Neil Marshall’s career has lead him to the middle ground between fame and cult status, somewhere in the neighbourhood of his predecessor John Carpenter. His films make use of elements of horror and the macabre and distinguish themselves with a healthy helping of strong female characters. In Centurion, his latest film, Marshall treads over familiar ground by making use of some of his trademark elements and fails to come up with anything we haven’t seen him try before.
Centurion is yet another retelling of the ill-fated campaign of the Roman Ninth Legion north of Hadrian’s wall into the forbidden lands that will one day be known as Scotland. In the year of our Lord 117, Roman soldiers are dispatched north to engage the marauding barbarians known as the Picts. When they are betrayed and almost completely wiped out by the woefully underestimated Pict army, a small band of soldiers run for their lives across the Scottish highlands while they are hunted at every turn by a soulless tracker of preternatural “Lord Baltimore” ability.
“Marshall tends to begin with a squad populated with a diverse cross-section of humanity, traps them in some kind of hostile ground, and then follows them out as they contend with insurmountable odds until there’s only one of them left.”
If it sounds like your seen this movie before, it’s probably because this is Marshall’s second Hadrian’s wall type scenario, and all of Marshall’s involve ventures into forbidden territory. Whether it’s deep within a cave, into a quarantine zone, or a farm full of werewolves, Marshall tends to begin with a squad populated with a diverse cross-section of humanity, traps them in some kind of hostile ground, and then follows them out as they contend with insurmountable odds until there’s only one of them left. And while Marshall tends to rely on clever character development in his films, in Centurion he instead decides to hang the film on the performance of leading man Michael Fassbender. This would ordinarily be a safe bet, but it plays against Marshall’s style, and the resulting torsion doesn’t generate the kind of conflict the story needs.
Elements in the film that do play to Marshall’s strengths include the same kind of anti-authoritarian/anti-establishment undertones present in all his films. The only authority figure cast in a sympathetic light eschews the trappings of power, displaying the common touch of eating, arm wrestling and brawling alongside his troops while the powers that be pull their sinister strings from a safe distance. His fondness for strong female characters is also evident in Centurion, but a combination of sloppy expository writing and an undisciplined performance from model-turned-actress Olga Kurylenko neutralizes what should have otherwise been the driving force behind this film. If you ask me, he should have held out for Rhona Mitra. I don’t know what the lukewarm reception for yet another modestly budgeted Marshall film means for the future, especially considering this movie made even less than the grossly misunderstood Doomsday. Perhaps Neil needs to retreat back into the realm of the tiny bankroll and resume the mantle of the underdog.
I saw another movie revolving around the Roman Ninth Legion, The Eagle from Kevin Macdonald which I thought was quite decent. From what I get, this is more of an action movie while The Eagle has a bigger scope and ambitions.
I suppose Centurion could be considered an “action thriller”, but I would say that it’s interest in the Hadrian wall idea was tenuous at best. It was just another opportunity for Marshall to do something about Scotland. I liked the take that King Arthur had on the wall, even if it was a little tenuous too. I stayed away from The Eagle strictly for the Tatum factor, but I’m sure I’ll be catching it down the line in some form or fashion. If you ask me, Doomsday was a great retelling of the story of Hadrian’s wall.
It’s odd. I typically like how Marshall starts his films (like Dog Soldiers and Doomsday) and can go along so far, but there’s always a point where the movie comes completely off the frickin’s rails. I want to see this, but I also dread it.
The derailing is always the best part, because Marshall’s sense of propriety takes a vacation when he’s on the set.
You make it sound like the films start as perfectly reasonable and controlled movies. They start pretty insane… and just as the audience is throwing up in the alleyway outback, he breaks out the absinthe.
I should write blurbs or something.
Dog Soldiers started out fairly regular, and The Descent was a little jarring but on the mundane side. Theres no doubt he takes his films crazy places, but as amped up as the beginning of Doomsday was, there’s no way I could have guessed there’d be knights on horseback at any point in the movie.
Seriously though. What’s his deal with Scotlland?
I went in with pretty low expectations, not having watched much of Marshall’s previous work. I told myself that if there was decent action and plenty of Fassbender that the movie would be a positive in my book. Check and check, and so there it sits, not a disappointment.
I will say that some of the action was pretty over the top. Like when one of the baddies is thrown against a tree. His entire body pretty much explodes and blood flies 15 feet in every direction. Come on, really?
Welcome back, Red! Yes, Marshall had to find some way to squeeze in some crazy gore – and I would have felt a bit of a hole in the middle of the movie without somebody being torn to shreds in graphic fashion.
I highly recommend digging deeper into Marshall’s past works. The Descent is a popular choice, and definitely check out Dog Soldiers. Me, I’m one of the few who actually enjoyed Doomsday – but I’m willing to admit it’s not to everyone’s taste.