Sword of the Conqueror (1962)

Absolutely the worst movie.

There are better movies of two hours length. I loved the actress'performance.

After playing with our expectations, this turns out to be a very different sort of film.

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

Jack Palance was the main reason I wanted to see Sword of the Conqueror in the first film. While Sword of the Conqueror is forgettable and less than brilliant, provoking a mixed reaction from me, it is a long way from a bad film.Sword of the Conqueror looks great, the sets are splendidly crafted, the colours are rich and the film's beautifully filmed. It's also rousingly scored, Alboino and Rosmunda are interesting characters and their chemistry has a nice degree of tension.The cast are mostly fine, with the most memorable being a splendidly over-the-top but also sinister Jack Palance(reminding one how good he was playing villains), there have been some instances where he is so much so it takes one out the film but that is not the case in Sword of the Conqueror, this is one such case where he is a lot of fun to watch and makes the film more interesting than it is. Eleonora Rossi Drago is very sensual and like Palance sinks her teeth into the role of Rosmunda and Vitorrio Sanipoli, Carlo D'Angelo and Raf Baldassarre are decent in supporting roles.Guy Madison however goes through the motions and looks bored, the character felt a little underwritten too. The script lacks flow and can be superficially melodramatic and aside from the chemistry between Alboino and Rosmunda the story doesn't really compel. The storytelling is not much new and pedestrian in pace and the action at times is chaotic and lacking in tension.In conclusion, Sword of the Conqueror is not bad and has a good amount to recommend but at the end of the day to me it just felt rather forgettable. 5.5/10

Guy Madison and Jack Palance were finding work scarce in America and elected to go to Europe for their future careers in the Sixties. Sword Of The Conqueror was typical of the product they were involved in. It's an Italian production set in Italy of the 7th century. Italy was becoming home to expatriates like Madison and Palance.Palance borrows from his Attila The Hun character he did in America back in the day playing a Lombard warrior who has it in his mind to reconstitute the western half of the old Roman Empire. First on his list is a small kingdom where Eleanora Rossi Drago is princess and this princess has had an illegitimate courtesy of Guy Madison her father's commanding general. Through betrayal Palance kills the king, holds the child hostage and forces Drago to marry him. He also rather stupidly lets Madison escape.Madison and Palance were going through the motions here. Both of their characters make no sense. Stupidest thing in the film that I thought was Madison being forced to do a gorge crossing by rope with a few obstacles placed so that a neighboring kingdom will give him necessary troops. Palance chews the scenery with vigor, Drago looks lovely and concerned, and Madison is just bored.To be back in Hollywood.

If you want to see a sort of 'remake' of this film, albeit in about 6 minutes, go to:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0pF7HlZ9cUwhere the Aunty Jack team over-dubbed it for Australian audiences, around 1971. The plot and name are changed a bit: "Herco the Magnificent", where Herco Barbuto is fighting his evil brother Euripides for the name of their father's fruit shop, Barbuto's Fruitarama. Some great lines: "You reckon Herco can grow a better apple? Well clap your eyes on that!" "Bring on the surfies!" "It's a bone china beer mug!" (Shirl's father's skull) "She must have a gut like a gorilla." As Euripides is stabbed by Shirl: "I've heard of pinning the tail on the donkey, but this is ridiculous." As he falls dead to the floor: "Never could hold his grog."This style of 'remake' pre-dated the work of Double Take by about a decade. Double Take would take a forgettable film and re-dub it in its entirely, live in the cinema. They would draw attention to the gaffes and continuity errors.There is a place for poor (and even awful) films, but it may not be the one that the original makers intended.

I first saw this movie about 20 years ago, and I recently found a tape of it, so I can now enjoy it whenever I want, although I close the curtains and lock the doors so no one can see me.Judged against other sword and sandal flicks, this is pretty good. The production values are better than average, and the acting and direction at least try. However, in some ways, this is an odd movie. The heroine is in love with Guy Madison's character (Amalchi), and Palance is the ostensible villain (who kills her father and forces her to marry him). But Amalchi is such a whiner, and seems so ineffective, that her love for him is incomprehensible. On the other hand, Alboin (Palance) does do some villainous acts: invading the kingdom, killing the heroine's father, etc. But it's made clear from the very beginning that he and everybody else are being manipulated into war and hatred by the slimy machinations of the king's adviser (who is secretly in the pay of the Byzantine emperor). *****POSSIBLE SPOILER ALERT****** So, at the end of the movie, when the heroine kills Alboin and marries Amalchi, you are left there asking, "Is this really a happy ending?" Alboin came across as a smart, shrewd ruler, and all that Amalchi has going for him is that he knocked up the heroine before the movie started. Not only that, but the Byzantine emperor is still out there scheming to destroy our happy pair, and let's face it, Amalchi is useless. Every time I watch it, I hope that Rozmunda ditches the loser and makes it with Alboin, for a truly happy ending.