User reviews

Hmmm, the cast first. Well, I am a big fan of red heads and Khrystyne Haje, who plays Roxanne, was the only reason I stuck with this sucker. She is as pretty now as she was back on the old American TV series "Head of the Class." The other female lead, Ashley Jones as the princess, was also a delight to watch, though no one would accuse her of being a great actress from watching this movie. Trevor St. John plays the captain assigned to guard the Princess and he acquits himself well enough. He reminds me a Cary Elwes, who was the lead in "The Princess Bride."

How in the world did Ron Perlman(from "Beauty and the Beast fame") and Eric Roberts get signed to this?? I suspect Mr. Roberts had some connection to the production beyond simply appearing in the film. The credits were revealing in that Roberts had his own driver, production assistant, costumer, and make-up artist, while the rest of the cast had to share a seperate team.

In fact, the blooper reel at the end was, in my opinion, also quite revealing in that almost all of the clips were of Roberts blowing lines. Almost none of the other cast were shown on the blooper real and I was left wondering whether Roberts was the only one unable to keep his lines straight or instead used his clout so that the rest of the cast just wasn't included. I wanted to see the three main female leads gaff it up a little but no luck.

The script took few chances, surrounding a paper-thin plot with all the standard fairy-fantasy tale cliches. One interesting twists was that one of the King's Guard was played with some flair by a black actor (name unknown) with light homosexual overtones. He kept complaining about his pink hat with a big pink plume and about his clothes getting dirty. There wasn't really any sexual innuendo involved but quite a bit of lifestyle innuendo. It was something I hadn't seen before in this type of movie and the actor did a fair job with the script he was given. An interesting diversion...

The sword-play and stunt work was pretty weak. I have a little experience with sword-play and I suspect what was shown in the movie was more a result of a limited practice schedule. I have seen much better sword handling in a variety of situations and I think the actors just needed more practice before shooting. Especially since with a movie, the editor can do a lot to make it seem more dramatic by good cutting from shot to shot.

And there were a lot of shots. The filmakers did take time to get a lot of angles in the film. Clearly there was effort to do a lot of conceptual layout work before committing anything to film. It's just that what they ended up with wasn't very special. The cinematography was one of the best aspects (relatively speaking) to the film. A lot of it was shot using natural sunlight and all the actors looked good in their costumes - another bright spot in the work. It was clear that this film was shot entirely in one physical location with a cheesy-looking "ruins" serving as the focal point of action. The credits gave a big kudos to such-in-such a ranch...

"The King's Guard" would make for nice family-friendly viewing for all ages but won't hold adults attention for any length of time. While there are plenty of deaths during the film there is no blood or gore of any kind so younger kids are safe with this one. Unless you are a fan of one of the cast members go rent Princess Bride.

Treachery, villainy, swordplay, noble secret love and a princess in peril: what more could the average ten year old would-be Musketeer ask for?

Set in the days of chivalry at sword point, "The King's Guard" is the tale of the "last stand" of a princess (Ashley Jones) being taken to a marriage that will save her father's throne and the young noble Guard (Trevor St. John) who secretly loves her, against the traitorous ex-Guard (Eric Roberts) who wants her and the greedy Lord (Ron Perlman) who wants her dowry.

This movie has nice costumes and I think that's where most of the money went. Ninety-nine percent of it takes place in one setting. There are no horses although the DVD cover shows them. The acting runs the spectrum from almost-painful-to-watch (Jones) to oh-good-someone-knows-what-they're-doing (Perlman, Roberts). The sword play, although decently choreographed, is done too hesitantly by most of the actors to be truly exciting.

People who are into the Renaissance Faire, SCA (Society for Creative Anachronism) and LARP (Live Action Role Playing) scenes may be able to glean some inspiration from the costumes and sword play.

Although there is much fighting there is no blood or gore so this would be an excellent family movie for anyone with young children going through a swashbuckling phase.

Worth a rent for gamers, worth a rent/buy used for youngsters.

Well, they had to make a period piece without expensive locations, crew, or even horses, that they couldn't obviously afford, and with some reasonably well known names, and that is what you get with this one. I couldn't stand more than 40 minutes of this. English accent was too pushed. I like Roberts, but he is not much on screen here. His top billing is more a marketing stunt. If I remember correctly, he is not even main villain. Ron is also an excellent actor, also wasted. The whole thing sinks... I will try to remember this film when I hear people badmouthing Kingdom of Heaven or Ridley Scott's Robin Hood. I love low-bud films, but not when they are so poor and uncreative.

Okay... I've seen high school students with handicams do better stuff than this. I don't know which was worse... Eric Roberts' awful, contrived character, the illogical love story between the two main characters, or the fact that they went and killed off Ron Perlman, who, as far as I could tell was the only one actually DOING any acting. I love swordfights, and these guys seem to have some good ability there... but even that seemed over-rehearsed and passionless. Character development is nonexistent. A previous reviewer commented that you can tell the people in the film were having fun... but it certainly didn't rub off on me. I was too busy trying to figure out the purpose for ever having made this film to start with.

Not the worst movie I have ever seen, but still in the same general vicinity. The King's Guard is a fumbling attempt to merge adventure and comedy. The humour often came off as really badly overacted nonsense and the action scenes were overlong and poorly choreographed. There was no grandeur in what should have been a grand adventure. It seemed as if all of the sweeping shots of wonderful vistas had been left out because they couldn't afford the extras to fill the spaces. The costuming looked hastily thrown together and this was explained by introducing the idea that the king's guardsmen were all acting undercover. It would have made as much sense if there was a scene where the king gathered his men together and said, 'Tomorrow is mufti day boys, so you can wear whatever you like.' The lack of extras/money was again shown when not very far into the movie, the narrator comes on to explain that the situation had become dire, due to an attack of overwhelming numbers of bandits and that during the fight, the allies of the king's guard had run off. The next scene shows some of the men of the king's guard pulling one of the carts that had formed part of the caravan that had been attacked…they couldn't even afford horses! The four or five thousand dollars that went into making the movie could have been used to do some good in the world, instead of stealing 92 minutes of my life.

there have been many great sword fights. "Robin Hood", "Captain Blood" and even "The Princess Bride" come to mind. This movie is so bad to almost drive the memory of those great fights right out of my mind. Bad acting-oh yes, bad dialog-oh yes, but the worst choreographed fight scenes perhaps in the history of movies. I know professional stunt people are expensive but not spending the money really really shows.

This was one of the worst movies I have ever had to sit through. The only reason I continued watching was to see if it would get any better, it only got worse. Eric Roberts and Ron Perlman should throttle their respective agents for putting them in such a low budget, poorly cast, and extremely bad fight/special effects scenes. Do not watch this movie. If you are a fan of rennasiance/romance films stick to The Princess Bride and Ever After. If you are looking for a good sword fight action movie try Braveheart or The 13th Warrior.

Beyond awful. The contrived accents were irritating and the sword play was absurd. I've heard better dialog and seen better acting in porn films. Perhaps had the creators included a bit of porn the movie might have had some redeeming value. Avoid this movie at all costs.

The different actors within this film all possess more than adequate talent to have made a much better film. Because a motion picture is not fitted with a large budget does not mean it has to be of poor quality. Do not blame the actors for this lame motion picture, you are only as good as the tools you are given to work with. The fact they utilized a very limited scene display for their plot showed a lack of either imagination or budget. Maybe both. A much better film could have been made from the script used. Better settings for filming, better choreography of the swordplay, better costuming. Horses and better costuming would have helped the film. There are numbers of small independent film companies spread across America that could have done a better job with the budget this film had. Nick Nashoba

I came into this movie as an Eric Roberts fan. On the DVD he's the only person on the cover and is hardly in the movie. They should have had the dude from One Life To Live on the box instead because he was the hero of the film.

Anyways, my main beef with the movie was the fact that it seemed like the director was more familiar with stage acting than film, and for the most part it seemed like the same went for the cast. The battle scenes in particular were horribly done.

I don't tend to bash movies for being low budget but this one really did nothing with nothing. No horses, one terrible set, childish special effects. Sam Raimi or Peter Jackson might have been able to pull a rabbit out of that hat but not the guys responsible for this one.

This fine Medieval tale will fill your heart with a longing for the noble days of knights and castles!

Fleeing from an attack on the Castle, Princess Gwendolyn takes refuge in a ruin with the surviving members of her entourage, including seven of her father's elite King's Guard and their leader, Captain John Reynolds. She's managed to escape with her dowry, a treasure chest filled with gold. Finding themselves surrounded by fifty bandits, lead by the evil Lord Morton the royal party discover that the notorious traitor Augustus Talbert is fighting with the bandits. Talbert had been the former commander of The King's Guard, a man who had mysteriously betrayed the King.

He chases them through shire, wood, and meadow as the fight of good and evil wages on eternally. Who will win?

I had the esteem pleasure of seeing the original directors cut of "The King's Guard," and I must say it goes wonders beyond the DVD "producers cut" seen in stores. We hear of this happening time and time again: producers stepping in and deciding they know better than the director and/or writers. In this case, the film falls short destroying some of the characters' depth and story continuity, thus eliminating some of the film's fun. Not to say the DVD is terrible, but when you've had the chance to see what it could be . . .

This is a lighthearted tale that came about from a labor of love. Simply put, this is an amusing, entertaining film that doesn't take it self too seriously, and will have you and your family enjoying every moment.

How on earth did they get Ron Perlman and Eric Roberts to do this tripe of a film? Just awful!! I love these types of films in general and I love some films that are rated very low but this film I can see why it has a very low rating - it's terrible.

I don't think any of the actors were "into this" - not really. The actors are half-hearted with their acting. Now the costumes and sets are gorgeous but the story and halfway acting does not do it for me.

I skimmed through the film and it did not pick up. I'll have to try another film... I'm sorry but I can't do this one.

2/10

Oh dear. What an unmitigated disaster. The script was rambling, the cast was bored, and the direction ... well, I can't say I noticed any. How two actors such as Eric Roberts and the tremendously talented Ron Perlman were cajoled into doing this tosh is beyond me. It's a shame the video cover depicted horses and the budget obviously didn't stretch to affording them - not an equine in the whole film.

Although I must say the costumes were delightful.

Oh, and the out-takes were a revelation.

Just fast-forward and watch the bloopers. Don't bother with the rest...

It started off great!! The odd hazy soft focus required some getting used to, but I was eager to see a fun film. But it got dumber, and then it got dumber. Some of the reviewers didn't like the swordplay. Well... it was kind of lazy. No real sense of aggressiveness or anger to it. The acting was bad. There were some attempts at humor, which seemed childish. Some of the reviewers said it was a children's movie. Yeah, maybe. But the movie poster seems to show a drama. This film was not for me. I couldn't finish it.

The movie was very enjoyable, lots of action and jokes to keep the family entertained. I have a personal interest in sword fighting and it appeared to me that they fought in a very authentic way for that time period. Also costumes seemed authentic. I recommend a big budget sequel.

It had a ok plot and the actors were a little over dramatic but the story had places to go. I really like Ashley Jones and Trevor St. John. They were the movie! There were funny parts with the other King's Guards and when Eric Roberts was on screen it was awesome! Now he has so much presents and with Ashley Jones and Trevor St. John it was a pretty good movie. A little cheesey but fun and entertaining! Ashley Jones is a standout and look for her in the future! Very pretty and going to be a great actress! Out of 4 stars I give it 3 stars. I guess I liked it! It's on DVD on VHS! RENT it or buy it! It's good for kids!

i saw this when i was like 5 cuz my uncle earl is in this movie he is the guy who doesn't like hats. the story behind that is he really doesn't like hats and he refused to wear 1 on the camera so they changed the script for him. i really don't remember it but it rocked!!!! my uncle rox!!!!!!!!!!! I'm supposed to have 10 lines in this comment which is really stupid but anyway i really wanna c this movie again and tell my uncle what i really think not just what i remember and everyone thinks this movie is crappy but its not. my uncle was gonna b in pirates of the caribbean 2 because he sword fights and the place where he takes lessons was gonna do the people in the movie but then the movie switched places but he still would rock in that movie. I'm really just babblling on about absolutely nothing but whatever!!!! tootles xxooxxoo

This film is a wonderful send-up of several action films: you have the outnumbered soldiers from the "Alamo" and "Zulu"; The comedy pairings akin to "The Lady Vanishes", and the bawdy fun of "The Princess Bride."

This certainly isn't the greatest movie ever made, but doesn't claim to be. It's just an adventure film with romance that's fun and thoroughly entertaining with a surprisingly good cast of newcomers. Trevor St. John as the lead definitely stood out (he's now on the soap "One Life to Live" and very nice to look at) I thought about a film in the same genre that came out about the same time, " A Knight's Tale" which also had a handsome male lead and romantic princess connection. The other quirky characters were also fun to watch. I think it warrants a good sequel with a somewhat bigger budget, if you know what I mean. It's a great movie for kids. Lent it to a friend and her little daughter could not stop watching it over and over again. A great movie for the family. It doesn't really warrant the PG 13 rating as I do not normally let my 10 yr old son watch PG 13 and am very careful about what he watches, but this was just fine. The outtakes are hilarious. Review from a 10 year old boy: "My favorite movie. It's funny with lots of action. Two big thumbs up!"

Fun family entertainment - love the action, swordplay and romance. Eric Roberts was fabulous. He's a great adversary. The princess was beautiful and I loved all of the characters. Scenery was exceptional. The costumes and weapons were authentic and I think they should make a sequel with a bigger budget for theatrical release - maybe Disney should pick this up!

The costumes were good, acting was flawed in some areas not involving Roberts, Gerald, or Perlman. I especially enjoyed Gerald Cox's performance as the bumbling assistant. Good work! The sets were alright, not great, and the lighting was a little too bright. But I liked the characters in the film. Roberts stole every scene of course, but Gerald and Perlman held their own. I recommend this flick to most people. If you really want to see a good film with Gerald Cox, you might want to check out "Fangs of The Harvest." It's an indy short film about the twisted relationship between a father and his family on a camping trip, and Gerald plays a "no-nonsense" Sheriff who is very entertaining to say the least. Of course, Eric Roberts is good in "The Specialist" and "Runaway Train." Ron Perlman giving his best effort in "Quest for Fire," and "Hell Boy".

The King's Guard was excellent. Lots of sword action and light humor combined with suspense and romance. I loved Eric Roberts' character and his quest for the princess. The ending was very clever and the out-takes were hilarious. It was a great film for every member of the family. They should do a big-budget sequel.