Reseñas de usuarios

It is clear that this title received little funding, but given that it has some pretty good sets, locations, weapons, costumes and sound design.

The actors are amateurs, and whilst there are some terrible performances (including a few bad attempts at the French accent) many of the actors are pretty good, and the camera work is well framed on the actors and their motions.

There clearly is a plot although I couldn't tell you what it was.

As far as films go this is an amateur production, but as far a amateur films go this is a pretty good effort.

These producers must have thought : "Let us record the scenes and then put them in a chronicle order to watch."

So poorly directed and produced... The acting is OK, not great but because its poorly put together its as if you go from short movie to short movie instead of watching 1 movie..

The story line is a great one but because the producers made a mess I had to give this a 2 for the effort.

There are some good scene's in this video but overall it really stinks.

Acting depending on the actor ± 6,5, Director 5, Producers 2.

Just to get the 10 line rule I will write this sentence just to get it approved, This movie isn't worth 10 lines!

Bad direction, bad script, bad production, bad research and acting. This is very low budget (nothing wrong with that) but it shows. According to this the Battle of Devil's Bridge was fought by about ten people. The scenery around the North West of France is snow capped mountains (it isn't) and the first castle they battled in was defended by one knight.

Had to give up after just fifteen minutes (if that but it felt like longer) and walk out. Felt to me like they were just mugging me off.

Apparently I need ten lines of text for the review. Which is ten more than the film merits. Originally, all I wanted to say was "Oh dear. Why?"

Probably the worst film I have ever watched. Poor acting, directing, filming, & script. I have nothing against low budget films but this is incredibly bad. It is the type of film you would make at school. It is a great shame because it could have been so good. The one thing that is good is the costume & set. Still something is not quite right with this though. It is all a bit to clean! When the film starts you think once the intro is over it will turn into a normal film, it never does. The scene isn't set very well, the introduction to characters is poor a confusing. In summary this did reach my expectations of what looked to be a very good very. It didn't even come close.

Firstly I'm a filmmaker, and I have nothing but respect for those that have actually navigated the gauntlet and succeeded in creating and finishing a film, so; good for the filmmakers.

Unfortunately that's where the praise stops. As they should be experienced enough by now to spot a terrible script. (Cheapest bit to get right, but so rarely done)

The Director ... There aren't words, just: casting: awful, simply awful... What's with the accents all over the place, half the English weren't, the French king sounded like no other 'french' (one heavily and horribly American, others eastern European) in his small theatre OTT. accent. The fights were needlessly unrealistic, tried to be cool, unlucky gamble. Really should have spent more time with casting, as none of the actors came off well and that tells me of a poor director that didn't rehearse with them enough. And didn't breakdown the script properly.

the cinematography: were there two conflicting DOP's?? Some shots were actually classy and well graded and framed and beautiful, making me believe the world. Then they were cut in with horribly framed, shaky hand-held pointless shots which made absolutely no sense. A DOP should be able to tell the story just with the shot selection, how you frame actors can tell a huge amount about their relations and emotions and so on.

The editing... Just... Wow. Equal to cinematography. So many shots were utterly pointless and just throw you out, they stand out for all the wrong reasons.

All goes back to the direction: did I mention BOOBS? Yeah because they helped the story... Maybe they were the story, three boobs decided to... Waste their and everyone else's time, all the way to this present day.

And I love that almost all the positive reviews on here are clearly from the same person, all around the same date, all written in the same flawed English and grammatical structure. That amused me greatly.

Don't get me wrong, I love this genre, but I really really want the filmmaker to grow, and learn from his mistakes. And I never even mentioned the sound... Obviously radio mics were above the budget which went on clean costumes (or were they via re-enactors?) and OTT/ unnecessary makeup.

I did however quite like the locations, when believable / historically believable.

Well done for trying.

I literally quit after 5 minutes it was that bad - and I've watched some pretty crappy movies. It felt like a high school drama production with boobs.

OK. This is my first review. I felt morally obligated to warn others. I admit I have wasted a lot of time in my life, but the 15 minutes I wasted watching this move...I truly regret. I actually felt embarrassed for everyone involved -- myself, the actors, the director, cast, crew, innocent bystanders, and all the anals of history (yes anal, as in 'anal orifice,' for who deserves the title more than war-mongering madmen?) Please, please, please...learn from my mistake. Don't waste your time and money on this jolly band of Ren-Faire flunkies with a camera, iMovie and iDeas. You will be as sorry as I am right now.

All the reviews fail to mention that for all its short-comings, there are a couple of redeeming features, in the first 5 minutes anyway, I didn't make it past the 2 man battle for the castle sheltering Queen Elinor of Aquitaine.

But in that 5 minutes the featured character is Queen Elinor. She does have a nice set of tits (they look natural, because they have a lot of natural sag, but good heft and healthy sized nipples that point in the correct directions, unlike a lot of fake ones).

Other than that, the movie is pretty much a waste of time. When she puts on some clothes it's time to close the VLC window and move on to something with better acting, plot and production values (and better nudity), like say The Room or The Canyons.

One of the worst films I've had the misfortune to watch. Two minutes in found me fiddling around in my handbag for entertainment.

There were a few minutes when the princes were introduced where I thought it might be worth watching just for the eye candy but they turned out to be corny and just as naff as everything else.

If a knight urgently knocks on a 6 inch thick internal castle door you don't expect it to sound as if its being done on a Formica topped school desk by a 5-year-old .... and when one of the princes need to escape instead of showing him doing it he is told 'there's a tunnel my father told me about' and then they are out! No budget for a tunnel - I like a good tunnel in a medieval drama.

Costumes were dreadful and although the Queens gratuitous nakedness was quite entertaining full frontal breast enhancements in 1173 is just wrong!

Rarely are low budget films great...but sometimes they can be good. This offering is neither.

A script that was surely written by an able 10 year old, acting that will embarrass the actors for years to come and locations chosen by a blind illiterate moron with no sense of History or Geography. Where are the bloody mountains in Northern France? What were they thinking...Or were they?

(Just watched Vikings Season 4. They sail up the Seine and haul their longboats up cliffs and then pull them over 'the mountains' - WHAT cliffs, WHAT mountains!)

I managed just under 30 mins. There is a simple obvious rule. If you have a low budget, stick to themes that you can afford. Mass battle scenes are clearly out. Spend the money on the script...Or did the actors just make it up as they went along?

They did manage to save some money by not having a Director, well it appears that way.

All in all - a shame. A great idea for a movie...It just needed a budget, a director, a script, actors and basic intelligence choosing locations.

Don't get me wrong, this film is absolutely terrible. You really only need to look at the trailer to see that this is a very low budget production. But, to be honest, that's what makes it so entertaining. Yes the acting and directing was horrendous, and it has all the historical accuracy of a Year 5 textbook, but that's part of the charm. It's so bad, it's actually quite good. And so if you want a film with realistic and relatable characters, that keeps you on the edge of your seat and truly brings history to life, then this probably isn't the right film for you. But if you want to watch something just to poke fun at how hilariously bad it is, then this is perfect for you.

At first I thought perhaps it was a comedy. Certainly the fake boobs on the queen in 1173 surely were a comedic introduction. My mother always told me if you have nothing nice to say then discuss the weather.... Best thing about this movie was the reviews!

Wow! I don't know where to begin. I first thought this was a spoof movie. You know, a comedy. I feel sorry for the film editor, he or she must of had nightmares trying to find enough footage to make this attempt to be called a movie. The battle scenes were just pathetic and so fake. Yes, I know, all movies are fake but it's the job of the director to make one forget it is. Trying to write 600 words about this film is very difficult." When I find you... I will take your fingers." Will surely be a line that will go into many trivia contest at the local bar and grill somewhere in southern Montana.

Bad, bad, bad movie.

The boobs were great. I was able to make it through the complete movie. One thing that was upsetting is they used the wrong flags. The English banner with the Lion was brought to England by Richard I; note lionheart. It was weird that King Henry used Richard's banner against Richard in the movie. I also wish they would of introduced the Knights Templar since King Richard I was in the 3rd crusade before being King. King Richard was a badass and I feel the producers got that part right. The costumes and backgrounds were awesome. The script seemed too forward and lacked emotion. I feel the actors did the best that they could to make the movie entertaining.

With the exception of the battle of the Devil's Bridge (Which only took 10 people rather than a lot of peasants vs knights) this is a movie. Is not a documentary it was made to entertain. You can see medieval brutality, seduction and certainly good costumes. However, even if you're not satisfied but want to learn about Richard's rebellion I also recommend The Lion In Winter! Eleanor, Henri, Richard, John (Lackland) all your favorites from that messed up royalty of the middle ages. Not bad for a B or low budget... Im sure the battle scene at the bridge might even been filmed there.

First of all. I love historical movie so when a friend show me this title I've said "why not?". So I've seen this movie after a hard day at work and I've founded it not bad. I'm falling in love with the queen's costumes and I wanted to be her just for try it. I don't know if this movie is close to the real story but of course is a well-made movie and there is a good research before the shooting. The costumes are realistic and if you know that period you agree with me and the young actors are prepared. Admirable work done by the director. After this title I've seen other movies directed by Milla and I think he grew artistically a lot. I've made some research about him, he's a young director movie and he won some festival around the world, in USA too. Beautiful locations and good screenplay have made the rest.

Richard the lionheart rebellion is a good historical movie. Remember me other film with the same story and i founded it more beautiful than others. The costumes are great and the actors very talented. Everything in the movie-soundtrack, design, cinematography is on a very good level for this low budget film. It's clear that the director movie put all his passion here and he studied a lot before the shooting. Probably some dialogues are here just for show but the result is not bad. In my opinion, historical movie require their director to possess great filming skills and Stefano Milla has these requirements. I've appreciated some characters then other, but I suggest to see this title at least once. Italy and her castles are amazing as usual and as everybody know, a very beautiful locations made the rest.

I loved Richard more than i shoud have, but that doesn't mean it is perfect. The dialogues were brilliant and the screenplay good. Utlimatly the storical movie are flat and boring, istead this One is addictive. I really appreciate Chandler Maness and Andrea Zirio, The chemistry between them is Good. The prison scene was very good, i've loved that in particularly. The attention to details are admirable. And the job done during The fight scenes are absolutely great. The director movie use The lights and The colors in a very Good way, sign He knows what He did. I really appreciate The music and The acting. The power of The film is The passion of The characters and a great editing. This movie captured me until The end and I'm really curious For a next chapters. Good work Stefano, The last applause is For your work.

It was suggested by a friend of mine and I really enjoyed. It seems to be a low budget but doesn't look like at all, instead it is a good production and photography. Some actors are really good and editing is made really well. I loved the views of the yards and castles and of course it is made with a genuine prospective of what was about a crusade in the 1100 D.C. Also, the music was really good and it sounds like a Hollywood blockbuster score..

I love this film! I like it very much! The cast was good and Chandler Maness is a talent actor. I already know the director Stefano Milla and I think he's brilliant. His special view and the way he use to tell us the story is unique. I've bought this DVDs on Amazon and my vote is 10! I've appreciated the costumes and the locations were amazing. This title is a good way for a light and funny evening at home. I'll planning the next vacation to this movie's location. I'd like a story and the editing. I've seen this movie the first time during the Monrovia film festival and the critics were enthusiastic! I think you should watch this movie. And I hope you enjoy it.

Obviously this is a B movie but the story-line is written really well and the performance was good! For all of those who wrote bad feedback I have something to say: Please go back to school and study, first study about geology, geography and after history ;) So, the wolf in the beginning doesn't make sense? You know wolfs were used exactly for that purpose, alert! Like many other small details in this film. But there is something else to say. From my experience some of the feedback sound like somebody which didn't agree with something, maybe actors that were not hired for this movie or the worst scenario, somebody against the crew. The film industry is full of flakes. Enjoy!

Usually I try to get track of all new releases about middle-age films. I came across IMDb from another website and reading the negative rating I was almost falling out with the idea of watching this. So, what is wrong with you guys? I really liked this film and it was made really well. HEY? Middle-age is not fantasy and is not the Pirates of the Caribbean, I think you guys have some issues with ages and historical geo-localization. Do you think that in the 1100 DC as a guardian of a castle there was a navy troop?

Good luck with your envy, and next time you can't get a movie because your limited budget don't come on IMDb to revenge your anger, you are delusional and cheap businessmen.