Isenhart: The Hunt Is on for Your Soul (2011)

When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

a decent mix of fairy tale and Medieval references. not great but nice. using the knight and his desire of revenge, the science and the magic in smart manner for a comfortable coherence of story. the low budget is its virtue and its weakness source. its virtue because gives the chance to the story to be the most important part. a sin because the acting is only pretty, the dialogues - better by other films from same genre and a drop of realism could save many not the most inspired details. but it is a pretty film. not original but reasonable in the way to send its message. and this is a good thing. in same measure, the androgen aspect of the lead actor could be a virtue for the atmosphere.so, a decent work.

"Isenhart - Die Jagd nach dem Seelenfänger" is a German movie from 2011, so this one has its 5th anniversary this year. The director is Hansjörg Thurn and the writer is Holger Karsten Schmidt and looking at other stuff these two have done in the last decade I am a bit surprised how weak their outcome here turned out to be. These 120 minutes were a production of the ProSieben Sat 1 Media AG and that describes it very well already. Occasionally, these two German television stations show quality films, but when it comes to producing their own movies, they deliver very very rarely only. A perfect example would be the (so far) three "Wanderhure" films that also run for roughly 2 hours each of them, so it is not too incorrect to call this movie the male equivalent to these Alex Neldel films and there are definitely more reasons than the facts that these films were produced by the same companies, they play at times long ago and Bert Tischendorf plays core characters in both films/franchises. Admittedly, this film we have here does not have as many (and as deep) lows as the "Wanderhure" films.So yeah, if there is any reason to check this film out, then it is maybe the visual side. The cinematography and sets are solid and the costumes and makeup aren't bad either, even if some characters look very similar the way they are displayed in here with their long blonde haircuts and their outfits. Neither the acting nor the story is good however, and with the story, you are almost pretty generous if you call it mediocre. There are almost no interesting characters in here at all and this also applies to the title character which is always a negative deal breaker for a film of course. I did not care about any of the relationships in here, be it friendship or love, or certain characters dying. And the final plot twist about the main antagonist is nothing of value either. I guess they just wanted to shock everybody a bit and they really sacrificed realism for it, not that there was a whole lot of it in the first place. But the good thing is they accepted how forgettable this film turned out and did not make further sequels the way they did with the "Wanderhure" films. But yeah, it is actually pretty tough to find pros about "Isenhart" as there are many more cons for sure. I don't recommend the watch. Thumbs down.

Recommended (be wary slightly slowpaced & relatively low budget)I exspected a fantasy and got a history/action (possibly slightly sci-fi to it as well).It's a good watch, it is slow at times, but the story is given time to evolve as it should. The effects are not all there even though costume possibly pulled off an incredible feat (depending on budget). However it still isn't fully enough as some helmets does not suit it's bearer and some extras does not fill the shoes as well as they should. Gore and grit is pretty much there, which is a big plus. The cast is alright, the lead (pretty unknown to me) is alright but does not excell - however does not remove realism from it either which is mostly down to the dialogue (which is well written). The acting overall could be a little better but isn't below average for similar movies, rather slightly above.Pro's • Script • Dialogue (up and down but mostly solid) • Original plot line (or at least have the feeling thereof) • Costume & scenery • Director (which probably made ends meet)Con's • Budget (?) - doesn't reach all the way • Some elements are slightly improved upon by modern norms/rationaleEnd notes: This isn't Braveheart, on the other hand it does not have a white van it in either. I liked it, it shows that you can do quite big historical movies with a relatively small budget. -It's quite well crafted for similar movies and delivers on originality.

complicated theme, delicate subject, great ambitions. a film who has its precise public despite the desire to seems more than a not very inspired exercise to explore forbidden subject. because the ambition to be more than a film with Middle Age scenes, few cultural/historical references falls in the search to mix Walter Scott with Umberto Eco. the way is interesting but risky if the desire remains to seem be a profound movie without the chance to really be. but, ignoring this detail, it is a beautiful film about knights, heroic facts and justice. sure, not remarkable but that is not a sin.to discover a mixture between history and fairy tale is always useful after a difficult work day. in this case, the things are easy - young men, beautiful girls, the ambiguous evil and fight scenes. all in nice package.