ManiakJiggy This is How Movies Should Be Made

Exoticalot People are voting emotionally.

Majorthebys Charming and brutal

Phillida Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

cheesey-1 This ' DocuDrama ' follows the battle of hastings through the eyes of the peasants (portrayed brilliantly by their respective actors) and the Huscarl they're forced into following; and where their journey takes them across the UK and tries to show the opinion of what life was like for a lowly foot-soldier of the era.Its nowhere near the high production values of Gladiator or any other blockbuster medieval romp... But it can hold its head high whilst standing next to them.Because they've used their budget effectively and tell the story well...It's not a history lesson.. But it does a great job of being sneaky and educating you whilst you're watching. I completely agree with another reviewers' assertion that it was great to learn how Tolkiens own 'middle earth' tales had taken inspiration and where he had adapted a lot of terminology from.I gave this 9/10 because i thought the acting was brilliant, the story was well told given the obvious budget restrictions (they were clearly trying to show the massive scale of the conflict but didn't have hundreds/thousands of people to work with) and personally i found the music/soundtrack to be icing on the cake.Which is why i'm here 3 years later writing a review.

Theo Robertson 1066 was broadcast with the subheading The Battle For Middle Earth which probably suggests it's marketed to tie in with LORD OF THE RINGS . Unfortunately when this historical drama was broadcast last year many people had forgotten about the film trilogy . Fellowship topped the IMDb top 250 for a couple of months but had rapidly fallen out of the top ten . Of course the books remain popular but you get the impression the producers are clutching at straws hoping that its flaws will go unspotted by a more critical audience . The sad truth is even Stevie Wonder will be able to see what's wrong with this historical mini-series From the outset we see contrived scenes where olde Anglo-Saxon characters state words like " Elves " and a caption flashes up giving the origin of said words . It becomes very tiresome as well as patronising but I guess it saves on the budget . What budget ? Exactly . Through out the running time you're left feeling that the producers have employed an amateur dramatics company and stuck them in someones garden . It's certainly amusing watching the climatic battle scene at Stamford Bridge take place which is at odds with the on screen verbal warning of" 1066 contains graphic and bloody battle scenes " which confused me since a word seems to missing somewhere and the word is " funny " that should appear between after bloody and before battle in the above sentence . The Vikings stand at one end of the bridge while the Saxons stand at the other . Remember in those old Bruce Lee films where the villain is let down by his guards and the guards undergo a trail of combat where they ultimately pay with their lives ? Well the same thing happens here . One after another a Saxon is forced at the front of the queue who gingerly advances up to the Viking who kills him , but not before at least one Saxon has the famous last words of " Stop pushing at the back there " . Honestly if Stamford Bridge was composed of pink tents it wouldn't have been more camp than what's on screen here Unlike me you may not have fallen in love with Peter Jackson's film version of Tolkien's book but you can appreciate the technical achievements and aesthetic beauty he brought to the cinema version . 1066 can show quiet clearly how easy it is to ruin a historical epic if you don't have much of a budget or directorial skills

altquark I'm going to give this 9 out of 10 - only because I'm unsure how exactly historically accurate this was - but it WAS about 90% accurate. I'm also knocking some off for being a little strangely anti-norman - I'm not sure exactly what that was all about, but I'll explain this.However, first of all - who ever is wondering why there are no Lord of the Rings elves or wizards - this is a HISTORICAL DOCUMENTARY. Its not a fantasy, and it portrays the MIDDLE AGES (though why the History Channel calls it "Middle Earth" is a little strange). I'm also unsure with the "Orc" references - it seemed a little bit of a stretch and lots of wikipedia editing it seems to get those references.However, as a student of the run-up to the Battle of Hastings, I found the movie entertaining and certainly an interesting perspective. There are a number of books - one of which is called "1066 the Battle of Hastings" which talks about the battle in the perspective of an average commoner of Anglo-Saxon England - and to be honest I was hoping for a little more of that perspective BEFORE the battles. But I guess that would have made the movie a little longer and a little drier.Now, the battle scenes aren't exactly totally gruesome - but they are gruesome enough. What comes across is that this is a violent time and men were thrust into battle with very little training or expectation of what to expect.Not sure with the portrayal of either of the Kings - one wasn't even shown, and the other was really very strange - a little too fantasy-like...OK - spoiler alert, for those who don't know the history of England and Great Britain...Yes, the Normans were French. Yes, they invaded and beat the Anglo-Saxons. Yes, they were brutal and "laid waste" villages and towns. Yes, they ended up "owning huge tracts of land for the next thousand years" etc etc But what was PAINFULLY missing from this documentary was the fact that the Norman Invaders became so INTEGRATED with Anglo-saxons that within one lifetime, England was changed forever. What was missing was the fact that prior to 1066, England was a number of warring shires - and that William, by conquering Britain, united the people under a single banner and created the first true monarchy of England, which links the British Monarchy for the next 1,000 years. What was missing was the fact that 1066 was the last time anyone successfully invaded England - that all technology, tools and foundations of defense stemmed directly from this new "invader".I missed the politics of what led up to the Battle of Hastings. What should have occurred was that they should have followed the tapestry from beginning to end. I was saddened to not see Halleys Comet even make an appearance in the movie (one of the most important "portents" and one which was in the Bayeaux Tapestry).I'm giving this a high mark, because more historical based movies should be made - knowing where we come from is always important. But, like my old history master used to say on my report card "could do better"...

Ernst Wiltmann The angle of telling the historical story from the fighting man's perspective, was suspensefully implemented. I witnessed the view of the invading Vikings, shared their long journey via the North Atlantic , the excitement of pillaging the anglo -saxon villages, and their thirst for a adventures battles. The main focus however was on the anglo - saxon peasants, who had to leave their homesteads and their loved ones behind, to fight the invaders. Expecting an attack from William the Conquerer from Normandy they had to guard the Sussex Coast. When News arrived, that a mighty Viking force was attacking the Midlands, 200 miles north. Imagine untrained farmers turned soldiers with few professional soldiers (the Kings Guard)commanding them, it was quite an archivement to cover that distance in 4 days, with only dirt path's in that direction. The old roman cobblestone streets run mostly east - west. The hardship of it, is illustrated in great detail, specially when you have watched the extras of the DVD, before you have watched the movie series. This is what I recommend to all viewers. After having seen the extra features, you will appreciate the movie more. Footwear, food, clothing and weaponry really round up the " you have been there " feeling. No Superheroes, or corny over-dramatized characters, just real people trying to survive. The battles however are graphic, nothing for the fainthearted. With fear, panic, cut of limbs, the movie is also not without humor. I remember the Stamford Bridge Battle scene, where eager soldiers from the rear ranks and file pushing the frontline without caution, where an "ole battle hand" in front kept swearing at them, going into certain slaughter. I haven't seen anything like that, so authentic in a period peace battle. King Herold,King Harald and William the Conquerer, take a backstage in this film, it's all about the common fighting man. A very interesting approach, that worked very well in this movie. A refreshing detour from the "300" type of making history movies. The movie is 4 hours short, more than 2 hours are of it spend for the 3 great battles: Midland, Stamford Bridge and Hastings. Yes, the anglo - saxons had to march all the 200 miles back to meet another enemy at Hastings, telling more would spoil the movie. I feel fortunate to own a region free DVD player, otherwise I couldn't see all the great historical movies from europe. There is nothing like this movie here in north America.