Evengyny Thanks for the memories!

Matialth Good concept, poorly executed.

CrawlerChunky In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

Fairaher The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

robinthealchemist this is not a movie. it is a collection of scenes a real movie would have, without any decent connection between them. sure it has flashy action, and even the very predictable "the hero gets to bang the blond chick", but there are no real characters. where in a movie scenes are tied together into a story, this "thing" has no story. just a collection of hack and slash, where somehow a handful of undisciplined Saxon farmers manage to beat a well trained army. also they pretend to be pagans, while england was already converted to the false Christian god 4 centuries before the battle of Hastings. also they were no Saxons, they were Anglo-Saxons. which basically is a Christian who has stolen pagan culture, amongst others.the only way this movie can be enjoyable, is if you are very drunk or stoned...

Tony Heck "The God's can no longer wait." When an evil ruler begins to oppress the land the is only one man that can fight back and restore peace. The fighter they find only wants one thing...blood. This is a hard movie to review. First of all, this is not really my type of movie. I have never been a big fan of the mid-evil genre and wasn't a huge fan of Hammer of the Gods so I wasn't really expecting much from this. All that said there was one thing that was really distracting and hard to get past. In the movie 300, during the fight scenes the camera slows down and speeds up so much that it takes you out of the movie. In this movie, they slow down the fighting...but never speed it back up. This may seem like a little thing but when it's overused it becomes far too distracting for you to focus on what is happening in the movie. I do have to say that although the movie seemed pretty low budget, the use of the sepia-like filter made it seem like the movie has made for more than it was. Overall, if you liked Hammer of the Gods you will most likely like this one as well. As for me, the technical issues were too much for me to get past. I give this a C.

DareDevilKid Reviewed by: Dare Devil Kid (DDK)Rating: 2.5/5 starsWith a stylish look and 86-minute runtime, "Sword of Vengeance" is chock full of action, violence, retribution, and minimal dialogue. The script revolves around a Norman prince (Stanley Weber) who seeks revenge on his father's murderer - his ruthless uncle, Earl Durant (Karel Roden). Gaining the trust of a band of exiled and beleaguered Saxon farmers, he leads them into battle against Durant and his army, exploiting them in his quest to satisfy his code of honor. Does the prince find his retribution, and will he be willing to sacrifice everything and everyone to quench his thirst for bloody vengeance forms the crux of the story.The film showcases a great use of color, making the battlefield look hazy and depressing. It's also heavy on style, has a great production design (considering its budget), and boasts impressive sets. There is an interesting background score to boot - very electronic and not at all what you might expect from a film set one thousand years ago, but nevertheless refreshing and merged well with the scenes.The bleak and desolate landscape, the depiction of the silent warrior, and the tyranny of the Normans over the Saxons are all well- portrayed. Unfortunately, the plot feels scattered, and the character development, subpar. The audience is only treated to flashbacks of our prince's past; how he got to where he is remains open to conjecture (and not of the less known the better kind). Though Weber does a good job of portraying his character, the writing and story does not provide adequate depth for the audience to sympathize with him, nor to be wholly engaged in his pursuit. Also, the historical authenticity of the portrayal of female Saxon warriors with one of being the leader (no less) of the ragtag and of Saxons is dubious to say the least. It's a given that the movie is a fictitious tale set against a historical backdrop, meant solely for entertainment, but this stretch of liberty taken by the filmmakers is somewhat hard do digest. And, as much as I'm an advocate for gender equality, it cannot trump reality."Sword of Vengeance" is basically one long battle sequence against a dark, brooding landscape interspersed with morose characters. Standing out from the bunch is Annabelle Wallis who breathes life into her battle worn character Anna. She is shown as a brutalized form in her introductory scene, and, then as the movie progresses, her inner warrior comes out. Obviously, Anna has to mix it up with the men, in battle and in the, um, bedroom, and Wallis has the proper combination of beauty and brawn to be believable in both aspects.Among the pros of 'Sword Of Vengeance' are its scenery, costumes, and score, which are pretty good, considering it's limited budget. The battle scenes are engrossing, barring certain portions where the use of slow-motion becomes excessive. The final battle looks epic with arrows, flames, pits, swords, axes, and plenty of mayhem. If you can look past the weak narrative and lack of character development, the film is worthy of an Itunes or Amazon download, especially for action buffs.

s3276169 Sword of Vengeance relies in large part on impressive visual elements to carry the film. That is not, however, necessarily a bad thing. The director utilizes chiaroscuro, a technique that utilizes strong contrasts between light and dark throughout Sword of Vengeance. The result is a film imbued with a dark, menacing and rather stark feel. This aptly reflects post 1066 Britain. A world of drastic change and no small measure of oppression from the nations new rulers, the Normans. Accompanying the strong visuals is a well synced, if at times annoying, electronic sound track.It suits the film but its intentionally jarring qualities are at times over stated. What is by contrast, not well emphasized is the story line. The story is kept vague, I suspect quite intentionally, to reflect a lone stranger, action flick, reminiscent of the lone cowboy genre that Clint Eastwood is famous for. The main character is mysterious, brooding type who remains mostly, silent, throughout the film. Indeed, there is not a lot of dialogue from any of the cast which actually works in this films favour. Its action driven and you get to know the characters, as the old saying goes, by their actions not their words. The fight scenes that are found throughout this title, are well choreographed with a feral, bloody quality. Certainly, this is not a film for the squeamish. In summary Sword of Vengeance is a well rounded action film. Visuals aside its arguably very forgettable but at the same time its manages something that is quite difficult. A film that heavily exploits visual elements in place of dialogue and still succeeds in engaging the viewer. Seven out of ten from me.