Attila (2001)

Short: A romanticized version of the story of Attila the Hun (Gerard Butler), focusing on both his relationships with his older brother, Bleda (Tommy Flanagan); a Roman general, Flavius Aetius (Powers Boothe); and the love of his life, N’Kara (Simmone Mackinnon), as he comes to terms with a prophecy that claims he will one day rule the world.

So, basically, the same epic story we see in every movie set around the waning years of the Roman Empire/the Dark Ages. I never thought I would even think such a thing.

If this movie has one good thing going for it, it’s its author, Robert Cochran. Where do I know Cochran’s name from? He’s a writer for 24.

If you haven’t watched the show, then shame on you. It’s the most intense show on television today, as well as one of the sharpest and deepest. It never, for even a second, is boring. In fact, there are usually at least three things going on at once, and your head starts spinning with the end of every episode.

Cochran brings that same kind of intensity to a story known only too well. Without letting us get bogged down in the pesky details (will Attila ever attack Rome? When?), Cochran shows the pressure Attila put on himself and the great leader he came to be from underneath his own shadow.

Of course, the end is anti-climatic, and I’m not sure that it was historically accurate. Regardless, there is something poetic about it.

I think what I liked best, though, was that Attila wasn’t obsessed with immortality. That seems to be a theme in the epic blockbusters of late, and it was refreshing to be rid of it for a moment.

Dock Lowry, the director, has made a career directing made-for-TV movies. I don’t know how one makes a career out of that, but he has. Frankly, that’s not the right thing to do.

Why? Because he makes the whole thing feel like a made-for-TV movie. I mean, it is one, but it doesn’t have to feel that way. You don’t need to feel budgetary constraints. You don’t need to feel that lack of luxury, which leads to lack of magic.

This is not a story line that needs to feel entirely realistic. I wanted to feel steeped in history and mysticism, but Lowry cut me short.

Butler is a bright spot in all of this madness. Lowry should have been reined him in a bit, but he’s still convincing. I read some speculation (http://edition.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/Movies/07/28/brosnan.bond.ap/index.html) the other day about him as the next Bond, and, as much as you know I love many other candidates on the list, I think he’s the best choice.

In fact, some of the other ideas there are just plain laughable. I mean, Hugh Grant? Oh, okay. Absolutely. Jude Law? Too feminine. As much as you know I find Clive Owen and Ioan Gruffudd sexy, those don’t seem like the right answers.

And don’t even get me started about the Heath Ledger idea. Oh, my, no.

Butler, second only to Owen in this respect, captures that “devil may care” attitude that Connery immortalized as one of the central characteristics of Bond. Plus, he would carry on the grand tradition of a Scottish Bond, which very much appeals to me.

Alright, enough of that tangent. I think everyone should post a comment of their pick. I’d love to debate it with y’all.

An important note when considering picking up the Attila DVD for your viewing pleasure: it’s a three parter, making the actual running time (without commercials) 177 minutes. I watched it all in one go, but you might want to consider breaking it up.