In adapting the celebrated popular Brit children’s novel “The Eagle Of The Ninth,” about a Roman legion in northern Britain who are defeated by local tribes, director Kevin MacDonald has wasted no time in drawing parallels to current day events. In the forthcoming film, if it seems a little odd to you that the Romans are speaking with distinctly American accents, it’s no mistake.
Speaking with TimesOnline, “It was always my concept for this film that the Romans would be Americans,” says Macdonald. “That was my first idea about the movie and it still holds up whether or not we had any money from America, that would have been my approach.”In the film, Channing Tatum plays Roman solider Marcus Aquila, who investigates the disappearance of his father’s tribe, with Donald Sutherland playing his uncle. In undertaking the journey through the lands they have occupied, Marcus begins to realize that maybe there is something to be learned from other cultures.
“Marcus thinks, ‘It would benefit them so much — can’t they see it is the only way to live their lives?’ He comes to realise there are other value systems, other people have a claim to honour in the same way that he as an American — or a Roman — can claim honour. This is a film which in some way reflects some of the current anxieties and the political questions that we all have,” says MacDonald. If you’re beginning to think of the current woes in the Middle East, MacDonald wouldn’t mind at all. “That’s what we are doing — not simply reflecting on the Afghanistan or Iraq wars, but a sense of cultural imperialism,” he says. “….The parallel is definitely there, and it is part of what you would want the audience to take away from the film. But it is not necessarily literal. Literalism is very often the death of films.”
And if you’re wondering if MacDonald is picking on Americans as cultural imperialists instead of having the actors speak in Brit accents? “Britain isn’t a force any more, we aren’t cultural imperialists. That just didn’t seem the right way to go.” Um, right.We dunno. Contrary to what MacDonald is saying, his political overtones sound very literal if not entirely simplistic and reductive to a certain degree. We’re sure he could’ve addressed the issues he wants to raise without beating us over the head with all-American Channing Tatum learning Important Cultural Lessons.
This is on our most anticipated films of 2010 list, but reading that article took the shine off the film a little bit. Hopefully, MacDonald’s political message won’t override the film, but if we keep hearing this rhetoric over the next few months in the lead up to the film’s release, we may be soured on it before even entering the cinema.
Perhaps this film can change people than the political tones would be valuable
perhaps it could also fly me to the moon.
Yeah, Kevin, just ignore that 400 years or so of British subjugation and genocide committed by your precious God and Country in the name of British supremacy, you hypocrite. It's doubly insulting (and more than a little sad) that he's a Scotsman, too. I guess someone has forgotten his roots.
For the record, I'm not British (not sure how you got that idea) and in case it wasn't entirely clear in the piece (which I presume you didn't finish reading) I have a lot of issues with MacDonald's approach.
this just seems like a way to save money on a voice coach for Channing…I just hope he isn't mumbling or talking like Mark Wahlberg circa 1990's throughout the film like he does in everything else he's been in
Oliver Stone tried this accent experiment with Alexander it just ended up distracting
As opposed to what….authentic ancient Roman accents? Just as historically inaccurate modern-day British accents? Give me a break. I am glad he has made the courageous artistic choice to use the accent of the largest film market in the world. Bravo.
Seems like the fact that Tahar Rahim ("A Prophet") is playing a celtic warrior (speaking gaelic) follows the same parallel with middle east wars…
Kevin J….It's fairly clear that Anon. 11:53 isn't writing about you, but about the filmmaker.
meant to be in a celtic scotland, but then again they had a french man play a scot and a scot playing a egyptian/spaniard in highlander!!!
Seems like just a different spin on the way the big Roman epics of the 50s and 60s always had Brits playing the Romans (which Scorsese played with in "Last Temptation of Christ" with his Cockney Centurions and Ridley Scott adopted straight in "Gladiator") while Americans played the Christians/slaves etc. Oliver Stone tried a similar thing with "Alexander" but its always a problem when American actors attempt dodgy accents.
As for the political dimensions – I don't have a problem with a historical film commenting on modern politics, but surely it would be best left to leave them unspoken? This smacks of MacDonald trying to give his film some significance beyond the usual remit of an Action-Epic.
Hope I'm wrong…
shheeesh….
whenever I hear stuff like this I always think of the 'what have the romans ever done for us' scene in Life of Brian…