Contentar Best movie of this year hands down!

ChicDragon It's a mild crowd pleaser for people who are exhausted by blockbusters.

Siflutter It's easily one of the freshest, sharpest and most enjoyable films of this year.

Skyler Great movie. Not sure what people expected but I found it highly entertaining.

jessegehrig Highlander! Swords! Dudes fighting with swords! Sometimes the sword fighting men have witty things to say, other times when they are sword fighting they have serious things to say, see so its juxtaposed, which is also the name of an art magazine. I am not too particularly fond of the word "juxtaposed", it sounds stupid to me, here is where I can reveal that. You know what's missing from Highlander movies? It's not swords, I think we call all guess that. No, what it probably is is ice cream, not enough scenes involving ice cream. My favorite right now is pistachio, first of all it's usually a lovely pale green, then it hits you with that weird savory sweet flavor, plus there's nuts! Movie reviewed.

t_atzmueller I was rooting for „Highlander: Endgame", despite having witnessed the steady decline of the franchise ever since the first movie: for one, the movie reunited both Connor and Duncan MacLeod (who, in the TV-series, had become a worthy replacement for Christopher Lambert). For the other: the film stars Bruce Payne as villainous immortal and Payne remains one of my favourite movie-villains since starring in "Passenger 57". Both points turned out as two of the films major flaws: Seeing Christopher Lambert return to his parade-role as immortal Connor MacLeod is a bit like seeing a relative, whom one hasn't seen in many years: it's good to see them again but in the back of your mind, you cannot help to notice how horribly they've aged. Indeed, all the make-up in Hollywood cannot hide Lamberts real age, making his forever young immortal less than convincing. It must be said that Lambert is able to mask the age-issue with a world-weary approach but his scenes remain awkward leaving, despite the double billing, Adrian Paul as real, even though typically uncharismatic protagonist.Bruce Payne's character, Jacob Krell, at times portrayed as some demonic, immortal anti-Christ-figure has potential but unfortunately the actor is given very little to work with: his character following the stereotypical "Highlander"-villain; Payne relies on his demonic stare but essentially, he's just repeating the same thing he's been doing in dozens of low-budget horror- and action-flicks over the last 20 years.Speaking about wasted potential: the story about Krell's posse, who they are and why they follow him, is never expanded upon. Nor is it clear why they sacrifice (or rather allow themselves to be slaughtered) themselves for Krell, only hinting that Krell may be some form of immortal Charles Manson.Where Kurgan in the original "Highlander" was often shown in retro-scenes (or at least hinting about his appearances in history), there's very little of that in "Endgame". Krell is shown in the medieval age, where he's "killed" by MacLeod and the next thing, he appears in the present. No flashbacks, no explanation of how Krell had spend the last centuries, just the presented fact that Krell is the most powerful because he's killed the highest number of immortals. Another wasted opportunity.Essentially, the movie is a blown up sequel to the "Highlander"-TV-series, which has been much criticized for breaking the canon of the original movie (female immortals, immortals fighting on holy ground, etc). Had this movie been made 15 years earlier (without the character Duncan MacLeod), focusing on Connor and Krell, the movie could have had a similar cult-status like the original "Highlander". Sadly, though it remains the second-best "Highlander" film to date – but only because of the level of awfulness of part two, three and five.In the end, despite all the films flaws, it was good to see the familiar faces in the familiar roles one final time and one could only hope that this movie would finally lay the "Highlander"-franchise to rest. Need I mention that "Highlander 5" followed as sure as tomorrow's sunrise?

zaisjr I am definitely biased when it comes to my review of this film. I am a fan of the first movie, fan of the TV series (minus a few poorly done episodes), and will watch anything that has the character "Methos" in it. This movie will be hard to follow if you haven't watched previous Highlander movies and/or the TV series. Recently my girlfriend purchased all of the seasons of Highlander and we just now finished watching them. We also just watched the first movie again. So I have a unique perspective. I have the original movie and the series still fresh in my memory. I think that Highlander fans love the concept more than the plot of the Highlander franchise. The idea of living forever while having a vintage style of dress and manners is of great appeal to us. But I also notice that many critics of this film didn't see the second and third movie. Those movies didn't do a good job following the first movie either. But this film mainly follows the TV series, not the first movie. I am one of those people who really liked Highlander: Endgame. The movie does a great job mixing the characters from the first movie and the TV series. When I started watching the movie I was thrilled to see Peter Wingfield and Jim Byrnes in the credits. These were two great actors from the TV series. Sadly Methos had a small part in this film. He is one of the greatest, yet wasted characters of television history. Still, I'm glad he was featured in this film. Sadly, this film still can't shake some of the corny effects and additions that Panzer and Davis add to each movie. Just like the first movie, the main villain is often overacting. The final quickening is lame. Someone needs to tell Panzer and Davis that the 80's are over with. Still, this film let us see what the TV series would have been like with a bigger budget. I have also been told that the Director's Cut does a better job of developing the characters. But this movie isn't for people who aren't Highlander fans. It's also not for people who hated the TV series. It's for die-hard fans.

DaRZA Highlander 4 is what Highlander 2 should have been. It tries in its directing, its landscape-shots, its massive past scenes and so on to be like the first Highlander.The storyline playing "now" is not to discussed. It is for me being a huge fan of Highlander and liked the TV-show how the TV-Show-Characters are integrated to the "big"-screen-storyline. It worked quite well. At least - gunfights of immortals takes getting used to me :/.Its a big reunion of TV-Characters and Movie-Characters. Btw.: you need to see at least some TV-Episodes and the first Highlander to follow the plot a bit. Newbies to the Highlander-Thing won't be able to get a bit of the plot line and characters, because the movie assumes that you already know them. For others: go and see it :)The movie is about 90 min long and kinda hurries through the plot. Characters are not well drawn etc. another 10 - 15 minutes might have been giving the movie a better chance to get a little deeper into the characters and give the movie more depth.