Having enjoyed re-seeing Beast Master I thought I'd dip my toes deeper into Sword and Sorcery films beyond the other ones I know like Arnie's Conan.
So I had a go at Deathstalker from the early 80's.
It was described as a cult hit and a great video rental success. I'd certainly never seen it before but it was available on Prime so I gave it a whirl.
I didn't like it. Compared to Beast Master its a rusty cheap blade unworthy of much sorcery. Sauce on the other hand is a plenty. Deathstalker is an eye-full, a Roger Corman exploitation slop-pot who's dubious high point is a womens' mud wrestling fight.
I found the whole thing tedious and crass. It must be an age thing. Maybe if I'd seen it in the 80's on VHS after several pints of Old Peculiar I might think differently.
Its only redeeming feature is the VHS/ Cinema cover art by the famous Boris Vallejo - do you like his work?
Please tell me there's no other merchandise for Deathstalker!
Ridley Scott's Legend is just starting in Film 4, Woodsy!
ReplyDeleteIt's not age and it's not just you. This is one of the worst of a bad lot and I recall feeling just the way you do when it first came out. Honestly, Conan, The Beastmaster and The Sword and the Sorcerer are about the only decent sword and sorcery films of the period. Conan is epic but a terrible representation of Robert E. Howard. The Beastmaster is a spectacular and watchable but irritatingly flakey second place. The Sword and the Sorcerer is amazing for what was done with so little money, but it is not really a good movie...
ReplyDelete