This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.

This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

This fabulous Roman Empire flick has all that it takes to tantalize. The historical detail is, of course, a complete fabrication. The movie's real power lies in its not-too-over-the-top story-telling. A Roman officer voluntarily posted to super-savage Britain sets out to rescue his father's honor by retrieving a lost legion's standard (i.e. The Eagle).Breathtaking cinematography combined with solid acting makes this movie a cut above the normal sword and sandal affair. Even the obligatory violence is remarkably restrained. All in all, this is sure to delight fans of the "historical" adventure genre.

The Eagle is an impressive vista on Roman Briton. It gives fair airing to Roman and Brythonic points of view. Like Gaul, Eagle can be neatly divided into three parts: garrison life, life in the Roman colony and adventure north of the wall.As the curtain opens we meet Marcus Flavius Aquilla (Channing Tatum) a newly minted commander on his way to a frontier outpost where Druids are rousing the restive Celts to action against the occupying Roman Army. Seasoned veterans at the officer's mess are skeptical of the new commander. "He's probably unpacking his rule-book," quips Galba (Paul Ritter).Marcus surprises the officers and men with detecting an attack on the fort early enough to interdict it. There is quite a long wait in the dark of damp northern England during which Galba's stare tells it all. However Lutorious (Denis O'Hare) stands by the commander seemingly with bemused detachment. To the experienced legionnaire's surprise, Marcus was right. The Keltoi attack just as Marcus appears ready to call off the alert. New to the post, he isn't used to all the nocturnal noise that conceals the approach of Celtic warriors. Injured in combat Marcus is sent to his uncle's villa in Southern Britain where Lutorious delivers news of the battle streamer awarded the unit, Marcus' medal and an honorable discharge.Donald Sutherland plays Uncle Aurelius to perfection. As the most experienced actor in the cast he refrains from overpowering the stars Jaime Bell and Channing Tatum. But I think that Sutherland's genius in this film was that he was playing himself: the elderly urbane white liberal, a man of bearing, sophistication, distinction, culture and refinement. Inviting a notable to the dinner table, Uncle Aurelius chides the guests about his vegetarian fare: "fish and eggs; lets not all rush at once." Uncle believes that slaves should serve voluntarily or be left to their own devices. Uncle buys Esca (Jaime Bell) a slave to tend to Marcus but doesn't care if the slave runs away. This Keltoi slave had been rescued by Marcus from a blood thirsty crowd in the arena because Esca had faced death unafraid. Reduced to personal servitude, Esca tells Marcus he hates everything Roman but will serve out of personal obligation, gratitude for being spared.When the fully recovered Marcus decides on the adventure north of the wall to recover the lost Eagle of the 9th Legion Uncle with utter hypocrisy bluntly tells Marcus that one can not trust the word of a slave. "He says what he says and does what he does because he has to." This sets the scene for the third act, the adventure north of the wall.North of the wall there's a roll reversal, Marcus becomes Esca's slave. Yet true to his word, Esca helps Marcus recover the Eagle and defend it from re-capture.The film is exceptional, partially because the lines of the Keltoi are scripted in the once outlawed Gaelic language with subtitles. When the Romans speak, they speak in English.

I wasn't expecting much from this movie, but there aren't many movies being made about the Romans, and I was in the mood. It didn't start out well, with poor direction, acting and dialogue, to the extent where it had the feel of a TV movie, but if you stick with it that soon gives way to a watchable flick.They obviously pent a lot on sets and the fight scenes, and the music was pretty good, but the last movie I saw was a great one, with top-notch everything – the kind that leaves you changed for the next day, with an invigorated feeling and lust for life until you gradually drift back to reality...so I was trying not to judge this one too unfairly. There is a good battle scene early on (the second one) that shows the tactical brilliance of the Romans and the animal fierceness of the Britons. Tatum did a fair job; I haven't seen him in anything else yet but I feel like he could do some decent acting in the hands of the right director.Without reading up on it, I felt that their imagining of the early tribes of northern Britain seemed credible/authentic/plausible enough; less suspension of reality was required here than in a lot of movies. As the slave pointed out, the original Romans had come to kill; the "savages" were only trying to defend themselves and their lands, and any sense on the part of the Romans of the need for revenge was groundless. But Aquila was only seeking to restore his family's honor, so you could still root for him somewhat even though he was basically on the side of evil.Interestingly, they had some Scottish flavor in some of the music, even in the scenes about the Romans.There was one point when they were fleeing in the river where you could see the water splash up on the camera lens, but there was some nice on-location scenery (if not the right location).I watched both the regular and unrated versions, and the only difference is a few frames of the most graphic violence. Couldn't be more than a second all together.When it was all over it seemed like only about an hour's worth of stuff just took place, and it was mainly just these two characters -- though with not enough time to really get to know them and their relationship, whereas in the same length movie that can usually be accomplished. Almost more like a buddy flick, or a road film.I think I'm being generous with a 6. I probably wouldn't recommend it if you're not into that kind of thing. But overall, no regrets.Denis O'Hare was good in The Proposal, but I wasn't wild about him in this. Jamie Bell didn't leave much of an impression either. So no standout performances, no standout anything – I want to give it 5 1/2 stars but I'll round it up for the battle scenes, sets and costumes.The alternate ending was stupid.

Warning - contains spoilers concerning the original book and the movie plot:I loved and still love the book of Rosemary Sutcliff, because its details of the plots:the introduction-plot of how Aquila was even quite deeply befriended with the British people around the Roman fort, how the situation was able to change so that they became enemies in fight... how he found the former friend's family dead after a fight and how sad that was for him... etc.the frame-plot about Cottia and Esca and Wolf- how watching Cottia had a main influence why Aquila himself decided to buy Esca, how Esca was important for getting the wolf cub named Wolf - then the part, how the connection between Aquila and Cottia started by the help of the wolf cub ... and after the return of Aquila it started to blossom the main story - the story about the Eagle, the idea of the mission, the main idea that Aquila would travel as Medic for Eyes so that he would be welcome - and how he even got working medicine by the aid of the medic who was a friend of the uncle... How Aquila decided to let Esca free BEFORE they left so that Esca joined him as equal man, not as slave ... etc. etc.And then I had to watch the movie:All important parts except the action-parts cut away or changed completely - and even the action parts changed so much that it all completely changed the drawn characters of Esca and Aquila and even other persons - it nearly made a kind of Rambo out of out of Aquila... and so of course this movie as well perverted the story plot in the North - nearly all natives constructed as evil monsters - far different than in the book where the ambivalence was a main point.Therefore - this could have become a great story of a movie, but it was perverted into a flat Action-C-Movie at the cost of all important side- plots and even at the cost of main aspects of the main plot:Even the end was changed into the complete opposite: Whilst in the book the eagle's wings had to stay at the northern tribe and therefore it was pointed out as impossible to re-establish the Ninth with an eagle-torso which had lost its wings, but nevertheless Aquila AND Esca get rewarded both (but secretly) - Well, in the movie of course the War-Heroes rescued the eagle COMPLETELY and then they even openly babble about rebuilding the Ninth Legion - robbing the story the last aspect of its real historical context... WHAT THE ****?-> I was close to give 2 points, but it went worse and worse... so only 1 point possible.