Add a Review

  • I love a bad movie, this is a bad movie, but not the sort to be enjoyed. It has taken elements that are currently popular and shoe horned them in to a movie very poorly. Even a porno version of Game of Thrones or Walking Dead (Series that this is trying to be) would have more story to follow than this.

    I was initially hooked in by how awful the first scene was, it's truly awful but is funny. Slo mo was used on everything, someone had brought a camera that can do 120fps and they were making sure they were going to use it. There is a clip of the guy slipping on a rock in super slow mo only for it to turn out to be nothing… slipping on a rock…. totally pointless. This is how I felt about most of the content of this movie thereafter, it shows us something only for it to be pointless. There was loads of stock footage of bears and wolves in completely different environments adding nothing to the story (if you can call it that), just put in there for the trailer perhaps.

    It feels like every part of this film was done on the cheap, like it was some sort of 'Challenge Anika' attempt, where they have 24 hours to make a film from start to finish with just the contents from an old garage to use as props and GCSE students to help out.

    I did feel very sad at one point upon seeing the old Blue Peter presenter Tim Vincent had lowered himself to acting in the film. Part of me feels he was only brought in to exploit Blue Peter skills to make some of the paper mache props.

    The biggest moment and shock in the film was that it's the first in a trilogy or at least it thinks it is. If they get the funding for another one of these, then everyone should buy themselves a camera with slow-mo functionality and have a go at making a truly terrible movie of their own.

    In summary, it's bad, really really bad… seriously, just terrible.
  • jesummers27 September 2017
    Here's the thing. The main/lead actors were god awful. No effort put in and sounded/looked as though they were reading the script for the first time there and then! Maybe they were? Clearly this was a money grab which is a shame because maybe this film could have been something had they put the effort, time but most importantly passion in. A fellow reviewer mentions the "bar scene". Yes, it was pretty awful but I thought the supporting artists (or extras) did a better job than the main cast. In fact, in all the scenes the extras did better. That's saying something. The main actors should be embarrassed of their panto- style acting. Why they were cast, who knows?! The camera work was shoddy and this whole film is offensive to indie film and passionate film makers. I'm only giving it a 4 because I know some (not all) of the extras actually put the work in and cared about the film.
  • michaelchandler4527 September 2017
    This film was bloody awful. There's really no other way to describe it. Just bloody awful and that's putting it mildly. I mean how does something this amateurish and sad even get funded or distributed? It makes absolutely no sense. None of the actors, if you can call them that, had the talent of your local thespian playhouse. I truly believe someone went to their local bar after work and said "My brother just got this cool new digital camera. Ya'll wanna make a movie?". They must have spent the twenty they had for a budget on a twelve pack instead of expenses. Save your money, time or bandwidth and watch Conan the Barbarian for the fiftieth time instead. Trust me, you'll be much more entertained and satisfied.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    The medieval-like kingdom of Nazroth is annoyed by a CG fire breathing dragon. The king sends out his 12 best knights to kill the dragon, but due to budget constraints 8 are already dead and one falls off a cliff so we are down to three. No need to worry about the dead knight for long because a man who looks like a voodoo witch doctor brings him and other dead people back to life so we can have knights, zombies, and dragons. There are Sirens who don't sing and some female warriors.

    The worst scene was the inn/tavern also called "a bar" in the film. The dialogue, acting, and fight choreography was laughable. The whole film had a "so bad it was good quality." It includes Ed Wood type of snips of wild bears. Who gives their girlfriend a spear and tells her to go kill a bear? Don't worry dear, I'm right here in case you don't kill it armed with a knife? The zombies were called "fury", generally a better name for a dragon, which made it confusing when I first heard it. The village people become zombies, or fury and at times foot drag and other times sprint. Some use weapons, most do not, whatever Simon Wells felt like at the moment. The king was downright awful. And the really bad news is Simon thinks so much of this film he is making not one, but two sequels.

    Guide: No swearing sex or nudity.
  • well it hard to describe but the acting is atrocious, the CGI is as good as the acting, and the sound effects is as good as the CGI dragon. best description for this movie i can think of is a bunch of D&D LARP players with an actual script running around on bad mushrooms. good luck and may Cthulhu watch over you.
  • I wish I could give this film a negative number of stars. Speaking as someone who goes looking for bad fantasy films to watch on purpose, this car crash of a film was so bad I wanted to gouge out my eyes with broken glass. So bad, it wasn't even entertaining.

    Poor Ross O'Hennessey- his acting was like a paradisaical island in a sea of effluent, as all the other actors were awful. But you can't polish a turd, and that dialogue was a steaming pile of it.

    CGI so awful they could have gained better results with sock puppets. Dialogue written by a three year old. Upbeat acoustic blues in ye olde tavern, played on a glossy guitar.

    It looks like a bunch of GCSE media students put in all the things they like (zombies, knights, dragons, warrior women) in a blender and mixed them all up, but forgot how to work a camera or edit video.

    It's like someone once heard a fantasy film described to them and thought, 'I can do that'. No. No, you really can't.

    PS: I am under the distinct impression that anyone giving positive reviews are mates with the production crew. I'm surprised they have any who want to speak to them after this.
  • Unfortunately the production values of this overshadow any redeeming features of the plot (so much so that I couldn't find any). Most of the acting was wooden, with the exception of one or two of the main characters. Some of the effects were moderately good (notably the blood splatters), but the CGI dragon was not-so. The sound editor ought to be shot, with most of the dialogue being drowned out by the music or, when there is no music, too quiet to hear. When there is music, most of it is fitting - except for in the tavern, when some sort of silly pop ballad played (which, one would assume was being played by the bard at the inn, on his modern guitar). I also can't believe they were that worried about marking their furniture that they had green baize on the bottom of some of the cups. Fortunately, Cosmeston medieval village pulled off the best and most authentic bits of the setting, but sadly the castle that features towards the end has far too many modern fittings, lighting, cables and other acoutrements to make me take it seriously, at which point I just started laughing about how little attention to detail there was and the fact that the gardens were floodlit, and the corridors contained a gazillion uplighters. The odd use of some sort of Chinese spear by someone in western gear also stuck out as particularly jarring!
  • Warning: Spoilers
    KNIGHTS OF THE DAMNED is another no budget indie fantasy flick made in Britain with an unknown cast giving pretty terrible performances. The whole thing is a complete waste of time unless you're a MASSIVE, MASSIVE fan of independent cinema, in which case you might get a kick out of it if you can overlook the terrible wooden acting from the leads and the intrusive music. Things begin with a CGI dragon straight out of a cartoon and move into the usual grunting, shaky-camerawork brawling and sword fights. The writing is as poor as it gets, and there's nothing memorable about this at all.
  • This was terrible! The cover looks amazing, really was hoping to have an amazing movie with my family but we were all disappointed. If you were thinking of watching it, I would say if you like shitty CGI, horrible acting, a shitty plot then this is for you but if you're not into that then do not watch it!!!!!
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Firstly I feel very mislead when buying this DVD. Plastered all over the cover that it's award winning producer of Game of Thrones etc.It isn't. The film maker is the producer of the shows son and so is no affiliation to those shows. After careful inspection it doesn't say from award winning producer..

    Secondly, the poor CGI and BAD acting. It ruins everything about it. It sways from well spoken to common language. Very irritating. Just avoid it or rinse your eyes with bleach afterwards.

    Finally,so we didn't feel robbed of the price, we treated it as a comedy trying to spot historical and physical errors. Like modern interiors of a medieval castle, in a scene a knight rips a tree from the ground, once lifted its flat and has no roots. The play- dough Dragon that graces us with it's presence. There is more, but I won't spoil in case you do end up watching.
  • michelpjensen2 January 2018
    Watch the trailer:)

    The special effects team behind harry potter, jurrasic world and suicide squad, lol that says it all.
  • Pretty low budget and boring fare about Knights fighting a dragon and zombies. If there's going to be a part II as the ending (?) suggests then I guess it's better than actors being out of work. But not by much.
  • Wooden acting, terrible special effects and a modern guitar being played in a medieval inn? But wait there's more! I have a number of dragon movies in my collection and as a fan I expect to see a truly awe inspiring form as it occupies the screen. What was this? A reanimated gargoyle? A bat on steroids? Good grief man what were you thinking? There was no attempt to even try to make this thing look authentic! And the accompanying special effects? In short? Terrible! Laughable! Look I don't like running down movies but if this was meant to be a cure for insomnia then it works. When one must start skipping through the movie to try finding good parts then there must be something seriously amiss. It wasn't believable and it was obvious that it wasn't.
  • When I see people rating movies like this at 8 to 10 stars something isnt right. Casablanca, On the Waterfront, The Godfather, Amadeus, even Raiders of the Lost Ark. These are movies that should get 10 stars. Or something in a specific genre like western or sci fi. The Good The Bad and the Ugly or Total Recall I would rate high. But this garbage???? Come on!!!! What do you rate those movies if this is a 8 star movie. So you dig deeper and without exception every single person that thought this movie was great and gave plus 7 stars or more oddly registered with IMDB 4 months ago. EVERY SINGLE ONE. Hmmm, how odd. Possibly some fake reviews??? Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.
  • pwilliams-1682510 February 2018
    In spite of all the hate on this board for Knights of the Damned, I watched it anyway and I ENJOYED IT. Is it a masterpiece? No it's not. Is it Academy Award acting? Nope. Is it a rousing good sword and sorcery kind of flick? Why yes it is! Personally, I'm looking forward to the sequel The Dark Kingdom coming in September. In a nutshell, I've seen far worse movies that I haven't enjoyed half as much.
  • Whoa! This is a bad movie. Terrible faux Shakespearean dialogue highlights a movie with Amazons, dragons, zombies, dark evil, evil darkness and the dorkiest Prince ever to rule a kingdom. I can't wait to see the Rifftrax version. The real story might be what terrible secret does the maker of this movie know about the guy who selects films to stream on Hulu? And....why did I keep watching it?
  • brewster1396 November 2020
    Anyone who can independently fund, produce and release a film using a small budget deserves huge respect. Especially given the fact they have so little talent at their disposal.

    I saw the 2.5 rating but I weighed that up against the idea of potentially seeing some "hot" amazon warriors fighting dragons. Who wouldn't like that?

    Unfortunately those amazon warriors were about as convincing as the UK's current response to the Covid pandemic. I would urge people to avoid this film and frankly I've been too generous with my rating.

    Why is it bad? Awful, awful sound, criminal acting, terrible script, painful and at times childlike direction and a meandering storyline that is just banal at best. Give it a miss and definitely under no circumstances pay to watch this.
  • I really tried to let this movie continue. I could see from the front this was going to be awful, but I didn't feel well and I was watching something I could fall asleep to. Then 18 minutes in the bar scene happened...I am a musician and a music teacher, that being said you don't have to be any kind of musician or teacher to appreciate how truly awful this scene is.
  • This movie is truly godawful and I'd rather roll in sewage and human excrement than watch another millisecond
  • wandasomrajit24 June 2018
    Storyline had potential, but the acting was lackluster. I don't recommend this movie. I feel duped. I purchased this movie on Amazon instead of renting. Let the buyer beware.
  • Directed by Simon Wells it's the film set before the brilliantly entertaining but no less poorly made Dragon Kingdom. Entertainment value this one was worse and the acting is as bad as ever, if you like good bad films give it a shot but otherwise don't bother.

    1/10: There's no quality here
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Horrible acting! Horrible special effects! (Short-bus special!) Hot Female warriors! You just want to mangle the joker who plays the ambitious got boy who a megalomaniac and wants to be king of all kingdoms!! The best part is when the fool gets stabbed in the yard
  • mrrebel-8038225 January 2021
    If you made it past the 10 minute mark, your a better person than me.
  • I actually really enjoyed this film. Clearly had a smaller budget than others of a similar genre but I have to say they did a decent job putting together a film that ticked boxes. It pretty much does what it says on the tin. It's a straight to DVD movie that all in all had been put together rather nicely and the CGI work was actually rather nicely done. There was a decent amount of action. Well worth a watch.
  • mhadcocks-3970428 September 2017
    Warning: Spoilers
    Love films like this! Bit of everything you want from a range of film types. Think GOT meets Conan meets Resident Evil and this is what you end up with. Shows some real creativity from the film makers to put together a hybrid like this.

    A little tong in cheek and some witty dialogue from the main cast make it an intimate and entertaining film that's thoroughly worth 90 mins out of your day.

    Hats off to the guys and looking forward to seeing the next two in the trilogy.
An error has occured. Please try again.