Description

based on the best-selling home video game, this action adventuretells of a group of expert fighters who compete in a dangerous tournament for the fate of mankind on a mysterious island. ... Read more

Reviews (111)

A silly film I find myself still enjoying.
I think some of the negative reviewers are taking this movie way too seriously. I actually saw this movie in the theatre because I ejoyed the video games(hey, i was just a 14 year old kid at the time). What's most surprising about it is that it has been translated from video game to cinematic format quite well, unlike other disasters such as Street Fighter, Double Dragon and Super Mario Brothers. As others have pointed out, the plot is rather thin, but at least it makes sense(unlike the dreadful sequel which i'll get to later) and follows the story from the video game just fine. While the actors don't deliver oscor caliber performances, they all play their characters quite convincingly. Ashby Linden(not a very well known actor) does a fantastic job as Johnny Cage with hilarous lines and that certain snirk Cage needs. He holds the film together and keeps it interesting/entertaining when there isn't a fight scene happening. Christopher Lambert is also good as Rayden, and believe me, I'm no Christopher Lambert fan beyond the Highlander movies. What truly makes this movie great is director Paul Anderson's attention to detail. He's clearly a fan of the games and it shows. Every set, as well as the outdoor shots are beautiful and well designed, the fights are quite impressive and the high energy techno-metal soundtrack is excellent. The CGI is also very good for the time(1995). One thing that's really disappointing is the lack of blood and gore that made the games so incredibly popular. There's virtually no blood in the movie in order keep a PG-13 rating. There's rarely any fatalities and the few that are in the movie are very tame. If you're expecting to see people have their hearts ripped out or their head and spine pulled out of their body, you should just go play the games instead. You aren't going to get that here. However, the characters, sets, music, fights etc. are very loyal to the games and save the movie. As I mentioned I saw the movie in the theatre and I've also seen it on video several times and recently on tv. I find it's still entertaining and holds up pretty well after 7 years. In many ways it's like an early Matrix, except the story isn't as good.

Like others have pointed out, the DVD release isn't too impressive. However, if you own a large screen tv and surround sound system it's definitely worth buying. The visual and audio aspects of the film will make it quite an enjoyable DVD experience. If you're home on a Saturday night with nothing to do, pop it in the player and crank the sound up. I think you'll find it quite exciting. Personally I think the movie is worth owning, but at least give it a rent sometime. Just don't take it too seriously and I think you'll find it to be a good action/martial arts/fantasy movie.

(...)

I understand they're putting together a third movie right now. I just hope for the sake of the fans of the video game and the first movie, that it's an improvement over MK: Annihilation. I can't imagine any movie being worse than that one, so hopefully they'll be able to improve on it and make a worthy sequel of the first movie even if it's just a straight to video release.

The Cheese Takes The Cake
This action/martial arts film should also be listed under comedy.
It is loaded with tons of sarcastic remarks, many of which Christopher Lambert adds in.

The whole movie plot is basically about a handful of people in training to save the world from a psychopathic, power-hungry emperor. The group of people includes the characters of g-man wannabe Sonya Blade, martial arts actor Johnny Cage, and Liu Kang, a former member of the Order Of Light Temple, or something like that.

These people are on the skeptical side and these are the reasons why: Sonya is out for revenge, Johnny is on an ego trip, and Liu thinks fighting in a tournament for the fate of the world is nonsense, and he only wants to fight so he can find his brother's killer.

As I said before, the cheesey lines are what's best about the movie, unless you happen to be a fan of Christopher Lambert, then that's the other main reason to watch Mortal Kombat.

although not always true if you watch a movie with cheesey lines and at least one good looking actor it should be good.

how ever it is NOT always the case.

this movie is great
if u are a kung foo fan like me u should get this movie it is so fun to watch ive probly watched it more then any other movie besides star wars empire. it has every person from the first game in the movie. including my favorite charector reptile. he rules but what i hated was he never used a special attack when he was in his ninja form. but he did use the poison spray in lui kangs eyes once and he was invisible as the lil lizard type form of himself. i cant wait till mortal kombat deception comes out that game is gonna be awesome and you should all buy it because deadly alliance was awesome and it uses the same type of fighting as that game and it includes new modes of fighting...online play...a new cool story mode...and new charectors but the problem is reptile wont be in it. when u beat deadly alliance with reptile it says a roaring beam of light enters his body and twists and transforms him the dragon king has returned...does this mean he turned into the dragon king of the the dragon king killed him? because it would explaine how he evolved so many times...oh yea and if your mad i didnt talk about the movie enough cry me a river.

Best movie based on a videogame
Mortal Kombat is probably my favorite fighter out there. It's been around for more than a decade and just got better and better through the years. The movie may loosely be based on the game, but many characters from the game are present, including Liu Kang, Johnny Cage, Kano, Raiden, Sonya Blade, Sub Zero, Scorpion, Reptile, Goro, Shang Tsung, and Jax. All of them are true to their fighting style in the video game. Liu Kang has his trademark special kicks, Johnny Cage pulls off his nut punch, and, best of all, Scorpion's got his spear attack. Movies based on games are generally weak and get a lame score in the B.O., but this was the opposite.

Sure, it's kinda corny, but it's older than people realize. It came out in 1995, and the series was pretty young then, as was the use of computer generated technology. Nowadays, the C.G. enhancements would make the movie even more spectacular, but thems the brakes. Anyways, if you are a fan of the franchise (I have been since age 7), check it out.

The most badass movie ever
This movie rules. It has almost every aspect of awesomeness in it. Badass fighting, badass ninja's, badass soundtrack, badass Christopher Lambert. BAD-ASS! If you didn't like this movie, then 'what the hell?' How could you be such an idiot? Go punch yourself in the groin for being so stupid. ... Read more

Reviews (4)

Chris isn't the problem !!
Hey now everybody just listen up!! Chris wasn't the let-down this film, He's an excellent actor !! It was just the storyline that needed some work doing to it

Good Actor Not Okay Movie
Chris is a very good actor but this was not the role from him. To say that he is a poor actor is not fair if you have seen Greystoke of Highlander. If he was a poor actor he would not make as many movies. They sell a lot overseas. This role was just okay not great. He is much better in suspense and action.

If only Christopher Lambert wasn't in it.
Christopher Lambert is the worst actor I have ever seen. He is completly unnatural in movies, and worst yet he can't even muster movie chemistry with his then wife Diane Lane. She always proves to give wonderful performances, but even she couldn't make poor ol' Chris relax. The plot could have been better, the movie is kind of blah,but with only one real actor (Lane) not much can be expected.

OLD OLD story, re-hashed. Good try for director Finch.
Lambert (At the time anyway)needed to learn to relax and be himself in front of the camera. Lane on the other hand a consumate professwional did a crediclb ejob but couldn't rise above the material. Best performances were by J.C. Quinn(Whom we don't see enough of on the silver screen) and another actor whose name I can't recall except that his first name was Joaquin. Also in the credits you neglected to mention the son of Anthony quinn (Francesco). Finch(A multi-talented man) had a VERY limited budget to work with, a difficult fantasy to try & pull off and he also tried pushing the envelope a little using some blue screen work that I don't think he ever used. Plus, shooting in Rome is a little difficult. Everything has to be translated (And we know how much is lost when that happens). Carpenters and other workers are hammering and yelling when you are on a sound stage shooting a scene(They figure, what the hell, it's only going to be dubbed anyway). Now as much as I usually dread a 14 or 15 hour shoot back here in the good ole' USA in Italy(France also) they only shoot an 8 hour day, plus when you go through the catering truk for lunch they serve you a bottle of red wine with your lunch. Who the hll feels like working very hard after that. So, even though I wasn't knocked out by the film, having been involved with it from it's(almost) inception when we were going to shoot it in Mexico for a much smaller budget with Judd Nelson I must give Charles Finch (who happens to be the son of the late-great actor Peter Finch) a bit of praise for pulling this movie off, raising the money, getting it shot, edited and released. My hats off to him, it was a hard sell project to begin with. I assure you we will in the future see some wonderful films come out of him. Thak you very much-------J.C. Quinn e-mail: deweydavis@aol.com ... Read more

Reviews (4)

B-Action Starring Lambert and Kerry Fox ("Shallow Grave")
Just another B-action flick starring Christopher Lambert. I didn't expect much, but some names on the cover interested me; they were co-starring Kerry Fox ("Shallow Grave" and "Intimacy"), and the director John Glen, who is behind the camera of James Bond films made in the 1980s (from "For Your Eyes Only" to "Licence to Kill"). Not that I mean his works are great -- Roger Moore played Bond at that time, and good as he was, the actions were not particulary great. But Kerry Fox is another matter.

The result is just what I expected, and I don't blame anybody for spending 90 minutes on my life for this ... one. Lambert is a kind of member of secret team who seem to deal with assassination of terrorists. But the team, though apparently successful in killing the target, made a botched job afterwards, losing some of the members, and then they are forced to disband themselves. However, Christopher Lambert's character is not convinced that their target is dead, and the ex-members of his team, now hiding with another identity, get bumped off one after another.

The story is so-so, and the acting is not bad. Kerry Fox is called even fabulous among them, raising the below-average action flick to a little higher place. But the cheap action scenes and tedious development of story kill every good thing in the film. The relation between Lambert and Fox -- they were once lovers, and Fox is pregnant even though she is hired by the secret agency -- is very interesting, but the film throws away any potential thrills coming from the characters so easily that I wondered how the original book deals with those elements. Perhaps, the original book (which I haven't seen) is better than this film.

Christopher Lambert made a satisfactory films in the past, like "Knight Moves" and others, but around the time of "Highlander 2" or "The Hunted", I began to lose interest in his films, and I'm sorry to say this, but things don't change after watching this awful flick. This film is far better than "Fortress 2", but like Pam Grier in that dreadful film, Kerry Fox is wasted.

Lambert really can act...
If you are a Lambert fan (like me), then you'll be surprised by his performance in this movie. It ranks up with Mortal Kombat in films he actually pulls off well.

However, if you're looking for a good story, stick with Highlander.

"I might be stupid, but I'm not crazy"
Fans of Christopher Lambert will be willing to see any movie he is in, regardless of the apparent quality of the feature. If you are not a fanatic of his films, more likely than not you might remember him from the Highlander moviess, his most mainstream work. The rest of us know him from such B grade action thrillers as Resurrection, Gunmen, Knight Moves, and Beowulf. Fear not, as The Point Men has a much higher quality level than most of his features, and this can be likely attributed to having a seasoned director such as John Glen at the helm. The story itself is nothing new; in fact it has been done so many times one has to wonder if there are any new paths one could take with it anymore. Think of how many films you have seen about an elite team working for a government doing things that no one would ever want to know about. Yet these films continue to be made because the formula, though worn, can still produce an entertaining feature given the right direction and stars. Also, the script makes an effort, albeit a small one, to not lay everything out in the open right away, and instead let it come out in layers.

There are some elements of the story that keep this one down, and they do so because they simply make no sense. With B grade films, even higher quality ones such as this, you do need to let things go, but in this case, several of them are difficult. Such as the fact that it is never really explained who the person was in the beginning who they all thought was the real Amar. Then there is the ease in which Amar travels to one country one day and back the next before sundown. If you can manage to let that and a few other tiny flubs go, it is easy sailing, and if you then consider other Lambert films, it gets even easier. The problems are simple sloppiness, perhaps laziness in not wanting to explain something and just pushing the story along instead.

Christopher Lambert here is, well, Christopher Lambert, and just about the same as he is in any movie on a more toned down level. He is a lot more restrained here, which suits his character very well. It is Vincent Regan who plays the evil Amar that is given the over the top role to play this time, and he does so with much glee. While in the beginning he came off a little on the goofy side, when his true motivations are put out into the open, he does manage to become much more menacing. Also, Regan is great in Amar's many attempts to change his personality to get closer to people in order to eventually kill them. This is one of the best aspects to the movie: a villain who seems capable of doing the things he does. All to often in these kinds of movies (such as the ultimate villain in Ronin being a disappointment) the villain is weak or turns out to be a disappointment. Kerry Fox (from Shallow Grave), who plays Lambert's love interest and fellow agent, Maddy, is also very good in her role as a seasoned veteran of her craft.

Essentially, as it has already been stated, if you are a fan of the "Christopher Lambert Genre" then you must rent this one as soon as possible. If you are just getting into his movies, this is a good one to start off with to ease yourself into it gently.

Subpar, hasty adaptation of a decent novel
The Heat of Ramadan, Steven Hartov's first novel, deserved a better film adaptation than this low budget, poorly edited disappointment. The plot was very promising and you could sense the potential. Perhaps veteran action film director John Glen (The Wild Geese, The Spy Who Loved Me, Moonraker) ran short of time, money, or talent.

For a better film on international terrorism, try instead The Little Drummer Girl, directed by George Roy Hill in 1984 and based on the novel by John Le Carre. ... Read more

Reviews (249)

"It's a kind of magic"
This movie is a real gem. I don't really understand why critics were so hard on it, much less do I understand why a few people here are insulting the movie itself (I know the DVD transfer was bad, so I relate to those people) or why the movie was so cheap, then again, the quality of the transfer of this movie would explain it. But this movie is excellent in all aspects. It's unique, and it unfortunately has had its glory destroyed by lousy sequels and TERRIBLE TV shows.

In terms of the acting, contrary to what other people claim here, Christopher Lambert's performance is first rate, and I think it a shame that he has subsequently appeared mostly in bad 1 1/2 star flicks and hasn't since had a real breakthrough in movies. Sean Connery adds real style to the movie with his acting, but it's a shame that he's in there for such a short time. Clancy Brown is as sinister as ever as Kurgan.

The visuals and effects are great by any standard and the swordfighting scenes are excellent

And WHO could possibly diss the rocking musical score by Queen? With such a strong opening theme ("Princes of the Universe") a truly emotional ballad ("Who Wants to Live Forever") and their smash hit single ("A Kind of Magic") just to name a few, you can't go wrong. If you learned about this movie just by being a Queen fan, and first watched the movie out of interest in their score (my situation), you're in for a real treat.

To fans of this movie who were disappointed by the latest transfer, My only suggestion is to wait a while for the Highlander Immortal Edition which will be released April 16, 2002. It promises better sound and picture quality, the uncensored Director's Cut, Commentary, and plenty of Queen material including music videos to their songs from this movie which are musical and visual masterpieces (I've seen them). Plus it's in anamorphic widescreen format, and anamorphic seems like a good way to go especially for a movie like this.

In any case, this movie is a winner and magic in it's strongest form. There can be only one.

There can be only one!
The wait is almost over! The first (and the best, as rated by most) movie in the Highlander saga is about to be released as a 2-disc set with completely new Dolby Digital and DTS audio mix and a much better video transfer. The previous DVD versions of the movie lacked the audio-visual quality, most dvd fans crave for. In fact, in my opinion the movie really deserved a good audio mix, for it is packed with some great music by Queen and I hope the new version contains an isolated music track as well!

The Immortal Edition will be packaged in a limited edition tin box, a feature Anchor Bay Entertainment is known for. With a second disc full of extras, this edition is a release no Highlander fan should miss.

"There can be only one", and it seems this is THE ONE!!

Enthralling Nonsense
That's about the only way to describe "Highlander." It's a B-movie in every sense yet has enough good in it to make it entertaining to watch. I guess that's why it became such a cult classic.

The story centers on a young Scotsman named Connor MacLeod who resides in New York City under a different name. Connor is actually one of the few men on Earth who have the special gift of immortality. These immortals can be killed if beheaded by another immortal and throughout the ages these elect men have been hunting each other down in the hopes of becoming the last immortal on Earth, which would give him a gift of high enlightenment, a gift that can be dangerous if in the wrong hands. Connor is on the run from an immortal goon, the Kurgan, who has been after him since the 1500's. It eventually comes down to Connor and the Kurgan as to who will be the one that receives the special gift.

Something that certainly doesn't work in favor of "Highlander"(and helps make it B-grade) is the fact that the movie has not aged very well. Compared to the action movies of today, this flick looks corny. The special effects are pretty cheesy and the whole production design feels outdated. The acting was, for the most part, not too memorable. Christopher Lambert doesn't do a good enough job of making his character of Connor MacLeod engaging. He makes for rather uninteresting hero. There were only two noteable performances I saw here. One was Sean Connery, who makes a nice little impression playing Ramirez, the man who first tutors Connor when he discovers that he's an immortal. But Connery only gets about 20 minutes of screen time and this hinders him from making a bigger impact. The other standout I saw was Clancy Brown, who plays the Kurgan. Brown makes his character the perfect bad guy giving him the "qualities" of vile, mean, and creepy. In short, he's a guy you wouldn't want to meet in a dark alley. I have to say that "Highlander" has quite an interesting concept. The idea of immortals hunting each other down to gain an ultimate power is nifty (if somewhat hokey) and director Russel Mulcahy executes it just well enough to make things entertaining, with the swordfights between the immortals becoming the highlight points.

Overall, I really can't say "Highlander" is a great film but at the same time, I can't dissuade you from seeing it either. Who knows? You, like many others, may have that "kind of magic" that will turn you on to this cult classic. The only way to know is to check it out and see what happens.

High level action and fantasy.
HIGHLANDER was undoubtedly among the best of the medieval/fantasy/Dungeons and Dragons sort of movies that proliferated in the 1980s. The choice of the brooding Christopher Lambert was perfect for the part of the Highlander, Conner MacLeod. There is a quiet intensity to his acting, and it works well here. Sean Connery, as his mentor and fellow-immortal, Ramirez strikes just the right balance of swashbuckling and seriousness. His acting is perfect. (So what else is new?)

For me, however, Clancy Brown's Kurgan steals the film. His physical features and bug-eyed grin are dead perfect! And his way over-the-top performance, at times, makes you a little afraid of his character, but he makes you laugh, as well. The confrontation between Kurgan and Conner in a church is a great balance of wit and tension.

The battles in Scotland, at the beginning of the film, and the mayhem in the streets of New York City at the end are priceless. My favorite moment: Kurgan steals a car and takes Conner's love interest for a ride. As he careens through the potholes and traffic, he quietly sings "New York, New York". Now I know where all our cabdrivers take their lessons from. HIGHLANDER is a great piece of quality mind candy that actually tackles some deep issues.

CLASSIC
This is a classic we should all have it ... Read more

Reviews (32)

Greystoke - The Legend of Tarzan, Lord of the Apes
I felt the film gave an adequate portrail of the book written by E.R. Boroughs. Christopher Lambert depicted Tarzan as one would imagine a human growing up in the jungle. His french accent gave credence to the original story where Tarzan, was taught the spoken language of French by Lt. D'Arnut. The scene with the ape attacking and killing his family is not romanticised - It appears as a wild animal jealously defending his territory against intruders. Tarzan's relationship with the apes that raised him is touching and the jungle scenes are fantastic. As well as are Christopher Lambert's portrail of Tarzan's difficulties adapting to the restrictions of "civilized" society. The film takes a number of "artistic licenses" in numerous places - which is a shame as the original story would be easily depicted in flim. The acting was very good and the sets fantastic! Overall the film would be worth viewing as the story moves fast enough to keep your interest, and it [film] will make you re-think who is really the savage beasts - man or animal (who is living by the most basic laws of nature - driven by survival and not greed)?

AT LONG LAST!!!!! But What About The Special Features?
GREYSTOKE is without a doubt the best Tarzan movie ever made (though I must admit, the Disney version came pretty close). Not only is it the most loyal to Edgar Rice Burrough's original novel, but it's the only adaptation to contain real drama. GREYSTOKE has an epic scope and musical score, and a cast of fine actors, including Sir Ian Holm, Sir Ralph Richardson, Andie MacDowell (though she was dubbed over by Glenn Close), and Christopher Lambert in his very first movie, and what a way to start! With his eyes alone, he expresses an emotion that many actors can't even muster with their entire bodies. Add to that some of Rick Baker's best make-up work ever, and you've got yourself a doozie of a movie. In short, GREYSTOKE is a classic, much neglected by modern viewers.

I have been waiting. And waiting. And waiting. But alas, this movie was no where to be found on the DVD format. Well, the long wait is finally over. Though I was hoping for a Two-Disc Special Edition release, this is goods enough. I just hope that it has SOME special features. Or, maybe they could just work on the movie and include a commentary track. For instance, they should definitely release the extended version available on VHS, and return Andie MacDowell's original voice track. And of course, give the movie a new digital transfer with Dolby Digital 5.1, or maybe even DTS!

Just having this movie on DVD will be good enough for me. That said, Warner had better not screw this one up!

A classic
Beautiful and touching story. Great images and good performances. One of the classics of the 80's.

Great Tarzan Movie
This simply has got to be one of the best Tarzan films ever made. Yet I can't help feeling that this Tarzan film is merely
a great prelude of what could have been a great series of more
Tarzan films. Christopher Lambert was excellent as Tarzan/John Clayton and Andie MacDowell looked beautiful as Jane (dubbed by
Glen Close). The scene of the jungle explorers traveling down
a African river via tramp steamer reminded me of Disney World's
Jungle Cruise ride exactly. Beautiful cinematography and Rick
Baker's ape effects were fantastic. This Tarzan film seems to take place around the late 1890s - early 1900s, so the attention
to period detail was very well done. So if jungle adventure and
romance is to your liking, check out this terrific film. Enjoy.

So Close...
"Greystoke - The Legend of Tarzan" could have been a classic. Lord John Clayton of Greystoke is shipwrecked in Africa with his pregnant wife. Shortly after she gives birth, they both die from an ape attack. One of the apes take little John, and raise him as her own. He grows up strong but wild and savage (now played by Christopher Lambert). One day he is happened upon by a French explorer. He is eventually returned to his family, but he finds it hard to fit in with "civilized" people. Along the way, he falls in love with Jane (played by Andie MacDowell, but her voice was dubbed by Glen Close, why they did this I'll never know?). It had a populor director (Hugh Hudson), an accomplished writer (Robert Towne), was beautifully photographed (especially in the jungles, it is just breathtaking) and based on one of the most populor books of the 20th century by Edgar Rice Burroughs. But it isn't that good. What happened? Well, the first hour or so there is no dialogue; but that is okay, because the physical expressions of the apes and Tarzan are pretty self explanatory. (By the way, he is never referred to as 'Tarzan'.) When he is 'rescued' and moved to England, nothing very adventurous happenes there. What happened to pirates coming out of the wood work trying to kidnap Jane? Where are the warriors from Opar? I'm sorry, "Greystoke" was pretty dull. The actors do ok, I guess. Ian Holm is alright, good in fact. Ralf Richardson looked like he was having a good time, and the relationship between he and his grandson rang pretty true. It is hard to tell if MacDowell was any good, with being dubbed over. But what about Tarzan? Christopher Lambert was actually good. I really liked his performance as the childlike savage. He played being in awe of the city wonderfully. He didn't talk a lot, but maybe that is a good thing. His acting tends to be a little wooden; in fact, in my opinion, he just happens to be in the right place at the right time, like this one and "Highlander". I read the novels and I think about how this movie could have been so much more. Still, it is a beautifully shot movie, and it dose play fair, so it is worth your time. If you can find it, watch the extended version, it is a little bit more action packed (loved how Tarzan took out the entire outpost!). ... Read more

Reviews (218)

As good as the 1st if not better
I had missed the chance to see the movie in the theatres so I spent half a year waiting for it to come out on DVD. As soon as it did, I went out and bought it. I had been watching the series for a while a few years ago up until cancellation, and now it plays re-runs on Sci-Fi Channel, and I try not to miss those. The series was always awesome and brought back the better feel of how and why the immortals were on Earth, not the alien BS that the second one brought about and the vague and pointless reasons a third movie was made...but End Game just basically brought Highlander back into "The Game" so to speak as far as a genre goes. You shouldn't have to watch the 2nd or 3rd movies to have to understand End Game, but the first movie is helpful...and some knowledge from the series as well. A must-have film for any sci-fi action fan and definitly for any Highlander fan. There can be only one...and this is it.

Highlander fans hate it, too; wonder what that says.
The Highlander series has always been catered to the fans, but even to them, this is as confusing as movies get. I'm hardly a follower of the series, but I have seen the movies (been a while since parts 2 and 3, memories of which don't serve me well at all) but I get the feeling watch those two wouldn't have made this any more comprehensible. As a matter of fact, doesn't each movie negate the one that came before it?

So what we have here is a tale of two immortals, Connor and Duncan MacLeod (Christopher Lambert and Adrian Paul), who apparently are out to stop an even more powerful and evil immortal (Bruce Payne) who holds a grudge against Connor. That's the basic premise, but getting into details would only be confusing, to me and whoever's reading this.

There are a LOT of subplots at work here, individual scenes that don't really seem to mesh with the main story, and if they do, they're never concluded satisfactorily. Example? How about when Connor is kept locked in a room with an iron mask covering his eyes; how exactly did he end up there and how did he even escape? What about those people who keep track of the immortal kills; who are they, how do they do it, and considering there are tons of rules these immortals have to follow in combat, how come these people never enforce the rules? For that matter, considering the evil Kell (the film's villain) isn't even following these rules, why shouldn't Connor and Duncan team up to take him down?

Those are only a few of the movie's numerous head-scratchers, suffice to say if this is the first and only Highlander movie you've seen, don't worry, I'm as every bit as confused as you are. The series never follows a singular mythology, which simply means if you watch the first film, each of the individual sequels plays as a follow-up to that film, and certainly not the one that came before it (i.e. part 2 sort of follows part 1, part 3 negates part 2 and follows part 1, part 4 negates part 3 and follows up to part 1).

But even that rule isn't completely sound. Even Highlander: The Quickening chose to negate much of what occurred in the first film, done in such blatant manners that you can't help but slap your forehead when you witness what a true mess this series became. If you've seen it, you know what I'm talking about; Connor and Ramirez are really from another planet called Zeist and they've known each other from then (which makes their "first" meeting in Scotland in the original film a headscratcher). I haven't even gotten to the fact that all these immortals are fighting to return to Zeist, even though they were banished there for being rebels (doesn't this mean they should all, I dunno, work together?) According to the Renegade version, immortals are from the past, which is still almost as mucked up.

But I digress, the point here is to review Endgame, and for what it is, it might please Highlander fans, if they prefer Paul to Lambert, as the former is the true star of the picture, and is highlighted in most of the action sequences. The action itself is relatively decent, the climactic swordfight could have been better filmed, but it's not like I was expecting a lot from the action in this movie in the first place.

When it comes to the series, I'm a casual open-minded viewer and what keeps me coming to each sequel is the hope that finally, someone will capitalize with the grand ideas at work. Instead, this quartet is mostly viewed as an embarrassment to sci-fi/fantasy/action filmmaking, an insult to lucid storytelling, and a spit in the face to those who enjoyed the first movie. I didn't absolutely hate Endgame, it's had enough watchable moments to keep my attention, but it's definitely a bad movie, and doesn't have the awe-inspiring kitsch value of The Quickening.

I have one more thing to complain about and that's the amount of effort put into marketing this picture. Obviously, Dimension films wanted to milk the series for all it was worth, but they actually gave us trailers that featured cool scenes that were never even meant to be in the film. Alternately, when we have a great sci-fi action film like Equilibrium left to die at the box office, I'm only further upset at what Dimension believes is or isn't worth marketing.
[one half out of five stars].

A perfect end to the Highlander saga
Now, I've read all the negative reviews and such, and I must say that if you are just looking for a good movie where you don't have to think much just enjoy or are looking forward to a good end to the Highlander Series, then this is a terrific movie. I am a fan of the first and third movies and the series, and as all Highlander fans know there are 3 seperate Highlander universes; Movie universe, Series universe, and Highlander 2 universe. The latter is total crap, but in the movie universe Connor MacLeod is the One, end of story. This latest installment takes place in the Series universe, of which Duncan is main man. Not only do the fight scenes kick a## but the story is interesting and the acting by Lambert and Paul is superb. They work so well together and really bring the relationship between the two MacLeods to life. Especially when the two Highlanders must come to there last resort against Jacob Kell. The movie universe ended years ago with Connor MacLeod winning the Prize. However, the series universe has continued and now is at its end, and it is a great ending for the series continuity. True, non-fans will be lost, but why would they wanna see it anyway? Forget all the stuff about it not being coherent or plot-less, bottom line is that its an entertaining movie and as perfect an ending to the series as I could think of. A great flick.

Worst Movie EVER
This movie is terrible. They completely ruin the character of Connor MacLeod. The villain is a total wimp who Connor or Duncan could've squashed like a bug. Nobody would be scared of that pencil neck!!! The story is choppy, the timeline is totally inconsistent, and the main characters act completely out of character. The makers of this film almost go out of they're way to be completely inconsistent with everything about this franchise. To be honest, the only thing they got right was the first movie. Part two was a joke, Final Dimension is above average, the TV series is very good but not plausible because CONNOR MACLEOD WON THE PRIZE AT THE END OF THE FIRST FILM!!!! Now there are thousands of immortals running around!
Really, this film is just like a long episode of the tv series only its not that good. This movie had so much potential but Davis and Panzer blew it. Once again the Highlander fans have not been taken serious. Once again the studios completely butchered what could've been a very good film.

Character Assassination
Reviewer: Lisa from Las Vegas, NV United States
I never watched the original movie or Highlander 2 or 3, but HELLO?!!! What were Christopher Lambert and Adrian Paul thinking in consenting to work on this movie? I'll take other reviewers' word on the butchering of Connor MacLeod's character, but I can attest to the butchering of Duncan's. Duncan MacLeod killing his wife? The boy raised to be clan chieftain, raised to protect those in his care, killed his wife? Duncan MacLeod married? Even though "Darkness" (season 2) specifically stated he never married and never would? Duncan asked Tessa (his lover of 13 years) to marry him in that same episode. Darn, if she hadn't died we could have added bigamist to his resume. How about "In the end there will be only one", yet Duncan and his immortal wife walk off at the end of the movie. So, is he going to kill her or allow her to kill him? I seem to remember other problems, but I have been trying to block this horrible movie from my memory and refuse to watch it ever again. I gave it one star because there wasn't any lesser option. ... Read more

Reviews (249)

"It's a kind of magic"
This movie is a real gem. I don't really understand why critics were so hard on it, much less do I understand why a few people here are insulting the movie itself (I know the DVD transfer was bad, so I relate to those people) or why the movie was so cheap, then again, the quality of the transfer of this movie would explain it. But this movie is excellent in all aspects. It's unique, and it unfortunately has had its glory destroyed by lousy sequels and TERRIBLE TV shows.

In terms of the acting, contrary to what other people claim here, Christopher Lambert's performance is first rate, and I think it a shame that he has subsequently appeared mostly in bad 1 1/2 star flicks and hasn't since had a real breakthrough in movies. Sean Connery adds real style to the movie with his acting, but it's a shame that he's in there for such a short time. Clancy Brown is as sinister as ever as Kurgan.

The visuals and effects are great by any standard and the swordfighting scenes are excellent

And WHO could possibly diss the rocking musical score by Queen? With such a strong opening theme ("Princes of the Universe") a truly emotional ballad ("Who Wants to Live Forever") and their smash hit single ("A Kind of Magic") just to name a few, you can't go wrong. If you learned about this movie just by being a Queen fan, and first watched the movie out of interest in their score (my situation), you're in for a real treat.

To fans of this movie who were disappointed by the latest transfer, My only suggestion is to wait a while for the Highlander Immortal Edition which will be released April 16, 2002. It promises better sound and picture quality, the uncensored Director's Cut, Commentary, and plenty of Queen material including music videos to their songs from this movie which are musical and visual masterpieces (I've seen them). Plus it's in anamorphic widescreen format, and anamorphic seems like a good way to go especially for a movie like this.

In any case, this movie is a winner and magic in it's strongest form. There can be only one.

There can be only one!
The wait is almost over! The first (and the best, as rated by most) movie in the Highlander saga is about to be released as a 2-disc set with completely new Dolby Digital and DTS audio mix and a much better video transfer. The previous DVD versions of the movie lacked the audio-visual quality, most dvd fans crave for. In fact, in my opinion the movie really deserved a good audio mix, for it is packed with some great music by Queen and I hope the new version contains an isolated music track as well!

The Immortal Edition will be packaged in a limited edition tin box, a feature Anchor Bay Entertainment is known for. With a second disc full of extras, this edition is a release no Highlander fan should miss.

"There can be only one", and it seems this is THE ONE!!

Enthralling Nonsense
That's about the only way to describe "Highlander." It's a B-movie in every sense yet has enough good in it to make it entertaining to watch. I guess that's why it became such a cult classic.

The story centers on a young Scotsman named Connor MacLeod who resides in New York City under a different name. Connor is actually one of the few men on Earth who have the special gift of immortality. These immortals can be killed if beheaded by another immortal and throughout the ages these elect men have been hunting each other down in the hopes of becoming the last immortal on Earth, which would give him a gift of high enlightenment, a gift that can be dangerous if in the wrong hands. Connor is on the run from an immortal goon, the Kurgan, who has been after him since the 1500's. It eventually comes down to Connor and the Kurgan as to who will be the one that receives the special gift.

Something that certainly doesn't work in favor of "Highlander"(and helps make it B-grade) is the fact that the movie has not aged very well. Compared to the action movies of today, this flick looks corny. The special effects are pretty cheesy and the whole production design feels outdated. The acting was, for the most part, not too memorable. Christopher Lambert doesn't do a good enough job of making his character of Connor MacLeod engaging. He makes for rather uninteresting hero. There were only two noteable performances I saw here. One was Sean Connery, who makes a nice little impression playing Ramirez, the man who first tutors Connor when he discovers that he's an immortal. But Connery only gets about 20 minutes of screen time and this hinders him from making a bigger impact. The other standout I saw was Clancy Brown, who plays the Kurgan. Brown makes his character the perfect bad guy giving him the "qualities" of vile, mean, and creepy. In short, he's a guy you wouldn't want to meet in a dark alley. I have to say that "Highlander" has quite an interesting concept. The idea of immortals hunting each other down to gain an ultimate power is nifty (if somewhat hokey) and director Russel Mulcahy executes it just well enough to make things entertaining, with the swordfights between the immortals becoming the highlight points.

Overall, I really can't say "Highlander" is a great film but at the same time, I can't dissuade you from seeing it either. Who knows? You, like many others, may have that "kind of magic" that will turn you on to this cult classic. The only way to know is to check it out and see what happens.

High level action and fantasy.
HIGHLANDER was undoubtedly among the best of the medieval/fantasy/Dungeons and Dragons sort of movies that proliferated in the 1980s. The choice of the brooding Christopher Lambert was perfect for the part of the Highlander, Conner MacLeod. There is a quiet intensity to his acting, and it works well here. Sean Connery, as his mentor and fellow-immortal, Ramirez strikes just the right balance of swashbuckling and seriousness. His acting is perfect. (So what else is new?)

For me, however, Clancy Brown's Kurgan steals the film. His physical features and bug-eyed grin are dead perfect! And his way over-the-top performance, at times, makes you a little afraid of his character, but he makes you laugh, as well. The confrontation between Kurgan and Conner in a church is a great balance of wit and tension.

The battles in Scotland, at the beginning of the film, and the mayhem in the streets of New York City at the end are priceless. My favorite moment: Kurgan steals a car and takes Conner's love interest for a ride. As he careens through the potholes and traffic, he quietly sings "New York, New York". Now I know where all our cabdrivers take their lessons from. HIGHLANDER is a great piece of quality mind candy that actually tackles some deep issues.

CLASSIC
This is a classic we should all have it ... Read more

Amazon.com

Theatrically released in 1991 as Highlander II: The Quickening, this sequel was later reedited and gained a small but loyal following (prompting a spinoff TV series), but at the time of its release critic Roger Ebert called it "the most hilariously incomprehensible movie ... almost awesome in its badness." In other words, you might find some guilty pleasure in this chaotic sequel to 1986's Highlander, in which Christopher Lambert reprises his role as Connor MacLeod, a member of the alien race known as "Immortals," banished to Earth from his home planet Zeist some 500 years ago. In the year 1999, Lambert owns a corporation that has created a shield to protect the Earth following the depletion of the ozone layer. But the shield is seized by an evil cartel, and Virginia Madsen plays a scientist who assists MacLeod in his mission to destroy the cartel. Sean Connery also reprises his role from Highlander as the Scottish Immortal named Ramirez (?!), but by the time he starts engaging in dashing swordplay you may wonder if he's wandered in from another movie altogether. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (102)

Great Movie.
Now, before all of your heads explode, let me tell you why I say this. As a huge fan of the delightfully funny series Mystery Science Theater 3000, I have a strange appreciation for films commonly regarded as being the worst of the worst.
If only MST3K had gone on with a larger budget for obtaining films, I think Highlander 2 could have made a standout episode for the crew of the ol' Sattelite of Love. Since they never made an MST3K around Highlander 2, a certain level of entertainment can be derived from sitting back and verbally ripping it to shreds with some buddies.
I urge you all to give it one more try while playing MST3K with a few of your friends. I strongly believe you will find a new appreciation for it based on this. Thank you.

ukkk!
It's so bad that its not even funny. It takes everything from the first movie and destroys it. The only good thing is it led to the series. The rest of the sequal don't even mention this alien thing. and thats good. Personally I'd rather believe in immortal humans then strange aliens in a plot that doesn't even make sense.

SPECIAL EDITION?!?!?!?! You've got to be kidding...
First we got the re-edited "Renegade Version" which did absolutely nothing to improve this abominable sequel. Now they are "re-imagining" it with over 100 new visual effects shots!??!?!? Are they THAT DESPERATE?!?!?! We get THIS instead of the Richard Donner cut of Superman II?!?!?!? NOTHING and I mean NOTHING can redeem this film from being one of the worst sequels in film history. Why bother trying to polish a diamond out of a turd?

Still sucks after all those versions.
Heh. Guess what? The theatrical version was bad and made no sense, but this "Renegade Version", making SLIGHTLY more sense, is equally bad - AND longer. Do not waste your time and money, dude. You'll miss it later. Word.

DO NOT buy this!!!
I wish I could think of something positive about this...but I CAN'T!!! It Sucks BIG time!!!
Ok, cast your mind back to Highlander 1...Connor Mcleod, born into a scottish highland family & eventually forced into exile as his relatives don't understand his mortality.
Well it turns out he's not scottish, but an alien!!?? from the planet Ziest!??
Ok, if anyone still reading this hasn't lost the will to live I'll carry on. Actually, is there any point? Look, connor mcleod has to save the earth from a gigantic shield that's covering the earth & causing major global warming, but by the time you realise this you'd be happy if the whole damn planet got fried its that bad!
I'm sorry, but just reviewing this movie is getting me depressed, I'll sign off now, if I can find my copy of scarface I'll be happy, otherwise I'm off to slit my wrists...bye! ... Read more

Reviews (4)

See it for Ed Harris
Ed Harris plays an up-and-coming secret policeman in mid 1980's Poland in this morality film about the communist crackdown on the Solidarity movement. The film also gives us Christopher Lambert as a soft-spoken Priest who outdoes his superiors in antagonizing the communists. Supposedly based upon a true story, 'Priest' seems to pit Harris's secret policeman against Lambert's noble and fearless priest during the period of martial law, but the story soon focuses on Harris's character and makes him the battleground for war of Poland's soul. As Stefan, Harris gamely goes after Lambert's Alec. Though prodded by his superiors ' especially Joss Ackland as a morally dubious police chief who tries to get Stefan to murder the priest without having to order him to do it ' Stefan finds his efforts undercut by spineless toadies unwilling to openly confront the opposition. Though repeatedly arresting and releasing the priest, Stefan's communist chiefs keep the pressure on both of them, tearing Stefan apart. Stefan, we learn, is the proud lineage of unregenerate Stalinists. Though the nominal chiefs of Poland, the shared popularity of the Solidarity movement and the Church isolates Stefan and his circle, further driving Stefan to the edge.

This was a good film when it becomes Stefan's story. Harris is so good, you forget that he's otherwise miscast (the quintessential American, Harris is surrounded with Europeans like Lambert, Ackland, Tim Roth as a fellow officer or Pete Posthelthwaite as a Solidarity supporter), and really has nobody to work with. Also, the film doesn't really play up it's best story ' Stefan's disintegration. Why Harris has his character go to pieces isn't clear. Stefan is intelligent and dogmatic. Early on, however, he shows signs that he may be a bit of a devout Catholic himself (while caught on video 'infiltrating' a Solidarity rally attended by other loyal churchgoers). Though he strenuously insists it was an act to help him blend in, why he feels subject to the very whims of his spineless superiors (who release Stefan's prisoners during frequent Amnesties) is unclear. Neither does he feel he owes anything to his parents' generation (they had the opportunity to rid Poland of the Church years before the Solidarity movement existsed, and squandered it). Rather than explore the two sides of Stefan's soul over which the Church and the Communists fight, the script relegates Stefan into one of the combatants, an ill-fated move sealed with Harris's closing speech. Lambert seems woefully miscast ' and I like him in other movies. However, the script has him squaring off defiantly against the communists as if they worked for the Kurgan from the highlander movies. Much of the problem is that this is an historical movie robbed of its force by later history. The Poland's communists are gone, and even the solidarity movement needed to shift its attentions to other threats to Poland's well being. Still a great film for Ed Harris fans.

Church and Polish Communists battle over Ed Harris
Ed Harris plays an up-and-coming secret policeman in Poland under martial law in this morality film about the communist crackdown on the Solidarity movement. The film also gives us Christopher Lambert as a soft-spoken Priest who outdoes his superiors in antagonizing the communists. Supposedly based upon a true story, 'Priest' seems to pit Harris's secret policeman against Lambert's noble and fearless priest, but the story soon focuses on Harris's character and makes him the battleground for war of Poland's soul. As Stefan, Harris gamely goes after Lambert's Alec. Though prodded by his superiors ' especially Joss Ackland as a morally dubious police chief who tries to get Stefan to murder the priest without having to order him to do it ' Stefan finds his efforts undercut by spineless toadies unwilling to confront opposition openly. Though repeatedly cutting the priest loose, the communist chiefs keep the pressure on Stefan, tearing him apart. Stefan, we learn, is the proud lineage of unregenerate Stalinists. The popularity of the Solidarity movement and the Church causes Stefan and his family to become ostracized, further driving Stefan over the edge.

This was a good film when it becomes Stefan's story. Harris is so good, you forget that he's otherwise miscast (the quintessential American, Harris is surrounded with Europeans like Lambert, Tim Roth as a fellow officer or Pete Posthelthwaite as a Solidarity supporter), and really has nobody to work with. Also, the film doesn't really play up it's best story ' Stefan's disintegration. Why Harris has his character go to pieces isn't clear. Stefan is intelligent and dogmatic. Early on, however, he shows signs that he may be a bit of a loyal Christian himself (while caught on video 'infiltrating' a Solidarity rally attended by devout Catholics). Though he strenuously insists it was an act to help him blend in, why he feels subject to the very whims of his spineless superiors (who release Stefan's prisoners during frequent Amnesties) is unclear. Neither does he feel he owes anything to his parents' generation (they had the opportunity to rid Poland of the Church years before the Solidarity movement existsed, and squandered it). Rather than explore the two sides of Stefan's soul over which the Church and the Communists fight, the script relegates Stefan into one of the combatants, an ill-fated move sealed with Harris's closing speech. The freedom fighters, however, never become elevated over stock martyrs. I came away from this film knowing little more about the state of Poland's affairs than I did before.

Lambert - An Actor
I sincerely never thought much of C. Lambert. For me he was a great Highlander and never would he be nothing more. Then one day I watched To Kill a Priest, mainly because I highly respect Harris' acting abilities. The movie raised some strong emotions within me and seriously I am not one of those crying when watching movies. I am not one of those that went for Titanic and never was I moved by Holywood's sad tales. This one did move me though and perhaps I am being over-emotional with my 4-star rating but I believe that it is highly deserved. If this movie will not make you think of Lambert as an actor, nothing will.

To Kill A Priest--review
The movie is based on the murder of a Polish dissident Catholic priest two decades ago as the Poles formed Solidarnosz in protest against the communist gevernment. The film is gritty and spare,mirroring the country at the time. Christopher Lambert is wonderfully believable as the priest who would do anything to help his countrymen while putting aside his own feelings of love,despair,fear,insecurity,and rage. His arch rival is a demented psychotic who is torn between his own deep religious feelings and the need for power and control by killing and destruction. The backdrop of schizophrenic Eastern Europe's political conflict,accurately portrayed on the streets,in the homes,and in the churches,add to the tense richness of this film. One of Lambert's better films,this is a must see for those who bask in a country where religious and political freedom is taken for granted. Lambert's Father Alex reminds us that it has not been so long ago that a man could be tortured and killed for his beliefs,and it could happen in this country if we yawn and ignore the strident voices of the religious right wing holding hands with the political right. ... Read more

Reviews (9)

Do you want nightmares?
If you do, get this movie as nightmares are almost guaranteed. I saw it with some college friends about eight years ago. It took about five years until the nightmares stopped. I cannot think back on this movie with any sort of fondness. The murders are quite gruesome.

The only thing that I feel was well done was how the writer seemed to get into the mind of a serial killer, but that also concerns me. My mind just does not think in that sort of mode.

While I am not a great player, I like the game of chess. I feel this movie did the game and those who play a really bad stereotype.

Avoid this movie. It is not worth the time or stress.

Check -- mate?
A children's chess tournament. Two boys facing each other in the final game, intently staring at each other and the chess board between them. They make their moves and register their time. Ultimately, one of them has to concede defeat. Facing "check" twice and almost out of time, he topples his king. And assaults his adversary. A doctor recommends that he not ever be allowed near a chess board while he is treated for his "condition."

Years later, another chess tournament. Grand master Peter Sanderson (Christopher Lambert) is in attendance, making a surprise return after three years' retirement. He easily wins the first rounds. After dinner with daughter Erica (whose only parent he is) and a strategy session with his advisor, Sanderson concludes the evening with a few steamy hours with a sensuous blonde ... and the psychopath who will soon hold the community in thrall has found his first target. When the woman is found murdered, gruesomely dressed up in death and the word "Remember" written on the wall above her in blood, Sanderson initially denies having been with her. This, and his arrogant demeanor towards the policemen investigating the crime - particularly, Detective Andy Wagner (Daniel Baldwin) - makes him an instant suspect. But is Sanderson the psychopath? Or is he, as appearances would have it, the psychopath's true target?

In a grisly game of strategy in which a city is turned into a chess board and women living in the target areas of town (attractive blondes all of them) are the chess pieces, Sanderson and the police hunt a serial killer who always seems to be one step ahead of them. While Detective Wagner never loses his suspicion of Sanderson, his newly minted boss, Captain Frank Sedman (Tom Skerritt) reluctantly comes to the conclusion that since the clues provided by the killer are based on chess references and directed to none other than Sanderson himself, they will not be able to solve the case without his help. Yet, for a long time the grand master, too, seems unable to decipher the killer's clues, and the meaning of the words written above the dead body of each of his victims. - How many women will have to die before his identity is revealed? Will he ever be caught? Will psychologist Kathy Sheppard (Diane Lane), brought in by the police to determine if Sanderson himself fits their suspect's profile, end up as one of his victims?

"Knight Moves" is a suspenseful thriller, intelligently built on the patterns of the royal game of strategy itself, and in which the audience is kept on their toes until the very end. Christopher Lambert in particular is believable as the astute, arrogant Sanderson, who hides his personal fears and insecurities under a mask of unapproachability which only one person seems to be able to pierce - his daughter Erica. His face-offs with Daniel Baldwin alias Detective Wagner, sarcastic and spewing barely controlled rage at each other, are among the highlights of the movie; in addition, of course, to the mind game itself which the killer plays with his hunters and, by extension, with the audience. While it is clear that the solution has to have something to do with the fateful game played by those two boys so long ago, all elements of the story are only connected up in the final scenes ... which are, however, unfortunately somewhat overplayed and emphasize gore more than psychology and hence, are a bit of a let-down. This, and the relationship soon forming between Sanderson and Sheppard, which doesn't entirely work for me (strangely enough, since Lambert and Lane were married at the time) are the only detractors I find in this movie. Overall, however, "Knight Moves" would have deserved much more attention than it has received since its 1992 cinematic release.

Love the movie. Hate the DVD.
This movie has ranked among my favorites since the first time I saw it. It's a great suspense thriller that keeps you guessing until the very end. I was eager to add it to my DVD collection, so I ordered it as soon as it came out.

Imagine my disappointment in seeing this DVD. The transfer is horrible. This disc was released in the first quarter of 2001 -- over a year after Anamorphic Widescreen became the accepted standard for DVD -- and not only is this transfer not anamorphic, but it is worse quality than the VHS I have seen. There are a number of glitches in the transfer, including some that look as though the transfer was done from a damaged source negative -- maybe even from the VHS itself.

On top of that, the disc has NO special features. Even the VHS version had a making-of documentary after the credits rolled! It's hard to believe that transfers with quality this poor are still being released today. If the studio doesn't care enough to do it right, then why do it at all?

In summary, I highly recommend this movie.

Very good until the end...the ending killed it.
Very good thriller/mystery until the very end. Now, how did the killer talk on the phone with Lambert and be with Lambert at the same time? As far as I can see, it is never explained, which means that the finale failed miserably.

Knight Moves Is One Of Lamberts Best, But Where's The DVD?
Quite honestly, this is one of Mr. Lambert's best films, just below Greystoke, Highlander and Fortress. Shot in Super 35 means the film has an aspect ratio of about 2:35.1 (like Star Wars). The laserdisc was the only widescreen version released but is now no longer available. To truly appreciate the film you need to see it in the widescreen (or letterboxed) format. I am hoping, whenever they get around to it, Republican Pictures will release the film on DVD so everyone can see what I'm talking about and perhaps include the trailer and that small featurette that was put on the initial Video releases (coming on right after the film had ended). As for the film itself, about a psychopathic killer who, it seems, wants to frame Peter (Lambert) for the murders of unsuspecting, beautiful women, as well as play a sick game with him in the process, Christoph (as he is known in France) keeps you interested and personally I think that's superb, considering for certain scenes he's playing chess. It's his facial expressions that keep you interested, rather than the game itself. Daniel Baldwin (John Carpenter's Vampires) stands out as the antagonistic cop who doesn't like Lambert at all and personally, it seems, would like nothing more than to see him behind bars (or dead). Diane Lane (Judge Dredd, The Perfect Storm) does an alright job playing the psychologist who is trying to figure out whether Peter is psychotic or not and the film takes some interesting twists and turns in that avenue (which propells the film instead of takeing away from it). The chemistry between them is apparent because they were married shortly before (meeting each other on an earlier film called, Priceless Beauty). Tom Skerritt (not Selleck, as a previous reviewer had indicated) plays the head of the police investigation with Baldwin as his partner. Honestly, when first viewing the film I had no idea who the killer was. That's what's great about the movie, it really does keep you guessing. At one point you think you've got it figured out and then it blows your mind and goes in a completely different direction, while still maintaining it's appeal. Knight Moves is the best chess movie(with suspense) I've ever seen. Check it out. ... Read more

Amazon.com

One of those legendary missed opportunities, Greystoke: The Legend ofTarzan, Lord of the Apes is a movie that should have been great but wound up the victim of conflicting egos and wrong-headed choices. Based on a screenplay by Robert Towne (who took his name off it when he wasn't allowed to direct) and directed by Hugh Hudson (riding high on the basis of Chariots of Fire), the film tried to rethink the Tarzan legend of Edgar Rice Burroughs, and boy, did it have to: By casting French-accented Christopher Lambert as Tarzan, the filmmakers had to transform his white-hunter mentor Ian Holm into a Frenchman to explain those inflections in Tarzan's monosyllabic speech. The film has some amazing jungle footage and a truly touchingrelationship between Tarzan and the apes--but it gets pretty silly when Tarzan gets to London and hooks up with Sir Ralph Richardson, as his grandfather.-–Marshall Fine ... Read more

Reviews (32)

Greystoke - The Legend of Tarzan, Lord of the Apes
I felt the film gave an adequate portrail of the book written by E.R. Boroughs. Christopher Lambert depicted Tarzan as one would imagine a human growing up in the jungle. His french accent gave credence to the original story where Tarzan, was taught the spoken language of French by Lt. D'Arnut. The scene with the ape attacking and killing his family is not romanticised - It appears as a wild animal jealously defending his territory against intruders. Tarzan's relationship with the apes that raised him is touching and the jungle scenes are fantastic. As well as are Christopher Lambert's portrail of Tarzan's difficulties adapting to the restrictions of "civilized" society. The film takes a number of "artistic licenses" in numerous places - which is a shame as the original story would be easily depicted in flim. The acting was very good and the sets fantastic! Overall the film would be worth viewing as the story moves fast enough to keep your interest, and it [film] will make you re-think who is really the savage beasts - man or animal (who is living by the most basic laws of nature - driven by survival and not greed)?

AT LONG LAST!!!!! But What About The Special Features?
GREYSTOKE is without a doubt the best Tarzan movie ever made (though I must admit, the Disney version came pretty close). Not only is it the most loyal to Edgar Rice Burrough's original novel, but it's the only adaptation to contain real drama. GREYSTOKE has an epic scope and musical score, and a cast of fine actors, including Sir Ian Holm, Sir Ralph Richardson, Andie MacDowell (though she was dubbed over by Glenn Close), and Christopher Lambert in his very first movie, and what a way to start! With his eyes alone, he expresses an emotion that many actors can't even muster with their entire bodies. Add to that some of Rick Baker's best make-up work ever, and you've got yourself a doozie of a movie. In short, GREYSTOKE is a classic, much neglected by modern viewers.

I have been waiting. And waiting. And waiting. But alas, this movie was no where to be found on the DVD format. Well, the long wait is finally over. Though I was hoping for a Two-Disc Special Edition release, this is goods enough. I just hope that it has SOME special features. Or, maybe they could just work on the movie and include a commentary track. For instance, they should definitely release the extended version available on VHS, and return Andie MacDowell's original voice track. And of course, give the movie a new digital transfer with Dolby Digital 5.1, or maybe even DTS!

Just having this movie on DVD will be good enough for me. That said, Warner had better not screw this one up!

A classic
Beautiful and touching story. Great images and good performances. One of the classics of the 80's.

Great Tarzan Movie
This simply has got to be one of the best Tarzan films ever made. Yet I can't help feeling that this Tarzan film is merely
a great prelude of what could have been a great series of more
Tarzan films. Christopher Lambert was excellent as Tarzan/John Clayton and Andie MacDowell looked beautiful as Jane (dubbed by
Glen Close). The scene of the jungle explorers traveling down
a African river via tramp steamer reminded me of Disney World's
Jungle Cruise ride exactly. Beautiful cinematography and Rick
Baker's ape effects were fantastic. This Tarzan film seems to take place around the late 1890s - early 1900s, so the attention
to period detail was very well done. So if jungle adventure and
romance is to your liking, check out this terrific film. Enjoy.

So Close...
"Greystoke - The Legend of Tarzan" could have been a classic. Lord John Clayton of Greystoke is shipwrecked in Africa with his pregnant wife. Shortly after she gives birth, they both die from an ape attack. One of the apes take little John, and raise him as her own. He grows up strong but wild and savage (now played by Christopher Lambert). One day he is happened upon by a French explorer. He is eventually returned to his family, but he finds it hard to fit in with "civilized" people. Along the way, he falls in love with Jane (played by Andie MacDowell, but her voice was dubbed by Glen Close, why they did this I'll never know?). It had a populor director (Hugh Hudson), an accomplished writer (Robert Towne), was beautifully photographed (especially in the jungles, it is just breathtaking) and based on one of the most populor books of the 20th century by Edgar Rice Burroughs. But it isn't that good. What happened? Well, the first hour or so there is no dialogue; but that is okay, because the physical expressions of the apes and Tarzan are pretty self explanatory. (By the way, he is never referred to as 'Tarzan'.) When he is 'rescued' and moved to England, nothing very adventurous happenes there. What happened to pirates coming out of the wood work trying to kidnap Jane? Where are the warriors from Opar? I'm sorry, "Greystoke" was pretty dull. The actors do ok, I guess. Ian Holm is alright, good in fact. Ralf Richardson looked like he was having a good time, and the relationship between he and his grandson rang pretty true. It is hard to tell if MacDowell was any good, with being dubbed over. But what about Tarzan? Christopher Lambert was actually good. I really liked his performance as the childlike savage. He played being in awe of the city wonderfully. He didn't talk a lot, but maybe that is a good thing. His acting tends to be a little wooden; in fact, in my opinion, he just happens to be in the right place at the right time, like this one and "Highlander". I read the novels and I think about how this movie could have been so much more. Still, it is a beautifully shot movie, and it dose play fair, so it is worth your time. If you can find it, watch the extended version, it is a little bit more action packed (loved how Tarzan took out the entire outpost!). ... Read more

Reviews (14)

Re-Entry is Pure Re-Hash (Somewhat Good Re-Hash)
This is one of those sci-fi sequel films where the concept was great along with some of the actors, yet leaves you with a bland feeling. The special effects and futuristic weaponry, gadgets and contraptions (brain pain/optic security camera implanted in the prisoners' bodies)are some of the better ones around for a sci-fi b-movie like this. As for Lambert, he's one of those actors where he's always teetering between mediocre acting ability and bonafide dramatic acting ability. It is a sequel where Lambert's character and family are runaway fugitives from a ruthless robotic prison system which he and several others destroyed in the last film.The underlying sub-plot for the sequel stems from the original where families are only allowed by law to have one child due to the devastating population growth.The main characters first child was a still born; they proceed to "illegally" procreate for another one and try to cross the Mexican border to guarantee that the child is born free and safe. The bit of tongue-and-cheek irony here is that in the future Americans are trying to escape the U.S. and cross the line into Mexico to get away from the oppression and police . Lambert's character and wife get caught by the police at the U.S./Mexican border and the rest is history seen in Fortress One. As for Re-Entry, if I explain the plot all will be given away;can't do that. It is a dvd worthy of a weekend rental when you're bored. Otherwise, Bladerunner or StarWars it is not...Viewers who have seen Fortress One take note of Fortress Two; the actress who plays Lambert's wife in Re-Entry somehow became more voluptuous and sexier (despite the fact she's been a fugitve on the run for ten years). Hmmm...

Oh the humanity!
The only word you need to know relating to the atrocity that is "Fortress 2: Re-entry" is, quite simply, LAMBERT! That's right, master thespian and international film god Christopher Lambert returns to reprise his role as the persecuted John Brennick, the bane of the powerfully evil Men-Tel corporation. The first film in the series, which arrived on the scene some six years before its sequel, was an enjoyable action/drama film larded with good characters, occasionally intriguing special effects, and lots of shoot 'em up action. The first film was even directed by Stuart Gordon ("Re-Animator," "From Beyond") and employed solid character actors like Jeffrey Combs and Kurtwood Smith to good effect. It got so you didn't even mind Christopher Lambert starred in the movie since the secondary elements made up for his lack of talent. You would think at least a little charm from the original might rub off on its sequel. You would be wrong. "Fortress 2" is a disaster across the board: bad acting, lousy script, slow pacing, and a forgettable supporting cast destroys any chance this movie had at success. "Fortress 2" is to the world of cinema what Linda McCartney was to Wings.

Once again John Brennick and his wife are on the run from the Men-Tel Corporation. At the end of the first movie the couple escaped the clutches of the evil plutocrats and went underground in order to defy the ban on having children. The opening of "Fortress 2" shows the Brennicks safely ensconced in a cabin somewhere far from the overpopulated urban centers run by Men-Tel. A group of rebels from the resistance pay a visit to Brennick so they can convince him to rejoin their efforts to destroy the corporation. Predicatably, Men-Tel thugs clandestinely follow these upstarts out to the cabin and launch a raid. Lots of bullets fly, Brennick and family escape through a tunnel under the house, and Johnny blows a helicopter out of the sky before the soldiers finally capture him. Brennick's spouse and young son escape, so there will be no wife in prison to compromise John's attention this time around. And prison is exactly where he is going, but this time the penitentiary is a floating space station revolving around the earth. It would seem that walking out of this situation will not be as easy as it was last time. C'mon, you know better! This is big, bad John Brennick we are talking about here. Of course he will escape. Our job is to play like good little sheep, shut our mouths, and watch how he does it.

The space prison is pretty much like the institution encountered in the first film with a few minor exceptions. First, the beloved intestinators from the first film are long gone, replaced with a different implant device that causes everyone to fall on the ground and roll around shrieking in pain whenever the guards punch a button. Second, one of Brennick's cellmates is a sexy young woman who takes lots of showers to distract the bulls whenever John and his allies are plotting something. Third, this is a dumb movie. There is a bunch of nonsense about Men-Tel building some huge project and using the prisoners as slave labor, but it is largely uninteresting most of the time. Pam Grier turns up in the role as the head of Men-Tel, perhaps the most egregious crime the film commits because she doesn't have much to do except threaten the prison warden via video screen and show up briefly in the end. Another wasted opportunity arrives in the shape of Yuji Okumoto as the sadistic guard Sato. Viewers will recognize this veteran character actor and loudly lament the inability of the script to put him to better use. By the way, did I mention this movie reeks?

I actually followed the movie for a bit before issuing an increasingly loud series of raspberries at the stupidity unfolding onscreen. A few things were slightly interesting, such as Brennick's turn in "solitary" after a failed escape attempt. The punishment differs slightly from a similar penalty on earth: guards lock Brennick in a transparent bubble on the outer shell of the station, thereby exposing him to extremes of cold and heat as the prison revolves around the earth. Alas, this scene is the only good point in an otherwise useless production. One need only watch one of the characters attach a miniature video camera to a roach to understand the ridiculous depths to which this movie sinks. The absolute worst, and I mean WORST, situation occurs when Brennick, in an effort to reach another part of the rapidly deteriorating space station, holds his breath and flies through space without any sort of protective gear. You heard me right. A man soars through deep space wearing nothing but the clothes on his back--with only a bloody nose to show for it--and survives to fight another day. This scene alone guarantees a one star review. How dare the screenwriters, the director, and the producer attempt to foist off such an idiotic scenario on viewers.

Brennick escapes in time for the inevitable reunion with his loved ones (in front of a picturesque sunset, no less), but the viewer has nowhere to go after watching this piece of crud except perhaps to the local pharmacy to pick up a bottle of Thorazine. Whatever your poison, pray it is strong enough to burn the memory of this film out of your head. The DVD is fortunately sparse, with a trailer for this film, one for a movie called "Resurrection," and a widescreen presentation of the movie. The lack of a commentary surprises me not at all; I wouldn't want to take any responsibility for such a worthless project either if I was associated with it. Good luck with this one, faithful viewers.

Doesn't add up to the original...
Our story picks up about ten years where the original ended. Brannick is caught and put in a new prison, this time in space orbiting Earth. The characters are plenty fun and the humor is well-placed, but the acting and overall script leave much to be desired. The film is very watchable, but little comes from it. Christopher Lambert is not a good enough actor to make his character as interesting as he was in the first film, but his supporting cast is not all bad. Mostly, I liked the computer effects and some of the action was neat. The star rating can be ignored here. I really give it 2 1/2, but Amazon.com won't let me do halves.

Sequel lacks the budget and performances of the original
Although I really enjoyed the original movie, "Fortress 2: Re-entry" is disappointing in comparison. The film offers a promising storyline: John and Karen Brennick are shown 10 ye