Metascore
62 out of 100

Generally favorable reviews - based on 21 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 12 out of 21
  2. Negative: 2 out of 21
  1. Reviewed by: F. X. Feeney
    90
    Up to now, writer-director Neil Marshall has specialized in horror movies (Dog Soldiers, The Descent), but here, he imagines and communicates a remote world with terrific energy and a passion for detail.
  2. 80
    Centurion has its moments of manly cornpone camaraderie and certainly isn't blazingly original, but it offers riveting storytelling, gorgeous cinematography and scenery, loads of gore, and a politically complicated history lesson.
  3. Fast-moving, epic-on-a-shoestring tale of one Roman soldier's fight that is by turns heroic, fearsome, funny, fateful and, oh, so brutal, with swords hacking off heads at every turn.
  4. 80
    "Doomsday," horror-trained British helmer Neil Marshall flexes strong action muscles and carves copious flesh here, creating the sort of broadsword-based bedlam that will thrill fans of ancient martial movies.
  5. 75
    Marshall, who helmed the underrated horror film, "The Descent," has a flair for the visual. Some of the mountainscapes, captured by use of a helicopter, are nothing short of spectacular.
  6. Reviewed by: Chris Nashawaty
    75
    The plot's pretty thin -- even for a gladiator movie. Fortunately, when it comes to crunchy impalings and messy arterial geysers, Marshall's a maestro.
  7. Centurion delivers some large-scale action but plays almost like a Roman-era Western in its depiction of a few soldiers trying to get home alive after the slaughter of their comrades.
  8. 70
    If you're like me, and you find yourself retreating to a safe place in your mind whenever human beings are being graphically decapitated on screen, you'll spend the majority of Centurion, horror maestro (The Descent) Neil Marshall's Roman bloodbath, on psychological lockdown.
  9. The real message: Life's ultimate pleasure lies in extreme fighting - to the death.
  10. 70
    The film has a resigned bitterness, hard to shake off, that feels right for the experience of tough guys, from whatever period of history, who find themselves at the tattered edge of what they take to be civilization.
  11. If I believed in the concept of "guilty pleasures," I'd classify "Centurion" as one, but I think I maybe just kind of enjoyed it.
  12. 63
    The profanity is delightful. And the general atmosphere is grim. The movie just isn't terribly inspired.
  13. Reviewed by: Dan Jolin
    60
    A gritty, brutal chase movie that's more about swords (and spears, and axes) than sandals - although it could have done with a lot more character-meat on those bones.
  14. It's prime B-movie material put through the Ridley Scott Cuisinart.
  15. 58
    Centurion offers little beyond viscera for its own sake, without anything like the bold abstraction of "Valhalla Rising."
  16. Compared with, say, Mel Gibson's "Apocalypto," which featured this sort of stuff in practically every frame, Marshall's film is downright Disneyish.
  17. 50
    Even if the movie had more shadings, though, Marshall's political point would undo his he-man action-flick format. If you're looking for a rallying cry to make the emotions sizzle, "Quagmire!" isn't it.
  18. Reviewed by: Ben Sachs
    50
    There's little here about soldiers and mercenaries that isn't lifted from other movies, though Marshall elicits a steady seriousness from his actors (especially Michael Fassbender, in an introverted lead performance), which generally keeps the movie from sliding into camp.
  19. Marshall shows off the breathtaking landscape, but with interiors, he populates the ale houses and encampments with cliches - like dueling female warriors, one a mute and the other a white-haired vixen.
  20. There are six standard types of violence in film these days: Tarantino, comic book, Scorsese, martial arts, horror and stupid. For stupid, look no further than Centurion.
  21. 20
    To say that Marshall's technique is so low-brow it may as well be a moustache is being kind--at best this is the sort of lazy, ambitionless hackery that can lead both filmmakers and audiences to write off a genre for dead--or at least until a more skilled storyteller is able to do it right.
User Score

Generally favorable reviews- based on 56 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 9 out of 13
  2. Negative: 3 out of 13
  1. awful. just awful. neil marshall is showing he really has absolutely no talent left after dog soldiers and the descent, i shouldn't really have to mention doomsday... but this movie is filled with cgi blood, pretentious acting and dialogue, horrible editing, and some really stupid PC stuff that was unnecessary and weren't realistic in the realm of the story. garbage. avoid. Full Review »
  2. 6
    People expecting a sanitized, Gladiator-like epic, might be in for a nasty (or lovely) surprise. There is little honour in this survival story and even less glory. There are, however, many majestic and harsh landscapes and even more brutal, deservedly R-rated spear-to-the-mouth type slayings. In essence, this is “Northern Comfort” with Scotland for Louisiana, Picts for Cajuns and Romans for Guardsmen. The Walter Hill movie clearly had undertones of Vietnam, but here only the pretentious will immediately see parallels with Afghanistan and War on Terror in general. After an ambush and a botched rescue mission which turns into a war crime, a small, diverse and multiethnic band of imperial soldiers is trying to escape from deep behind the enemy lines and they soon find that the only way to survive is to adopt the guerrilla tactics of their foes – the savage and merciless freedom fighters led by an almost supernaturally capable female tracker (Kurylenko). The prevailing feeling is that of despair and nihilism as our questionable heroes get killed one by one at the hands of the Picts but also abandoned and betrayed by amoral Roman politicians. The main reasons I cannot give this a score better than 6/10 (which in my book stands for “worth a watch”) are poor characterisation on both sides of the conflict, the cheesy and completely unnecessary narration and clunky plotting. Cheep looking and juvenile opening credits do not help either. Also, the top billed Dominic West has no more than 15 minutes of screen time which is kind of dishonest. If you liked Marshall’s previous movies (especially “Dog Soldiers”) and are not put off by the flying limbs and the rivers of blood (it seems most weapons here are vorpal and critical hits abound), you will not be disappointed. If you are the gloomy sort who thought “Valhalla Rising” was an underrated art-house gem of awesome glacial beauty, if you were entertained by the silly but lush and dreamy “Pathfinder” or you were not utterly disgusted by “King Arthur”, you might really like this gritty, feel-bad-movie-of–the-year. However, the weak of stomach and the sunny of disposition should stay several spear lengths away, safely behind Hadrian’s Wall with the weaklings who do not paint their bodies blue, braid their magnificent moustaches and charge naked at their enemies. Full Review »
  3. Centurion is a pretty decent action-packed historical thriller. The story may be merely diverting rather than compelling, but there's plenty to entertain throughout. The fight scenes are brutal and expertly handled, and I like the comparison made between Pict tactics and modern guerrilla warfare. The cast are all competent, but no-one gives a performance of any particular note, and the script is a little flat. When compared to other films of this type, Centurion is far better than King Arthur (which had few redeemable qualities at all) but it's not quite in the same league as Gladiator (lacking as it does Ridley Scott's visual pinache and well-developed characters). Neil Marshall continues to prove himself as a talent to watch. While there's nothing majorly wrong with Centurion, it doesn't have enough to make it stand out from other releases - perhaps Marshall needs to return to doing something more daring again, like Dog Soldiers and The Descent. Full Review »