Sword of Vengeance

Just about worth a watch on a rainy afternoon, but don't get your hopes up. Very limited characterisation, sparse and rather hammy dialogue, so the only aspects that saves this production from media oblivion is that the fight scenes are well-orchestrated, the special effects good, and the cinematography is well done. Very much a mediaeval take on the spaghetti western/ samurai movie genre, in which, like Clint, the hero often wears a cape and says little or nothing throughout the film. Glad I was able to watch this for free on Amazon prime, as I certainly wouldn't have wanted to pay good money for a viewing.

I remember watching Hammer of the Gods and liking the beginning, then getting disappointed by the ending, so I started watching Sword of Vengeance with apprehension. It was a good idea, because it is kind of the same.

The bleak and desolate landscape, the silent warrior, the tyranny of the Normans over the Saxons, I bought it all. It again gave hope of something really good. Unfortunately the plot was a mess. I am not going to explain it here, but let me just say that warrior should have remained silent.

I also researched the characters and I couldn't find anything historical related to the story. The only real thing is the Harrying of the North where a single source describes the death of 100000 Saxons at the hand of William the Conqueror, but it is unclear how he could have achieved this with the resources he had.

Bottom line: they got the feel right, but they should have worked a lot more on the story and character development. It is a better done movie than Hammer of the Gods, I think, but that movie may have been better overall just because I remember it and this film I will forget after writing this review.

From the creator of "Hammer of the Gods", starring Stanley Weber ("Borgia") and Annabelle Wallis ("Annabelle"), the subjects of a ruthless tyrant's oppression discover an unlikely freedom fighter whose code of honor demands bloody retribution.

WellGoUSA has made a name for themselves bringing some of today's best martial arts movies to American audiences. This time they took a slightly different approach and are releasing a story of early England.

And in it, we have a great use of color, making the battlefield look hazy and depressing. The film as a whole is heavy on style, has great production design and some impressive sets. Some of the style is conveyed through slow-motion walking we probably did not need, and which may add a few minutes to the run time.

There is an interesting score, very electronic and not at all what you might expect from a film set one thousand years ago. Those women warriors? Not sure that is remotely accurate in a historical sense. And, as much as equality is a good thing, it does not trump reality...

And then, sadly, there is not much of a plot or character development, meaning it has very little that will be memorable. The film still deserves a slightly better than average rating simple because it looks so darn good, but it has little of real meat to offer people. Audiences will likely consider this a dud: all gunpowder and no bang.

Sword of Vengeance is shot almost entirely in slow motion. Characters perceive time differently from us, as they feel the need to dramatically walk, talk and stare at each other while posing at the camera. Visual is all shades of gray, while this might be stylish at first, it overstays its welcome by the fifteen minutes mark, by then the main character probably have taken his fifth slow-mo steps. Story is thin at best, with average runtime and majority of it is painful slow-mo, the film barely has any substance to offer.

An outsider comes to a village, he beats up a few thugs, makes a speech and fights tyranny. This simple premise is flawed by the first couple of scenes. The outsider dispatches people easily at one point, only to be jumped by a random extra and got whooped in the next. Considering that everyone moves as though they are in fashion show, it's borderline comedy this near superhuman can be even wounded, his plot armor must have worn off.

Acting is equivalent of cardboard box, but at least one could draw smiley or sad faces at a box. To be fair, it's not the actors' fault, the script barely gives anyone personality aside from one-dimensional extra from Vikings or 300. Story is heavily predictable, and the title helps by giving it away. There could be some underlying message of vengeance here but it's buried by the piles of slow-mo spam.

The fight is mediocre, either it's slow or shaky cam. There's barely logic in this as well, people swing and charge recklessly. Soundtracks are mesh between electronic and techno. It's a strange style and could've worked better if the movie had ordinary pace. Cinematography is different shots of a forest, some with all trees, a few buildings and its interior. The film tries too hard on creating cool shots, it is literally nothing but slow motion.

Watching Sword of Vengeance is more like looking at slideshow of concept art, which may be edgy in modesty, but not for entire movie. Alternatively, one could watch Robin Hood in half speed or compilation of fights from 300, any of those should prove more interesting.

The basic problem - what you expect ?. You know the recipe and the ingredients. You know the basic lines of story and the characters. And you know that nothing is real high or memorable. The basic problem of this film- the desire to be more than gives its possibilities. The recipe is clear and nothing surprising can be. History as pretext, dark landscapes, dark hero, fights and fights, few drops of love story. Seems enough. But the desire to say all seems the not very inspired option.