![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
May. 18th, 2013 09:24 amHaving now watched nearly the entire Beastmaster film series in an evening (I, III, and it was getting late about the time that II passed the bad movie event horizon), I kinda have more weird opinions.
I don't think you can argue these were good movies, but I actually really liked the pacing for the first Beastmaster film. Plot elements get wrapped up, but not at the same time, which is a little more believable to me than having say, Dar's final combat with Maax resolve Dar's origin, his conflict as an adult with King Zed, the invading Jund hordes, and his relationship with Kiri. I felt like I was getting a much longer movie than it actually was. I also actually liked the competence of the supporting characters - especially that the young prince, Tal, isn't funny comic relief or the kid who knows more than the adults, he really shouldn't be getting dragged into a dungeon and two nasty battles, but he does a pretty good job of holding his own.
None of the three are good movies but what gets me is they're bad in ways very characteristic of the time period. The Beastmaster is an early 80s attempt to make this awesome over the top barbarian movie and despite its flaws it's got a more aggressive energy that makes it enjoyable. Beastmaster II: Through the Portal of Time is like this overly-cutesy, stereotypical, hack attempt to merge Star Trek IV with Conan the Destroyer and failing to capture the appeal of either, a little like the way popular culture in the late 80s was frankly, brainless homogenized shit. Beastmaster III: The Eye of Braxus is very mid 90s, as though the filmmakers were making something for kids and filed the sharp edges off, creating something which I think might be a bit less appealing to 10-12 year old kids than the sometimes scary original. It's like comparing the kid-friendly jollity of mid 90s TSR to the viciously over the top character-killing modules of the '70s. Really good in its own way, but "its own way" is this pale wan ghost of the original.
I don't think you can argue these were good movies, but I actually really liked the pacing for the first Beastmaster film. Plot elements get wrapped up, but not at the same time, which is a little more believable to me than having say, Dar's final combat with Maax resolve Dar's origin, his conflict as an adult with King Zed, the invading Jund hordes, and his relationship with Kiri. I felt like I was getting a much longer movie than it actually was. I also actually liked the competence of the supporting characters - especially that the young prince, Tal, isn't funny comic relief or the kid who knows more than the adults, he really shouldn't be getting dragged into a dungeon and two nasty battles, but he does a pretty good job of holding his own.
None of the three are good movies but what gets me is they're bad in ways very characteristic of the time period. The Beastmaster is an early 80s attempt to make this awesome over the top barbarian movie and despite its flaws it's got a more aggressive energy that makes it enjoyable. Beastmaster II: Through the Portal of Time is like this overly-cutesy, stereotypical, hack attempt to merge Star Trek IV with Conan the Destroyer and failing to capture the appeal of either, a little like the way popular culture in the late 80s was frankly, brainless homogenized shit. Beastmaster III: The Eye of Braxus is very mid 90s, as though the filmmakers were making something for kids and filed the sharp edges off, creating something which I think might be a bit less appealing to 10-12 year old kids than the sometimes scary original. It's like comparing the kid-friendly jollity of mid 90s TSR to the viciously over the top character-killing modules of the '70s. Really good in its own way, but "its own way" is this pale wan ghost of the original.