BootDigest Such a frustrating disappointment

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.

Ogosmith Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

Kinley This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

bkoganbing 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.

MARIO GAUCI This is definitely superior to the dullish REVAK THE REBEL (1960) but a slightly lesser achievement than THE MONGOLS (1961); both these also star Jack Palance and were made in quick succession. A couple of years ago, a work colleague of mine (a movie-buff who worked as an extra on renowned Malta-shot productions like CLASH OF THE TITANS {1981} and MUNICH {2005}) used to wax lyrically about his VHS of this ultra-rare film being among his most treasured possessions; at the time, I was not even aware of its existence and though I soon learned about Leonard Maltin's unflattering *1/2 rating, I immediately acquired the film when the first opportunity arose (sourced from a gorgeous, high-definition TV print that, nevertheless, suffers from a couple of very minor video glitches)! Still, the fact that its director's resume' (albeit having been active since 1914…and he amazingly made this, his penultimate effort, at 76 years of age!) was pretty unenviable, I went into it with low expectations only to be pleasantly surprised by the results; for the record, I had earlier acquired Campogalliani's swan-song, the even more obscure THE AVENGER OF VENICE (1964), and which I may be able to include in my ongoing Epic marathon.Incidentally, the English title here has no particular relevance to the plot but, then, the original – ROSMUNDA E ALBOINO – does not exactly set the screen on fire either!; those two characters, of course, are the protagonists played by Eleanora Rossi-Drago and Palance respectively. In a neat reversal of the situation in REVAK THE REBEL, it is the latter who offers a truce to the conquered king (Andrea Bosic) – this time around by marrying the man's daughter, even if she already had an illegitimate child by his most loyal lieutenant (Guy Madison)! However, the ruler proves gullible and, led on by his scheming adviser, proceeds to place the blame of their defeat on Madison; the situation deteriorates further when the two allied nations organize a friendly joust. The very first participants are Madison and Palance's younger and war-mongering (both on and offscreen) brother and, when the latter turns up dead regardless, the conqueror reiterates by beheading the king himself (in full view of his own daughter)! Feeling completely ostracized now, Madison has no choice but to flee and try to rally support for his people's cause.Naturally, the doubly begrudged and strong-willed princess initially resists Palance's advances but eventually relents when he gets wind of her offspring's existence (once again, by way of treachery); their relationship is sort of poignant since they gradually come to at least respect one another but, given the characteristically superficial script, this element is largely lost amid the myriad court intrigues and rampant snarling! Anyway, Madison comes upon a peaceful tribe who, in order to join forces with our hero, set him the odd task of going from one side of a valley to the other via a spiked rope laid over an array of wooden stakes! In the end, Madison bursts on the scene just as Palance finally forces himself upon Rossi-Drago: the two men engage in a scuffle and, as their common enemy seems to be getting the upper hand, the woman intervenes to give him the coup-de-grace – which, this being Palance, he turns into a melodramatic showcase; the closing shot, then, presents a conventional greeting of the reunited lovers by an anonymous but over-enthusiastic crowd.

anonymous999-2 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.

ridleyr1 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.