Sinbad and the War of the Furies

.....bad? Bad plot, bad costumes, bad cinematography and the worst acting ever! Why do directors think all it takes to make a male lead Sinbad is for the "actor" to have long dark hair and wear a vest with no shirt under it? It fails as a drama, it fails as a fantasy, it fails as a comedy and it fails as entertaining. Most concerning is the money that was wasted on this.....even if it was probably under a thousand dollars. Well at least it was a next step for the high school drama department!

Did not watch 'Sinbad and the War of the Furies' with high expectations. The premise itself was just ridiculous and it looked horrid. Saw it however out of curiosity, as part of my low-budget film quest (yes, have got a good deal of quests going on, some of them completest ones) and especially because Sinbad is a great character.

A character that deserved an infinitely better film than 'Sinbad and the War of Furies'. It really does him an injustice and manages to be even worse than it looked and even more of a mess than indicated in the premise. That it is not a waste of a good concept film made me less annoyed than some other films seen recently. My annoyance though is aimed at how poorly done in every single way 'Sinbad and the War of the Furies' is.

There is nothing good going on here. The acting lacks any kind of passion or emotion, even skill. No exceptions here, even the titular character who actually is one of the worst examples.

'Sinbad and the War of the Furies' uncharismatic, wimpy and annoying character writing and writing that is far too excessively ridiculous to be guilty pleasure cheese and too awkward and dull to be tongue in cheek works against them. As well as non-existent direction.

Direction that fails to convey any urgency, tension, fun, suspense or emotion in the numerous scenes that need them. The action scenes are the complete anti-thesis of exciting, are poorly filmed and looks so awkward in the choreography. The whole story is just lifeless, completely fails to make any sense at all and on the wrong side of daft that it's insultingly ridiculous.

Visually, 'Sinbad and the War of the Furies' looks cheap as sin, with an overuse of truly risible special effects that never gels with the setting or looks real, dizzying camera work and editing and shoe-string budget production and costume design. Faring least bad is the music, which at least tries to appeal to the ear and give a little urgency, not a compliment sadly because one doesn't remember it and it's often not placed that well.

Overall, far from furious and as the opposite of good as one can get. 1/10 Bethany Cox

To give this any stars would be to praise it too highly. It is almost unwatchable. The characters are not properly set up, the basic premise is invisible, the main character might as well be called Joe Bloggs since he does not resemble the literary or film Sinbad in any way... Watching paint dry would be more intellectually rewarding.

There seems to be some uncertainty as to whether this thing is called "...Clash of the Furies", or "...War of the Furies".

Let's be clear here, Sinbad and the War of the Furies is no great film making. Pretty much anything that can be wrong with a film is wrong with this one. But for all that it does not suck. The casting is poor, the acting highly uneven, and the directing terribl The production was ridiculously cheap - Sinbad is filmed almost entirely indoors, most of those indoors limited to two rooms - with very few real action scenes. But the writing is reasonable enough to carry it along and if you're a film lover your curiosity will do the rest. Because there is something oddly sweet about this movie with its bare bones cast and its rationed sets, especially as you realize its makers clearly thought it had franchise potential. Folks clearly punched above their weight with this one, but kept going anyway (though I don't know if they ever noticed they were out of their league) and I respect that. So, no, I did not hate this movie even though we all made fun of it throughout, maybe even enjoyed it a bit.

When "WWE's John Morrison" gets top billing for this film, there's only one way the film can go and that is downhill at alarming speed. You may be asking yourself "who the hell is John Morrison?" and you wouldn't be wrong for asking. He's a third tier pro-wrestler at the WWE which increasingly believes that it's pro-wrestlers can become A-list actors but for every success story like Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson, Dave Bautista (Guardians of The Galaxy), Roddy Piper, or Jesse Ventura (Predator) you've got...ehhh....ten John Morrisons, the generic angry tough guy. In all fairness, he does a really good job at being a generic tough guy. He snarls. He growls. He grimaces. He flexes his muscles and jumps and kicks and punches and frightens bad guys. He does everything a generic action movie tough guy should do. It's just that, he's not a good actor at all. It's not entirely his fault. The dialogue in this movie sucks hardcore. It's terrible. It's like the Expendables meets Indiana Jones except without all the good actors, or the good writers, or the good budget, or the good studio, or the good director. IF you take away all those things, I mean, well I guess you've still got a movie, right? But hey, it also stars that one girl with that bit part from Thor: Dark World. The Asgardian Waitress, Chloe Farnworth. That's something right? No, no, it's not. You want my summary? Here it is: This movie is terrible. Absolutely terrible. The premise is stupid: Sinbad the modern adventurer. What? They couldn't get Attila The Hun, Wall Street Banker? Don't watch this unless you enjoy torturing yourself. However, even if you did, there are better ways to do so. May I suggest licking a hairless cat? I'd rather do that than watch this.