Stevecorp Don't listen to the negative reviews

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

Kaydan Christian A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

Dana An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

skallisjr When I first rented a copy of the film, I thought it would just be another Medieval oater, but was pleasantly surprised to discover it had classic roots. It's a retelling of the Song of Roland. As Excalibur was the best incarnation of Le Morte d'Arthur, and Dark Kingdom was an incarnation of the Nordic Nibelungen Ring Cycle, the roots of this go back to the legends of Charlemagne, most specifically, Ariosto's Orlando Furioso.Naturally, the story is abbreviated from the original, and there are a few changes, possibly for simplicity.Probably because of its Italian origins, the film features some really artistically designed armor.

Blueghost Most likely this film was thrown together to ride the coat tails of John Boorman's "Excalibur." There's much in the way of imitation or homage paid to Boorman in terms of feel, and of course the knights.The problems with this film are various. One of the things that leaps out is the mediocre cinematography. Again, there's a whole hearted attempt to "pay homage" to Boorman, but the long shots are either misplaced or not set far enough away. There're some interesting scenes of bleak forests and wastelands, again like Boorman's work, but the shots are ill conceived with little in the way of thoughtful composition. I'll also add that there's an excessive number of slow motion shots.The story was a little difficult to follow, and the fact that the Moors in the film are depicted as caucasian (men with 1980's shoulder length feathered hair no less) doesn't help either visual or story aspect. And therein lies a tale because the acting is below average, hammy, boring and otherwise nearly talentless. Slow motion can only cover up so many sins. Sub par talent isn't one of them.One of the real drawbacks is a lack of cast. By that I mean warm bodys or extras. There're precious few people inhabiting this world, and it seems as though all the fighting is done by a little over half dozen folks (the main characters). There's money in the budget to build a Moor encampment, but no money hire the extras to bring it to life.Still, for all it's flaws, and even though I laughed out loud at a number of the more ridiculous parts (mostly the actors), I could appreciate it for what it is (that, and my buddy loaned me his copy, and I'd hate to tell him I disliked a film he really likes :)). It's a B-movie striving for an A. But striving for an A on money that's little more than a shoestring budget.Some nudity, a good amount of violence, the film was meant for an adult crowd, but if you took away the bare breasts and blood you'd have a film fit for kids. As it is it's designed for adult consumption, but unless you're a fan of the knight genre (by that I mean you really go overboard for all medieval themed films) I wouldn't recommend it.Fun but flawed. Don't bother unless you need some sword play on your TV screen, because it truly is a stupid film.*EDIT* The man who loaned me his tape is actually a private security type as well as an investigator for the Department of Justice. A real jerk.

Luis Filipe dos Reis Peres I didn´t knew this was made as a television series. If it was, certainly doesn´t show, at least in the version i have on video. I don´t know what editing was done here, but it certainly works just fine.This might look like a B movie, (and most certain it is), but in my view this story didn´t needed any more production values to be told. If this would look more produced, certainly it would have lost all his authentic look and feel and it would look like another knights movie, (or should i say, unrealistic adventures with knights, american movie)PALADINI is just fine the way it looks, because it manages to create a very accurate depiction of the days it tries to portrait. And i live in the exact same area of the globe where those types of events occurred, 700 years ago more or less. The type of situations depicted in PALADINI are a part of the History in my country Portugal, (more exactly in the region where i live the Algarve), as well as they are part of Spain and the south of France.I really like the story in PALADINI. It seems taken out of one of the many legends and historical events that i know from my History classes back in high school. True it´s a simple story, but many times these are the best, and this movie didn´t needed more to be a good depiction of those days of the Arabic invasions to the south of Europe a long time ago.As a knights movie is probably my favorite ever. I liked EXCALIBUR for example (and it´s truly a superior movie), but it always feels a bit artificial. Specially when compared to the looks in PALADINI, which couldn´t feel more historically correct.So, i don´t know, how many versions of PALADINI are out there, but the one i have is certainly very good, and it doesn´t feels like a television work at all.Maybe people are mistaking the lack of an american style in this, for a bad B movie, wich it isn´t. It´s just European comercial cinema. And a very good one.My version runs for about 100 minutes, by the way and i advise everyone to find it, if you want to finaly see a movie in which knights are depicted with a realistic feel. There aren´t even good guys and bad guys in this movie. just persons who live in a dangerous time.An excellent movie.

Brett-9 This is the classic B film with bad acting, no story, no accuracy. All I saw was weak attempts at a love story in tin foil costumes and gratuitous nudity attempts. Not for those interested in good film.