Las aventuras del príncipe Valiente

This is one of those movies getting trashed by people without any good reason (just like Showgirls and Last Action Hero, which I both consider to be very entertaining movies). I've watched it a second time last night and was pleasantly surprised at how good it (still) is.

The acting is pretty good. There are no major plot holes. The number one "bad guy" wasn't just some 1 dimensional asshole, but actually a well fleshed-out character, who was actually smarter (strategically) than the good guys.

Also, he effects weren't bad at all for a movie with this kind of budget. And, another good reason for watching this, I got a good look at Katherine Heigl's bare ass. :)

I wasn't bored for a single moment while watching Prince Valliant, and really what more could I ask for?

All in all, a very enjoyable movie, and I highly recommend watching it.

The true star of the film, yes that right I'm talking about Chesney Hawkes! Without his brief but exquisite performance the film would just be a very disappointing with a lack lustre scrip and even worst over the top acting.' But your father gave me strict instructions to...' Arguable one of the best lines in cinematic history, do you not agree! I thank you Chesney Hawkes for one of the best performances ever!

this was a lovely film on a great cartoon. It completely delivers in full. Stephen Moyer played I fantastic Valiant, and I like the modern edge on the princess. Joanna Lumley made an evil Morgan Le fay come to life.It was funny, had plenty of action and just the right amount of romance. I thought it was cool and well worth watching. I'd recommend it to anyone

Jaivien@hotmail.com

Beautiful sets, great costumes and makeup.

Run of the mill script. Mediocre acting.

Bad special effects and stunts,and bad film-editing.

The special effects were truly terrible. Just stop-the-movie awful. Alligators that don't move and clearly are not alive. One alligator, clad in plate mail (huh?), shoots vertically out of the water into the air and descends down onto the stonework beside the water, where it doesn't move -while characters run about, pretending to be fearful of the clearly-lifeless, unmoving armor-clad alligator.

And lots of characters swinging Tarzan-like on ropes, slamming feet first into the villains. Except the actors are clearly hanging on ropes being moved by an overhead crane. And the ropes move slowly, as if there was great concern on the set about hurting the actors. In these scenes the villain conveniently stands in one spot until the slow-swinging good guy finally collides with him. This isn't a one-time screw-up; the slow-swinging Tarzan-bit happens over and over again.

The film editing is bad enough that it makes it hard to follow the story at spots. And the stunts and special effects kept blowing up the suspension of disbelief.

There is plenty of no-brainer action, though, and high production values on the sets and costumes. This could have been fun if it was better made.

With a so impressive cast, the story just matters ? It is the simple question after its final. Because its gift, after almost three decades, it is to represent the answer to inner children , nostalgics and lover of fairz tales and their not pretentious adaptations.

Sure, a king Arthur remindind Charles I Stuart, a young Stephen Moyer in a role not so comfortable ( not only for him ) but behind Prouix or Bill Compton , a young and nice Katherine Heigl behind Izzie Stevens and chain of romantic comedies and Warwick Davis more than seductive. And, sure, excalibur , near the impressive crocodiles. So, what expect more ?

The result, a sort of gratitude and nice veil of nostalgia, near some good smiles.