LoremIpsum321
Joined Jul 2012
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Ratings56
LoremIpsum321's rating
Reviews36
LoremIpsum321's rating
A decent enough idea totally messed up.
If you're hoping for some action or horror you will be disappointed.
Well, I've to admit the landscapes are nice, but obviously that's not enough.
A bunch of highly insubordinate, moronic soldiers, a completely incompetent leader and one useless scout are having a bad time because of their own stupidity - thanks to a real stinker of a script.
It's pretty much just about cretins wandering around and blabbing nonsense, and when they shut up - they rarely do - the directing isn't helping either.
And women as legionaries? C'mon! K, it's not a documentary about ancient Roman warfare, but seriously?
Don't waste your time.
If you're hoping for some action or horror you will be disappointed.
Well, I've to admit the landscapes are nice, but obviously that's not enough.
A bunch of highly insubordinate, moronic soldiers, a completely incompetent leader and one useless scout are having a bad time because of their own stupidity - thanks to a real stinker of a script.
It's pretty much just about cretins wandering around and blabbing nonsense, and when they shut up - they rarely do - the directing isn't helping either.
And women as legionaries? C'mon! K, it's not a documentary about ancient Roman warfare, but seriously?
Don't waste your time.
While it's not the worst film there is, it's still below average.
The excecution is quite flawed and feels rather cheap, from the direction to the weapon FX. But a couple of gory melee effects were not bad.
The Story is simple and didn't make too much sense. The script is poor, some of the actors did alright with what was given, some did not.
I've watched worse, but there is certainly no need to spend time on this one.
The excecution is quite flawed and feels rather cheap, from the direction to the weapon FX. But a couple of gory melee effects were not bad.
The Story is simple and didn't make too much sense. The script is poor, some of the actors did alright with what was given, some did not.
I've watched worse, but there is certainly no need to spend time on this one.
The low rating is completely off, in my opinion. Some trash productions get praise by fake reviews and sometimes also by real ones, but something like The Courier gets totally smashed? Yeah, suuure...
In terms of action, and hence entertaining, it delivers. The film uses a limited setting and a limited timeframe for its story, not many nonsense distractions, it's rather straight to the point. That's what I personally like in action thrillers.
Kurylenko did a good job, Oldman falls short, Shah is OK, Moseley pretty bad. Aim the hand-to-hand fighting parts for realism or for certain Hong Hong ingenuity? Nope. Do villains make stupid mistakes and sometimes also the heroine? Happens, quite typical for the genre, so who cares, it's fiction and not the reinvention of action cinema.
Of course, the story is simple, characters not complex and dialogues rather basic, but who watches a film like this for that? What do some people expect here, Shakespeare?
You want something simple that won't win Oscars, just to sit back and relax, then you could do a lot worse.
Normally I would give it a very solid 6, but now a 7 it is.
PS: One here compared it to Salt in terms of how it's done right... What on earth? Salt is way more unrealistic in every way, had a much, much higher budget and is still just the inferior flick, but that's my opinion. Anna was recommended instead by another one, which wasn't bad, but also not as entertaining and for sure a lot less believable, just like Salt. Those 2 films were more 'complex', pretentious and stupid, with more money put in and those idiotic spy-'twists' of which I'm sick of. Another one said the soundtrack was bad... Huh? Well, I found it to be atmospheric and fitting. I better don't want to know what that person considers a good OST then.
In terms of action, and hence entertaining, it delivers. The film uses a limited setting and a limited timeframe for its story, not many nonsense distractions, it's rather straight to the point. That's what I personally like in action thrillers.
Kurylenko did a good job, Oldman falls short, Shah is OK, Moseley pretty bad. Aim the hand-to-hand fighting parts for realism or for certain Hong Hong ingenuity? Nope. Do villains make stupid mistakes and sometimes also the heroine? Happens, quite typical for the genre, so who cares, it's fiction and not the reinvention of action cinema.
Of course, the story is simple, characters not complex and dialogues rather basic, but who watches a film like this for that? What do some people expect here, Shakespeare?
You want something simple that won't win Oscars, just to sit back and relax, then you could do a lot worse.
Normally I would give it a very solid 6, but now a 7 it is.
PS: One here compared it to Salt in terms of how it's done right... What on earth? Salt is way more unrealistic in every way, had a much, much higher budget and is still just the inferior flick, but that's my opinion. Anna was recommended instead by another one, which wasn't bad, but also not as entertaining and for sure a lot less believable, just like Salt. Those 2 films were more 'complex', pretentious and stupid, with more money put in and those idiotic spy-'twists' of which I'm sick of. Another one said the soundtrack was bad... Huh? Well, I found it to be atmospheric and fitting. I better don't want to know what that person considers a good OST then.