Nice waterfalls, not so much movie
STORMQUEST was made as part of a 10-movie deal by Roger Corman. The first (Deathstalker) used a big chunk of the budget, leaving the rest to scrape by on what was left, using largely the same sets and props (and sometimes even footage). Corman seems not to have had anything to do with this one however; his name isn't on it, and it lacks the previous entries' brisk editing (as well as the previously requisite toplessness). Perhaps he had given up on the intended drive-in market (which was rapidly disappearing in the 80s), because this was sent directly to video.
And it shows. "Direct-to-video" was synonymous with "not good enough to release in theaters", and STORMQUEST was (is?) certainly subpar. Actors deliver mostly subpar lines with subpar conviction, plots don't make much sense, outcomes are telegraphed, and no real drama (or comedy occurs), although we certainly get the idea. Apparently one person was hired to provide a soundtrack on synthesizers, which is sorta interesting in itself but sometimes a bit curious. This too suffers from the choppy editing, which frequently seems to cut a scene on a sloppy note, or a shot that doesn't have a clear purpose -- and at least once cuts off a soaring soundtrack cold, as if a commercial were cut out.
The actors are nice to look at but often cartoonish in motivation, and sometimes seem to be receiving their dialog line by line (which, being in English but filmed in Argentina, might actually be the case). Plot elements are rather skimpily used without much to hold it all together. Basically you're here to see young fit adults be scantily clothed, and there's some plot. Also a lioness, a snake and a couple tarantulas -- but then, if you like tarantulas, you may not like what happens to them.
On the other hand, the film makes use of a fantastic set of waterfalls, which are gorgeous, and feature extensively on the intro and end credits. Does this justify the whole movie? Well, no; although there is some interest for those who watch these movies as a series -- to see just how many movies can be made on the same sets without looking like it's all the same sets. Special mention for Dudu Mkhize who tries to bring dignity to her character, despite being thinly sketched.
And it shows. "Direct-to-video" was synonymous with "not good enough to release in theaters", and STORMQUEST was (is?) certainly subpar. Actors deliver mostly subpar lines with subpar conviction, plots don't make much sense, outcomes are telegraphed, and no real drama (or comedy occurs), although we certainly get the idea. Apparently one person was hired to provide a soundtrack on synthesizers, which is sorta interesting in itself but sometimes a bit curious. This too suffers from the choppy editing, which frequently seems to cut a scene on a sloppy note, or a shot that doesn't have a clear purpose -- and at least once cuts off a soaring soundtrack cold, as if a commercial were cut out.
The actors are nice to look at but often cartoonish in motivation, and sometimes seem to be receiving their dialog line by line (which, being in English but filmed in Argentina, might actually be the case). Plot elements are rather skimpily used without much to hold it all together. Basically you're here to see young fit adults be scantily clothed, and there's some plot. Also a lioness, a snake and a couple tarantulas -- but then, if you like tarantulas, you may not like what happens to them.
On the other hand, the film makes use of a fantastic set of waterfalls, which are gorgeous, and feature extensively on the intro and end credits. Does this justify the whole movie? Well, no; although there is some interest for those who watch these movies as a series -- to see just how many movies can be made on the same sets without looking like it's all the same sets. Special mention for Dudu Mkhize who tries to bring dignity to her character, despite being thinly sketched.
- skinnybert
- May 1, 2022