Recensioni in evidenza
10giustolr
I for one absolutely loved the film. Beautiful love story in the beautiful forest, yo the camera work was exceptional we've all seen better however the colorful scenery the costumes were exceptional. The girl was beautiful, who doesn't agree with that. Richard had the beauty we all long to fight for. He showed masculinity and did so humbly. Oh, cannot leave out the best and most important part. It's definitely a romantic love story Overall I there's nowhere near enough of this type of film available today I thread through many that are 10 times worse than this film. The Kingslayer is a masterpiece of its own kind.
From the director of Wolf and The Necromancer, I was ready for another wild ride of bloodshed and grief in an isolated location, driven by a fantasy story. I certainly got that, and more. Each character distinct, colourful and purposeful. There comes a moment that is beautiful and cuts very deeply, returning later to cut some more, and it's so very effective and resonant. This isn't a huge budget epic of cgi armies battling, like the many countless number of other films in this kind of story, and I'm thankful- it's much more personal, thoughtful and soulful. I love the creativity.
Heavy lies the crown indeed.
Heavy lies the crown indeed.
It's a B-movie, with B-movie actors, B-movie direction and story. Walk on by, nothing to see here...
Terribly cheaply produced B-movie about knights, which is so bad that it becomes laughable.
In all sincerity this shouldnt be called a movie and I bet it was intended for television only and that shows, because everything about this "movie" is inferior, from the story, to the direction, to the actors.
Walk on by folks, dont expect a knight movie, this is a laughable cheap surrogate...
Only the title is kinda interesting and it was the title hat fooled me into thinking this could be of some interest, BUT ofcourse it wasnt.
Fool me once...
Not any good then? NO NO NO. But if you wanna have a laugh go ahead and watch it...
In all sincerity this shouldnt be called a movie and I bet it was intended for television only and that shows, because everything about this "movie" is inferior, from the story, to the direction, to the actors.
Walk on by folks, dont expect a knight movie, this is a laughable cheap surrogate...
Only the title is kinda interesting and it was the title hat fooled me into thinking this could be of some interest, BUT ofcourse it wasnt.
Fool me once...
Not any good then? NO NO NO. But if you wanna have a laugh go ahead and watch it...
Low budget, badly acted, poorly directed, laughable editing.
Feels like a 'made during lockdown' type movie, and that's not good.
I gave it 2 because getting a movie made on this level of budget gets a thumbs up and the basic storyline (made up drivel notwithstanding) is at least passable. Low budget, badly acted, poorly directed, laughable editing.
Feels like a 'made during lockdown' type movie, and that's not good.
I gave it 2 because getting a movie made on this level of budget gets a thumbs up and the basic storyline (made up drivel notwithstanding) is at least passable. Low budget, badly acted, poorly directed, laughable editing.
Feels like a 'made during lockdown' type movie, and that's not good.
I gave it 2 because getting a movie made on this level of budget gets a thumbs up and the basic storyline (made up drivel notwithstanding) is at least passable.
Feels like a 'made during lockdown' type movie, and that's not good.
I gave it 2 because getting a movie made on this level of budget gets a thumbs up and the basic storyline (made up drivel notwithstanding) is at least passable. Low budget, badly acted, poorly directed, laughable editing.
Feels like a 'made during lockdown' type movie, and that's not good.
I gave it 2 because getting a movie made on this level of budget gets a thumbs up and the basic storyline (made up drivel notwithstanding) is at least passable. Low budget, badly acted, poorly directed, laughable editing.
Feels like a 'made during lockdown' type movie, and that's not good.
I gave it 2 because getting a movie made on this level of budget gets a thumbs up and the basic storyline (made up drivel notwithstanding) is at least passable.
Kingslayer is an incredibly tedious and frustrating watch. Nearly the entire film takes place in the King's Wood, which quickly goes from your local walking trial to *Yawn* extremely dull and monotonous. The plot, which loosely centers around a young Richard the Lionheart (referred to here as Richard for most of the film) and his romance with a common stable hand, feels disjointed and cheap.
The villains are surprisingly timid and unthreatening, leaving no real sense of danger or tension. Even with the occasional twist, like a mention of poison (Hemlock, in case you miss it) or a tragic and surprising fate the narrative never really lifts off.
Credit where it's due: the romance has its occasional moments, and Carolina Carlson who played Lea was quite good, the action sequences are passable if unremarkable, and while the accents are strong, the acting is decent enough to keep things watchable.
The priest or monk wielding his mace ends up being the most compelling and important character, which probably says a lot about the script's priorities.
John Rhys-Davies as William Marshall feels like a local pub patron that's running the kings guard, and even the castle keeps interior looks like a stage play.
Compared to something like Guy Ritchie's 2017 King Arthur, this feels like a backyard reenactment with a fraction of the budget. While it's not the absolute worst medieval film (I think) I've sat through, it's definitely an absolute shocker.
2/10.
The villains are surprisingly timid and unthreatening, leaving no real sense of danger or tension. Even with the occasional twist, like a mention of poison (Hemlock, in case you miss it) or a tragic and surprising fate the narrative never really lifts off.
Credit where it's due: the romance has its occasional moments, and Carolina Carlson who played Lea was quite good, the action sequences are passable if unremarkable, and while the accents are strong, the acting is decent enough to keep things watchable.
The priest or monk wielding his mace ends up being the most compelling and important character, which probably says a lot about the script's priorities.
John Rhys-Davies as William Marshall feels like a local pub patron that's running the kings guard, and even the castle keeps interior looks like a stage play.
Compared to something like Guy Ritchie's 2017 King Arthur, this feels like a backyard reenactment with a fraction of the budget. While it's not the absolute worst medieval film (I think) I've sat through, it's definitely an absolute shocker.
2/10.
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is Kingslayer?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paese di origine
- Sito ufficiale
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- Kingslayer
- Azienda produttrice
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 3404 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione
- 1h 37min(97 min)
- Colore
- Proporzioni
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti