|Page 1 of 3:||  |
|Index||25 reviews in total|
Well, they had to make a period piece without expensive locations, crew, or even horses, that they couldn't obviously afford, and with some reasonably well known names, and that is what you get with this one. I couldn't stand more than 40 minutes of this. English accent was too pushed. I like Roberts, but he is not much on screen here. His top billing is more a marketing stunt. If I remember correctly, he is not even main villain. Ron is also an excellent actor, also wasted. The whole thing sinks... I will try to remember this film when I hear people badmouthing Kingdom of Heaven or Ridley Scott's Robin Hood. I love low-bud films, but not when they are so poor and uncreative.
Hmmm, the cast first. Well, I am a big fan of red heads and Khrystyne
who plays Roxanne, was the only reason I stuck with this sucker. She is
pretty now as she was back on the old American TV series "Head of the
Class." The other female lead, Ashley Jones as the princess, was also a
delight to watch, though no one would accuse her of being a great actress
from watching this movie. Trevor St. John plays the captain assigned to
guard the Princess and he acquits himself well enough. He reminds me a
Elwes, who was the lead in "The Princess Bride."
How in the world did Ron Perlman(from "Beauty and the Beast fame") and Eric Roberts get signed to this?? I suspect Mr. Roberts had some connection to the production beyond simply appearing in the film. The credits were revealing in that Roberts had his own driver, production assistant, costumer, and make-up artist, while the rest of the cast had to share a seperate team.
In fact, the blooper reel at the end was, in my opinion, also quite revealing in that almost all of the clips were of Roberts blowing lines. Almost none of the other cast were shown on the blooper real and I was left wondering whether Roberts was the only one unable to keep his lines straight or instead used his clout so that the rest of the cast just wasn't included. I wanted to see the three main female leads gaff it up a little but no luck.
The script took few chances, surrounding a paper-thin plot with all the standard fairy-fantasy tale cliches. One interesting twists was that one of the King's Guard was played with some flair by a black actor (name unknown) with light homosexual overtones. He kept complaining about his pink hat with a big pink plume and about his clothes getting dirty. There wasn't really any sexual innuendo involved but quite a bit of lifestyle innuendo. It was something I hadn't seen before in this type of movie and the actor did a fair job with the script he was given. An interesting diversion...
The sword-play and stunt work was pretty weak. I have a little experience with sword-play and I suspect what was shown in the movie was more a result of a limited practice schedule. I have seen much better sword handling in a variety of situations and I think the actors just needed more practice before shooting. Especially since with a movie, the editor can do a lot to make it seem more dramatic by good cutting from shot to shot.
And there were a lot of shots. The filmakers did take time to get a lot of angles in the film. Clearly there was effort to do a lot of conceptual layout work before committing anything to film. It's just that what they ended up with wasn't very special. The cinematography was one of the best aspects (relatively speaking) to the film. A lot of it was shot using natural sunlight and all the actors looked good in their costumes - another bright spot in the work. It was clear that this film was shot entirely in one physical location with a cheesy-looking "ruins" serving as the focal point of action. The credits gave a big kudos to such-in-such a ranch...
"The King's Guard" would make for nice family-friendly viewing for all ages but won't hold adults attention for any length of time. While there are plenty of deaths during the film there is no blood or gore of any kind so younger kids are safe with this one. Unless you are a fan of one of the cast members go rent Princess Bride.
Oh dear. What an unmitigated disaster. The script was rambling, the cast
bored, and the direction ... well, I can't say I noticed any. How two
such as Eric Roberts and the tremendously talented Ron Perlman were cajoled
into doing this tosh is beyond me. It's a shame the video cover depicted
horses and the budget obviously didn't stretch to affording them - not an
equine in the whole film.
Although I must say the costumes were delightful.
Oh, and the out-takes were a revelation.
Just fast-forward and watch the bloopers. Don't bother with the rest...
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Set in a medieval setting the somewhat serious plot ends up in comedy.
The costumes are quite good even though they look looted from various
theatre wardrobes as they do not match at all. Some of the villains are
wearing soldiers costumes while the king's guard have no uniform what
The acting is pretty decent, though the main actors should have been the villains as they were the only ones who really stand out. The story feels a bit stretched towards the middle of the movie as no swordsman facing possible doom has time for taking tea, argue about hats or perform stand up comedy. Still, the filming and sound effects are pretty good. Only the opening scene looks a little fake. OK, it looks really fake but its OK as it only takes up a couple of frames. Some locations are really good but they end up in a single field with a ruin in the middle. And that is where most of the story happens.
This would be a fun movie for anyone not feeling to watch anything too serious or feeling too critical.
Okay... I've seen high school students with handicams do better stuff than this. I don't know which was worse... Eric Roberts' awful, contrived character, the illogical love story between the two main characters, or the fact that they went and killed off Ron Perlman, who, as far as I could tell was the only one actually DOING any acting. I love swordfights, and these guys seem to have some good ability there... but even that seemed over-rehearsed and passionless. Character development is nonexistent. A previous reviewer commented that you can tell the people in the film were having fun... but it certainly didn't rub off on me. I was too busy trying to figure out the purpose for ever having made this film to start with.
It had a ok plot and the actors were a little over dramatic but the story had places to go. I really like Ashley Jones and Trevor St. John. They were the movie! There were funny parts with the other King's Guards and when Eric Roberts was on screen it was awesome! Now he has so much presents and with Ashley Jones and Trevor St. John it was a pretty good movie. A little cheesey but fun and entertaining! Ashley Jones is a standout and look for her in the future! Very pretty and going to be a great actress! Out of 4 stars I give it 3 stars. I guess I liked it! It's on DVD on VHS! RENT it or buy it! It's good for kids!
This film is a wonderful send-up of several action films: you have the outnumbered soldiers from the "Alamo" and "Zulu"; The comedy pairings akin to "The Lady Vanishes", and the bawdy fun of "The Princess Bride."
I came into this movie as an Eric Roberts fan. On the DVD he's the only
person on the cover and is hardly in the movie. They should have had
the dude from One Life To Live on the box instead because he was the
hero of the film.
Anyways, my main beef with the movie was the fact that it seemed like the director was more familiar with stage acting than film, and for the most part it seemed like the same went for the cast. The battle scenes in particular were horribly done.
I don't tend to bash movies for being low budget but this one really did nothing with nothing. No horses, one terrible set, childish special effects. Sam Raimi or Peter Jackson might have been able to pull a rabbit out of that hat but not the guys responsible for this one.
I had the esteem pleasure of seeing the original directors cut of "The
King's Guard," and I must say it goes wonders beyond the DVD "producers
cut" seen in stores. We hear of this happening time and time again:
producers stepping in and deciding they know better than the director
and/or writers. In this case, the film falls short destroying some of
the characters' depth and story continuity, thus eliminating some of
the film's fun. Not to say the DVD is terrible, but when you've had the
chance to see what it could be . . .
This is a lighthearted tale that came about from a labor of love. Simply put, this is an amusing, entertaining film that doesn't take it self too seriously, and will have you and your family enjoying every moment.
The different actors within this film all possess more than adequate talent to have made a much better film. Because a motion picture is not fitted with a large budget does not mean it has to be of poor quality. Do not blame the actors for this lame motion picture, you are only as good as the tools you are given to work with. The fact they utilized a very limited scene display for their plot showed a lack of either imagination or budget. Maybe both. A much better film could have been made from the script used. Better settings for filming, better choreography of the swordplay, better costuming. Horses and better costuming would have helped the film. There are numbers of small independent film companies spread across America that could have done a better job with the budget this film had. Nick Nashoba
|Page 1 of 3:||  |
|Ratings||External reviews||Parents Guide|
|Plot keywords||Main details||Your user reviews|
|Your vote history|