Richard the Lionheart

If the Italian review has any validity, Malcolm McDowell got most of the money spent on this thing. And if he read the script beforehand, he could ONLY be doing it for the money....

The Introductory Sequence made absolutely no sense & everything went downhill from there. I think monkeys wrote the script & a couple humans put their name on it. The last scene has some basis in History but nothing that came before it does.

Loved the Druidess, although I think she had about 90 seconds of total screen time.

I have a serious soft spot for bad movies, but this was just painful.

I am afraid, this particular movie has been utterly forgotten by Yours Truly. We forget movies for a variety of reasons, including of course limitations in how our brains store and retrieve information, time passage and distractions. In the case of mediocre films, forgetting can actually be a beneficial process, helping us focus on what's really important as far as the só called Seventh Art is concerned. There are also other factors: (1) Age: Some age-related memory decline is quite normal. (2) Stress and Sleep can also affect memory and recall. (3) Certain medications can have side effects that impact memory.

Absolutely horrible...Didn't want to feel like I wasted my money (any more than I already did)renting it so I fast forwarded through most of it to just watch it. Bad acting would be kind to it, barely even loosely based on Richard, even the love scenes were horrible. Couldn't follow the plot, as much as it could be called that, and the sound was horrible, so it was tough to make out what they were saying...or maybe it was just the dialogue was that boring and pointless.My $1.20 was wasted...They tried and failed to gain gravitas with MacDowell, and why were the Romans in this at all? I've never seen Rome or Caesar connected in any way to Any Lionheart legend...

Don't waste your time on this movie. I wish I'd checked it out, I could have watched paint dry for two hours and been more entertained.

There is nothing which can describe how bad this film is. If you are a student of film making you should watch this film and learn from it how not to make a film, which could hurt you in the future. If you make a film like this you might never have an opportunity to make a film again.

Plot: What is it? I carefully watched it and could not figure it out. Since I read the other reviews I still was not sure what the plot is. So, nonexistent plot. I do not get to see many of those.

Acting was that bad that future actors should carefully examine these non acting and try to do it differently. They might be successful actors if the do not act as these people. What is wrong with them? Is that some psychiatric ward trying to do something with its patients? This is a must see! Not!

If there is only one small redeeming quality about Richard: The Lionheart, it's that they did get Henry II's sons' names right, the only bit of history in the movie that's accurate. Other than that, the low-budget shows in some of the cheapest and most vague costumes and sets there's been for any low-budget movie, the modified night-gowns comparison for the costumes is pretty apt and from the way the movie looks it is not clear what the setting is. The special effects never rise above crude standard and the sound constantly sounds as if it was recorded in an over-reverberant bathroom, which is really jarring. The music is the opposite of rousing, instead it's monotonous and sounds like a very, very pale imitation of Hans Zimmer in places. The dialogue sounds stilted and underwritten(especially in the very clunkily-written romance scenes), with a lot of the line delivery being very awkward, plus it has a weird mix of archaic and contemporary so you never feel as though you've been transported to the era of the Plantagenets. Richard: The Lionheart is flatly directed throughout that has the word inexperience all over it, and has uniformly bad performances from a largely unknown cast, most of them under-acting to the point of not looking as if they want to be there. Even worse is that the movie also wastes Malcolm McDowell who on paper seemed perfect and would elevate, but his performance is a mix of over-compensating and sleepwalking through and not helped by being hampered by having little to work with. The story is the biggest failing, it is often very difficult to follow, some scenes drag on for far too long and uses plot devices so overused already that it becomes very predictable as well. The action sequences are incredibly lazy, both in pace(like being in slow-motion) and choreography, school playground fights are honestly far more believable. In conclusion, just horrible in all areas, apart from that one historical accuracy, and unforgivably wastes McDowell. 1/10 Bethany Cox