Eva (2011)

"A shy genius is employed by his former university to design robot software."

Although "Eva" is really sci-fi, I needed something for "Fantasy Friday", and it fits this category too. In fact, it's closer to being a "Frankenstein"-esque fairytale than anything else, and for those of you who've noticed a theme going on this month, yes, it's another beautiful Spanish movie. I've been watching more foreign movies recently than ever before due to the lack of decent English language titles, but that will change again next week because I haven't got many new ones left.

Not to be confused with Peter Dickinson's YA novel of the same name (which I know you've never heard of!), "Eva" is about robots rather than chimpanzees, but it still brings up the same questions about life, consciousness, and what makes us what we are. The subject matter is a staple of sci-fi books and movies, so it's not the most original story in the world, and there are similarities to "Bicentennial Man" (1999) and "A.I. Artificial Intelligence" (2001).

I'm not going to knock the big Hollywood robot movies which are obviously excellent, but I enjoyed "Eva" just as much as "Bicentennial Man" and more than "A.I. Artificial Intelligence". Apart from a twist which I didn't see coming (but should have done!), there's a cat robot in "Eva" which is outstanding, plus I'm kind of in lust with Marta Etura who plays Lana. If you don't know who she is, check out "Sleep Tight" (2011) and "Los Últimos Días" (2013).

Marta Etura and Claudia Vega.

Detractors may say that "Eva" is too slow, overuses long shots, and the characters don't have much depth, but I disagree. There are no pacing problems, and the cinematography is very good indeed. The characters could have been fleshed out a little bit more, especially in the case of Alex Garel (played by Daniel Brühl) who is a bit boring even for a scientist, but there's enough made of them to tell the story. Bearing in mind that a 20 minute prologue (which is included on the Spanish Blu-ray) was removed to give more emphasis to the twist, the characters weren't originally so flat.

As "Eva" isn't set that far ahead in the future, there aren't too many weird effects used except at the robot lab and every time Alex runs his computer program. Some people may find that disappointing, but I didn't. Less is more, as they say, and the snowy location covers a multitude of sins. There are plenty of robots if you look for them including little horses, dogs, more traditional machines, and, of course, the cute prototype 519. Channelling Robin Williams slightly, Lluís Homar undoubtedly steals the show as creepy servant-robot Max. His menace is a total red herring though and is completely unintentional. In this movie, it's the "free robots" that you have to be careful of.

Claudia Vega as Eva.

Horror fans will notice several similarities to "Splice" (2009) but without the incestuous implications. Claudia Vega who plays Eva isn't as sexualised as some reviewers suggest despite a couple of scenes which might make you wonder. If anything, she comes across like a nicer version of the little girl in "Sleep Tight", and her use of age-inappropriate dialogue is meant as a clue to her secret instead of turning her into another Esther from "Orphan" (2009). I can't say any more about that without spoiling the movie for you, but it doesn't take a genius to work it out.

According to a rumour on the IMDb, the Weinsteins will be distributing "Eva" in the USA later this year. In what format, I have no idea, but I expect there will be a dubbed version for the hard of understanding, and an inevitable Hollywood remake eventually. For now, I recommend importing the English subtitled Blu-ray from Amazon.

The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones (2013)

"When her mother disappears, Clary Fray learns that she descends from a line of warriors who protect our world from demons. She joins forces with others like her and heads into a dangerous alternate New York called Downworld."

Based on the YA fantasy-horror novel by alleged plagiarist Cassandra Clare, "The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones" is yet another wannabe "Twilight" replacement which has turned out to be a huge flop at the box office. I can't say that I'm surprised.

Since I'm not a reader or a "young adult", I've never heard of the series of books which this movie is based on before. I also have no idea if the allegations of plagiarism against the author are true or due to "cloning" and homaging, but either way, "The Mortal Instruments" appears to be little more than a bland conflation of "Night Watch" (2004), "Buffy the Vampire Slayer", "Percy Jackson and the Olympians", the "Prophecy" series, and a plethora of clichéd offerings from the "demon-hunting" subgenre. Ironically, given that "The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones" is produced by Constantin Films, there's a very slight feeling of "Constantine" (2005) about this too. Unfortunately, that's where the good stuff ends.

"The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones" is overlong at 130 minutes, and pacing problems don't help to alleviate the boredom between brief and confusing action scenes. Harald Zwart's previous effort, "The Karate Kid" remake, also suffered from the same issues, but it's probably not entirely his fault this time. I imagine that producer and author interference influenced things quite badly; conflation of characters, casting choices, accent changes, rewrites, and the desire for a PG-13 rating to get more asses on seats were all contributing factors.

Thus, "The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones" is a visually pleasing big-budget production, but if you think that "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy is bad news for your bladder, this movie will literally, figuratively and actually bore the piss out of you too. I lost track of the number of toilet breaks I needed, but I think it was over half a dozen. The two cans of Rockstar which were necessary to keep myself awake took their toll, but at least I didn't wet myself like I did during "The Golden Compass" (2007), and I didn't miss anything important either.

Clary and creepy Jace share a mundane moment.

The cast of pretty "teenagers" do okay in their roles although Jamie Campbell Bower (who has been in the finales of the Harry Potter series, and played Caius in "The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn") is quite creepy-looking as Jace. Not looks-wise but accent-wise, he's very Paul Bettany, which brings up another irony since the star of the show, Lily Collins, was also in "Priest" (2011).

As she's not really a teenager, there's no problem with complimenting Lily Collins for being hot as Clary. Hell, even if she was sixteen instead of twenty-three, Phil Collins' daughter would still be pretty, and there's nothing wrong with saying so. She's slightly upstaged in the sexiness department by Jemima West as Isabelle, but she uses her huge eyebrows and nearly always open mouth to good effect. The "teeth and eyes" acting-style strikes again, albeit slightly less so than in typical teen soap operas. I also have to mention here that there's nothing more confusing than older actresses playing younger "jailbait" characters, so be prepared to feel as grubby as I did for ogling them. Or not, as the case may be.

Apart from Robert Sheehan as scrawny Simon gratuitously taking his shirt off, there's nothing for girls to see here unless they like their Jacob substitutes to be less ripped. Needless to say, his underdeveloped bare-chestedness did absolutely nothing for me, and I didn't like his character.

Kevin Zegers (recently in "The Colony") is very underused as Alec, yet he's got nothing to be ashamed of. Being unconscious on a bed for half the movie covers a multitude of sins. MILF-tastic Lena Headey is wasted even more since she disappears very early on in the story, and several other underwritten characters also suffer from clearly being reduced to bit parts for their respective actors. "The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones" truly equals "The Twilight Saga" in trying to pack too much in and rushing through the characters, and that's its downfall.

The problem with any of these "Young Adult novel" adaptations is not only that "Young Adult" is a curiously self-contradictory term and genre which pleases nobody—least of all its target audience—but that characterisation is never a strong point. It's hard to care about characters just because they are pretty, especially if there's none of the fleshing out which presumably occurs in the original literary medium. Having never read a "YA" novel in my life, I can't honestly say if the authors of these papery abominations make more of their "Mary Sues", and I'm not prepared to infantilise myself to find out. Just judging them by their movie adaptations, everything from "Harry Potter" and "Twilight" through to "Beautiful Creatures", "His Dark Materials", "Camp Half-Blood" and "The Hunger Games" must be some very low-brow reading material in the first place. You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

Sexy Isabelle has a big pair of swords.

As an aside, I don't care how much flak I get for it, but the unrequited gay love triangle which I assume to be one of the selling points of "The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones" is very bizarre and completely out of place in a movie (or book) meant for little kids. Most of the target audience simply wouldn't understand it except as an insult, or they might not notice its insidiousness at all, but others are surely going to say, "What?"—and therein lies a problem. For me, the trendy, politically correct acceptance of homosexuality shown here as something completely normal rather than applicable to a minority is about as realistic and subtle as decorating half the cast with tribal "magical sigil" tattoos. It's controversial propaganda aimed at an age group which shouldn't even have a sex life, and it's not done in way that provides any explanation for differences from the norm. Briefly mentioned as it is, the Achilles-Patroclus thing comes across as contrived as an episode of "Torchwood", especially as there's another more traditional, heterosexual, and "age appropriate" love triangle going on. If you really want children to see gay romance in a movie, you should let them watch dramas such as "Another Country", "My Beautiful Laundrette" or "Brokeback Mountain", not a kiddified action-adventure/supernatural-fantasy. No? Maybe it's they're R-rated! It's not worth pressing the point however, because there's no sexual tension or chemistry between anybody in this movie. It's all very tame.

With the MacGuffin-laden plot taking a back seat to the equally superficial teen romance, "The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones" reeks of blandness throughout. Rather than losing focus, it never has any to begin with, and it has no vitality, inertia, momentum or any other words which you can pull out of a thesaurus to describe its lack of "oomph". Maybe if the producers had gone for an R-rating instead of a PG-13, some realistic violence, goriness and horror could have spiced things up considerably more than the borderline adult dialogue and situations, but I highly doubt it. The bad guys are so underplayed that there's never any real threat to the safety of the main characters, and as I already said, it's impossible to care about any of them anyway.

"The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones" is insipid, often tedious, and confusing with it, so I don't recommend it at all.

Gallowwalkers (2012)

"A cursed gunman whose victims come back from the dead recruits a young warrior to help in the fight against a gang of zombies."

Made seven years ago but still not due to be released until August, "Gallowwalkers" stars Wesley Snipes in a comicbook-style fantasy which is more like "The Crow" being played out on the set of a Sergio Leone western than "Blade" no matter what the promotional posters and trailer might want you to believe.

Pirates have already uploaded this film to the usual sites out of spitefulness rather than helpfulness, but as I'm a huge Wesley Snipes mark and will be buying the DVD anyway, I feel no guilt about succumbing to the streaming temptation. I'm not in the loop of chosen people who was sent a screener copy anyway although I damned well should have been. It's not going to taint my honest review of "Gallowwalkers", but it does leave a nasty taste in my mouth that someone who the distributors did trust with a screener then uploaded it.

Rather than spoil the big surprises of "Gallowwalkers" with a synopsis of what little plot there is, especially as I could describe it in one or two sentences and know that I'd done a good job, I have to begin by correcting an error in the IMDb description which I've quoted above. "Gallowwalkers" is definitely not about zombies. Thank God for that! Instead, it's a $17,000.000 hybrid of spaghetti westerns and "Hellraiser"-style fantasy-horror with laconic Wesley Snipes making a lot of strong poses and looking surly while far less well-known performers attempt to act around him. While not exactly brilliant, it's a typical Wesley Snipes movie.

There are worse things out tonight than vampires.

I say "performers" rather than "actors" because there isn't a whole lot of acting to talk about. Apart from the action scenes, and a fantastic cameo by Patrick Bergin, "Gallowwalkers" is mostly (but not entirely) one of those movies where once everybody got dressed up, they thought it would be enough to carry them through rather than putting any more effort in. Since it was filmed in a desert in Namibia, I'm sure the heat could be blamed for the overall listlessness, but that's not a satisfactory excuse for having the atmosphere of a cheap SyFy channel movie rather than a product designed for theatrical release.

Long camera shots, barren sets, very little dynamism, and stylistic homages to "High Plains Drifter", "Hang 'Em High", and "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" show that director Andrew Goth loves his Clint Eastwood westerns, but none of it comes together in the "cultish" way that I'm sure he wanted it to. I don't know the full story of why "Gallowwalkers" sat on the shelf for so long, but I assume Wesley Snipes' incarceration for tax evasion may have caused so many rewrites and a such a nightmare for the editors that we're lucky to have this movie at all.

To be brutally honest, "Gallowwalkers" is a bit of a mess, and there are some very weird elements in it which aren't properly explained, but as a salvage job, it's actually not bad overall. There are a couple of plot holes and a few loose ends, but I've obviously seen far worse things which other reviewers rave about. The good news is that it's not as boring as "Jonah Hex" (2010).

One intentionally quirky thing which sticks out is that the major characters are never named except in the end credits. I'm not sure if they were named very quickly and I missed it, but I don't think so. I suppose it doesn't matter because, for all intents and purposes, Wesley Snipes is the black version of "the man with no name", and the gang he fights is another generic and instantly forgettable bunch of baddies anyway.

Nice coat, dude!

Kevin Howarth tries hard to inject some menace into his role as the boss of the bad guys, and Riley Smith is likeable as Wesley Snipes' recruit, but everyone else is barely more than eyecandy. Nobody has more than two or three lines each throughout the movie, and the beautiful girls are underused to say the least. Tanit Phoenix, Simona Brhlikova, and Alyssa Pridham all shine in their few minutes of screen time, but none of their characters go anywhere. Simona Brhlikova is the best as the bad girl member of the gang, but Tanit Phoenix's character has almost no purpose whatsoever. Alyssa Pridham only appears in flashbacks for obvious reasons.

Of interest to Brits of a certain age, former children's TV personality Derek Griffiths has a role in this as Mosca. Yes, he's one of the lucky few whose character actually gets a name. His prosthetic make-up stands out more than he does, but it's nice to know that he's still around.

Due to its nature, there's nothing scary about "Gallowwalkers", but the violence and gory set pieces are nicely done. Gunshots which smash large chunks out of their targets and bullet holes with blood spurting out of them are always enjoyable. Decapitations are simply a bonus! There may not be anything here that hasn't been seen before, but the effects are very good, and there aren't lots of quick cuts to ruin them.

If you're a Wesley Snipes fan and can appreciate a very flawed movie which is more style over substance, you'll probably enjoy "Gallowwalkers". You might even find yourself saying the word "Lush!" on more than one occasion. I did, and I'm not that easy to please.

Man of Steel (2013)

"A young itinerant worker is forced to confront his secret extraterrestrial heritage when Earth is invaded by members of his race."

Due to unforeseen circumstances yesterday with storms knocking out my internet connection, I couldn't post this review as a "Fantasy Friday" update where it belongs, but since it's more about aliens anyway, I now have the first "Sci-Fi Saturday" post in months. It's not that any superhero movie meant for 10-year-olds and 40-something comicbook nerds is a priority for me anyway, so who cares, right? I'm not a fan of Superman in the first place.

Back when I was the right age, I saw "Superman: The Movie", but I wasn't impressed. Out of all the superheroes, Superman always struck me as a bit of a wussypants, and Christopher Reeve only confirmed my prejudice. I mean, he has every superpower possible and could rule the Earth if he wanted to, yet he chooses to hide behind the bumbling façade of Clark Kent (as if people can't tell it's the same guy with glasses!), and just stops a few "bad guys" from time to time. It's pathetic! Superman and everything he stands for makes me want to puke.

I never watched more than one episode of the Dean Cain version because of his girlie voice and the fact that Teri Hatcher makes me cringe, and I certainly never watched "Smallville" either. I've seen parts of the other Christopher Reeve movies, but my interest came and went with Ursa (Sarah Douglas) in the first sequel. Thus, even though I'm not an authority on Superman, I've seen enough to know what it's all about, and I just don't care for it. As flawed as it is, I prefer "Hancock" (2008).

The trouble is that I sometimes have to watch other genres when the horror genre dries up just to keep abreast of who's who and what's popular. I'd be an even shittier reviewer if I only watched horror movies and nothing else. Thus, I gave "Man of Steel" a chance to change my mind about Superman.

Unfortunately, apart from Antje Traue looking hot as Faora-Ul (an updated version of Ursa), Zach Snyder's "Man of Steel" is easily the worst Superman movie ever made. While I can appreciate the darker tone and Michael Shannon's exceptional performance as General Zod, there's nothing here story-wise that I haven't seen before. As dated as they are, I would've been better off rewatching "Superman: The Movie" (1978) and "Superman II" (1980) instead of this "Transformers" wannabe.

"Man of Steel" features such things as disjointed storytelling which is ridiculously hard to follow, visuals which might look spectacular but make no sense, a script written by Christopher Nolan so you know it'll be crap, and lots of CGI buildings being demolished... but that's about it. With a running time of approximately three days, it's far too long and monotonous with it. It's all bang, bang, boom like a Michael Bay film with 90% of it made of swirling computer-generated battles, explosions, and gut-churning aerial shots of places which don't even exist.

It's not worth mentioning the big names who have small parts in "Man of Steel" because the only fun for anybody is spotting them and thinking, "Oh my God, so-and-so looks so old now!" I'm not going to take those suprises away from you. Just enjoy them for what they are, and savour the brief moments with Ayelet Zurer who plays Superman's real mother (Lara Lor-Van) at the start because she's really beautiful. She can't act, but she looks great.

I didn't think there could actually be a more disappointing superhero movie than "The Dark Knight Rises", but there is now.

Iron Man 3 (2013)

"When Tony Stark's world is torn apart by a formidable terrorist called the Mandarin, he starts an odyssey of rebuilding and retribution."

Since I reviewed the original "Iron Man" movie years ago and then decided not to ever review "Iron Man 2" because it was a load of arse, I can't say that I was expecting anything more out of this second sequel. With such a low opinion of this dreck, I wasn't disappointed either. "Iron Man 3" is yet another big-budget, kiddified superhero movie for tweenagers and 40-year-old comicbook nerds who still live in their parents' basement.

The funny thing is that even I kind of enjoyed it in places although the story is really only a cobbled together version of elements from "Batman Forever", "The Dark Knight Rises", and Pierce Brosnan era James Bond with loads of CGI robots and explosions just for the hell of it. To say that 'Iron Man 3" is like a Michael Bay film but with slightly better dialogue is the best way I can think of describing it.

As usual, lapses in logic and plot holes abound, characterisation is minimal except for Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.), and the acting skills of everyone except Robert Downey Jr. are completely lost among all the bang, boom, bang and special effects. There's nothing really wrong with any of that in a Summer movie though so it's not worth criticism. This isn't depressingly dull Oscar material after all.

I liked seeing Rebecca Hall from "The Awakening" (2011) even with an American accent. There are a lot better uses which that sexy mouth of hers could be put to instead of over rhotacization, but she does a good job nonetheless. Between her and Stephanie Szostak, there's a bit of a battle going on as to who is the hottest actress in the movie. Sorry, Pepper Potts fans, but until the very end of the movie, it's never likely to be Gwyneth Paltrow.

Guy Pearce is okay as Edward Nygma, I mean Aldrich Killian, and it's a shame that he never made more films in the same vein as "L.A. Confidential" when he was top of his game. Seeing a great actor like this, and also Ben Kingsley, reduced to playing about in movies for little kids is sad. Paul Bettany only used for the voice of a computer? That's just a crime.

If you're looking for a fun night out with lots of action, nothing heavy to think about except the nauseating patriotic messages, and the kind of world-travelling changes of location like Bond movies used to have, then "Iron Man 3" is for you. You'll get a bit of a post-movie buzz out of it for sure.

If you leave before the end credits, there is even the false hope for a moment that this is the last we'll see of Iron Man getting everything destroyed and then putting it all back together again for a while. That's something pretty great in and of itself.

Dark Skies (2013)

"As the Barrett family's peaceful suburban life is rocked by an escalating series of disturbing events, they come to learn that a terrifying and deadly force is after them."

While other people were getting all excited about the "Evil Dead" remake which, undoubtedly, will be reviewed on every horror blog this weekend until you are sick to death of reading about it, I chose to watch something different last night. There were no "Evil Dead" marathons for me because I don't even like the original anymore. Instead of getting caught up in the circus of Bruce Campbell grinning like a lunatic, chopping bits of himself off and waving a chainsaw about, I decided to watch something completely alien to me in more ways than one.

I endeavoured to find enjoyment in yet another Blumhouse Productions movie which has already been slammed by discerning horror critics from one side of the internet to the other. I heard that it had cats in it at one point, and really that's all a movie needs to keep me entertained nowadays. Well, that and a decent bit of storytelling, of course.

I'm not going to get into the finer details because I could easily sum up "Dark Skies" in a couple of choice expletives after it gave me another bout of "Juno Syndrome". For those of you who never read my blog regularly when I was more prolific, "Juno Syndrome" is my own term for when I enjoy a movie throughout its running time then realise 2 minutes after it ends that it was a load of contrived crap which doesn't stand up to any kind of critical deconstruction. "Dark Skies" has good production values, quite a few creepy moments, and I got fished into the Spielberg-esque suburban family problems, but almost as soon as the credits were over, I realised that I had been well and truly misled.

Already people will think, "Ah, but you're just a hater and don't like any PG-13 movies!" That's not entirely true. I didn't even know that "Dark Skies" was a PG-13. I also didn't know anything about the story beforehand other than it might have "extra terrestrials" in it. As long as a PG-13 movie doesn't intentionally have its punches pulled to earn that rating, I'm actually okay with it.

An anorexic teenager with a big head is behind you!

A lot of people also think that I'm totally against PG-13 rated horror just because horror shouldn't be PG-13. That's not actually true either as there are quite a few PG-13 horror and sci-fi movies which I've enjoyed over the years including "Poltergeist" (1982), "Signs" (2002), and even "The New Daughter" (2009). It's just as well really since "Dark Skies" is little more than a fusion of those three all over again. Unfortunately, with it being a Blumhouse Production, "Dark Skies" also shares the same plot construction as "Insidious", "Paranormal Activity" and "Sinister", and I really do hate those.

"Dark Skies" is "Poltergeist" with more discovery contrivances and the ghosts changed to evil grey aliens who look like "Slenderman". If you think you've seen it all before, you have. The only thing which stands out in a good way is the Apple product placement because I'm pretty sure that my next computer really will be an Apple after all the trouble I've had with Linux recently. It's refreshing to see the computers in use rather than being pawed by a certain immature blonde on YouTube.

No, I'm joking. The highlight of "Dark Skies" is actually the cat-owning "alien expert" Edwin Pollard, played by J.K. Simmons, whose exposition is up there with the best of them even if it borrows a lot from the scene between Roger Wayne (James Gammon) and John James (Kevin Costner) in "The New Daughter". I've seen J.K. Simmons in a lot of things. He's a great actor, but he'll still always be Vern Schillinger from "Oz" to me.

The rest of the acting is fairly decent too. I couldn't understand a single thing the little brother said, and the unnecessary close-ups of Keri Russell's upper lip mole distracted me, but it's fine otherwise. I can't abide kids in movies anyway, and Keri Russell is still fairly hot without any lipstick so I'm not going to condemn the cinematographer of "Dark Skies" for wanting to get near her. The characterisation is very good to the extent that the family and their lifestyle are more interesting in themselves than any of the alien abduction nonsense which comes along to ruin it.

The trouble is that aliens and alien abductions simply aren't real. It's total bullshit. If "Dark Skies" had been about a demonic house possession (which it really is anyway given so many "Poltergeist" homages) then it would be a worthy (albeit very generic) entry into the genre. Apart from an awesome (but borrowed) bird scene and one genuinely terrifying (also borrowed) moment near the end, "Dark Skies" is long on tension but disappointingly short on scares.

There's barely a trace of originality in "Dark Skies" other than the "twist" ending which should have quit while it was ahead. It seems to be a trademark of Blumhouse to deliver a great punchline and then ruin it all by adding too many anti-climactic minutes afterwards. It's not as if they care. Movies are just a pop product to them. As long as they make as much money as possible (as quickly as possible), to Hell with leaving the audience feeling satisfied.

Witchville (2010)

"In the Middle Ages, Erik and Jason seek out his compatriot Malachy and force him to return to his homeland."

Well, since it's "Fantasy Friday", here's a nasty thing from the SyFy channel for you starring Luke Goss, Ed Speleers, MyAnna Buring and Sarah Douglas. You'd have to have spent your life under a rock like my Blogger/Twitter stalker to not know who any of these people are, but I'll remind you anyway.

Luke Goss is, of course, one half of the Bros boyband from the late '80s who now fancies himself as an actor. In fairness, he isn't too bad in any of the movies that I've seen him in although he's reached the age where he looks like a poor man's Jason Statham rather than the pop idol he once was. As King Malachy in "Witchville", he's credible enough especially as it's only a B-movie anyway.

Allegedly, Ed Speelers is famous for playing "Eragon" in the 2006 movie of the same name, but I haven't watched it yet. Maybe I'll do that next week since I've heard a few good things about it. If it has big CGI dragons in it then I can't wait! Yes, that was sarcasm. He doesn't have the biggest role in "Witchville" apart from being tied up and tortured, but that's good enough for me.

MyAnna Buring is someone who you should know from "The Descent" and a few other horror movies that I've reviewed on this blog including "Credo" and "The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn Part 2". She's a very good looking girl and always adds a nice bit of blonde allure to whatever she's in even though her acting skills seem to be minimal. She's underused once again here as a warrior-sorceress, but at least she looks the part.

Finally, Sarah Douglas started off as one of the brides of Dracula in Dan Curtis' 1974 adaptation but only achieved real fame in the "Superman" movies as Ursa. In "Witchville", she plays "The Red Queen" quite adequately even if it's just a case of dressing up in feathers like a big, scary chicken version of Darth Vader.

There's not much to like in this movie other than the serious tone and the background music. The CGI effects would have been okay in "Hercules" or "Xena: Warrior Princess", but there aren't many of them, and they look dated. The oversized leeches are the highest point with the lightning bolts of magic and glowing eyes which change colour being the lowest.

If you are into "sword and sorcery" B-movies then you might also get a kick out of this one. It's rather slow and very formulaic, but some of the action sequences are interestingly choreographed, and the filming location in China suits the story well. Unfortunately, "Witchville" is still as instantly forgettable as all the other SyFy movies.

Hearts and Armour (1983)

"Bradamante, a woman wearing an invincible suit of armour, is travelling the countryside at the time of the Crusades. After ending up in the middle of a web of romantic and cultural tangles, she finds herself in love with a Moor prince, while one of the Christian knights has fallen in love with a Moor princess. Others, however, are against the cross-cultural romance, and Bradamante's love is soon forced into a duel to the death. Will she ever be with her true love?"

Do you remember "Hearts and Armour" from the '80s? No? Nor do I much except that it was the second VHS tape that I ever bought after "Flesh + Blood" (1985). I'd never heard of it before, but the original VHS artwork looked similar so that was enough for me. I practically threw my pocket money at the guy in Blockbuster and ran home thinking that I'd found treasure.

Of course, once I put in in my VCR, I was very disappointed. Although "Hearts and Armour" promised lots of former "Charlie's Angels" star Tanya Roberts (who shows more than she ought to if you watch carefully), I wasn't so keen on Barbara De Rossi, the terrible dubbing, or the really jarring editing. Allegedly, "Hearts and Armour" was cut down from an Italian miniseries, but I've found no real evidence of that. Basically, it was a cheap piece of trash designed to cash in on "Excalibur" (1981).

Nearly thirty years on, I can't say that I've grown to love "Hearts and Armour". It's still horrible, Bradamante (Barbara De Rossi) looks very uncomfortable in her suit of armour, and the fight scenes are ridiculous. There are some nice gory bits with dismembered limbs flying about in the battles, but this isn't really my kind of thing at all. As much as I can appreciate the work that went into making the costumes as historically (in)accurate as possible, I couldn't care less about the Crusades.

Barbara De Rossi also played Helietta Canins in "Vampire in Venice" (1988) which is the sequel to the terrible remake of "Nosferatu" starring Klaus Kinski. That's much more my cup of tea although I can't honestly say that she's any better in it than in this. Let's face it, she was cast in these movies because of how she looks rather than for any other reason. Strangely, I don't have any problem with that at all. Barbara De Rossi was quite the hottie back in the day.

Because I don't pay attention to crap, I can't tell you who played any of the knights in "Hearts and Armour" except by grabbing their names from the IMDb. Ronn Moss plays Ruggero (the pony-tailed object of Bradamante's affections), Rick Edwards is Orlando, and Maurizio Nichetti is the scruffy, little magician called Atalante. As for the others, who cares? It's not like they've ever been in anything else anyway.

The cinematography isn't bad despite attempts to ruin it with the panned-and-scanned VHS transfer (as yet there is no DVD available), but the acting is so dreadful and the pacing so slow that the overall atmosphere is one of boredom rather than excitement. I nodded off several times during the epic ordeal of trying to rewatch "Hearts and Armour" and even had to have a proper sleep before my numbed brain would allow me to complete it.

Unintentional laughs are created by the pompousness of the dialogue and the inclusion of a Samurai warrior for no good reason at all other than he's another kind of sword-fighter. Some of the action scenes do indeed liven things up for a few seconds, but "Hearts and Armour" even makes the "Deathstalker" sequels look good in comparison.

If you've never seen "Hearts and Armour", I'm not going to recommend it to you. Just knowing that something this awful exists should be enough to satisfy your curiosity.

Deathstalker (1983)

"The warrior Deathstalker is tasked by an old witch lady to obtain and unite the three powers of creation - a chalice, an amulet, and a sword - lest the evil magician Munkar get them and use them for nefarious purposes."

Filled with a plethora of monsters, boobs, blood, decapitations, and no acting ability whatsoever, "Deathstalker" marks the beginning of my new "Fantasy Friday" series in a way that no other '80s sword and sorcery adventure ever could.

There's certainly no other which co-stars Richard Brooker, the third actor to play Jason Voorhees in the "Friday the 13th" series, and the first Jason actor to wear the hockey mask. Did you really think that I would choose a movie which had no association with horror on my blog? Shame on you. Richard Brooker is also very British so that's another good reason to mention him although it's Rick Hill who plays the lead role of Deathstalker.

I was never a huge fan of the "fantasy" genre, but there were some titles which had to be watched back in the day simply because they came from the same Roger Corman stable as a lot of horror flicks. The awesome "Deathstalker" poster was also so proudly displayed by my local video store that I just had to rent the VHS tape to see if anything on it remotely resembled what the artwork suggested. It didn't really, but I was too young to understand why. God help me, I even looked forward to the sequels as they came out over the years.

Obviously, "Deathstalker" is an even lower-budget clone of "Conan the Barbarian" with lots of manly posturing, surprisingly well-choreographed swordplay, and hardly enough plot to keep it going for an hour and a quarter, but what more do you expect from any B-movie apart from cheap entertainment? If you want gratuitous nudity, hot chicks, or just some weirdly homoerotic costumes and a bizarre, magical sex-change, "Deathstalker" has it all. There are some nice gory bits dotted around too.

I'm not going to go into any great detail about the story because it won't stand up to any serious critique. Instead, I've embedded the full movie at the top of this post for you to enjoy.

Let me know what you think of "Deathstalker" in the comments section below.