Exoticalot People are voting emotionally.

CommentsXp Best movie ever!

Odelecol Pretty good movie overall. First half was nothing special but it got better as it went along.

Keeley Coleman The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

berberian00-276-69085 How about that mess with H. Rider Haggard's heritage! Ayesha or She-Who-Must-Be-Obeyed has been filmed several times and none of them comes true to spirit of the original. "She" (1925) is silent movie with extensive budget but parts of script are missing. "She" (1935) goes as far as the North Pole where Leo/Kallikrates stumble on lost city Kor. "She" (1965) is most popular where Horace and Leo travel to lost city of Kuma. Ayesha dies in the Eternal Fire, while Kallikrates becomes immortal and waits for her reincarnation. There comes "Vengeance of She" (1968) as sequel, where Carol - a modern European girls - is taken over by the spirit of mysterious Ayesha. Finally, "She" (2001) is the latest remake which I couldn't obtain and YouTube has ban on it.Let's get to the meat now. It appears that Ayesha story is four novels serial written by H. Rider Haggard at different time intervals (1886, 1905, 1921 and 1923). You can check in Wikipedia for synopsis but it is still complicated as Maya calendar. So, stay calm until someone gives you digest or otherwise a one page summary plot. Then if you have patience and compliance, you can stop worry or else you start arguing because its in your character. I know people that hold strong executive positions and still haven't read a book in their life. They are just proxy for authority.H. Rider Haggard (1856-1925) is the most important English writer of adventure fiction. Unfortunately, his novels are not reissued regularly and maybe because there is lack of demand. For instance, Charles Dickens (1812-1870) is English Victorian era author who wrote numerous highly acclaimed novels. I would rather read two novels from H. Rider Haggard than one from Charles Dickens. It's not that he is dull, but he is highly unreadable. In our country Haggard has been translated widely in the past 80-90 years. New titles are coming in translation regularly, but I repeat, original Haggard novels are difficult to obtain."She: A History of Adventure" and "Ayesha: The Return of She" have appeared recently in double edition. Preface for two books is combined, where the Editor tells the audience how he received a parcel with manuscript. In the parcel, there is attached letter from executives of Horace Holly and his ward Leo Vincey. The manuscript gives a first-person narrative of Ayesha adventures for 2000 years.Ayesha was borrowed from Arabic, being traditionally one of Mohammed's wives names. What happened in the plot ... ehh, you can start in 500 B.C. when the frame story begin. A threesome story evolves when the Persian king invades Egypt and three people flee away in hidden kingdom of Kor, in Africa. Those are Ayesha (celibate priestess), Kallikrates the Greek (mercenary employed by the Pharaoh), and Egyptian princess (loves Kallikrates and seeks revenge on Ayesha). The story builds on ...

utgard14 Sequel to Hammer's version of She is actually more interesting than that film, at least to me. I loved the 1935 version of H. Rider Haggard's She. But the Hammer version did little for me. I found it very dull with only Ursula Andress' beauty to recommend it. This sequel is hardly a masterpiece but has enough going for it that it surpasses the previous film. The opening with the corny song playing while hitchhiking Carol (Olga Schoberova) is cornered by a rapist then saved by something mysterious is a moody start to things. The film keeps up that mood as the girl swims out to a yacht and hops aboard. She's being compelled towards Kuma, the lost city from the last film. Turns out Ayesha (again, from She) is attempting to possess the girl. As they make it closer to Kuma, the movie becomes a lot less interesting.Olga Schoberova is beautiful but brings little to the part other than that. The scenes of her having nightmares screaming out "Ayeeeesha!" will give most viewers giggle fits. Still, she's not as wooden as Andress. Derek Godfrey is the bad guy but there's nothing bad about those awesome eyebrows. Edward Judd and John Richardson are solid. The great Andre Morrell has a small part as a man who helps Carol. Like She, this is pretty dry stuff. Worth watching for a nice score, atmospheric touches, and for Olga's beauty.

Wuchak "The Vengeance of She" is a 1968 Hammer film (British), a a sequel to 1965's "She" with Ursula Andress. Whereas the events of the first film took place in 1918, this sequel takes place 50 years later in the modern day (1967).THE STORY: A beautiful blond named Carol (Olinka Berova) is plagued by voices calling her "Ayesha" and is drawn by a mysterious force toward the Southeast. During her journey she meets Dr. Phillip Smith (Edward Judd) who decides to accompany her, likely because he wants to attain boyfriend status (even though he's obviously old enough to be her father). They travel through the desert with Philip (Edward Judd) and eventually reach a lost city in the mountains. John Richardson is back as Killikrates while Derek Godfrey and Danièle Noël play Men-Hari and Sharna.Although the storyline is sometimes kinda lazy you'll no doubt enjoy this film to some degree if appreciate Hammer films. What's it have going for it? Well, it's a serious adventure for one thing; don't expect any goofiness or camp here. It's got great locations including breathtaking shots of the Mediterranean coast. It also has one beautiful leading lady in Olinka Berova. Yes, Ursula Andress is gorgeous as well, but Olinka beats her out IMHO. Olinka may lack Ursula's looks-that-kill stunning-ness but she makes up for it in gentle, sweet innocence. Seriously, Olinka possesses a quality that's rare today. The film's worth watching or owning just to behold this.As to the "G-rated" issue, an Amazon reviewer -- "A Customer" (May 27, 2002) -- spends his entire review ranting about how mediocre the film is because it's rated G. First of all, the DVD is not rated G; it clearly states that the film is "unrated." Secondly, even if it WAS rated G at some point (like when it was originally released in theaters) it would be at least a PG or PG-13 today. Want proof? - Olinka is shown for long shots in just her underwear. One scene shows her walking into the ocean where her panties are wet and clearly see-through. Does this sound G-rated? - There's a fairly long belly dancing scene where the girls are less than half-dressed. Does this sound G-rated? - There are quite a few violent fights that end in death. Plus a woman on a sacrificial altar has a sword dropped into her bosom and a man staked to a wall is speared in the chest. Does this sound G-rated? Suffice to say that reviewer doesn't know what he's talking about.One last thing about this reviewer's piece. The guy appears obsessed with film ratings. Personally I never pay attention to these ratings. Why? Simply because a film is either great, good, mediocre or bad period. The rating is irrelevant. Does more gore, more nudity, more cussing, more overt sexual situations determine the worthiness of a film? Maybe for 13 year-olds. Is "The Wizard of OZ" a lousy film because it's rated G? How about the original "Planet of the Apes"? BOTTOM LINE: Although "The Vengeance of She" is not a hard R-rated film, it's neither a tame G-rated film either. It's worth watching or owning for the breathtakingly beautiful Olinka Berova, the fine locations and the serious spirit of adventure. It's only real flaw is that it has a bit of a lazy vibe, but it makes up for it with an ethereal ambiance. Regardless, "The Vengeance of She" delivers the goods if you're in the mood for a serious adventure flick à la 60's James Bond, but without the goofy super-spy elements. If you appreciate Hammer films it's a must.The film runs 101 minutes and was shot in Monte Carlo (Mediterranean coast), Spain (the desert) and England (the studio sets).GRADE: B (6.5/10 Stars)

jamesraeburn2003 *POSSIBLE SPOILER*A beautiful young Scandanavian girl called Carol (Olinka Berova) is lured to the city of Kuma by the immortal Killikrates (John Richardson) and Men-Hari (Derek Godfrey) who convinces Killikrates that she is the reincarnation of his lost love, Queen Ayesha, who died years ago. Killikrates intends to give Carol the secret of immortality so that he can live with her forever and restore her power over the city. Meanwhile, he has also promised Men-Hari the secret for bringing him back his old lover.The basic premise provides a fairly adequate sequel to Hammer's successful adaptation of H. Rider Haggard's 'She' (1965), which was something of a curates egg in itself (see separate review). The main problem here is that the Peter O' Donnell script is unconvincing in that one ludicrous situation hardly runs smoothly into another. There is also some unbelievably inept dialogue like when the heroes are chasing after a desert peasant who is on horseback in a Land Rover but they still have difficulty keeping up with him. I bet the British Motor Corporation would have been horrified because that wouldn't have been good publicity for their versatile off road vehicles! With the exception of Edward Judd's performance as the English doctor who is in love with Carol, a good cast is working well below it's capabilities, even though it includes Andre Morell who was superb as Dr Watson in Hammer's 'The Hound Of The Baskervilles' (1959). The film is made watchable by the direction of Cliff Owen who displays his skill at narrative pacing (his work partly redeemed the otherwise unfunny Morecombe & Wise vehicle 'That Riviera Touch'). In summary this film failed to repeat the success of it's predecessor.