Giants of the gaming industry are more and more taking over the film industry every year. It has already reached the point that they began to screen even games from mobile platforms. There are good games like Resident Evil, and there are bad ones like Uwe Ball. And finally, the film industry reached the cult series of games called Assassin's Creed. This film is already doomed to success, regardless of fees and ratings. There are a lot of fans of this series. She is loved for her historical authenticity, twisted plot, and of course for perfectly staged battle scenes. Let’s start with this picture.
Plot. The filmmakers decided to move away from the events of the original games, but the basis of the picture and part of the plot were borrowed from Assassin's Creed II. All fans of the games it will be familiar and in the course of the film you can try to guess what will happen next. Sometimes it worked, sometimes it didn't. In general, the plot is quite good and understandable, but those who are not particularly familiar with the game will be hard. Personally, the film reminded me in part 'Avatar' James Cameron.
The local Desmond Miles performed by Michael Fassbender turned out to be quite tolerable, but his story is very different from that shown in the game. At first, he does not cause any special sympathy for himself, and for those who did not play the game, he will seem like an antihero at all. However, by the middle of the film, everything falls into place and the hero proves that he can be trusted and he will fulfill his mission to the end.
Abstergo. In general, the atmosphere and the very appearance of the building of this organization coincide with the one in the game. But what struck me most about this film was how the creators decided to portray the Animus. If in the game he looked not catchy and was a small portable device, then in the film it is a serious machine, which one of its appearance is terrifying. This makes all the scenes of the Spanish Inquisition much more realistic.
Atmosphere The creators very clearly managed to convey the horror of the situation of that era. The Inquisition spared no one and burned people without remorse. The picture looks gloomy, everything seems to be happening in the dark, but this technique allows you to immerse yourself in the film completely and literally feel everything that happens on the screen. And superbly staged battle scenes once again prove the fact that even with a small budget you can make a good movie. In my memory, this is the first movie I saw, even if it was 5 hours, it is so addictive.
8 out of 10
I can't say the movie is 100% good.
1. Casting actors.
2. Operating work.
3.The visualization is gorgeous.
4. The plot is quite exciting.
5. The script is pretty good.
6. Humor (there really is a bit of it, but it is).
But!
1. Adapting games to big screens is a difficult task in itself.
2. The problem with this film is that not all characters are revealed. Let's say Callum Lynch was well prescribed. As for Aguilar, there is little we can say about him. He can be described as an assassin and that’s all.
3. The dialogue in this movie seems strange.
4. Only about 30% of the film is given to the Spanish Inquisition.
I would like to add that this film has potential. It seems to me (I hope they will) that the creators need to make a film about Aguilar as a separate character. The fact is that in the series 'Assassins creed' all attention goes to the ancestors: Altair, Ezio, Connor, etc.
Let's say Ezio. What moved this character was revenge. Revenge for my father, for my brothers. What moves Aguilar is unclear. What is his motivation?
And although after watching this film did not meet my expectations, it is worth saying that I was not bored when watching and quite interesting to watch.
7 out of 10
Of course, for history lovers, it's just hugging and crying. That's one of the reasons I've never played AC or even watched Letplay. From the film I expected: mysticism, entertainment, plot, good acting. First on zero, plot - 50%, the rest - above a hundred.
I watched with my nephew, who went through all the games, who explained to me what he saw. 'Why do assassins have the motto of Aleister Crowley?' I asked in a whisper after the first scene. 'No, it's from the game, the Assassin motto', he explained. I put another batch of chips in my mouth, and I was glad that I had abandoned computer games and immersed myself in the atmosphere that Kurzel was loading with trucks.
What an Assassin sanctuary! What an amazing scene of burning heretics! What Templars are! However, when the Templar Cotillard leaned over Fassbender-Callum, something in me stopped. Stopped and started screaming: 'I don't want a love line! Don't! You have no right to mock the audience like that! I can predict each of them in advance!' But there was no love line. And this, too, I will attribute to the undoubted advantages of the film, because the clichéd phrases and sounds of kisses, for the voice of which a vantage point is used, are not for the weak nerves of a moviegoer. Much better is what turned out, that is, an emotional connection that brought the plot out of the category ' and here we are blasting, the audience will swallow' on ' and then the audience will have to feel, put themselves in the place of the heroes'.
What I didn't like was the shaking camera in the chase scenes. I don't know what kind of bastard made it fashionable, but now fights, chases, wars are filmed this way. Should we start a petition to stop it? Well, in real life, when you run, that's how the brain records what's happening, but, firstly, the brain also finishes the mentally unseen, and secondly, shoot in films not from the first eyes, but from the outside. So what the hell is that?! Everything is shaking, everything is unclear, here's the arrow, where the arrow fell, no, and there's the idiot, who with the knife, he stayed behind, alive, not alive, but stop you running, do not let you admire the medieval backgrounds, devils, and also, damn, it's clear who will survive, so why this is all? Let us consider all the wounds normally if you want the viewer to have adrenaline in his blood and sing drunken songs. Here's the leap of faith - it's yes, it's beautiful, here's what Callum saw in the rays of light surrounding ' Animus' when his memory appealed to his ancestors - it's also gorgeous. Well, let’s see what you shoot in non-static scenes!
Kurzel did a lot for the film, a lot is guaranteed. Cotillard was brought out of the role ' a pretty female for the main character' and that she is really a scientist who is obsessed with the idea of reconciling the orders of Assassins and Templars, bringing the world into a new era - quite believe. Fassbender gives a wide range of emotions, as he is prescribed a rather strong dramatic line. Irons and Rampling are beautiful in the role of dried powerful personalities, and Labeda’s wild eyes, I think, will steal more than one heart.
The film really turned out to be deeper than the endless ' film about the heroes' with their monotonous victims (ah, grabbed the girl, ah, killed Dad!), but at the same time beyond ' movie on the toy' did not come out. Yes, it’s beautiful, but it’s just a fascination with the hero, not a belief in his reality. Games in ' who else Callum could kill (who could fall in love with) in the most beautiful way' Counting the expa, overkill. Almost exactly what people did, fascinated by supermen before the era of computer games. And so is the story of Eden's apple - yes, I wonder who will own it. But even more interesting would be who put in it the DNA code responsible for free will, what kind of mysterious civilization controlled the artifacts and how far from its goals are both orders of Templars and Assassins. And the principle ' nothing is true' only means that the Assassins' loyalty to their order (Creed) is as much a lie and a falsity as anything else. I bet that this contradiction will not be solved in the next films, because it is still a film about cool men in tough circumstances, and not about what is true in our small universe. . .
And then there's Columbus Assassin, who knows he's sailing to the New World. And the Alhambra! So fuck it - it's still amazingly beautiful!!
*Special for moderators: there is no spoiler!*
Being a fan of the series of games 'Assassin's Creed' I was certainly looking forward to this film. I went to the film today, by the way, gave only 100 rubles for 3D and did not regret it.
Definitely I can say that the film will not like people who are not familiar with the series of games. The film will appeal to fans of games 'Credo Killers'
Let’s get to the movie itself:
Activity
- Michael Fassbender ("X-Men', '300 Spartans', 'Centurion');
- Marion Cotillard ("Taxi', 'The Dark Knight', 'Inception')
- Jeremy Irons ("Die Hard 3: Retribution')
- Brendan Gleeson ("Braveheart', 'Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire', 'Lie low in Bruges')
Michael Kenneth Williams ("12 Years a Slave" 39)
Without a doubt, I have no questions about the cast. Amazing actors who starred in wonderful films.
I have a big question for the director of the film.
Justin, why in a movie about murderers rating: PG-13 ??? In connection with such a rating for me personally became a huge disadvantage - the absence of real cruelty: with blood, dismemberment, with tearing the flesh of enemies. You won’t see that in the movie.
Very paradoxical, in the film about murderers, even the murder of enemies is not really shown. I was very upset about that. In the same Assassin games, cruelty is off the scale.
The film made on the game can seem nonsense, delusions, incomprehensible and boring action movie with parkour for those who have not played in ' Assassin's Creed'. The devastating opinion of critics is clear to me: 'Difficult script, abuse of religion, abundance of action scenes ...' Therefore, I do not recommend the film to the average viewer.
Most of the film is shown these days. And only 3 times are we allowed to move into the past. At the end of the film, there is a clear hint of a continuation of the film. But will it be a question? After disappointing box office fees and low ratings, hardly anyone dares to take a sequel.
Unreasonable expectations
Separate topic for conversation. The film made high stakes, predicted the success of the picture. Claimed that after the release of the film will be shot ' Curse of unsuccessful movies on games '. They also said that the movie will appeal not only to fans of the game, but also to the ordinary viewer. Didn't work. The film failed.
How much effort was spent on the advertising campaign:
1. Three trailers have been released.
2. Weekly promotional videos a month before the release of the film.
3. A huge number of interviews with actors and filmmakers.
Let’s take a look at this:
Once see 'Killers Creed' should every fan of the game of the same name. For those who want to watch this movie for the sake of their favorite actors, I do not strictly recommend it, because disappointment will be too great, due to a lack of understanding of what is happening on the screen.
And here's what I can recommend to any viewer is a short film: Assassin's Creed: Lineage, 2009.
7.5 out of 10
Even if there is a person in the modern world who has not touched computer games for the past 10 years, even he probably has heard of such a series of games as "Assassin's Creed". The series has long had tens of millions of copies sold, and endless sequels that bury the series in the ground, then dug back. As a person remotely familiar with these games, at the first acquaintance he singled out for himself the beautiful atmosphere of Medieval Europe and dynamic parkour. “Assassin’s Creed” has long been asked for a wide screen, but the sticks in the wheels were inserted by the leaders of Ubisoft, then the Hollywood producers , who pulled the train on themselves, as in the famous fable. With the arrival of Michael Fassbender, things moved from a dead point, and in fact it was thanks to Michael that the film came to the screens, since he controlled many aspects of the creation of the picture, starting with the selection of the director, with whom he worked well in the film Macbeth. Fassbender has repeatedly stated that he is not a gamer, and perhaps this is not the flaws of the film that we saw on the screen.
It is worth saying that the film had a great advertising campaign (not counting the music of Kyney West), which gave the impression that we would have a beautiful historical blockbuster with an interesting script and powerful special effects. However, with each passing minute, this impression crumbled about the reality of what was seen. From the synopsis on the film page, we already know that with the help of the device "Animus" the main character is forced to penetrate into the memories of his distant ancestor, who was an assassin, resisted the Templars and tried to find an invaluable artifact "Paradise Apple". And it would seem that the war between the Assassins and the Templars is a magnificent topic, with many historical facts and mysterious legends, on the basis of which you can build an excellent scenario. But I don't think so. The fact is that real-time events come to the fore, and Medieval Spain plays a clearly secondary role, only diluting openly boring dialogues with action. And you could say that's how the director sees the game's universe, but the trailers positioned it to be the opposite. Moreover, even while in The Animus, the film constantly reminds that everything happens in the present, combining footage from the Middle Ages and the present, which greatly distracts from the narrative.
Sometimes it seems that the director allocated about 30% of the film to the Middle Ages, since the footage from Spain in 1492 is really interesting to watch. Beautiful landscapes, good fights and parkours, including the “leap of faith” – the very things that fans loved this series of games. In the film, there are few such shots to indecency, and taking into account the viscous plot that tells about the present time, these shots rush very quickly that you barely have time to enjoy them. The writers clearly tried to make both worlds interesting on the screen, but with the world in the present time, they failed, because there is nothing interesting happening there, and the Middle Ages are quite small. Because of this, the very topic of the Assassins and Templars does not seem to be fully disclosed. Not only is the plot simply absent, there is only one thought: “We need to find the apple of Paradise” and stay alive”, so the battles are too simple. After all, we have a war and an age rating of "16+", but blood appears only a few times during the entire film, and then after the person is killed. And this despite the fact that the main weapon in the film is cold weapons.
Nevertheless, we have beautiful long plans, albeit rarely. The acting, although there is no doubt, but these are very simple roles for the nominee and winners. As a result, it becomes unclear for whom this film was made. Yes, fans of the series can immerse themselves in a familiar atmosphere, but it is immediately taken away, returning the hero to the modern world. Perhaps the director was afraid that the viewer would get tired of reading, since in the Middle Ages everyone speaks Spanish, and for the viewer there are only credits, but this is not an excuse. The hero is in the Animus, which means that the creators themselves can dictate certain conditions. The average viewer will enjoy a few good action scenes, and then, looking at the clock, will wait for all this to end. "Killer Creed" suffers from typical symptoms that occur when transferring the game to the wide screen, namely: a weak immersion in the atmosphere of the game and a meaningless plot, and only Paul Anderson and Duncan Jones for some reason do not want to ask other directors how to deal with this.
How to delight 80% of the time and brutally screw up on the last 20%
I’m not a big fan of the Assassin series, but overall I liked the universe and the story. I wanted to go to the movie because everything was very promising. However, what I got in the end, frankly, threw me into such a shock that I can’t walk away for 40 minutes. So in order:
The cast is great. I really liked the level of the game, everything was at a high level and here I have no complaints.
Visual effects, costumes, scenery are also on the level. I even liked the idea of an updated animus. It was very impressive.
Plot. This is where the nightmare of this movie lies. It's pretty normal at first. It doesn’t even make much sense to retell everything, because what is happening does not cause a wave of indignation or discontent. But in short: We are not ambiguously hinted at the origin of the main character, as well as what awaits him in the future. In the future, we are shown the events “after 30 years”. Fassbender, sentenced to death for murder, is allegedly killed according to all the laws of the movie commandments, after which he falls into the hands of the evil Abstergo Corporation. Who want to use memory replication through DNA to find the Apple of Eden. After that, the hero is broken and he helps them find the Apple. And it would be great if the hero was killed and finished the film. But no. The film continued. Oh my God, that was terrible.
After the location of the apple has been established, the main villain gives the command to clean the building, which implies the murder of all the “assassins”. The guard immediately rushes to carry out this order, armed with something like sharpeners and crossbows. What? The corporation, which owns the technology of re-creating memory through DNA, did not realize to arm guards with firearms, but gave them crossbows? Crossbows with optical sights? Of course, the heroes, armed with BLACK AND AARLES, which they easily took away at the base of the corporation, because it simply stores them in glass windows throughout the ALL building (God forgive me), five kill 20-30 guards. Which is no wonder, because the latter did not even guess to close the door to the control center. Okay, let's move on. Then we learn that the very artifact that the Templars chased for centuries, it turns out, lies in the Cathedral, not only is it not protected, so the priests themselves who serve there are subordinate to the Templars. And as the scene unfolds, the creators make it clear that these same priests were aware of this artifact box, as they are waiting for the Templars to give it to them. That's the second question. And we keep going. Next we're being transported to, get ready, Grand Templar Hall! Where our main villain should give a speech, attention, only in front of the Templars and their top. And, apparently, that is why everyone is allowed there, the main thing is that the metal detector (which still does not work, judging by the fact that one of the GG assistants carried a knife in the mouth, yes, in the mouth) pass. There comes the moment of the classic speech of the villain, which should take time so that our Main Hero could talk to the daughter of the main villain and she decided on whose side she was on. And it's determined. (as I thought) She just doesn't stop the main character's gang of assassins from killing her father. The murder scene... Are they running out of budget or ideas? Honestly. We are shown 5-7 minutes as GG assistants sneak into this meeting of the Templars, how unnoticed they take out weapons, how they stand, hiding in the crowd. They show how the hero talks to the villain’s daughter, how she makes (like) a choice. And all this for the sake of GG killing the Villain in 3 seconds and hiding in the darkness. What?!
And now the cherry on this cake: the heroine Marion Cotillard (daughter of the main villain), comes to the corpse of his father and vows to return the apple and avenge the death of his father. What? If that's not what you wanted, then why would you let G.G. the hero sneak in? Why did the whole movie fight with your father and say he betrayed you? Why? To give us a hint of a sequel later?
All these questions will remain unanswered. Like the main one: How could you keep the bar of a movie eighty percent of the time and so cruelly screw up on the last twenty?
That's too bad.
One of the most anticipated games of 2007 was Assassin’s Creed. A pseudohistoric blockbuster combining a sci-fi element interspersed with our time. The life story of the protagonist from the past, whose name is Altair ibn La Ahad, was liked by many. The times of the Crusades, the detail of the recreated cities, and now captivate with its beauty and magic philosophical adventure. The first Assassin’s Creed, although it turned out to be a kind of revolution in the world of open world games (open world), was empty in its structure, suffering from a lack of variety of situations and additional missions. But the rest: the interesting storyline, the dialogue, the spirit of freedom, the credo and the leap of faith - did their job. Nevertheless, the army of fans and heated to the development of the franchise, gave a powerful start to the brainchild of Ubisoft. A couple of years later, the sequel Assassin’s Creed II was released, giving more demanding players everything that was missing before. The series found a new hero in the historical part - Ezio Auditore da Firenze, instead of the cities: Damascus, Acre and Jerusalem, replaced by Renaissance Italy. The developers focused on a different and more elaborate character of the protagonist, his: life, love, goals, training in the skill of a warrior and revenge. The plot appeared dramaturgy, empathy with the main participants of the events, a stunning staging of combat scenes. Also, the authors added the function of studying history using in-game puzzles - without departing from the console / computer. There were various trifles for the arrangement of the villa, the purchase of weapons, outfits, changing colors and other uniforms. A lot of different quests and secrets. In short, there was everything that could be imagined (if possible) in an open-world game. It's perfect. Further sequels, including about Ezio, only cemented the hit status of the series, but better than Assassin’s Creed II, they were definitely not – although who knows how? Well, the most brilliant music, people listen to tradition - separately.
So, more or less, the picture, at least for the first two games outlined, you can start the film of the same name.
The director of Assassin's Creed/Assassin's Creed was Justin Kurzel (Macbeth). The filmmakers themselves are Ubisoft. Written by Bill Collage and Adam Cooper - Exodus: Kings and Gods. To create an excellent adapted historical epic, these factors are very useful. The plot could calmly unfold in a separate part of the game franchise. So talented and careful the film crew tried to transfer and bring something new to the mythology of Creed without spoiling the old. The most serious change was the redesign of the Animus - a machine for immersing in the past of their ancestors. This freedom is easy to imagine in the world of the games themselves, given that the peculiar machine of the past, at times, has been improved. In addition, the creators of the game series themselves were impressed by the unusual vision of the Animus and took his new functional design to notice. Spain during the Inquisition perfectly and stylistically adjacent to the first Assassin’s Creed. All the same retro-medieval entourage, as if descended from the screens of monitors and went to the theater halls, only under the guise of another design. The dynamics of our days and the events of the past, again, will please old school fans the most. Personally, I do not consider myself a fan or a fan of the primary sources, the same applies to other adaptations and canons, I just like them. It should be understood that the Creed of the Killer is almost a perfect vision. Here in moderation carefully, as saturated as possible conveyed all the key features. This is done at a level above the same references from Warcraft and is extremely clear to the average viewer. In general, it is difficult to imagine how you can get confused in the plot here. Yes, there is a certain hoax, but it was in the original, thus giving food for thought. And what is, gives a very simple science fiction. A simple and intelligible script, the main focus of which is aimed at the characters, raising questions about the existence of the world and people.
The tragic image of Callum Lynch, the hero of our time, makes it clear how he achieved who he became and what threatens him. Only the details of his mortal sins are not described, but they describe him as not the best man, from the category - the best of the worst, gone into the shadows, mired in the corners of the gloomy streets.
Probably, the Creed of the killer is also the most vivid example of acting in the film adaptation.
Michael Fassbender masterfully shows the emotions of fear, anger, calm, hysterics and rage. He played two protagonists, displaying opposite characters. Marion Cotillard looks much better here than in the recent film. An innocent image of a scientist, combining both naivety and devotion to his work. Despite her professionalism, the essence of some people, she discovered herself late. The situation with her character is instructive also because you need to have the courage to admit your own mistakes and time is not a hindrance to this. Anti-touching and tearless drama, leaving a certain devastation. We can say that the stage of character change goes through almost all the main characters, minus some antagonists / protagonists who are devoted to their beliefs and ideals.
By the way, the theme of the villainy in this film is very double-digit.
Action, a tribute accompanies us back to the first part of the game, as for ground battles and climbing. Then sharply shifts to the second, in the stages of chasing on wagons. Scenes, frames and angles are constantly changing. Parkour is absolutely incredible - jumping through narrow streets and city roofs, running through windows and apartments a la Assassin's Creed III, pushing back from the walls - better not to do. A sincere canon that not only borrowed the key fan service, sprinkling everything with references.
The artistic validity is exceptional. Fights with the use of gadgets, smoke bombs, hidden blades, darts, swords and sabers - choreographically staged. There are no violent scenes and excessive bloodshed, and the format is not the same. As such, injuries are present and fine (without accentuation). It's not like this is a God of War .
The composer Jed Kurzel (Strictly to the West) although lagging behind Jesper Kyud, Lorne Balf, Brian Tyler, but tries very hard to conform to them. There are few tracks, a couple of them will definitely be remembered. The operator Adam Arkpou caught the essence of panoramas, angles of understandable actions, where it is impossible to get confused. Sitting and enjoying yourself. And what is the flight of the eagle and the leap of faith! View. Installation Christopher Tellefsen is not torn, at least it did not seem so to me, there is no such feeling - as if once, and the operator with the editor, would suddenly move somewhere at the behest of scissors. Direction, gluing, camera - one.
The creed of the killer turned out to be the same as the first part of the game series - controversial. The film franchise has huge potential to grow. A chance must be given, because in due time, after not the coolest and most sophisticated game, there was already a truly sequel holiday. So with the film can be, especially for its first time, it was grandiose, correctly mastered and spectacularly shot. Don’t miss your chance, especially the fans.
9 out of 10
Quite a lot I expected from this film, I became more and more disappointed to see bad reviews and reviews. But I did not even think to remove the reservation from the ticket for the premiere in Russia. And for good reason. The film is replete with action, thoughtful plot and incredibly good acting. I may be exaggerating a bit now, being impressed by the film, but the fact that I liked the film is undeniable. All I didn't like was the overly aggressive protagonist in the middle of the film. But it's nothing. I had a visual orgasm at the end of the movie. I'm hoping for a trilogy. Yeah, about those who don't know the universe. I’m a longtime fan of the universe, I remember reading Oliver Bowden’s books, but there are few explanations in the film. Many in the audience didn’t even know why everyone wanted this apple of Eden. But in exchange for this, we got a great addition to the universe, and not the adaptation of one of the games, in this developers only respect.
8 out of 10
So, in my opinion, the years of life of fans, lived in anticipation of the film adaptation of their favorite series, were not in vain! Praise to Ubisoft and Fassbender, ladies and gentlemen!
When the first rumors about the film adaptation of the famous series appeared, I felt that the film would be waiting for the sad fate of the already seen films on games. As a fan (not an ardent fan) of the franchise about killers with a blade up his sleeve, it would be very, very annoying if everything turned out this way.
In the beginning, the film may seem tedious and the color scheme is slightly depressing. However, do not rush to leave your seats, because it will not be long! Personally, the film is so drawn that I caught myself thinking that sometimes I watch the film with bated breath! And don't be embarrassed by the credits! (hello Planet of the Apes: Revolution)
When you watch the trailers, you’d think the film would be set in 15th century Spain. In fact, this is far from the case. The plot of the picture unfolds in our days, where the main character of the picture is subject to execution for crimes committed by him. This is where Abstergo comes in. Then everything is clear from the trailers: a conversation with the doctor, Animus, synchronization, action, etc. I will not reveal the plot, because I do not want to provoke the anger of readers.
The plot of the picture is predictable, although a separate story of the franchise was written for the film. However, this cannot be attributed to shortcomings. Fans will immediately be aware of events when the average viewer does not immediately catch the whole essence. I was pleased with the large arsenal of weapons used in the film: throwing knives, swords, axes, crossbows, of course, hidden blades, etc. Fights are sustained in a classic game style, fans will immediately see familiar movements, at least the same moment of throwing an axe at executions of the 15th century. Panoramas of the flight of the eagle, leaps of faith, parkour - all this is in the film!
Fassbender was pleased, who managed to show Calum’s emotions. Misunderstanding, panic, aggression - in my opinion, a great choice for the role of the main character. Do not forget that it was thanks to him that the case moved from the deadlock when the project was frozen. Cotillard also coped with his role, showing us a scientist who, for the sake of an idea, is ready to take radical measures.
Initially, the film does not have a certain division into bad and good, which can mislead ordinary viewers, because they do not know what the Apple is. Having no idea about this, they can be imbued with the ideas of the heroine Cotillard, who wants to defeat violence, as a result of which, the Assassins appear in a bad light with their desire not to give the artifact to the Templars.
In the film there will be references and Easter eggs to games. I will not reveal them, I will give only one. In the scene of Calum entering the Brotherhood (I don’t think it’s a spoiler), the ancestors of the latter appear in the background. Hello from Ezio? Or perhaps from Aguillar?
Impression from the film blurred not the brightest ending, but the groundwork for the continuation still turned out. Like, you want an apple? Then run after us, because we are still on horseback!
The film will appeal to fans of the series, fans of action and fiction, as well as those who just want to see a good movie.
9 out of 10
I really liked the movie! I look forward to continuing!
Assassin’s Creed is a film based on the computer game series of the same name. In the center of the plot Callum Lynch (Michael Fassbender), who, being sentenced to death, becomes a tester of technology that releases the genetic memory inherited by man. He lives part of the life of his longtime ancestor Aguilar during the Spanish Inquisition of the fifteenth century. Callum, who has gained amazing abilities and exceptional skills in this strange journey in time, will now have to fight the adepts of the mysterious order in our days. Events in the film develop simultaneously in the past and the present.
I played games in the Assassins Creed series, so when I saw the first trailer on TV, I was very happy and immediately decided to watch this film right on the day of the premiere.
It's just fire! The whole film kept in suspense, and what philosophy can be traced in the film. The special effects of VAU, scenes with fights and parkour are simply fascinating, the acting is at its height. Michael Fassbender and Marion Cotillard are gorgeous! In the picture they did not stupidly copy the game, but only slightly added their own to the plot, but also did not forget to mention many moments from the game. The idea itself is not bad.
The film deserves high praise. And yes, the continuation of this film is likely to be, the ending of the film made it clear.
10 out of 10
This film is based on a non-trivial plot. The main character, being the ancestor of one of the assassins, with the help of the latest technologies goes to the distant past to trace a small segment of the life of his ancestor. As in all films of this genre, he needs an artifact that gives some freedom (but that freedom to one, death to another). The apple is not for him, but for those who saved him from the death penalty. This is if it is clumsy and in general terms about the idea.
As far as I know, the film is an adaptation of a sensational computer game. Perhaps that is why the “Assassin’s Creed” during the entire timekeeping was more like a game than an art canvas. The tape is certainly dynamic, rich in special effects, atmospheric. But it does not allow us to feel the inner world of the protagonist. This is something from the “opera” adaptation of comics, when you should not expect serious drama or abstruse plot. The film is superficial and at the same time beautiful, stylish and colorful.
It should also be noted that all characters are endowed with a minimum of emotions and the shortest characteristics. Each actor played a very narrow and one-sided spectrum.
Fassbender is clearly tight within the framework of his especially unwritten character. He is capable of deep drama, but the picture does not require it. The script is more like knitted together quests. In general, almost a game on the big screen. Also worth noting is Fassbender's amazing physical training. Credo is rich in fights, a symbolic intersection of the past and the future, beautifully decorated with special effects.
In general, this is a good movie, but do not expect anything more from the film. The style with the film adaptations of comics is the same, and the presence of such large actors as Fassbender and Irons in this case does not change anything.
6 out of 10
We work in darkness to serve the light. We're Assassins.
Welcome to everyone.
This is my first review. Congratulations, reviewers of this film, you managed to force me to register on this site and leave my opinion about the film, which was not possible to anyone before when they wrote red reviews, in my opinion, good films.
So here we go.
I’m a fan of the Assassin’s Creed series and I think it’s a decent adaptation. But she does have problems from both a fan and a third-party perspective.
Even before the premiere, it was stated that the plot of the film will not repeat any plot from the games. And this is both the plus and minus of the film.
The downside is that the picture was distanced as much as possible from the intersection with the events already told in the games, and this will cause bewilderment among fans. As an example, "right hand" Abstergo doesn't know what the left is doing? After all, the Apple of Eden Templars by the beginning of the 21st century was found as much as 5 pieces. No, fans (not everyone, however) know that Apples were not exact copies of each other and each could perform slightly different functions, but in the film everything is presented so that the Apple is one and only, and others have not been sought before.
Plus – the film adaptation of the plot of the game would inevitably generate discrepancies and contradictions and something like, forgive God, Hitman.
Still, someone does not understand what the Assassins and Templars are different. Nothing. Except for ways to get there. Some are for everyone to have free will, others want to keep the world in a hedgehog. But both want a world without conflict. And the movie says that.
Further, there were claims that the Spanish Inquisition was shown criminally little.
I think it's quite normal. Would you be interested in seeing 100,500 side-tasks in preparation for the major? Traveling by horse from one city to another? “The main quest” is issued at the very beginning of the film and this is quite enough.
They left the most basic and dynamic. Fighting and parkour here are performed at the highest level, nothing but delight it does not cause.
Also indignant about the fact that de, eminent actors here do not act out emotions. It's just a hand-face. Do you still not know that actors are sometimes called not for the fact that only they can cope with the display of necessary emotions, but for the sake of increasing box office fees?
Here they play what they have to - professional assassins (hello Statham!), scientists and members of their factions. Do you want someone who is corroded by emotions and debt? Look at Maria played by Ariana Labed! She (the actress) is good.
Oh, and some "girl" resented that "And why would Aguilar have to do with such terrible bristles as mud on his face, in the game either a shaved face or a neat beard." Have you ever seen a movie? When will he shave there, eh?!
In terms of music, I can’t say anything bad, the director’s brother did not copy Jasper the Kid and for that thank you.
I read that because of the huge hype, the localization of the film was given to fans of the series. Well, even for the better was the first trailer with the same "We are killers." Our outrage forced Yubikov and distributors to give the text for translation to those who care about what the actors of dubbing say.
By the way, dubbing - comrades, thank you, you played well.
Everything was shot insanely beautifully, they worked diligently on the visual part. One complaint, but maybe I was unlucky with the cinema - the picture dullly lacked the overall brightness, the eyes a little sore by the end of the session. By the way, the hall itself (about 400 seats) was almost full. And that was the first session at 10 a.m. on the day of the premiere. 2D.
In the end, I think the film is normal, definitely not the bottom. But he's not a masterpiece. Definitely one of the best games, if not the most. Nah, Mortal Kombat, on nostalgia and Techno Syndrome, you're not going out.
And the critics of Rotten Tomatoes have to throw them tomatoes themselves. It's over.
7.5 out of 10
Forgive me for the frequent breaks in the text, I did not know how to transfer text to a new line here.
So far, I haven’t had a definitive answer to the question of whether Michael Fassbender could actually make a bad movie. He's a terrific, phenomenal actor who, even if he doesn't want to be great, can't help being great. However, his decision to star in “Assassin’s Creed” I now regard as an unconditional puncture. Although very much waiting for him - as, indeed, all the new products with Fassbender.
No, the actor personally did not embarrass his profession this time. The problem is in the film itself, in the story that is told, which looks not derived from the cult video game, but an immature fantasy in the style of early (and rather even fallen into childhood) Dan Brown, a lover of inventing any heresy about running for medieval artifacts to save the world. Moreover, in the “Assassin’s Creed”, such a fantasy is flavored with pseudo-historical porridge about the Templars, assassins, princes, a fateful apple and pseudo-scientific delights with the movement of consciousness into a person from another time. As a result, the main character turned out to be a kind of cross between two old Worthington film characters, Jake Sally and Marcus Wright: from one the principle of brain assimilation is taken, from the other – a criminal past with a play in the form of a pseudo-death penalty followed by resurrection for a great purpose. There are also elements of apparent plagiarism from the second Divergent and I, Frankenstein with Eckhart. And if only all these borrowings were talented! But no. Murderer's Creed is a really boring movie. Even stupid - looks like a pink curly wig with papillots on a black rhinoceros. However, it is played by a cast (led by my adored Fassbender) with ridiculously serious faces. Michael, of course, I will forget this - he still remains among my favorite lyceums. But to find in everything that is happening in the "Assassin's Creed" at least some sense personally I failed. I hope that those who are going to see this movie will have more luck.
I’ll start with what happened after watching. The Assassin creed is a boring movie. He's boring because he hasn't decided what story he's telling. Does he tell the story of the main character? Nope. The apple of Eden? Nope. The Assassins and Templars we saw in the games? Nope. The film tries to tell you all 3 stories at once, but at the same time, none of them has neither a beginning nor a clear ending, you just leave the theater not so unenthusiastic - you just do not understand what you were shown and what they tried to convey.
Let's get this straight. Why do players love Assassin's Creed? These games always created a certain mythology around you when you tried to get into the history of this brotherhood of Assassins, its confrontation with the Order of Templars, in very interesting bright times with characters written off from real historical personalities! There were Lorenzo Medici, Borgia, Machiavelli, Caterina Sforza, the same Da Vinci. There were interesting places - Milan, Italy, Florence, Rome.
But in the cinema, even this topic managed to present as boring as possible. The theme of the Assassins does not cause any trepidation at all, they just dump information on you that there are Templars, there are assassins, there is an apple of Eden. That's it.
Besides, the movie doesn’t feel whole, it’s just like 2 movies merging into one. You have one storyline in the present where Fassbender is tormented in this animus, and a storyline in the past, and these 2 storylines do not intersect at all, only interruptions. And none of the stories fascinates you. You don't penetrate any of the characters, their stories are too simple, too flat, too obvious.
Strangely enough, the movie can not hate. Just because it doesn't make you feel anything but boredom. You cannot tear it apart because there is nothing to cling to; you cannot praise it because again there is nothing to praise. This is such a gray marketing product that neither video game fans, nor fans of good movies, nor people who just want to go to the holidays and watch some cool action film. No one will like him. Because everything is as indirect as possible, confused, crumpled. The actors don’t create chemistry, the dialogue is boring, the story is boring.
And it's actually very hurtful. Not because the movie is bad, but because of Ubisoft. Because they had a chance, a great chance to build a huge media franchise that was as cool and worked in all genres and formats as Star Wars. The funny thing is that Ubisoft CAN do this, in 2009 they have already shot an excellent short film Assassin's Creed Lineage, which was timed to the release of the second part of the game, and which really shows the assassins and the Templars, and not crumpled and confused, as it is now, but in a normal and sane form on the screen, albeit a short film. And now, instead of a luxurious film that would change the way video games movies should be, and just as a missed opportunity to tell the rest of the world that doesn’t hold gamepads in its hands that ' Hey, video games can actually tell cool stories', we got some grayness.
And the story of the Assassins, their mythology, their opposition -- it's really cool, players all over the world were thrilled with the first game, showing the time of the Crusades, the second game during the Renaissance, the next part in Rome and the confrontation with the Borgias -- it's really cool stories, you play and hook on to a lot of interesting things, and especially sick of the fact that none of these interesting things have migrated into the film. Absolute grayness, which is not worth spending time on.
I watched Assasin's Creed yesterday. It is a complete feeling that Russian translators sacrificed their soul to the god of literal translation. Let's not talk about it. The script is frankly weak, the filmmakers did not want to take any of the games as a basis and did it in vain. Ubisoft has a very, very high-quality attitude towards its offspring, which is not true of the film writers. So for almost 2 hours, get ready to be puzzled and constantly think “the state?” God is with him with the script, you could go out on the action, but this did not happen. The fact is that the 20th century in pursuit of the rating PG13 did not spill a drop of blood in the film! Can you imagine? A film about murderers, about the age-old confrontation of 2 clans, a lot of murders and no blood! The love line fit into 2.5 words, "jump of faith" - 1 pc parkour for which everyone loves the series almost no. Fassbinder plays with a stone face, a little more severe than completely, pumped, but does not play at all. My beloved Cotillard is the only salvation in this world of inadequate and despondency. In short, the film turned out weak, fans of the games in principle will like, the rest will be in parallel. What reminded the Prince of Persia, only he and that was more interesting.
6 out of 10
Assassin's Creed - seen in magazines behind for mobile toys in my childhood. Then in "Prince of Persia" intermingled with Gylenkhal and the army of the Persians. That's what I imagined. But I never thought they would get a solo movie, and even so amazing. I agree, the plot borders on the reality and past of the Assassins, which on the surface looks a little blurred, but in the end everything ends with a beginning. Yes, the beginning, because in the future a sequel is expected. Today, watching this ghostly film received as many interesting turns as you will feel.
After the promising "Macbeth" Justin Kurzel returns us to the world of eternal wars. Against the background of Spain of the XV century, the Templars want to take possession of a certain artifact that will rid the world of the virus - cruelty. The Assassins are glorious wars, subject to the Creed of the Assassin, but they have no power over the laws, freedom flows in them. Like a free eagle in the sky. I missed a lot not playing video games like Prince of Persia, Assassins and Warcraft. Maybe it's right. After all, there were cruel games then, but now I realize what aesthetic and heroic pleasure I missed. But the fans will be happy, they adored them. It was easier for me to play LEGO-constructors (video games) than to enjoy killing on the screen. And now the game has migrated to movie screens, and I say with confidence: “not bad” it turned out to create a parkour that is not inferior to the film adaptation of “Prince of Persia”, collect a simple but brilliant cast and release a story from which the spirit will be breathtaking. The first time I was unlucky to go to "Warcraft", which I still regret there: "Two worlds, but one destiny", only here the goal is to protect true freedom, not all of humanity. So there's no perfect world, as Kevin Flynn said of The Throne. Now I think maybe play some game, don’t give an idea where to start?
Michael Fassbender is a leader by nature and an actor who inspires hope in Hollywood. Convinced of the superiority of Magneto in the new “X-Men”, whether you liked the charismatic David of Prometheus, then appreciate him. If it goes on like this, you have to make him your favorite actor.
Marion Cotillard - her heroine came out as an obstinate lioness, looking for a miracle to the last. However, not all are white and fluffy, and in the final moment she will have to find out the truth. Just think, recently saw in "Taxi" and has already been heavily lit up in "...pink" and "Beginnings", now the actress is on the hook.
Well, without the rest of the actors did not do: Brendon Gleeson what is worth, his hero empathize, no less Fassbender. But my heart was captured by Maria, so do not tear off, at first thought Kristen Stewart in the execution scene, well, where did she come from, this was Ariana Labed, but thank you very much! Again in sight was Michael Williams, gradually gaining momentum in the face of mysterious heroes. Jeremy Irons is always intimidating.
The true way is freedom. Like an eagle floating in the sky. Of course, you don’t have to kill and hurt yourself, as Call later thought, but if you defend the true Creed, you will go to any trials. Although he did not play games, but believed in the film until the end, it is a pity that the medieval world of Templars and Assassins showed little, only more diluted - watercolor reality. And this is the fourth best film adaptation of the game, which is good! Everyone has his own way, but free will is sacred to all.
Where others are constrained by morality and law, remember: Anything is possible!
Personally, I, a person who is well acquainted with the game universe, was not hooked by the plot at all, if everything is done well in terms of recreating the past and game elements, then the plot is none at all, both lines are blurred, that the present is what the past is, and this is understandable since in two hours to accommodate the completed plot of two times and somehow to explain the whole concept of the world seems to me not real.
But the plot is exactly what the game took, along with historical events, characters and cities. And if you look at the game, it's the story of Desmond (a character from the present) we saw as many as five games, with each game having a separate story of the character from the past. I think with the film, it was necessary to move along the analogy of the game, to conceive a trilogy at once and through it to stretch the plot of the present, while in each part to focus on the past, then the film would be more holistic and leave a mystery at the end.
And yes, I was really waiting for the original soundtrack of the game, which would fit perfectly into the beginning, but alas.
How to destroy the hopes of millions of people in 1 hour and 40 minutes
I’ll start without any pretentious phrases and get straight to the point, the movie “Killer’s Creed” is bad. From now on, in order. The plot tells about the magnificent technology "Animus" with the help of which the main character Callum Lynch relives the memories of his ancestor Aguilar, who lived 500 years ago in Spain.
I'm not going to talk about the game, you know everything, and if not, I'm sorry. That’s the movie and I support that movement. There are a lot of inefficiencies in the movie if you haven’t played the game. And the critics don’t like it, because they came to see their own tape, and I support them in this. The script is bad, no, it's terrible! It was a similar situation in the movie Warcraft, but he only had problems with the script, and Credo is not so simple. One of the main problems of the film is its attempt to show not the past, but the present. And it spoils the picture. All the action and boring development of the plot is very boring. And the action in the past takes place in only 4-5 scenes, which are necessary only for action. There's no story in the past! And the plot of the present is very boring and unrealistically boring.
Also, from a useful in a bad sense mention “deserve” actors and characters. Everyone plays with wooden faces and the characters don’t evolve. More or less just showed normal play Michael Fassbender playing the main character.
I didn’t see the music in the movie at all. I won't say anything about that. But you're going to say, "At least there's action in the movie!" This is not the way it should be.
In the film, the action is decent, and filmed well, namely the action itself is something. In every fight, in every beat, we are transported into reality to show what Callum is doing at this time, and it starts to piss off from the start. And when they fall behind Callum and start showing only Aguilar, the camera begins to shake wildly, and it is simply unrealistic to make out what is happening. In general, the action in the film is needed to be spectacular. I don’t recommend going to 3D.
As a result, if you are a fan, then your expectations will be shattered, and if a simple viewer it will be incomprehensible and “idiot” picture.
If you mix two types - the usual viewer / critic and the fan, you get -
5 out of 10
I played all parts of the game Assassin’s Creed and I was very impressed there, but first of all the plot: the very first part with Altair immediately captured, because at once intrigue and an interesting hero, inevitably involved in the intrigues of a thousand years ago. And of course, the player is dedicated to all the subtleties and details of the ongoing story, solving riddles, pumping the hero. And what music is there, the soundtrack is powerful, juicy, unreal.
And what a sad film made based on this legendary game. Okay, they didn't start filming the story of Altair, Ezio or Connor, they came up with their hero, but the plot is what a ridiculous, crumpled made. The apple of Eden for some reason should deprive everyone of freedom and rid everyone of rigidity, the essence of the differences between the Assassins and the Templars is unclear, only names remain from them, for some reason the frames of real life are more than Aguilar’s life, although in the game, on the contrary, more attention was paid to the past of the hero.
If you discard comparisons with the game, even as a pseudo-historical action movie is very average. Heroes are not sorry, you do not feel any emotions when they do something, because the purpose of what is happening is unclear - some kind of chase for a fantastic artifact to save the world. The soundtrack is completely invisible. And why does Aguilar have to do with such terrible bristles as dirt on the face, in the game either a shaved face or a neat beard.
An unsuccessful attempt to fit the universe of the game into screen time. Clearly the director didn't play it. It would be better as the Hobbit on 3 parts stretched, but purely in the game and in detail.
2 out of 10
There was a lot of controversy about the film. Starting from the localization of posters, ending with the first reviews of critics. Good hype and a huge hype. So huge that they gave the localization of the film to fans of the series, as it was with Deadpool.
Even after watching 'Macbeth', I was really looking forward to going to the movies. Caste made an excellent picture. Starting from acting, ending with tracks. It's just fine. And finally, fortunately, I was able to evaluate the film ahead of time.
A lot of worries about the film adaptation, a lot of conflicting opinions. Fear caused a decision on screen time. Why more of the present is a game about the past? Why is it so small? Can they do it? And critics have sown even more doubt.
But enough around the bush.
The screening turned out to be very unambiguous. And critics are right in their assessment, but only in part. The film has a lot of problems.
Scene and script:
It's simple and unpretentious. It's both a plus and a minus. Plus - acquaintance with the series for a new viewer, far from the games. Don't strain your brain. Why do people go to the movies? Right, rest. Straining the curves while watching is superfluous.
The downside is that almost the entire film will be understood only by fans of the series, because many references are not explained at all. You guess. The emphasis is on... at least minimal knowledge of the series. Without her, there will be questions.
It's a definite joint in the movie. There is nothing you can do about it.
But there's a little weirdness. In view of the fact that the events literally jump on each other, not having time to reveal all the details, a strong feeling is created that he is cut. And a decent amount of content is thrown out. Questions are brewing here for the studio and there may be a director's version. But it's guesswork.
As for the apple... As a fan of the series, I knew where, what and how. But the average viewer will not understand what it is for in the film and what kind of fruit it is. This is a religious issue.
The dialogues, although well written, but again, explain little.
As for the fan service - references are incredible. And yes, the film is canon. There are no complaints here.
Game of actors:
She's beautiful. Michael Fassbender is as good as ever. Marion Cotillard got a very interesting character. She doesn't take sides. All she cares about is science and the knowledge of truth.
Everyone else played well. There are overplays in places, but these are small things. The main thing is that the picture is not divided into black and white. Everything is presented in a different light, which makes it possible to view the situation from different angles.
As for the character disclosure, it’s bad again. The reason is the lack of screen time. The characters only get over it a couple of times. For the rest, it feels cardboard. Everything happens so quickly that each story is a brief sketch and nothing more.
But there is a small plus - it's chemistry. Characters can convey emotions without words. An understanding of the situation comes and there is an easy disclosure of the inner component of the characters. But that's too little.
Action and graphics:
It's just great. At the highest level. Parkour is as close as possible to realism as fights. That's five points. The green screen is practically absent, and where it is - perfectly combines and complements the fantastic atmosphere of the film.
I really liked the idea of the animus. Very unusual and allows you to visually interweave the present and the past, which the original concept ' lounge & #39; would not allow in principle.
Great job done, bravo!
Operational work:
That's five points again. Elegant views, addition and disclosure of acting, increased emotions, tension and atmosphere. Bravo.
Trek:
No matter how much controversy there is about 'Jesper Kyd-Ezio's Family' as the best composition for all time and games. No, that's enough. It doesn't work that way. While watching, I tried to imagine this possibility. Nope. .fire.
Jed Kurzel was not afraid to create his style from scratch. Thank you so much for that. It's just something. Complements each frame and merges with it, creating a unique atmosphere. A low bow from me, maestro. This is really amazing.
Result:
What’s great is that the film lived up to expectations. It’s a really new and cool story that deserves its place in the Assassin's Creed universe. Unfortunately, he did not reach the plot component and definitely failed the intention of Yubisoft to attract a new audience. The viewer of the film, if he understands, then he definitely does not want to review.
Did the film deserve critical acclaim? Definitely NO.
Assassin’s Creed is a film based on the computer game series of the same name. In the center of the plot Callum Lynch (Michael Fassbender), who, being sentenced to death, becomes a tester of technology that releases the genetic memory inherited by man. He lives part of the life of his longtime ancestor Aguilar during the Spanish Inquisition of the fifteenth century. Callum, who has gained amazing abilities and exceptional skills in this strange journey in time, will now have to fight the adepts of the mysterious order in our days. Events in the film develop simultaneously in the past and the present.
Films based on computer games are successful, like "Warcraft", and sometimes not - "Killer's Creed" is an illustrative example.
Critics have already declared Murderer's Creed to be Michael Fassbender's worst project, both as a producer and actor. Fees in the United States show low interest in him. Although the creators did everything to interest a potential audience - teenagers and fans of the game: a lot of action, chases, fights, crossbow shooting and fantastic jumps on roofs. I wonder if people of that time could own parkour and hand-to-hand combat techniques, which would envy the professionals of our time? At times, it seems like you’re watching some nonsense – the technology and equipment shown in the film are questionable, and the whole story is far-fetched. Unlike Fassbender, the viewer is not able to immerse himself in the atmosphere of the dark Middle Ages, nor to feel feelings for the heroes. And here no scattering of stars can save the project.
The only plus - good multi-level scenery and costumes - high-quality work of designers and artists. But it is a pity all this, if the cinema is elementary not able not to intrigue, not to impress.
4 out of 10
Cal's suicide bomber was bought by some Templar Corporation 'Abstergo Industries' and with the help of the machine, the Animus began sending it mentally back in time by genetic memory. Specifically, he had to experience the adventures of the Assassin Aguilera in 1492, during the capture of Granada, because he was the last to hold the apple of Eden.
Perhaps the closest this game screening to 'Prince of Persia', about the same level of interest and meaning. And externally: there is also everything yellow/sandy, a lot of parkour and throwing in time. And he's definitely better than Warcraft. But even compared to these films, it has a huge drawback - the inconsistency of literally everything. History now and then rushes between the past and the present, in the focus flashes the confrontation between father and daughter, the difficult childhood of Cal, the murky ideology of confrontation between the Templars and Assassins. There is a lack of some semantic core around which the whole story would gather. Another great annoyance was the idea of the aggressiveness gene, which such a smart scientist girl sincerely believed in. Well, as a final kick, it is simply a crime to use Brendon Gleeson in vain and little!
So the film is of course wild beauty, especially all the scenes in the past - a solid dizzying action, as many as two & #39; leap of faith & #39; and fantastic parkour. And they say in Spanish, "A little bit really." If, as in the game, most of the events took place during the Spanish Inquisition, there would be no price. Especially there are stunning views, such as the big fight in the Alhambra. Everything that happens in the corporation also looks good in contrast, the functional design and cold colors perfectly shade the dusty, cruel brightness of the past. The scenes with the Animus are damn beautiful. ' Apple of Eden' did not bother at all, McGuffin as a McGuffin, there have been worse.
Jeremy Irons and Cotillard are traditionally good even with emotionless faces, but Fassbender is not that there is something to play, but even from this ' almost nothing ' he squeezes to the maximum. In addition, the director made him a third of the film shirtless walk – fans will die simply.
In general, maybe fans of the game will be more interesting, but I advise you not to count on much. Unfortunately, criticism is not in vain on him.
Before considering this product of the film market, I will anticipate the quite expected fanatical-sectarian squeals of some moviegoers, who are still inextricably linked to death by the original source with the result in the form of a film. And, if you have not yet reached the elementary truth that the film is an independent work of fiction, then the arguments here are powerless, only therapy. In fact, just as the story of Vasya the tractor driver from Kolyma can be transferred to the film canvas, making it a masterpiece, so the brilliant Sholokhov’s “Silent Don” can be put in such a way that the amputation of the director’s hands will be met with applause.
At first glance, the picture “Assassin’s Creed” has everything that is necessary for a full-blooded blockbuster that would slightly go beyond the framework of the movie-attraction. And, given the army of idolaters of the series of games, the picture could even become a cult. Notable cast, starting with Michael Fassbender and ending with the charming Irishman Brendan Gleeson. More than a decent budget. But it turned out in the end, as in a well-known joke - "Well, I didn't sniff, I didn't sniff." The picture came out to an amazing lifeless and devastated, literally cut into parts, each of which remained unsaid and unfinished.
So the powerful Templar Order finally learned to extract genetic memory from the blood of its descendants. One of their guinea pigs, Callum Lynch (Michael Fassbender), thus lives the life of his distant ancestor Aguilar, a member of the secret society of Assassins, who just crumbling the Templars into a small vinaigrette. And these Templar studies are not conducted out of archaeological or historical interests, but in order to track the path of one biblical gadget with which you can — here’s the surprise — control the world. Like the institution of lobbying, “independent” media and banal marketing, which will make seemingly sane people bite each other’s throats for the right to buy another iPhone, is not enough.
No, I will not resent the fact that a viable ancient order in one particular place gathered all its worst enemies and allowed them to secretly conduct workshops on the exchange of experience. Nor will I resent the fact that before their very eyes a guinea pig is slowly turning into an evil tiger. I do not even bother that the security of the most dangerous representatives of the Assassins, apparently, was recruited from the Berkut unit, since even at the time of enthusiastic breaking through the skulls of the guards, they continue to wave truncheons timidly.
No, all these annoying little things of life could be omitted. If the picture were filled with people, living people with their stories, past and desired future. But they're not. The characters are flat as the inscription on the fence. Although in this case, a great greeting should be conveyed to those geniuses who decided that the writers of the 3rd part of Divergent (Divergent, Karl!) can be born with something sensible, even under the threat of the guillotine. Apparently, therefore, in particularly dramatic moments, almost all actors continue to stubbornly play Mr. Stoneface. Therefore, the chic cast turned into an evil irony for the film. No, this is not about the cult figure of Charlotte Rampling, who with age began to play herself with the crown gaze of ice cream fish, which for some reason I do not know many consider a special charm. I mean the enchantingly charismatic Gleason, who just has nothing to play here, and the femininely fragile Cotillard, which was also driven into the framework of a fresh-frozen vegetable mixture.
Moreover, the creators even missed a chic opportunity in the framework of a fantastic action to develop a line of historical detective in the exotic entourage of 15th century Spain. The whole expanse for intrigue and mystical atmosphere was safely fucked. And the ridiculous editing and outright understatement scream only about the itchy desire of the creators of the picture to bite off another hundred million from the stingy studio financiers to continue the project.
As a result, the picture turned out, as they sometimes say, “without a soul.” Watching one visual part is frankly boring, although it is made at the highest level - and no wonder, almost a dozen companies have worked on the visuals. And to talk about the motivation of the viewer to empathy is completely dull, since the Assassins are not inferior to the Templars by the degree of ideological schizophrenia.
Therefore, if the moviegoer and vorbite in one place is sure to watch this picture, then I advise you to either drink a sedative and wait for the television premiere, or go to the big screen. After all, only a high-quality attraction visual can discourage the thought of wasted money.
Welcome to the Spanish Inquisition (for 15 minutes)
I’m a big fan of the Assasin’s Creed series and when I heard the movie was coming out, I was really excited about it. But the first news that I did not like, so it is Michael Fassbender in the lead role, then I took it very badly, to the actor there is no dislike, but it felt that he is not the one who is needed by this picture and for good reason.
Fassbender invited director Justin Kurzel to the film, with whom they worked in the film ' Macbeth', the picture itself was not bad, but the director borrowed some things from his film and transferred this to this film adaptation, which were not necessary here. Although Ubisoft controlled the film and the script, it’s unclear how Ubisoft was able to allow a 90% offshoot from the canon. If you change the title of the film, as well as not to say ' animus' then this is never a film adaptation of the game series Assasin's Creed. It seems that the creators were given all the games of the company, and they decided-'So this first part is incredibly monotonous, we will not play the rest, there is probably the same slag. We will do so, in the past there will be a minimum of time (15 minutes), and in the present we will unfold the whole plot. Yes, in the first game of the series, the tasks were monotonous and the game could get bored quite quickly if you were not interested. In the film, Aguilar cut off his ring finger when it is 1492. This is an incredibly strong offshoot of the game, as in the second part of the series, which took place from 1459 to 1499, it was not necessary to cut off a finger, as Leonardo da Vinci himself said. Just as a big offshoot is the trickle-down effect (when, after a long stay in the animus, the object sees hallucinations), here the filmmakers completely contrived business, and it is absolutely unclear how Ubisfot allowed this. All right, so there's no point in continuing.
The plot of the picture is quite simple, the Templars in the present time (' Abstergo') need the apple of Eden (a rather strong artifact). And for this they need a man whose distant ancestor was an assassin. They initiate his death through the death penalty, take him to Abstergo 39 and put him in an animus, exploring his distant ancestor. It was normal, but then I was disappointed. The game always sent us to an era we could feel. But in the film none of this, in the past the main character is 3 times for 5 minutes and all this is accompanied by comments in the present, which are absolutely superfluous. Again, it's unclear how Ubisoft agreed to this. It is also noticeable that the film removed scenes that were in the trailer.
I am very disappointed with the game’s adaptation. It is especially sad that for the adaptation of such a game you do not need to think about the script. I chose an era with famous historical personalities, connected it with assassins and that’s it, the film is ready. The game has been around for almost a decade.
3 out of 10
I really don’t want to see the sequel that is hinted at in the film.
A lot of computer games, released after the mid-2000s, has an accurate plot, worked out to the smallest detail, which is not necessarily transferred to large screens in the format of a full-length film adaptation. Developers of leading game studios realized that users are no longer interested in monosyllabic shooters with the sole purpose of destroying everyone and everything around the main character, elevating their own fictional universes to the rank of a full-fledged work of art. thanks to the resourcefulness and ingenuity of the creative team of Ubisoft, 2007 was marked by the release of one of the most revered and in some way revolutionary games known as Assassin’s Creed, or Assassin’s Creed. A good action story conquered the audience with a competent study of characters, still impressive scenes of action and the versatility of the world, which allows you to expand known boundaries almost to infinity. Naturally, the subsequent sequels strengthened the reputation of Ubisoft, but neither the studio nor Hollywood, shocked by the nightmarish game opuses from Maestro Uwe Ball, was in no hurry to transfer “Assassin’s Creed” to the movies, in order not to spoil the reputation of the franchise successfully sold over the years. And yet the iconic game could not run away from the big screens forever, transforming into an expensive blockbuster led by Justin Kurzel, author of the brilliant Macbeth starring Michael Fassbender and Marion Cotillard. Having judged that once shot at all the duet of actors will not be superfluous in the “Assassin’s Creed”, Kurazel invited colleagues to the second joint film, thereby providing the painfully mediocre film adaptation with the only advantage to which I do not want to put unnecessary claims.
Considering that the plot of the eponymous game should not be repeated on film under a copy, the filmmakers partially reworked the narrative from Ubisoft, while leaving the overall concept of the story unchanged. So, meet Callum Lynch (Fassbender), a dangerous criminal whose life has not changed since childhood, when one irredeemable tragedy occurred that influenced the formation of the aggressive character of the hero. Having committed several serious crimes, Kahl naturally finds himself in the dock, from which he should have been directly sent to the execution chamber, but the timely intervention of the mysterious Abstergo organization saves the criminal from imminent death. From now on, Cal becomes the object of an incredible experiment that breaks through timelines and is able to reveal the secrets of a long past that produces fruits in an equally alarming future.
When producers take on the adaptation of a truly cult game, they must understand that the answer they have to keep not only in front of a multimillion army of fans, but also ordinary viewers, only mediocrely familiar with the original. I consider myself one of the latter. Transferring the plot of the game to the cinema is obliged, on the one hand, to recreate the inviolable precepts brought to the history by the developers, and on the other hand, to interest the ignorant viewer who came to the cinema in order to discover a new world from scratch that requires explanation and justification of what is happening on the screen. Justin Kurzel, with all his desire, failed to please the entire audience, raising questions at least from third-party viewers who do not feel particularly reverent feelings towards the creation of Ubisoft. There are no powerful emotional rods in the film adaptation, and therefore it is very difficult to imbue the personal drama of the main character, about which, in fact, we do not know very much. Callum Lynch should be interesting even though he did it, but what did he do? Who is he really? Why would you excuse him? The director answered all these questions very vaguely, probably betting on revealing most of the secrets in the sequel, which may not take place. In addition, Kurzel’s “Assassin’s Creed” periodically gets confused in its own narrative, partially reduces promising plot finds to naught and completely does not use the dramatic potential of its performers.
In the “Assassin’s Creed” there are indeed many semantic blunders that affect the integrity of the perception of the picture, and yet actors engaged in leading and secondary roles cause predominantly benevolent feelings. Yes, Michael Fassbender didn’t get the right to reveal himself as an Actor with a capital letter, and he knows how to do it, and we’ve seen it many times. In Justin Kurzel’s film, Fassbender simply does not have a single chance to demonstrate a full emotional palette, since his character is mysterious and empty at the same time. No revelations in it are not yet visible, and over time nothing special from Callum Lynch is not expected. The only thing that saves the situation is the inner charisma of Michael Fassbender, thanks to which he became one of the brightest performers of his time. We do not have much to respect Callum Lynch, but the actor who gave him his life is definitely interesting and sometimes manages to break the bonds of talentless script and insecure directing. Coupled with Fassbender, Marion Cotillard looks good, although she failed to present the viewer and a hundredth share of her own dramatic possibilities. And because, as in the case of Michael Fassbender, the charming Frenchwoman has to rely solely on her own charm, which, fortunately, she has a surplus. Jeremy Irons also got his role in “Assassin’s Creed”, but in addition to the joy of meeting with his favorite performer, the audience is not expected. Irons has relatively little screen time, and therefore the opportunity to show the best aspects inherent in his playing in more worthy productions. But in the case of “Assassin’s Creed”, it is enough for us that actors appear in the frame, who inspire respect in one way. It may not be enough, but it is also good that it exists.
The undoubted success of Justin Kurazel was the action, repeating a number of scenes from the original game, including “Leap of Faith”, replicated in every trailer for the film. Chasing a medieval city, saber fights, dizzying stunts are performed at a high technical level, which is expected to see from an expensive studio film. So in terms of visual and spectacular performance of Justin Kurzel’s “Assassin’s Creed” looks worthy. The nuance is only that a beautiful picture, honed to the smallest tricks and a colorful, memorable entourage in modern cinema is not uncommon. Without strong dramaturgy and a well-built storyline, no special effects, entertainment and tricks can cause genuine delight. And this circumstance seriously undermined the “Killer’s Creed”, wasting serious potential.
In the end, I want to say that Justin Kurzel’s film has turned from a potentially interesting, not stupid spectacle into a beautiful, but not fascinating historical-fiction action movie by pleasant actors who brighten up the faded narrative. “Assassin’s Creed” was worthy of a more accurate film adaptation, and this is understood even by those viewers who navigate only in the general plot outline of the game of the same name. The director and producers set themselves a rather difficult task to develop sequels, since the dubious successes of the first volume of Callum Lynch’s adventures could not but affect the box office. But who knows, maybe working on the mistakes and having a strong faith in the future of the franchise will do wonders. Only it will definitely not happen during the rental of the film by Justin Kurzel.
5 out of 10
I am not familiar with the original game 'Assassin's Creed' which is the basis of this film, so I cannot evaluate it from the point of view of a gamer. But as a viewer, I enjoyed watching.
For the visual part I boldly put 'Credo' 10 out of 10. In the modern surroundings of a research laboratory equipped with the latest technology, beautiful and unusual shootings of dusty Spain of the 15th century are organically interwoven. The scenes of fights and chases are made very qualitatively, beautifully and dynamically. Any element of the battle is staged with choreographic accuracy and even grace. The shooting is fascinating and really pleasing - against the background of popular explosions and receivers of the captains of the Americas and those with them, the disassembly of medieval assassins looks fresh. And an eagle flying past a high tower under the scorching Spanish sun is a spectacular symbol of the film (by the way, like many moved to the big screen from computer monitors).
Now the story. Unfortunately, he was a bit disappointed, although on the whole - quite at the level. The story begins with the childhood of the main character Callum, in whose veins flows the blood of a warlike ancestor - an assassin. Because of the family tragedy, Kal grows up extremely aggressive, eventually for a number of cruel crimes, the details of which, alas, are not disclosed to us, he is sentenced to death. To avoid death, he is helped by a strange organization, innovative developments of which allow you to look into the memories of a distant ancestor Callum. This realistic, fantastical assumption allows us to experience all the most poignant, turning points in the fate of the fearless Aguilar, fighting for the secret society of assassins more than 500 years ago. The interweaving of Callum and Aguilar’s stories is interesting, vivid, but it lacks development. The plot of the film is like an unpressed lemon, an unsalted dish - all is well, but it could be much better. Of course, you can forgive the inefficiency, citing the need to cast a rod on the continuation, on the other hand - if the first film is not cool or publicized enough to collect a large box office, then the second part may not happen.
About the actors. They're exceptionally chic here. Michael Fassbender delivers a powerful dramatic game, despite the fact that the script itself does not require such a wide range of emotions from him. Marion Cotillard is serious and beautiful with these mesmerizing big eyes and bright red lipstick that adds significance and sensuality to her words. Jeremy Irons is as good as ever, playing at a high level. The only drawback: well, a very small role was assigned to the wonderful Brendan Gleason. A little more screen time and the development of the storyline of his character, and the film would only win. Again, they couldn’t reach 100%.
The atmosphere of the film is created primarily by the gloomy and dusty Middle Ages. Mysterious assassins, cruel Templars, bonfires of the Spanish Inquisition, sacred artifacts and cool shooting - all together gives the film a mystical flair. While the action together with the filming of our time translate 'Credo' from the category of pseudo-historical fantasy in a live and quite original action.
'Credo' a good movie to spend time on. Sadly, he didn’t make it to a good one at all. There the plot was not brought, it was not disclosed, here the talent of the actor was not used to its fullest, but all these seemingly trifles form as a result of a huge chasm between ' Norm, I liked' and ' it was just cool!'. Actually, the whole essence of the unrealized potential of the film is how we were shown the same ' leap of faith ' assassins. But I won't spoil it - you need to see it.
Successful film adaptations of video games are rare, either because they were cursed by Mr. Ball, or the approach to them is really not so simple. The pearl of Ubisoft, “Assassin’s Creed”, which has already gained cult status, could not but attract the attention of film producers, so the film adaptation of the game remained only a matter of time. Production accelerated after Michael Fassbender established himself as the lead actor and also producer, lobbying for the appearance in the film of actress Marion Cotillard and director Justin Kurzel, who previously staged Macbeth with this on-screen duet. The film was based on the original script, which does not repeat the storyline of the games, although it was rewritten more than once. The days of the Third Crusade were replaced by the Spanish Inquisition, and Desmond and Lucy served as prototypes for some Callum and Sofia. The latter in a cunning way dragged the young man to the Abstergo Corporation, where, thanks to the Animus device transformed for interactivity, Callum began to live the adventures of his ancestor Aguilar in Spain of the XV century, and at the same time he learned that he is a descendant of members of the mysterious secret society of the Assassins, which in every way prevents the Templars from finding a powerful ancient artifact that allows you to control people.
Kurzel wanted to portray the eternal struggle of the Assassins and Templars from the game somewhat differently, without exposing some as heroes and others as villains, because he believed that none of these ideologies can be categorically called right or wrong. And this very uncertainty played a cruel joke with the director, since the film could not fully concentrate on anything, on the ideas of the heroine Cotillard or the conditional antagonist of Irons and his thoughts, on the traumatized childhood of the hero Fassbender or his present, or even on his ancestor and the world of the medieval era, which, to give credit, attracted much more modern, but it was not enough. Kurzel showed everything and nothing at the same time, because he wanted to cover many things, but did not go into anything properly. However, the game universe of Assassin’s Creed is rich in many events, and it is clear that the film, even in its script, based on the motifs of the game, would not be so exhaustive, therefore, and partly turned out to be confused. And for this reason, the character transformations in some places are very sudden and not entirely justified, especially Callum, who, wanting to get away from home to live a free life, he, acquiring incredible skills, gets involved in a struggle in which he is little informed, while other descendants of the Assassins, who despise him, quickly change their orientation. And Abstergo with its level of protection stands on an equal footing with Oscorp.
But the film still fulfills its main task: it presents the game and at the same time demonstrates its potential, which, as Kurzelev’s practice shows, is difficult to realize, and the similar atmosphere and action scenes with parkour on roofs, blade murders and a “leap of faith” is not quite enough to completely capture the viewer and, most importantly, keep the intrigue, even if you wove a couple of winged phrases and repeat them twice, and also periodically frame the flight of an eagle, probably wanting to remind gamers of the “eagle’s vision”. However, it is unlikely that even gamers will tremble with delight, primarily because of the simplification of the plot, and not the free script, since the picture captures individual episodes, but not entirely, due to the lack of the very touch that would clearly emphasize all the positive aspects and at the same time would give the story a refinement and perfect form, as Duncan Jones did. Kurzel did not want his film to resemble a “superhero movie”, which to some extent, thanks to a peculiar entourage, he managed to achieve, although not as spectacular as in “Macbeth”, but its groundlessness and superficiality “Killer’s Creed” resembles the notorious popcorn-movie, of which the car and a small cart. And the picture, accordingly, has a crumpled ending, devoid of integrity, so that the sequel had where to accelerate, that a priori is not an excuse, but nevertheless, such a movie is to some extent able to captivate.
Nothing is true, everything is allowed. Kurzel had to read between the lines.
I don’t know how to write reviews, so this is more of a personal opinion about the film. . .
As a fan of the movie, I expected much more. No, the film is not bad just nostalgia demanded more, going to see the film, I recommend not to expect from him those vivid emotions that were experienced during the game of the first parts, although the scenes with the chase and fights are shot very well and keep in suspense. . .
The music in the film seemed to be, but something did not remember anything at all, as if the whole film was without musical accompaniment at all, I will refer to the fact that Hans Zimmer spoiled his work.
The plot, as promised, does not duplicate the plot of the game and throughout the film I did not feel bored. The first half of the film with a smooth and logically developing plot near the end turns into a crumpled something, as if during the shooting for some reason decided to remove 40 minutes of story time and everything had to fit in the last 15 minutes (and the film does not give reason to get bored). If I was watching this movie on a computer, I would definitely not rewind, as I do with most new films where the film is stuffed with unnecessary scenes, trying to somehow stretch the time to the required 1.5-2 hours. In general, I am waiting for the continuation (and judging by the open end it should be).
8 out of 10