Northeast of Seoul

This is a rhetorical question, of course; I know that "Northeast Of Seoul" isn't part of any trilogy. But it feels as it if it could (or should) have been: the first movie would have introduced the three central characters more properly and explain how they ended up working together, and the third movie would chronicle their obviously intended caper to steal the priceless ancient sword which they were looking for throughout the movie, and which (in a smartly ironic twist) turned out to be right before their eyes the whole time. As it is, Victor Buono, Anita Ekberg and John Ireland make an enjoyably offbeat team of middle-aged adventurers, but it's hard to care much about their characters when so much of their (shared) backstory is only hinted at, and the film ends just when it is getting at its most interesting. Maybe worth a look if you can find it, but is seems as if the filmmakers thought that by shooting on location in Korea, the film would automatically be exotic and exciting - they were only half right. ** out of 4.

Well, certainly not in the same class as the 1941 classic. But the basic plot is the same. Three foreigners, each an old hand in the region, are after a valuable ancient Korean sword. They change allegiances at dizzying speed, but basically cannot avoid each other as they tear around South Korea.

Some nice scenery and plenty of hamming it up. Pleasant, a little offbeat, but certainly no classic !