Some things I liked some I did not.

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

This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

Great movie. Not sure what people expected but I found it highly entertaining.

Jack Palance was the main reason I wanted to see Sword of the Conqueror in the first film. While Sword of the Conqueror is forgettable and less than brilliant, provoking a mixed reaction from me, it is a long way from a bad film.Sword of the Conqueror looks great, the sets are splendidly crafted, the colours are rich and the film's beautifully filmed. It's also rousingly scored, Alboino and Rosmunda are interesting characters and their chemistry has a nice degree of tension.The cast are mostly fine, with the most memorable being a splendidly over-the-top but also sinister Jack Palance(reminding one how good he was playing villains), there have been some instances where he is so much so it takes one out the film but that is not the case in Sword of the Conqueror, this is one such case where he is a lot of fun to watch and makes the film more interesting than it is. Eleonora Rossi Drago is very sensual and like Palance sinks her teeth into the role of Rosmunda and Vitorrio Sanipoli, Carlo D'Angelo and Raf Baldassarre are decent in supporting roles.Guy Madison however goes through the motions and looks bored, the character felt a little underwritten too. The script lacks flow and can be superficially melodramatic and aside from the chemistry between Alboino and Rosmunda the story doesn't really compel. The storytelling is not much new and pedestrian in pace and the action at times is chaotic and lacking in tension.In conclusion, Sword of the Conqueror is not bad and has a good amount to recommend but at the end of the day to me it just felt rather forgettable. 5.5/10

Guy Madison and Jack Palance were finding work scarce in America and elected to go to Europe for their future careers in the Sixties. Sword Of The Conqueror was typical of the product they were involved in. It's an Italian production set in Italy of the 7th century. Italy was becoming home to expatriates like Madison and Palance.Palance borrows from his Attila The Hun character he did in America back in the day playing a Lombard warrior who has it in his mind to reconstitute the western half of the old Roman Empire. First on his list is a small kingdom where Eleanora Rossi Drago is princess and this princess has had an illegitimate courtesy of Guy Madison her father's commanding general. Through betrayal Palance kills the king, holds the child hostage and forces Drago to marry him. He also rather stupidly lets Madison escape.Madison and Palance were going through the motions here. Both of their characters make no sense. Stupidest thing in the film that I thought was Madison being forced to do a gorge crossing by rope with a few obstacles placed so that a neighboring kingdom will give him necessary troops. Palance chews the scenery with vigor, Drago looks lovely and concerned, and Madison is just bored.To be back in Hollywood.

This is definitely superior to the dullish REVAK THE REBEL (1960) but a slightly lesser achievement than THE MONGOLS (1961); both these also star Jack Palance and were made in quick succession. A couple of years ago, a work colleague of mine (a movie-buff who worked as an extra on renowned Malta-shot productions like CLASH OF THE TITANS {1981} and MUNICH {2005}) used to wax lyrically about his VHS of this ultra-rare film being among his most treasured possessions; at the time, I was not even aware of its existence and though I soon learned about Leonard Maltin's unflattering *1/2 rating, I immediately acquired the film when the first opportunity arose (sourced from a gorgeous, high-definition TV print that, nevertheless, suffers from a couple of very minor video glitches)! Still, the fact that its director's resume' (albeit having been active since 1914…and he amazingly made this, his penultimate effort, at 76 years of age!) was pretty unenviable, I went into it with low expectations only to be pleasantly surprised by the results; for the record, I had earlier acquired Campogalliani's swan-song, the even more obscure THE AVENGER OF VENICE (1964), and which I may be able to include in my ongoing Epic marathon.Incidentally, the English title here has no particular relevance to the plot but, then, the original – ROSMUNDA E ALBOINO – does not exactly set the screen on fire either!; those two characters, of course, are the protagonists played by Eleanora Rossi-Drago and Palance respectively. In a neat reversal of the situation in REVAK THE REBEL, it is the latter who offers a truce to the conquered king (Andrea Bosic) – this time around by marrying the man's daughter, even if she already had an illegitimate child by his most loyal lieutenant (Guy Madison)! However, the ruler proves gullible and, led on by his scheming adviser, proceeds to place the blame of their defeat on Madison; the situation deteriorates further when the two allied nations organize a friendly joust. The very first participants are Madison and Palance's younger and war-mongering (both on and offscreen) brother and, when the latter turns up dead regardless, the conqueror reiterates by beheading the king himself (in full view of his own daughter)! Feeling completely ostracized now, Madison has no choice but to flee and try to rally support for his people's cause.Naturally, the doubly begrudged and strong-willed princess initially resists Palance's advances but eventually relents when he gets wind of her offspring's existence (once again, by way of treachery); their relationship is sort of poignant since they gradually come to at least respect one another but, given the characteristically superficial script, this element is largely lost amid the myriad court intrigues and rampant snarling! Anyway, Madison comes upon a peaceful tribe who, in order to join forces with our hero, set him the odd task of going from one side of a valley to the other via a spiked rope laid over an array of wooden stakes! In the end, Madison bursts on the scene just as Palance finally forces himself upon Rossi-Drago: the two men engage in a scuffle and, as their common enemy seems to be getting the upper hand, the woman intervenes to give him the coup-de-grace – which, this being Palance, he turns into a melodramatic showcase; the closing shot, then, presents a conventional greeting of the reunited lovers by an anonymous but over-enthusiastic crowd.

I first saw this movie about 20 years ago, and I recently found a tape of it, so I can now enjoy it whenever I want, although I close the curtains and lock the doors so no one can see me.Judged against other sword and sandal flicks, this is pretty good. The production values are better than average, and the acting and direction at least try. However, in some ways, this is an odd movie. The heroine is in love with Guy Madison's character (Amalchi), and Palance is the ostensible villain (who kills her father and forces her to marry him). But Amalchi is such a whiner, and seems so ineffective, that her love for him is incomprehensible. On the other hand, Alboin (Palance) does do some villainous acts: invading the kingdom, killing the heroine's father, etc. But it's made clear from the very beginning that he and everybody else are being manipulated into war and hatred by the slimy machinations of the king's adviser (who is secretly in the pay of the Byzantine emperor). *****POSSIBLE SPOILER ALERT****** So, at the end of the movie, when the heroine kills Alboin and marries Amalchi, you are left there asking, "Is this really a happy ending?" Alboin came across as a smart, shrewd ruler, and all that Amalchi has going for him is that he knocked up the heroine before the movie started. Not only that, but the Byzantine emperor is still out there scheming to destroy our happy pair, and let's face it, Amalchi is useless. Every time I watch it, I hope that Rozmunda ditches the loser and makes it with Alboin, for a truly happy ending.