Barbarian Queen II: The Empress Strikes Back
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guide
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips
Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]
Index 12 reviews in total 

13 out of 14 people found the following review useful:

Lana Clarkson II: Back On The Rack

Author: Troy Whigham from Florida, USA
30 October 1998

Ok, I'll admit it. I'm a Lana Clarkson fan. Her torture scene in "Barbarian Queen" was one of the best mainstream "B" movie bondage scenes ever. Lana can moan and twitch with the best of them and make it look like fun. "Barbarian Queen II", supposedly the sequel to the first film, really doesn't have anything to do with the original. None of the characters from the first film are back and Lana is the only returning actor, and even her character's name has been changed. Like the first film, you can see most of it in fast-forward mode on your VCR and just hit play whenever you see Lana in a dungeon.

In this film, Lana is a noblewoman whose evil brother usurps the crown and gains rule over the land. Lana escapes into the woods and gains the friendship of a band of woman warriors by defeating their leader in a mud wrestling match (Lana gets topless at the end of it). They attack the castle in an attempt to restore Lana to her rightful rule. Unfortunately, the attack is defeated and Lana is captured. Those who have seen the first film will appreciate these scenes.

Lana is (again) bound to an upright rack, though initially clothed this time. The torturer makes a brief speech before removing her top. Just as he is about to begin the day's activities, a young girl enters the room stands in front of the rack and announces "I will enjoy this part when I am queen." Lana retorts and the torturer starts his demonstration of the new rack. This time, instead of a silver hand with a needle embedded in the finger pricking Lana's body, the rack itself is lowered onto a bed of sharpened spikes. This shot would've been much better if we could've seen a full-view of Lana tied to the table. Instead we have a profile of Lana's head and the other two actors bending over into the shot. Obviously, Lana is NOT tied to the table but is just leaning over, too. Such a waste of potential.

Anyway, while everyone is away at dinner, Lana manages to free her hands and escape. She's soon recaptured while trying to decide what to do with a magic sceptre (apparantly the source of power) and is sentenced to death by torture. Just as this movie is "Barbarian Queen II", so too we get to see "Lana On The Rack Twice" and I'm glad we do. I have to give Lana credit for these two movies and their torture scenes. She really does do a good job of playing the strong defiant torture victim, though I wish the second rack scene had been a bit longer with more build-up and drama. Same with a later scene where the young girl places a spider on Lana's arm as Lana is on her back on another rack (or perhaps the same rack rotated horizontally). It would've been a better scene if Lana's character had been conscious and could squirm as the spider is placed on her arm and crawls up her shoulder. It could've made the similar James Bond scene look like amateur film.

"Barbarian Queen" and "Barbarian Queen II" were made several years apart and in that time Lana Clarkson became more "womanly". Don't worry - they're real. And they're spectacular. I'm hoping that Lana can be convinced to do a "Barbarian Queen III" and give us 3 long rack scenes, if she's still got the body for it. Lana, if you see this, hit the gym and let's get one more film on that filmography, girl. Do it for your fans. We're counting on you.

Anyway, Lana is eventually freed by a knight and they go on to defeat the evil ruler and liberate the land. You can take her top, but you can't take her FREEDOM!

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 10 people found the following review useful:

Athelia is mighty certain of her bedroom prowess...

Author: sickcritik (sickcritik@hotmail.com)
26 August 2002

Lana Clarkson returns to once again pop her top and endure some light bondage on a rack in this non-sequel sequel. This time she's Athelia -- a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT revolutionary vixen -- who falls on hard times when her father's rule is hijacked by the evil King Ankaris (Alejandro Bracho) and his snotty bitch-in-training daughter (14-year-old Cecilia Tijerina). After Athelia refuses to hand over her magical scepter of power, she's imprisoned, but easily Houdinis it outta there. A routine she inevitably repeats throughout this tale. Athelia then manages to fit in among the peasants by impressing them with her topless mud rasslin' skills, so much so, that she's able to rally a babe militia to put the hurt on the hopelessly inept forces of Hofrax (Roger Cudney) who's out to rain on her rebellion. His seething hatred of rebels is only matched by his disdain for women, which is infinitely amplified when Athelia has him stripped, bound and sent back to Ankaris in utter humiliation. But revenge is sweet when, after a botched rebel raid on the castle, he's finally able to dangle HER delicates over a bed of rusty spikes in a half-hearted attempt to learn her scepter's secret. Yet to Hofrax, and most CineSchlockers, the REAL fun is in watching Ms. Clarkson squirm.

Six breasts. 74 corpses. Catfighting. Creepy tarantulas. Gratuitous mute chick. Athelia is mighty certain of her bedroom prowess, "Everyone has something that can destroy them. One night with ME would be the end of you!"

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

wronged princess seeks justice

5/10
Author: windypoplar from United States
26 May 2009

Actually this wasn't that bad. Lana Clarkson is lovely as usual and yes there are plenty of topless shots, but what set this b-grade sword and sorcery tale apart is the other actors. Rodger Cudney is a great villain as always and somehow manages to maintain his dignity no matter how awful the situation. Greg Wrangler does a nice job as the conflicted love interest and best of all is the young Cecilia Twerina as the evil little Tamis. Who the heck let a kid on this picture? Who cares? she's great.

The plot is simply, Athalia's father, the king, may be dead and the evil Ankaris wants the throne, but needs the magical scepter to hold it. For some reason, never really explained, Hofrax (Cudney) is helping him. Tamis is Ankaris's wicked daughter. OK, the budget is obviously low, but the film doesn't look that bad and the performers appear to be trying. Note the convenient barrel of water that spills off the back of the wagon so Althalia and a barbarian babe can mud wrestle!! the fights aren't too badly staged and the plotting is pretty decent. Chris Young tries hard to convey a sense of epic with the music.

Athalia refuses to divulge the secret, in case her Father is still alive, and gets tortured by Hofrax and Tamis!! All together for the rack sequence and spider bite-ewww! Orian (Wrangler) rescues Athalia nd together they unite, literally and then the King's warrior's return and it's off to strike for justice! I won't reveal the fate of Ankaris and Tamis, but it is rather moving.

All in all this is a good b-movie with attractive performers and plenty of fun for all.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Half-nekkid amazon warriors follow their busty queen

5/10
Author: Hugh G. Rection (ElKabong-3) from Humble, Texas, USA
13 August 2005

Let me say up front that this is NOT a great film. No Oscar nominations, probably none of the cast was ever in an award winning film. What this is, is your basic raunchy action flick, complete with bouncing bare bosoms. This is late night cable TV fare, watch it for free when you can, and be glad you're not watching the Ya Ya Sisterhood movie. Lana Clarkson is more than up to the task of providing the bouncing boobies frequently throughout the movie. The plot is stale and formulaic, the acting stiff, but there's still that charm of scantily clad amazon warriors led by their rather randy queen in a revolution against the Great Evil which is in power. This is from the eras before Hollywood became so concerned with accusations of smut mongering, the films of the last decade or so have been lacking the delightful skin scenes which used to be a standard component of such films. If this film were being made today, the amazons would be covered much more thoroughly and Ms. Clarkson would not share her bountiful charms with us. If it sounds like I miss those days, I do. Many a mediocre film was made worthwhile by a liberal splashing of young nubile skin. Don't watch this for an example of great cinema, watch it for young lovelies on display.

5 out of 10 for obvious reasons.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

Better than the first

5/10
Author: pumaye from Firenze, Italy
21 November 2004

Z-movie of almost no-budget level, with the late Lana Clarkson as the beautiful heir to a kingdom that is forced to fight against an evil usurper and his spoiled child. Echoes of Robin Hood in female form for most of the movie - even if the subtitle parodies the second Star Wars movies. If you are in this movie for Clarkson's breast your are in for good surprises, as the actress shows her best asset several times - they are real, boys, no silicone in them! It is really a poor movie, with a modest plot, terrible acting, terrible stunts, cheap to say the least special effects, horrible fight scenes, but it is better than the first episode of this duology - in name only, as the two Barbarian Queen movies share only the lead actress and no other part.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

Largely the same

7/10
Author: Kakueke
29 October 2001

This is a follow-up to Barbarian Queen, but certainly not a sequel, although Lana Clarkson is back as the female protagonist (slightly changed name, Amathea). This time she is rivaling her brother, who has unjustly usurped the crown on the basis of a presumed death of their father, but on a more mundane level his principal advisor Hofrax is her chief nemesis, along with her brother's daughter. The characters are different, but she is once again leading a few elite women warriors and peasants to justice. Greg Wrangler plays her love interest (Aurion). Pretty much the same stuff, with less often, less intense bondage etc. but a nice mudwrestling scene near the beginning. In movies like this, when I think some of the acting is pretty bad (this does not include Lana), I guess I have to be understanding in realizing they have programmed, wooden lines and delivery, so... Overall, I felt this one fell a bit short of the original.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

Hilariously Awful, Awfully Hilarious

3/10
Author: Bensch
18 February 2008

As its 1985 predecessor, "Barbarian Queen 2: The Empire Strikes Back" of 1989 is once again an incredibly awful, and equally hilarious Z-grade Sword and Sorcery film that fans of bad cinema should have one heck of a time with. The whole film is a lineup of crappy battle sequences, hilariously stupid dialogue, bared breasts and (unintentional?) hilarity. The late Lana Clarkson once again plays the sexy eponymous heroine, Barbarian Queen Princess Athalia. Actually, I don't really see why the people in this flick are referred to as 'Barabarians' since it clearly takes place some time in the middle ages (although the first part took place in times of the Roman Empire). Both movies, of course, are actually set in some indefinable fantasy time, but while the first film equally mixed up medieval and more ancient elements, everything looks predominantly medieval here (well, except for the Amazon warrior chicks in buckskin mini skirts and tank tops). The battle sequences are extremely crappy, and so is the entire choreography. During fights, it always looks as if the 'actors' are going to drop their weapons anytime since they act so amateurish. The performances are plain awful and the dialogue is even worse (in a hilarious way though), not to mention that all the medieval 'Barbarians' talk in American English. Even though this film is about as awful as it can get, you can't really get bored. One hilariously awful fight literally hunts the other, and each time this seems to become monotonous Lana Clarkson bares her breasts for a change. Both the "Barbarian Queen" films are hilarious examples for movies that are 'so bad they're good'. This "Barbarian Queen 2" must be one of the silliest and most amateurish films ever brought to screen, but it sure is great fun to watch!

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Production values, we don't need no stinkin production values...

Author: bobburkhar
19 February 2005

Poorly done, poorly scripted, poorly shot, just a film disaster. It looked like more budget was spent on hairdressing than the costumes or props department got. Sad tale of a group of women forced to live as outlaws in the forest with only their never seen hairdressers as company. The late Lana Clarkson "stars" and shows off her chest to save the day. Mudwrestling topless, tied to a torture rack, showing off the latest in forest mini skirts, it's all in a day's work for these babes. If you have lots of time on your hands watch this film. It usually plays about 3-4 am on the various movie channels, so plan on staying up late.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

Barbarian Queen II: The Empress Strikes Back

3/10
Author: Phil Hubbs from UK
25 September 2014

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Not too sure what the title means here, there was no Empress in the first film and the plot doesn't relate in any way to the first film either. Characters are also different to the original film despite starring Lana Clarkson in both.

What we have here is a slight play on Robin Hood. A king is killed in battle so his unruly son claims the throne for himself including the magical scepter which is the source of the kingdoms power. The kings daughter (Clarkson) protests this naturally and is marked for execution to get rid of her...naturally. She escapes, joins up with some other female rebel warriors (just like that) and they all band together to win the kingdom back hurrah!

Now I hope your not expecting too much here, you know what this will entail, much like the previous film and all the 'Deathstalker' films. Plenty of tits and ass, skimpy outfits, females killing poorly skilled swordsmen, Clarkson on the rack again topless and errr more poorly skilled baddie swordsmen trying to rape big breasted women (happens a lot in these films).

Pretty much exactly the same as the first film, there's a good rescue scene from the gallows which is similar to the sequence in 'The Adventures of Robin Hood' with Errol Flynn. There is a nice sadistic little girl Princess who is heir to the throne (if Clarkson's character is gotten rid of, the whole point of the film) whom I liked, her spoilt bratty ways are fun to watch as all around her cower in fear.

Just like the first film the finale is way better than the rest with a semi decent sword battle within the castle. Costumes are quite nice in this film it must be said, a kind of Crusades thing going on with the good guys whilst the sets look suspiciously like sets used before, oh well. The lead male hero in this looks the part too, he actually looks like he could be in a proper film, the same can't be said about the clichéd blonde lead Clarkson.

Well by now you will know if you like these films or not, a guilty pleasure possibly, just for a laugh and some naked girlies perhaps. Not as good as 'Deathstalker' though.

3/10

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

The Difference Between 'Low Budget' and 'No Budget'.

2/10
Author: the_match_maker
17 April 2004

Low-grade production values and only slightly better acting bring down an otherwise generic plot.

The bottom line: a 'magical' princess leads a group of women warriors and peasants against her evil brother who seeks to take the kingdom's throne after the death of their father.

As far as 'Fantasy' flicks go, there are three levels of production values. On the high end one has `The Lord of the Rings' trilogy. Below that one has `Conan the Destroyer'. And below *that* one has this movie. The production values here make `Xena: Warrior Princess' look like `Lord of the Rings'! They're horrible. The props look as though they came from the trunk of the local community theater. The weapons are especially laughable (and who know that one could be stabbed with a sword and not bleed!).

And the acting, well, the best thing that can be said about the acting is that the thespians involved took the dialogue seriously (though I can't imagine the humiliation one must feel to have been a part of the making of this travesty). If I were to have worked on this film I don't think that I could have ever looked anyone straight in the face again.

And to make matters worse, the movie tries to 'cater' to a certain demographic with gratuitous nudity. Even the sight of two bare-chested ladies fighting in mud is not enough to recommend this flick-that's just how poorly done it was. One has seen soft-core porn with better production values!

And for nominally being a 'fantasy' film, no actual 'magic' is ever really seen.

Everything about this movie is so poorly done one can't help but wonder *how* it ever got made. A film student and two chimps could have produced something better!

There is a difference between low budget and *no* budget! Avoid this film if you can, though viewing it won't do one any long term harm. It's just bad. Not 'laughably bad', just bad. I don't think even `Mystery Science Theater' could make this one look good!

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Ratings External reviews
Plot keywords Main details Your user reviews
Your vote history