Home > Drama >

Boudica

Boudica (2003)

October. 12,2003
|
5.3
|
PG
| Drama Action History TV Movie

The Celtic queen who shook the Roman Empire. Boudica is one of history’s first and fiercest women warriors. Sickened by ceaseless war, the king of the Iceni accepts a treaty with the Romans in exchange for his tribe’s continued independence. But oppressively high taxes impoverish the tribe and soon the Romans want something more — slaves. Refusing to submit, the Romans, led by the greedy and psychotic Emperor Nero, move to crush the Iceni and control their lands. Drawing on the strength of her warriors, mystical druidic powers, and her own pain, Boudica unites the historically fractious tribes of Briton to unleash a stunning onslaught on the Roman colonial camps. The ferocity of Boudica’s attacks will shake the foundations of the Roman empire and make her a legend.

...

Watch Trailer

Cast

Similar titles

Reviews

WasAnnon
2003/10/12

Slow pace in the most part of the movie.

More
Unlimitedia
2003/10/13

Sick Product of a Sick System

More
Protraph
2003/10/14

Lack of good storyline.

More
Kaelan Mccaffrey
2003/10/15

Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

More
Black_Man24
2003/10/16

I hate fact twisted into some overdone fantasy/historical fiction called epics. This is one of the worst. I am obsessed with Celtic culture and I look it up endlessly. I have no problem in creating epics with a touch of unrealism. It's fiction. I like adding spin to it. But I absolutely hate it when people take history and completely ignore facts to add their own "idea" of realism.Boudicca is one of my heroes. But she was usual for her time. The actress played her well, but the whole idea of Boudicca should have been left to true, hard-core lovers of Celtic culture.One day,maybe, someone will get it right. The actors were fine: the writing was WAY overdone. Stilted and unimaginative.

More
Julius Caesar
2003/10/17

I didn't hate this movie but there were a lot of times where I grimaced at the usual things that annoy me about historical films. I would love it if for once someone decided to explore the possibility of making a historical movie that actually tries to recreate a picture of what really might have happened! Is this so difficult? Will it screw up the story so badly to just make it feel real? I want the Romans to talk Latin and the Celts (if possible) to talk in their language. (subtitled with English) That's how real it should be. Virtually no one should have white teeth either. And they should spend a bit more time researching the tactics! Romans didn't just stand there waiting to be attacked (the final battle) they would have thrown their pila (javelins) and then drawn swords and hacked into the enemy. Standing defensively works for spear armed infantry not for assault infantry like the soldiers pictured in the film. No one has to know all these details but it's not like one is asking the director to move a mountain just to show the (cooler) actual tactics that we would have seen had we been watching the battle... Sure not many people will care about the added accuracy but...what have they got to lose by it? A few extra nights on google searching for ancient accounts of roman warfare??? As for Nero I thought the film showed him to be too concerned about the incident, like it was consuming his life. I don't think it occupied his thoughts as much as they make out - he is even totally preoccupied with the Celts before the rebellion! (which actually occurred years after Claudius's death).

More
dannym-3
2003/10/18

It's got some great sets and costumes, a fantastic, frankly groundbreaking soundtrack of calling vocals, and spectacular deeply theatric moments, basically any time the characters aren't actually speaking is OK. The dialogue is fundamentally awful, Romans are one-dimensionally bad, absurdly condescending and arrogant, and barbarians good. Obviously the writer wanted to make this a commentary about current politics, referring to Icenians as "terrorists", a concept which did not exist at the time. In fact, many lines such as "For God's sake!" would not exist for this setting.I don't suppose anyone could tell me the reason why all the Roman soldiers have cockney accents either.To watch this film, you've got to have a sense of humor for the dialogue which is utterly painful. The Romans are written so badly on such a deep level one can take amusement in it. But it can't be described, laughed at, and appreciated as a bad B-movie, there are quality stirring dramatic moments there and any humor you see in it is killed by the prolonged gang rape scene, which is not a gratuitous addition but a serious, fundamental part of the historical accounts of the real Boudicca.This film is without compare in its strengths and weaknesses and I'm wholly at a loss to classify it or say exactly how one should appreciate it. You will have to decide for yourself and tell me.

More
Charles Herold (cherold)
2003/10/19

I've been looking at the comments on this site, and it looks like almost everyone who posted is very familiar with Boudica and very upset by what are apparently myriad inaccuracies. It makes me wonder if anyone saw this show who wasn't a history freak. So let me begin by saying I know absolutely nothing whatsoever about the real story. But from the vantage point of someone who isn't horrified by incorrect costumes and hairstyles, I thought this was an excellent movie with many striking scenes. Also, as someone who doesn't watch ER I have not pigeonholed the excellent actress Alex Kingston into whatever character she plays in the show. I am only familiar with her from her first rate performance in Moll Flanders. It's very silly to object to a performance not based on the quality of the performance but on what you're used to seeing the actress in.I liked this about as well as I liked Braveheart (which I thought was good but overrated).

More