash classy English historical movie set in the year 1215, tells the mostly true story of the vile King John,played with wonderful abandon by the great actor Paul Giamatti with a perfect English accent,who for reasons to many for this review lays siege to Rochester Castle in Kent.The castle looks the real deal, but it was built for the film in the beautiful countryside of Wales.The budget was small in USA terms,£20 million, but the film looks fantastic and belies it's low budget.The main theme music by Paul Brady is beautiful.The cast is the cream of British actors, the likes of James Purefoy,Brian Cox,Derek Jacobi,Charles Dance and Jason Fleming.Mackenzie Crook and new young actor Aneurin Barnard shine in supporting roles along with female lead Kate Mara.It is a very gory movie with proper stunt work rather than reliance on CGI.Here in UK it got a 15 cert.If you like this sort of film, think a smaller version of El Cid, then your in for a treat.For reasons i don't understand this cracking good film sat on a shelf for over a year to get a release.In my view, a must see.
437th Review: Blood and Valour (But mostly blood)
Definitely shot in a Ridley Scott fashion this is an effective medieval pot-boiler with some moral vision and lots and lots of gruesome full-on combat scenes - without a doubt some of the more bone-crunching, blood squelching fights of recent memory.
Is a great movie? No. It never quite delivers on its promise, and though extremely competent it just can't quite produce that true magic that better films can. It is, however, a highly competent and interesting historical drama. I have some quibbles with costuming etc; but that kind of goes with the territory.
All in all, this is a full-on medieval siege account of the Siege of Rochester -it is well made is most respects and if medieval battles are your thing then you'll be into it.
Is a great movie? No. It never quite delivers on its promise, and though extremely competent it just can't quite produce that true magic that better films can. It is, however, a highly competent and interesting historical drama. I have some quibbles with costuming etc; but that kind of goes with the territory.
All in all, this is a full-on medieval siege account of the Siege of Rochester -it is well made is most respects and if medieval battles are your thing then you'll be into it.
Entertaining but I am afraid the camera man was having a seizure..
I enjoy James Purefoy and Paul Giamatti's acting, so yes, I indeed enjoyed this movie. It isn't historically accurate, but it's still entertaining since the actors are good and I especially enjoyed the part where the script gives a lot of screen-time to every character. Character development of anyone other than the protagonist, usually never happens in Hollywood movies. So I was surprised how this movie made me actually care for and even like everyone fighting to protect the keep.
That said, I am afraid the poor camera man was suffering from Epilepsy since every action scene involves camera shaking around and not staying at a character for more than 0.5 seconds. The art of editing and shooting an action scene, is lost on these people.
Anyway, annoyance with the action scenes aside, the real gold is in the moments spent with the characters. Even King John is weirdly likeable.
That said, I am afraid the poor camera man was suffering from Epilepsy since every action scene involves camera shaking around and not staying at a character for more than 0.5 seconds. The art of editing and shooting an action scene, is lost on these people.
Anyway, annoyance with the action scenes aside, the real gold is in the moments spent with the characters. Even King John is weirdly likeable.
Dark, raw and brutal
Even though historically inaccurate, I found this movie appealing, due to its gloomy atmosphere, raw characters and great fighting performances.
Filmed with low budget, the story focuses on a specific event, therein lacking certain depth and dynamics. Although poorly developed, the characters are well chosen and give the impression that they actually belong to that time and place. I especially liked how James Purefoy expressed the dark of his character.
The fighting scenes are realistic, brutal and very convincing, and it is a real drawback that the chaotic camera movement spoiled that which is best in this movie.
If you like raw medieval action, violence and gore, then this is the movie for you.
Filmed with low budget, the story focuses on a specific event, therein lacking certain depth and dynamics. Although poorly developed, the characters are well chosen and give the impression that they actually belong to that time and place. I especially liked how James Purefoy expressed the dark of his character.
The fighting scenes are realistic, brutal and very convincing, and it is a real drawback that the chaotic camera movement spoiled that which is best in this movie.
If you like raw medieval action, violence and gore, then this is the movie for you.
Quality medieval movie
Released in 2011, "Ironclad" is based on the real-life siege of Rochester Castle by the pompous and loathsome King John (Paul Giamatti) in 1215. In real life the castle was protected by 95 to 140 knights supported by crossbowmen, sergeants, and others, but in the film there are less than 20 fighting men. I suppose this keeps the social interplay in the fortress less complicated. The main protagonist is a solemn Templar, Thomas Marshal (James Purefoy), loosely based on medieval knight/statesman William Marshal. The others include the historical leader of the defense, Baron William d'Aubigny (Brian Cox), a squire (Aneurin Barnard), and various characters played by Jason Flemyng, Jamie Foreman, Rhys Parry Jones, amongst others.
I won't tell you what happens in the film, but in real life King John takes the castle and the nobles were either imprisoned or exiled. Also, the foreign mercenaries John enlists were mostly Flemish, Provençals and Aquitainians, not Danes, and the French didn't arrive until six months after John took the castle. Speaking of the Danes, they're depicted as decidedly pagan when Denmark was already thoroughly Christianized by that point. Lastly, William d'Aubigny was not an ennobled wool merchant and what happens to him at the end of the siege is fictional.
If you can handle historical deviations like these "Ironclad" is a very worthwhile medieval film. The action is realistic and brutal and the main characters are decent to strong. The score and cinematography are top-rate. On the womanly front, Kate Mara plays the platonic wife of Baron Reginald de Cornhill (Derek Jacobi), who becomes infatuated during the siege by the mysterious Templar. Will Marshal give-in to her feminine charms or won't he? Also on hand is Bree Condon as the utterly stunning full-maned brunette Agnes. Unfortunately, not enough is done with the women.
Although not as good as "King Arthur," "Tristan + Isolde" and "Black Death," my three favorite medieval movies, "Ironclad" plays better IMHO than (the overrated) "Braveheart." I'd put it on par with 2010's "Robin Hood," "Rob Roy" and "First Knight."
The film runs 121 minutes and was shot entirely on location in Wales, UK.
GRADE: Borderline B or B+
I won't tell you what happens in the film, but in real life King John takes the castle and the nobles were either imprisoned or exiled. Also, the foreign mercenaries John enlists were mostly Flemish, Provençals and Aquitainians, not Danes, and the French didn't arrive until six months after John took the castle. Speaking of the Danes, they're depicted as decidedly pagan when Denmark was already thoroughly Christianized by that point. Lastly, William d'Aubigny was not an ennobled wool merchant and what happens to him at the end of the siege is fictional.
If you can handle historical deviations like these "Ironclad" is a very worthwhile medieval film. The action is realistic and brutal and the main characters are decent to strong. The score and cinematography are top-rate. On the womanly front, Kate Mara plays the platonic wife of Baron Reginald de Cornhill (Derek Jacobi), who becomes infatuated during the siege by the mysterious Templar. Will Marshal give-in to her feminine charms or won't he? Also on hand is Bree Condon as the utterly stunning full-maned brunette Agnes. Unfortunately, not enough is done with the women.
Although not as good as "King Arthur," "Tristan + Isolde" and "Black Death," my three favorite medieval movies, "Ironclad" plays better IMHO than (the overrated) "Braveheart." I'd put it on par with 2010's "Robin Hood," "Rob Roy" and "First Knight."
The film runs 121 minutes and was shot entirely on location in Wales, UK.
GRADE: Borderline B or B+
Did you know
- TriviaAccording to Writer and Director Jonathan English, the bloody hackings of arms and legs were not done with CGI, but with old-fashioned prosthetics.
- GoofsIn 1215, Rochester was already a sizable city. When Rochester castle is seen in the film, there is no sign of the dwellings that would have comprised the city, nor of the cathedral, which is a massive building, situated about one hundred yards from the castle. The cathedral was looted by King John's forces, during the siege.
- Crazy creditsAs the last end credits roll, there is the following language: No animals were harmed in the filming of this picture. "Especially Newts. "
- ConnectionsFeatured in Breakfast: Episode dated 25 February 2011 (2011)
- How long is Ironclad?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Official sites
- Languages
- Also known as
- Templario
- Filming locations
- Tree Tower Manor, Wales, UK(Archbishop's residence)
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $25,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross worldwide
- $5,151,023
- Runtime
- 2h 1m(121 min)
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 2.35 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content






