Ceticultsot
Beautiful, moving film.
Kidskycom
It's funny watching the elements come together in this complicated scam. On one hand, the set-up isn't quite as complex as it seems, but there's an easy sense of fun in every exchange.
Myron Clemons
A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.
Leofwine_draca
SEVENTH SWORD is another of those cheap medieval films made on a budget just above that of a typical indie. The main characters are a group of adventurers returning home in the Middle Ages, only to fall foul of a sinister plot that causes them to fight their way out. It's extraordinarily cheap and limited in terms of plotting, cinematography, and intent, and the dialogue which just goes on and on and on is really, really boring. The worst thing about this? It was made in Malta, which is very unusual, so you wish they'd come up with something better.
jpfloydster
Although this film might not quite live up to its expectations as an "epic" given that the word today seems to be used more to describe productions of an immense scale rather than of a historical genre, it certainly has elements which make it worthy of such a tagline, bearing in mind of course the words "Malta's first"precede it. The story itself is not exactly a stroke of genius. You have five soldiers returning home from a battle which is only described as a "skirmish up North". They stop by a fortress on the way and ask for shelter. It then turns out that the lord who rules this fortress might have a grudge against the protagonist, Tristan played by the very charismatic Andrei Claude. Although the lord sets his grudge aside and greets the soldiers into his fortress, Tristan soon enough gives him a good reason to hunt him down and seek revenge. The underlying story, which is the psychological journey Tristan goes through as he encounters different scenarios is much more appealing in my opinion. The choice of costumes was interesting and most of the sets looked quite authentic. The action scenes were rather limited but at least well executed and not overly graphic. As far as the acting goes, with the exception of Tristan, who seems like he was born for this kind of role, and a few others such as the priest and lady Isobel I feel it falls a bit short. With that being said, I still enjoyed watching it, and I thought it was a very brave effort.
maltafilmcritic
The Good - This was a very ambitious project, so I admire the executive producers for taking the risk and investing in such a production. Any experienced filmmaker will tell you that the hardest part of this business is always related to funding. Which brings me to my next positive point, the setting. The visuals of this film are actually very good, the way each set is designed and the lighting used really enhance the feel of this medieval story, so well done to the set designer and the director of photography. And last but certainly not least I applaud the main actor (Andrei Claude) for his outstanding performance as Tristan of Leon. Quoting from a recent review on The Sunday Times "Claude has good screen presence and portrays well the noble hero that has seen his sense of idealism dissipating before his eyes by the callousness of the world around him." I should add that this is also a credit to the casting director who must have had a clear vision of what this character had to represent.The Bad - I don't like being negative but I have to be honest. The story wasn't well structured and many areas remain unexplained. Some of the acting was rather poor, and I found this a bit distracting.The Outcome - I still enjoyed watching this film and I recommend it. Yes it could have been much better, but so could World War Z (which cost $190,000,000) and millions of people watched it anyway.
tuula-1
Do not let the ratings fool you: this movie is bad. I really hoped it would be even passable, but not really - there are areas where it is OK, the fight scenes are fine, the idea was fine, but then it falls flat on its face in those bits it didn't need to, namely writing and direction. The story is all over the place. The first part has a completely unattached visit to blacksmith, stapled on to showcase Joseph Calleja - he sings nice, and acts fairly well, in this film the non-actors constantly outperform the actors - but contributes nothing to the story. Also he is the worst blacksmith ever, banging on cold steel with a hammer. This would not matter, if it was not first of a series of weird illogical details, that could easily have been written around. Have him do something else if you do not have means to heat the iron, for example. The setting is deliberately vague, there is a war on "in the north" and any shot is meticulously avoided that would show where the action takes place: why could it not take place in Malta? Why not show a bit of Malta, even if was not - not that many people would point and go THAT'S MDINA!! As a result the story seems unrooted, and the filming claustrophobic as there are very few far shots, mostly half-closeups. Also the beginning is full of speechifying, especially the (yes, very handsome) main character is made to look in the horizon and spout Wisdom and Philosophical Truth instead of acting like a normal human being. Later on the director has people twitching, and tutting, and more speeches, in places were a simple look would have sufficed and been more natural. Even extras in the market are all super lively, no-one is waiting for his rabbit to be weighed, no, they all gesticulate and haggle. After rather pointless meandering, the actual plot of the film takes place. This was the better part of the film, and has some reasonably good and natural acting, as well as some fight scenes that are quite good - well done, historical reenactors. The end of the story is quite good too, even if more time could have been used to elaborate, maybe also some foreshadowing? Would have been better use of screen time than the dull speeches at the beginning.
