After reading so many bad reviews I didn't expect much, but I was pleasantly surprised. I guess the reason for most negative reviews here is "mistargeted" audience. I see many people were expecting something similar to "Ben-Hur" or "Gone with the Wind", when in fact this movie is more like "Wild Wild West", "The Brothers Grimm", and "Van Helsing". The only difference is that it's not a blockbuster, and the only famous actor in it is John Rhys-Davis.

I was still amazed at some negative reviews, let's see what reviewers are complaining about: 1. Erratic plot. - I think the plot is simple, shallow and very predictable, but it is logical and doesn't have major loopholes. I think "Van Helsing" has more loopholes than this, but it's just my humble opinion. 2. Church theme. - Seriously, I didn't really see that. There is one place where main characters pray before execution, but that's it. There are blockbusters out there that have many more religious references than this movie. 3. Historical inaccuracies - come on! Do you expect historical references from "Sherlock Holmes" with Robert Downey Jr.? Or "National Treasure"? This movie is a fairy tale/victorian steampunk/alternative reality flick, not a historical movie. 4. Bad CGI. - blockbusters really set high expectations with people. This movie has low budget so it does OK with what it has. 5. Bad storytelling. I agree with that, storytelling is rather weak, could use more twists and be more "punchy".

I also think the issue with this movie is that main characters (William and Charlotte) are not "sparkling" enough. They should have shown more expression in both love and war. It would also help if William was more cunning, but he was too straightforward and naive instead. John Rhys-Davies was OK as a main villain.

But again, to jump from B-movie to A-movie you need to tighten up everything, from storyline, characters and special effects to budget and casting. Still, it's a nice entertaining B-movie, and if you like movies like "Van Helsing" or "The Brothers Grimm" or "Wild Wild West", and your expectations are not too high, give it a try, you might like it.

This is a pseudo history of the beginning of the American Revolution that is part ZORRO and part WILD WILD WEST. It is a love story, and love stories are the best stories.(I heard that in another film.)

William Reynolds (Andrew Cheney) is a paid assassin for the East India Company working for Charles Kemp (John Rhys-Davies). They have a falling out and William starts another life and ends up courting Charlotte Holloway (Kara Killmer) his niece. Charlotte breaks up with him because he is William Reynolds and not Ryan Reynolds. Then we all go to Philadelphia 1776 where we encounter Alan Madlane in what was the worst portrayal of Benjamin Franklin since Bill Franey in 1924. It was written either for or by a five year old.

Now as you watch the film, you might wonder how much of this story is true...don't think too hard as they give you the highlights at the end, like there was a Philadelphia and an East India Company. Later they would name a ship after Charlotte and it would be discovered by Nicolas Cage and blown up by Sean Bean.

This is a good family film, unless your kid is taking a class in American history.

This movie has great action, storyline, acting and casting. These days when a really good movie follows traditional ideas of a "good" protagonist and a "bad" antagonist without murking it up and a clear storyline (especially when a bit of religion is thrown in there - unless the antagonist is religious - then people HATE the movie and rate it low.). Now if the movie is not engaging, people don't care and don't bother to slam the ratings. Well done and thank you to the producers.