La spada della vendetta

The basic problem - what you expect ?. You know the recipe and the ingredients. You know the basic lines of story and the characters. And you know that nothing is real high or memorable. The basic problem of this film- the desire to be more than gives its possibilities. The recipe is clear and nothing surprising can be. History as pretext, dark landscapes, dark hero, fights and fights, few drops of love story. Seems enough. But the desire to say all seems the not very inspired option.

In 1066, William the Conquerer defeated the Saxons at the Battle of Hastings. After the battle, a brutal campaign of subjugation descended upon the Saxon people known as The Harrowing. Earl Durant slaughters 100,000 Saxons and rules The North with his sons Lord Artus and Lord Romain. Shadow Walker (Stanley Weber) is an avenging warrior. He is joined by Anna (Annabelle Wallis) and her surviving people.

The brooding violence is interesting. The plot, such as there is one, is a slow muddle. Dialog is sparse. In the end, there is little more than the brooding style and a bit of violence. Even the action lacks kinetic intensity. It's a lower budget production in eastern Europe and it doesn't have the grand size. The moody atmosphere is not enough.

This is a perfect example of style over substance. Visually it's incredibly good, but the absence of a story, let alone a script is baffling. How the hell are we (the viewer) supposed to make head nor tail of it, when both the actors, and the director haven't got a scooby doo. Can we blame it on the editor!!! 🤔

Just about worth a watch on a rainy afternoon, but don't get your hopes up. Very limited characterisation, sparse and rather hammy dialogue, so the only aspects that saves this production from media oblivion is that the fight scenes are well-orchestrated, the special effects good, and the cinematography is well done. Very much a mediaeval take on the spaghetti western/ samurai movie genre, in which, like Clint, the hero often wears a cape and says little or nothing throughout the film. Glad I was able to watch this for free on Amazon prime, as I certainly wouldn't have wanted to pay good money for a viewing.

I remember watching Hammer of the Gods and liking the beginning, then getting disappointed by the ending, so I started watching Sword of Vengeance with apprehension. It was a good idea, because it is kind of the same.

The bleak and desolate landscape, the silent warrior, the tyranny of the Normans over the Saxons, I bought it all. It again gave hope of something really good. Unfortunately the plot was a mess. I am not going to explain it here, but let me just say that warrior should have remained silent.

I also researched the characters and I couldn't find anything historical related to the story. The only real thing is the Harrying of the North where a single source describes the death of 100000 Saxons at the hand of William the Conqueror, but it is unclear how he could have achieved this with the resources he had.

Bottom line: they got the feel right, but they should have worked a lot more on the story and character development. It is a better done movie than Hammer of the Gods, I think, but that movie may have been better overall just because I remember it and this film I will forget after writing this review.