Highly Overrated But Still Good

Your blood may run cold, but you now find yourself pinioned to the story.

Easily the biggest piece of Right wing non sense propaganda I ever saw.

The acting in this movie is really good.

Poul Anderson's book "The High Crusade" is an enormous milestone in the rare genre of historic alien invasions, a true work of fine penmanship, and this movie doesn't hold a candle to it.In all honesty though, alien invasion movies, and historical realism movies generally require huge budgets to be done "right" by Hollywood standards, and combining the two sounds to me like a movie maker's nightmare. While it would be great to see the original book done justice, the budget needed for an epic battle between knights and aliens isn't likely to be forthcoming.The movie version of the high crusade sticks with the original premise, but due to the restrictions of a very tight budget, it was necessary to scale everything back. The special effects are sparing, the sets are repetitive, the script is a little worn around the edges, and the actors are, for the most part, not huge names.All things considered, the movie does especially well for what it has. The slick, smart humor of Poul Anderson is cut out to make room for a lot of silly European humor, but thankfully, it all works great. Certainly, there are not a lot of surprises, but the gist remains funny, and it is the first movie I've seen my boorish father laugh at in over five years, which has to say something.Also, the movie is pretty clean. The worst language is the repetitive use of "bloody," "bastards," "Hell," and "Devil's." The bloodiest wound in the movie is a bump on the head. Two battle scenes, and a severed leg don't spill a drop though. A certain amount of reproductive humor adds a bit of spice to the movie, but this is done in as tasteful a manner as the matterial can be done.Certainly, a lot was lost from the book, but the movie that is left makes for several good laughs, and memorable one-liners.

Years ago the very first SF magazine I ever saw had a knight battling an alien -- it was Astounding SF with "The High Crusade." For a kid it was a great adventure, reading as an adult it is truly hilarious. Poul Anderson handled comedy and tragedy equally well. Had they filmed the book they would have had a hit. Rick Overton would have been a perfect Sir Roger, John Rhys-Davies is worth watching even if he isn't very 'parvus (ie. 'measly.')They clearly did not have the budget for the cast that would have been required The best lines are the ones taken from Anderson's book, such as the 'negotiation' scene. My recommendation, if you have time to kill Rhys-Davies is always worth watching as is Overton. The novel was recently brought out again by i-Books in a cover evidently modeled on the movie. Add the book to your collection and enjoy. Really, it's a very good book and someone should make a movie out of it.

This film has almost everything it needs to be first class science fiction, except a decent screenwriter. The effects, makeup, photography, and direction are all perfectly acceptable for the story. However, the script is a disaster. This is a highly inept adaptation of Poul Anderson's classic sifi novel. Most of the basic premise, and introduction, are preserved. However, the rest is terrible. Anderson's competent crusader knights are replaced by idiots and buffoons. The subtle humor of the original is replaced by inane slapstick. The result is implausible, and embarrassing. If they had simply cut for time, without trying to replace or add, the film would have been vastly better.

When I found this movie listed at DVD Express, I was excited. I've been a serious fan of Paul Anderson's work since I started reading. "The High Crusade" has always been one of my favorite books by Anderson and I have long thought that it would make an excellent movie. I still think it would make an excellent movie. Unfortunately, this is not it.I was completely surprised by the direction taken by the screen play and direction of this movie. Or maybe shocked would be a better word. It had simply never occurred to me that Anderson's book would be interpreted as a comedy. Certainly, there is humor in the novel, but it is basically a story of high adventure with some very serious elements balancing the humor. There is none of that in the movie. Brown (the screen writer) and Knoesel & Neuhauser (the directors) extracted elements from the book and used them as a skeleton on which to build a second rate "Monty Python and the Holy Grail."This movie was almost painful for me to watch because I could see enough of the novel on the screen to know that a good movie could have been made from "The High Crusade." The SFX, though a little cheezy by current standards, are still acceptable. The cast was adequate, though some of the parts would have been cast differently if this were not a comedy, I'm sure. Certainly, John Rys-Davies makes an excellent Brother Parvis and he is one of the few redeeming factors of this film. And the few scenes taken from the novel were almost watchable. But the overall tone and direction were not even remotely true to the novel. Frankly, even fans of "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" will be disappointed because it's just not that funny.If you have never read the book, then you may find this movie mildly amusing. If you are a fan of this classic science fiction novel, then I recommend steering clear of this movie. It will taint your good memories of the book forever.