Assassin's Creed

Kurzel filmed the Assassin in his own way and if he hadn’t had to cut down on the length, it could have been an excellent movie. This cut of the movie lacks explanations that would have helped the story to run more smoothly. Despite being a little banal (though fits magically together) the story should be told in full. The serious tone of it might not suit everybody. Paradoxically, Assassin’s Creed isn’t all fun, but about questions that viewers should ask themselves. (01/01/2017)

This film has character. On the one hand, it goes as far as possible against the fans of the game franchise, but at the same time it tries to make a distinctive artistic concept of the Assassin universe. The passages set in medieval Spain are visually stunning, the depiction of the Animus is boldly different (and better!) than we know from the games, and while it left me emotionally cold, I appreciate the personality that Kurzel brought to the table, and I can sense from it his desire to make the best possible film that isn't just a boring descriptive retelling of the game. The highly artistic Kurzel simply entertains me. It's a pity that people won't appreciate his honest approach and that there won't be a sequel. (16/07/2017)

It’s no fan service and it goes hard toward even the most welcoming viewer. It’s a non-Hollywood adaptation that mercilessly flushed over a hundred million and had no shame in doing so. It’s visually captivating bliss that tests the projectionists and the limits of how much the viewer is willing to accept the creative rules. (30/12/2016)

I can't help but feel that I haven't seen such nonsense in a long time, especially in the mainstream scene. A film that wants to be a tribute to the gaming fan, but doesn't give a damn about the viewer. Great actors with incredibly silly roles, and only Fassbender shows physical prowess, even though there are too many effects anyway. A stupid script and overall uninteresting story. (26/03/2017)

The curse of movies based on a videogame brand continues. This film is once again evidence of the fact that a good gaming adaptation does not need to mean a well-made movie. The computer game is based mainly on the atmosphere of the medieval setting. I always thought the story set in the near future wasn’t too great and I always sort of skipped it. Not only was it fairly nonsensical, but it also didn’t fit into the otherwise nicely depicted history at all. But Ubisoft wanted it this way and they sold it this way. However, the story of the film didn’t work at all although it offered good quality fimmaking, which could represent a pretty good experience. In the end, the only thing I got from the movie were the historical action sequences, which were absolutely perfect. The director of cinematography and the editor probably puffed a joint or two, but it was still within reasonably bearable limits. It was probably also because the film itself wasn’t too cheap so they didn’t have to patch things up and cover them up with a cheaper budget. Some of the stunt shots that I saw were really great. It’s a pity though that Fassbender and Cotillard didn’t get a chance to show off their acting. Emotions – none. Dialogues – horrible. And the plot? What was the whole thing actually about and what is it that was going on in there the entire time? Well, as I said the action was good, but the rest was pretty bad. (02/05/2017)