Home
search
more | tips
SHOP LAST CASTLE...
Amazon.com Amazon.ca Amazon.co.uk Amazon.de Amazon.fr
IMDb > The Last Castle (2001) > IMDb user comments
The Last Castle
[Add to My Movies]
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany creditstv schedule
Awards & Reviews
user commentsexternal reviewsnewsgroup reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guiderecommendationsmessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summaryplot synopsisplot keywordsAmazon.com summarymemorable quotes
Fun Stuff
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
merchandising linksbox office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specslaserdisc detailsDVD detailsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

IMDb user comments for
The Last Castle (2001)

advertisement
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 26:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
Index 257 comments in total 

56 out of 87 people found the following comment useful :-
The Farcical Castle, 19 June 2003
3/10
Author: dunmore_ego from Los Angeles, California

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

The Last Castle was a good movie - until it got pillow-fartingly ridiculous.

A military prison. Warden: Tony Soprano. (Anyone who writes to me, explaining the distinction between an actor's character name and his real name will get a reply explaining the distinction between hebetude and tongue-in-cheek.) New inmate: profusely-decorated 3-star general Robert Redford. Theme: Battle-theorist (Tony, battle memorabilia collector) versus battle veteran (Redford, whose field credits include the Gulf and other inane political coups). Premise: Inmate Redford takes a dislike to the way Warden Tony disses his marine and army peeps behind bars, so launches a prison revolt, inmates rallying behind him due to his iron-fisted reputation and rakish good looks.

Let the farce begin.

Requisite character stereotypes abound: Aguilar, the dim bulb; Yates, the amoral prison bookie; the fallen-from-grace doctor, the big black guy, the big white guy, the big guy of uncertain ethnic descent and the token Latino guy. Redford coaxes The Patriot from this ragtag band of uncertain heroes, twisting Tony's panties into cat's cradles in the process.

For we who came to see Tony Soprano bust a move other than his renowned Gansta Rap, we were not prepared for the impotent swab his warden character turned out to be - even as a 'character actor playing against type', Tony was reined in by director Joe Lurie to such an extent that even when the situation warranted explosive retaliation during the siege, Tony simply sulked around his crumbling office in a prissy rage.

Saluting is not allowed amongst prisoners in a military prison - something to do with loss of rank and lack of hairspray. Redford's clichéd one-liners evokes inmate-saluting soon enough, causing big trouble in Little Italy. Which leads to Redford's punishment: to bare his virile, octogenarian man-torso (we're talking' carpet-chest that makes Paul Stanley's look like a bowling green) and to move a pile of rocks from here to there. With his blond ambition and undeniable desirability to prison men of all persuasions, Redford turns this punishment into yet another spectacle with which to win over the hearts of his fellow crims.

All the philosophy, chess-playing and tough love comes from the convicted criminal in this film - Redford - so the viewer is cajoled into rooting for the WRONG side. The attempts at tear-jerking and patriotism and brotherhood are completely misplaced by the fact that this bake sale is held - in a JAIL. And the good guys.are the bad guys. When was the last time you supported a prison revolt, replete with murder and destruction of taxpayer property, cheering on the cons in their noble cause to usurp authority?

Redford uses Tony's own armaments against him; the water-cannon, the trebuchet (the wha-?). This last weapon turned up out of nowhere, like Monty Python's Trojan Rabbit, when the plot had degenerated to guys running around and burning things, and the director thought no one would notice the appearance of a construct that literally cannot be hidden anywhere on prison grounds. (The Great Escape this ain't.) Checkmate is to capture the warden's American flag and fly it upside down, which denotes a distress signal, a concept which they make abundantly clear through the dialog of about twenty people. Okay - I heard you the SEVENTH time - so if the American flag winds up flying upside down, nobody's a terrorist or anti-American - sheesh!

To cap this farce with the seal of disbelief, these guys don't even want to escape - they just want another warden. I got news for you, guys: the warden may change, but the JOB-DESCRIPTION remains the same, i.e. it's his DUTY to retain your low self-esteem, disorientation and to KEEP YOU IN JAIL. Changing the management amounts to nothing more than amending the names on the doors and letterheads. Of all people, you military perps should understand that in contravening The System's laws, you yourselves have empowered The System to isolate you from it.

A prison is NOT a democracy - at least, not the last time I was in one. Since when do we grant prisoners the expertise to diagnose anti-social behavior in a warden? Or the inalienable right to OVERTHROW the prison if they "don't like the conditions"? Yeh, jail sucks - it's meant to!

In the final scene, Redford flashbacks to his Sundance Kid days, as an army trains their rifles on him in the rec yard, waiting for the word from Don Soprano to bake his ziti. Redford carries the folded flag stolen from Tony's office, and word on the street was that he was gonna raise that puppy upside down, thereby broadcasting Tony's incompetence to the Five Families. So Tony must stop him at all costs; he faces Redford, staunchly: 'Give me back my flag!'

Redford: 'It's not 'your' flag.' Ouch! - now that was so patriotic, it made my thighs supple. Sundance strides to the flagpole and resolutely starts raising the flag, as Tony is screaming at his men to shoot him down - but of course, each rifleman's dreams were now rife with frolicking in that snowy-white chest-jungle with the blue-eyed avenger-general who defied a mob boss. They lower their weapons - and it is up to The Jersey Godfather to whack Boy Redford. Of course, he is arrested immediately by his lieutenant; something to do with The Law - The Law which they suddenly want to adhere to, after not giving it a moment's thought during the last hour's siege.

Camera pans up the flagpole and - the flag is flying, proud and true - RIGHT SIDE UP. And the convicts salute it. And the guards salute it. And the music swells, as Redford dies with a smile, flag fluttering in battle-smoke breeze, cheese glutting all Exit doors.

Probably the best advice one could offer to someone contemplating viewing this movie - Fuggedaboudit!

(Movie Maniacs, visit: www.poffysmoviemania.com)

Was the above comment useful to you?

37 out of 59 people found the following comment useful :-
Redford has the ability to fade, 20 August 2005
8/10
Author: bamabryant from United States

Redford's ability to fade into a character is profound. Sometimes an actor who has been in the business a very long time will become larger than any role he plays... John Wayne for example (with a couple of exceptions). He becomes Eugene Irwin in this movie. This movie isn't about Redford's character, just like "The Legend of Bagger Vance" isn't really about Bagger Vance. The Last Castle is about honor to one's self and honor among soldiers, even if they are prisoners. James Gandolfini's portrayal of a colonel who knows nothing of this honor or brotherhood is excellent. He makes you despise his character. Colonel Winters is a deeply disturbing study of corrupt power and jealousy of others' glory. A fine ensemble cast of characters make this movie well worth watching.

Was the above comment useful to you?

31 out of 53 people found the following comment useful :-
Utter cornball nonsense, 18 May 2002
Author: Casey Machula from Flagstaff, AZ

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

The penultimate scene in this movie, which I don't mind divulging because the film is worthless anyway, is about as cheesy and corny as they get: the wounded and dying general (Robert Redford), imprisoned in a military stockade for disobeying orders (he did so with the best of intentions, naturally, so we're all supposed to sympathize with him!), uses every ounce of his dying strength to raise the American flag up a flagpole. As this drama unfolds, the prison inmates stand at attention, their chests flush with red-blooded patriotic pride, their butt-cheeks puckered tight, saluting the flag, as solemn and serious as a heart attack. It's the last act in the ridiculously contrived struggle between the dishonored general and the corrupt, power-hungry prison warden (James Gandolfini), whose motto is something like `my way or the eternal dirt nap.' What I don't understand is, Who gets paid to write this stuff?

Was the above comment useful to you?

18 out of 28 people found the following comment useful :-
This Castle Needs Demolished, 14 July 2003
3/10
Author: Theo Robertson from Isle Of Bute , Scotland

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

This film starts with some information on castles : They`ve been around for a thousand years , they contained garrisons and flags and were built to keep out intruders . Yes indeed I can confirm this , castles are very old and they were built to keep people out . As THE LAST CASTLE continues we learn lots of other interesting information like bullets can travel very fast and can kill you ( No sh*t ) and where saluting comes from . What I didn`t learn was anything about the military prison where it`s set or about the inmates which is a major disadvantage seeing as the movie revolves around a military prison

I`ve no idea how the United States treats servicemen who`ve fallen foul of the law , but I do know how Britain treats hers . In Britain servicemen commiting minor infractions are usually sent to the " Glasshouse " ( Every military base has its own ) while for more serious disciplinary matters like testing positive for drugs or going AWOL British servicemen are sent to the military prison at Colchester for a period ranging from a few days to several months after which they`re returned to their regiment or discharched from the military . For more serious crimes like murder , rape etc servicemen are sentanced by a civilian court of law and this is what confused me about THE LAST CASTLE - Why are the inmates sentanced to many years in a military prison ? Wouldn`t they be sent to a state prison ? Not only that but if it`s a military prison wouldn`t it be a disciplined environment ? The one seen here is no different than any other one you see in cinema with all the inmates hanging around the yard , all aged in their mid 20s to late 40s and all hanging with their own ethnic groups . I often found myself forgetting this was a military prison for large chunks of time and was only reminded it was run by the military when the action cut to Col Winter`s office

!!!!! SPOILERS !!!!!

The actual plot of THE LAST CASTLE is about the battle of wills between the prison commander Col Winter and new arrival General Irwin . Irwin was a hero from Vietnam ( I wonder if he`s based on John McCain ? ) who upsets Winter by stating that because he collects all sorts of military memorabillia Winter couldn`t have served on a battlefield which understandably upsets Winter because it`s a bizarre comment to make . Let`s see now absolutely no one in history who collects military artifacts has never been in the field ! I won`t bother to point out how inaccurate this sweeping generalization is except to say it`s used to set up the battle of wills in a very weak example of scripting . And the more the story goes on the more aware you become that the production team have little knowledge of military or political matters . It turns out Irwin was in charge of a mission to Burundi in central Africa which cost the lives of eight American soldiers and it`s this that led to him being sent down for ten years . Are you trying to tell me that if an American commander is in charge of a military mission that goes wrong he`ll find himself sent to prison for many years ? Well in that case General McArthur should have been sentanced to hundreds of years in prison for the Chinese intervention in Korea and General Westmoreland should have been shot for the Tet offensive . Did General Garrison do time in prison for the events in BLACK HAWK DOWN ? Oh and it should be pointed out that America never intervened in Burundi , just thought I`d point that out . But it goes from bad to worse as General Irwin leads his men on a prison revolt ( Bet you couldn`t see that coming chaps ? ) where the inmates reveal right out of the blue a siege engine . " What`s that ? " Col Winter shrieks . A siege engine , a catapult to be more accurate , a catapult that must stand thirty foot high that none of the guards seem to have noticed , isn`t there a minimum eye sight requirement in the American military ? Just curious since no one seems to have noticed a thirty foot catapult standing around . Perhaps Hollywood should bring in a basic intelligence test for its screenwriters ?

I won`t bother telling you how the story ends except to say if you can reach the end credits without turning off you deserve some sort of medal for watching a movie above and beyond the call of duty

Was the above comment useful to you?

7 out of 9 people found the following comment useful :-
New contender for most improbable plot., 17 October 2002
3/10
Author: JohnnyCNote from Jacksonville, FL

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

I just finished watching "The Last Castle" on satellite and must admit I've had an easier time suspending my disbelief in other movies. I'll get straight to the point. The premise of a highly decorated war hero Army general being sent to (presumably) Leavenworth military prison is, at the least, a bit unlikely. Much more likely is that he'd have been allowed to retire. But this is Robert Redford and he's got Principles (not to mention being a loose cannon)!

Now, it's hard to get to the top of the heap in the military by not knowing how to play the game and by choosing one's battles very carefully (at least political ones). But then if the producers had been that realistic, the movie would never have been made. So the great general goes to prison, drawing from his 6 years in the Hanoi Hilton. What does he do? He starts leading the troops, er, excuse me, "prisoners", because there are no soldiers among the inmates, and no rank, etc. etc.

A military prison would not be that much different from a civilian one. The major difference is that the inmates of the former were convicted of committing crimes while serving in the military. That means you'd have your share of thieves, murderers, sexual predators and other assorted sociopaths. It seems, however, that the producers of "The Last Castle" thought otherwise. Why these are men who are just in need of a charismatic leader to whip them into shape.

Well, I think I've made my point. The great general manages to inspire these thieves, murderers, etc., to achieve real greatness. Oh yes, there's the warden, played by Tony Soprano, er, James Gandolfini. I have to confess that I couldn't keep from thinking about "The Sopranos" every time I saw him. I also couldn't help wishing I were watching that instead of "The Last Castle".

The final sequence is so far-fetched that it borders on the ludicrous.

Potential Spoiler Alert!

It really crossed the line when a guy climbs up a chain and manages to enter into a helicopter and SINGLEHANDEDLY overpowers the door-gunner and pilot. He then slams the tail into a tower and survives the subsequent crash landing. This would have worked in a "Die Hard" movie with good ol' Bruce Willis, but not in a movie that takes itself far too seriously. Well, at least he was a helicopter pilot in the Army.

Add to that an embarrassing assortment of clichés, rousing music, a gratuitous scene with the alienated daughter, and you have it, a solid 2 star movie. I only give it that because at least it was competently produced. I have satellite, so these movies are repeated quite frequently. However, this is one I will NOT be tuning into even if there's virtually nothing else to watch. I'd rather take a nap, read a book, go shopping, do just about anything than sit through this one again....

Was the above comment useful to you?

8 out of 12 people found the following comment useful :-
Redford, Gandolfini Shine, 17 February 2008
8/10
Author: ccthemovieman-1 from Lockport, NY, United States

Prison movies can get a little depressing for me after awhile, but this is one of the best I've seen because the two lead actors, Robert Redford and James Gandolfini, are fascinating. I also liked this because the characters were a bit softer than in most prison movies, the language more tolerable and the story kept my rapt attention for the two-plus hours.

The only fault I can find with it is the normal credibility where people should have been shot but all the bullets miss, of course. That happens mainly to Mark Ruffalo's character. Also, I was surprised at Delroy Lindo being listed pretty high in the credits but he had very little screen time.

Overall, thanks to the acting this is a solid film and recommended.

Was the above comment useful to you?

13 out of 22 people found the following comment useful :-
Only watch this for a laugh, 7 March 2006
1/10
Author: redvers from United Kingdom

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

One of the funniest films I've seen in a long time - but unfortunately I don't think it's meant to be. From the forbidden salutes to jailed general Robert Redford - which prisoners get round by saluting and then smoothing down their hair - to the ridiculous siege weapons which the prisoners have somehow been able to make in the prison workshops. I mean, we know the director is trying to compare the prison riot to a medieval siege but do we really need all the prisoners running around with shields made of trays, bows and arrows and a trebuchet (oh yes). I was only waiting for the final swordfight between Redford and the warden to be shown as shadows cast on the prison wall. It's totally laughable and has one of the cheesiest endings you will ever see.

Was the above comment useful to you?

5 out of 7 people found the following comment useful :-
A good if predictable movie., 1 June 2002
6/10
Author: evilasahobby



The Last Castle is a fine if somewhat predictable jail movie of redemption and determination against the odds. Having seen the previews I thought nothing of ever seeing the film, but saw it on the shelf in the video store and thought it would pass an evening.

It did that very well, and is worth seeing for at least one reason. Although Robert Redford puts in a solid performance, James Gandolfini steals this movie with his simpering, bully-boy performance. Despite knowing from the opening scene that he will undoubted lose against Redford's disgraced general, Gandolfini's depiction of a man in authority but with little power is very subtle and worth watching.

The rest of the film has some clever moments, but you see everything coming - Redford inspiring the other prisoners, the inevitable conflicts and the finale. The Last Castle is worth seeing once.

Was the above comment useful to you?

9 out of 15 people found the following comment useful :-
A prison film with a twist, 11 May 2003
Author: David krasnow (stargirlrk@yahoo.com) from Ann Arbor, MI

This movie was pretty good. Robert Redford is an ex-general who is given a long prison sentence in a military prison because he led a faulty mission that ended up with several soldiers killed. It turns out that it was never his fault, but he ends up going to this prison anyway. Throughout the film, he tries to rally other prisoners behind him and rebel against the brutal prison warden, who has killed many prisoners (and makes it look like an accident). It is supposedly called "The Last Castle" because while most castles made in the last few centuries were built to keep people out, this prison castle was built to keep people in. This was good and exciting and the explosive action scene at the end is definitely worth the rental fee by itself. Feel free to email me with any questions or comments.

Was the above comment useful to you?

10 out of 17 people found the following comment useful :-
Highly unlikely, but entertaining nonetheless..., 4 February 2007
6/10
Author: moonspinner55 from redlands, ca

A prisoner's fantasy: decorated U.S. General Robert Redford has been Court Marshalled for disobeying orders during wartime--which resulted in the deaths of eight soldiers--and is sent to a prison for violent criminals (!). He immediately gets on the wrong side of warden James Gandolfini and rallies the inmates to take control of the yard. Fairly typical genre picture with all the usual details, including the stuttering innocent whose bad treatment becomes a catalyst in the warring sides. The film is well-cast and has some fine passages, yet the heavy symbolism (with flying flags, chess moves and endless talk of castles) comes off as self-important in a movie which uses its entire second half to allow violent criminals to run roughshod over security. Redford gives a modest, self-effacing performance--he's so noble he's like visiting royalty; Gandolfini plays his Colonel like an offended child, affecting a soft but precise, lispy voice, giving the one-dimensional role some unexpected subtext. The handsomely photographed film looks great and works its way slyly on the viewer until all defenses are down, but in retrospect its earnestness seems woefully silly. **1/2 from ****

Was the above comment useful to you?


Page 1 of 26:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]

Add another comment


Related Links

Plot summary Ratings Awards
Newsgroup reviews External reviews Official site
Plot keywords Main details Your user comments
Your vote history