CALIFICACIÓN DE IMDb
5.2/10
677
TU CALIFICACIÓN
Un grupo encuentra una nave extraterrestre y su piloto. Con tecnología avanzada, intentan llegar a Jerusalén, pero terminan en un planeta alienígena donde causarán un caos medieval.Un grupo encuentra una nave extraterrestre y su piloto. Con tecnología avanzada, intentan llegar a Jerusalén, pero terminan en un planeta alienígena donde causarán un caos medieval.Un grupo encuentra una nave extraterrestre y su piloto. Con tecnología avanzada, intentan llegar a Jerusalén, pero terminan en un planeta alienígena donde causarán un caos medieval.
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Elenco
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Todo el elenco y el equipo
- Producción, taquilla y más en IMDbPro
Opiniones destacadas
Poul Anderson's book "The High Crusade" is an enormous milestone in the rare genre of historic alien invasions, a true work of fine penmanship, and this movie doesn't hold a candle to it.
In all honesty though, alien invasion movies, and historical realism movies generally require huge budgets to be done "right" by Hollywood standards, and combining the two sounds to me like a movie maker's nightmare. While it would be great to see the original book done justice, the budget needed for an epic battle between knights and aliens isn't likely to be forthcoming.
The movie version of the high crusade sticks with the original premise, but due to the restrictions of a very tight budget, it was necessary to scale everything back. The special effects are sparing, the sets are repetitive, the script is a little worn around the edges, and the actors are, for the most part, not huge names.
All things considered, the movie does especially well for what it has. The slick, smart humor of Poul Anderson is cut out to make room for a lot of silly European humor, but thankfully, it all works great. Certainly, there are not a lot of surprises, but the gist remains funny, and it is the first movie I've seen my boorish father laugh at in over five years, which has to say something.
Also, the movie is pretty clean. The worst language is the repetitive use of "bloody," "bastards," "Hell," and "Devil's." The bloodiest wound in the movie is a bump on the head. Two battle scenes, and a severed leg don't spill a drop though. A certain amount of reproductive humor adds a bit of spice to the movie, but this is done in as tasteful a manner as the matterial can be done.
Certainly, a lot was lost from the book, but the movie that is left makes for several good laughs, and memorable one-liners.
In all honesty though, alien invasion movies, and historical realism movies generally require huge budgets to be done "right" by Hollywood standards, and combining the two sounds to me like a movie maker's nightmare. While it would be great to see the original book done justice, the budget needed for an epic battle between knights and aliens isn't likely to be forthcoming.
The movie version of the high crusade sticks with the original premise, but due to the restrictions of a very tight budget, it was necessary to scale everything back. The special effects are sparing, the sets are repetitive, the script is a little worn around the edges, and the actors are, for the most part, not huge names.
All things considered, the movie does especially well for what it has. The slick, smart humor of Poul Anderson is cut out to make room for a lot of silly European humor, but thankfully, it all works great. Certainly, there are not a lot of surprises, but the gist remains funny, and it is the first movie I've seen my boorish father laugh at in over five years, which has to say something.
Also, the movie is pretty clean. The worst language is the repetitive use of "bloody," "bastards," "Hell," and "Devil's." The bloodiest wound in the movie is a bump on the head. Two battle scenes, and a severed leg don't spill a drop though. A certain amount of reproductive humor adds a bit of spice to the movie, but this is done in as tasteful a manner as the matterial can be done.
Certainly, a lot was lost from the book, but the movie that is left makes for several good laughs, and memorable one-liners.
A mildly amusing film. And I do put an emphasis in the word "mildly". It doesn't go further than that.
You get farcical treatments of cliche subject matter. The wide feels underappreciated, the barbarians just want to pillage, the advanced aliens try to explain basic scientific knowledge to medieval idiots, etc. And of course everything gets wrapped up in a quick and tidy happy ending.
It's a bunch of tripe capped off with an insufferable final tracked that puts quotes from the movie to an ugly techno beat.
The original book was a bit farcical and silly in its own right, but it had ambiance and an intriguing concept. It had runaway ambition and intrigue and sincere portrayals of betrayal, romantic and otherwise. This film doesn't amount to even a fraction of what the book was and in no way deserves to bear its name.
Honourable Mentions: The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1996). Probably the darkest of the Disney movies. Turns a serious novel into a musical with comedy elements. It wasn't bad, though.
You get farcical treatments of cliche subject matter. The wide feels underappreciated, the barbarians just want to pillage, the advanced aliens try to explain basic scientific knowledge to medieval idiots, etc. And of course everything gets wrapped up in a quick and tidy happy ending.
It's a bunch of tripe capped off with an insufferable final tracked that puts quotes from the movie to an ugly techno beat.
The original book was a bit farcical and silly in its own right, but it had ambiance and an intriguing concept. It had runaway ambition and intrigue and sincere portrayals of betrayal, romantic and otherwise. This film doesn't amount to even a fraction of what the book was and in no way deserves to bear its name.
Honourable Mentions: The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1996). Probably the darkest of the Disney movies. Turns a serious novel into a musical with comedy elements. It wasn't bad, though.
Rented it because of the book. Enjoyed it for it's own Pythonesque humor.
It's not a serious movie and it doesn't take itself seriously, nor are the actors all that good. Nonetheless, it takes a very light-hearted approach that is fun if you are in the right mood. My 15-yr old son and I laughed and laughed, my wife left the room.
Did you enjoy Time Bandits (especially the scene with Robin Hood?) How about Monty Python's Holy Grail (especially the scene with the rabbit?) If yes, give it a try; if not, you've been warned. As my son says, "It's so random!!" However, from him, this is something close to praise.
For what it is, the production values are pretty good and the jokes (especially in the subtitles) are frequent. Others criticize it for not being what they wished it were. Yes, there could be a much different movie made that takes Pohl Anderson's book more seriously. It could be the basis of a good series of the SciFi Channel. But if you can take THIS movie as it is and put aside thoughts of the OTHER movie you might wish it were, you can have some fun.
That's how it looks from here.
It's not a serious movie and it doesn't take itself seriously, nor are the actors all that good. Nonetheless, it takes a very light-hearted approach that is fun if you are in the right mood. My 15-yr old son and I laughed and laughed, my wife left the room.
Did you enjoy Time Bandits (especially the scene with Robin Hood?) How about Monty Python's Holy Grail (especially the scene with the rabbit?) If yes, give it a try; if not, you've been warned. As my son says, "It's so random!!" However, from him, this is something close to praise.
For what it is, the production values are pretty good and the jokes (especially in the subtitles) are frequent. Others criticize it for not being what they wished it were. Yes, there could be a much different movie made that takes Pohl Anderson's book more seriously. It could be the basis of a good series of the SciFi Channel. But if you can take THIS movie as it is and put aside thoughts of the OTHER movie you might wish it were, you can have some fun.
That's how it looks from here.
A very bizarre movie but highly amusing, at least it was years ago, when I watched it on video. Back then, all the aliens had comedy Sean Connery accents which the English could not understand. All very high camp and kind of stupid, but definitely amusing. However, when I watched it recently on DVD, all the Aliens spoke alien gibberish which subsequently required subtitles. This lost a massive amount of the comedy value of the original version. It seems a shame that the directors or whoever, would mess with the original format when the end result is vastly less entertaining. The acting is still pretty good (for such a daft film) as are the effects. I guess the budget was pretty low but it doesn't show as much as you might expect. Certainly it has a better production values than so called "B movie classics" such as Spaceballs. For those who've read the book and are now complaining that the film is not the same, hard luck, get over it. As a movie, it was pretty good (originally).
Poul Anderson had done all the screenwriters' work for them. With a solid historical backbone, subtle wit, and an engaging story, his novel was enough to relegate the writing of the script to a fill-in-the-blank exercise. Instead, the movie emerges as a pale ripoff of MONTY PYTHON AND THE HOLY GRAIL, yet with even more historical inaccuracies (HIGH CRUSADE has Jerusalem falling to Saracens in 1345, not 1187, and even has a trio of Saracens attacking a keep in England!)
The dialogue does flirt with intelligence, as when John Rhys-Davies's character, Brother Parvus, insistently tries to "educate" spacefaring aliens about the Holy Trinity and geocentric cosmology, but ultimately it's just a tease. Things quickly descend into weak farce, and some devices, such as the aliens' construction of an evil human clone, are pure throwaway filler.
I sure hope Poul Anderson never saw this film. My fear is that he would never sell film rights for one of his excellent books again, which would be a shame, since in the right hands some fine movies could be produced.
The dialogue does flirt with intelligence, as when John Rhys-Davies's character, Brother Parvus, insistently tries to "educate" spacefaring aliens about the Holy Trinity and geocentric cosmology, but ultimately it's just a tease. Things quickly descend into weak farce, and some devices, such as the aliens' construction of an evil human clone, are pure throwaway filler.
I sure hope Poul Anderson never saw this film. My fear is that he would never sell film rights for one of his excellent books again, which would be a shame, since in the right hands some fine movies could be produced.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaThere were two different versions of the film made. Version one: The aliens mostly speak in an alien language, with subtitles. There is one alien that speaks English, but it is a lifeless dialogue, with an equally dull voice. Version two: Same version as above, in terms of video. But the alien subtitles and dialogue have been completely removed, along with their dull voices. It has been re-dubbed with a silly Monty Python styled English dialogue, and just as silly voice actors. Who are extremely funny, the alternate audio transforming the movie completely.
- Créditos curiososAs the credits roll, a remixed song featuring funny quotes from the movie plays.
- ConexionesReferenced in Der Freund meiner Mutter (2002)
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is The High Crusade?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta
Principales brechas de datos
What is the English language plot outline for La Alta Cruzada (1994)?
Responda