StunnaKrypto Self-important, over-dramatic, uninspired.

VeteranLight I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

MonsterPerfect Good idea lost in the noise

Jemima It's a movie as timely as it is provocative and amazingly, for much of its running time, it is weirdly funny.

HaemovoreRex This film is ostensibly an attempted remake of the original Deathstalker movie. It even plunders numerous scenes from the aforementioned such as the warriors banquet for instance (presumably to a) save on money and b) pad out the running time) In reference to the first point, viewing the film it is immediately blatant that this was shot on a very tight budget indeed.But of course cheap doesn't necessarily equate to crap does it? So the question obviously is, is this film any good?Well yes and no in fact.....On the plus side, as other reviewers have noted, Michael O'Hearn looks splendid in the role as the barbarian Kane (basically the same character as Deathstalker but actually far more amiable) There are also a number of rather well choreographed fight scenes utilising an interesting variety of weapons. A big plus for the guys now: The ladies in this film are absolutely stunning! (and virtually all of them at some point are seen topless!)Sounds pretty good so far? Well.....let us consider some of the bad points...For one, Martin Kove is dreadfully wasted in his role as the main villain. I'm presuming, judging by the amount of scenes he was actually in, that he only had a day or twos work on this movie. Another very irritating (not to mention down right bloody infuriating) gripe I have with this film is the ridiculous character of 'Wooby'. What in the hell was the point of inserting this 'thing' into the film?! It looks like a cross between a shrunken wookie and a piece of rotting carpet! - and don't even get me started about the ridiculous, 'supposed to be cute' noises it emits! Finally, the movie has quite obviously been entirely (and very poorly) re-dubbed throughout.To conclude then, I guess that if you look upon this as a sort of modern tribute to the sword and sorcery movies of the 1980's that were all the rage in the wake of the success of Conan the Barbarian then you may find it to be worth a look (for nostalgia purposes if nothing else) Likewise, fans of TV series such as Hercules and Xena: Warrior Princess may find some not inconsiderable enjoyment here as this film does carry a similar (albeit more violent) feel to it. However, overall in comparison to many of it's brethren in the Sword and Sorcery genre this sadly comes out as only average at best.

ramen7noodles Entertaining movie with lots of hot girls!!!! What all movies should be!!!!AMAZON GIRL was RREEAALLLY HOT!! Wooby was totally SWEET and had LOTS of funny moments as well!! Princess had nice legs, and when I say nice I mean NICE!!!!!!! Great family movie!!! All in all I'd give it 12 thumbs up, WAY UP!! I loved the tournament, the narrator and all those CRAZY fighters with all those SICK weapons, YEEAHH!! The editing was flawless, I couldn't even tell the difference between the NEW FOOOTAGE and the FOOOTAGE from DEATHSTALKER!!!! Special effects were great, especially Munkar's transformation at the end. He was KILLER fast!! Can't wait for the sequel.Barbarian would make an awesome franchise/video game/action figure!!

lordofshalot OK, OK, I can understand how some movies try to use womanly figures to promote their movies and give some cheap thrills to the male audience, but you have to begin questioning a film that has the main lead getting it on with the first two nameless bare breasted chicks he rescues. But that's not what makes the movie bad, nay painful. The script was a disaster and the delivery of said script was a travesty in the art of character portrayal. That being said, the characters in need of portrayal were shallow, one dimensional stereotyped fantasy figures and overused to the extent of being nauseous, so the actors can't take all of the blame.The worst part of the movie occurs with the introduction of the "cute little sidekick" in the form of the abomination named Wooby. It is some mix between an Ewok and a giant teddy bear but shares none of the admirable qualities of either. The costume looks like it was a halloween costume thrown out by a 10 year old who knew better. The fight scenes involving Wooby are equally ridiculous and are little more than the light tossing of stones that plink of the chests of the bad guys but somehow manage to do enough damage to kill or otherwise disable them.The only redeemable quality of the movie is O'Hearn himself, but not because of his acting ability or skill with martial arts and clearly not for his theatrical fighting abilities. The sole benefit he gives to the movie is that he looks the part and looks it well. The plot is overly cliché and reminiscent of fourteen year olds playing Dungeons and Dragons and the film doesn't even take itself seriously enough NOT to steal footage from other movies. Yes, an entire scene was taken right out of "DeathStalker".The movie was a disaster and rivaled only by the likes of films such as Time Bandits and Cave Dwellers.And for goodness sakes, it has Wooby.

johnnysugar You've seen this movie before. Don't lie, of course you have. You take a lone hero with a sword. Set him up against a dark sorcerer with monstrous servants. Make him run around a mythical backdrop searching for props to defeat said sorcerer whilst picking up a small party of comrades. For good measure, throw in a mysterious witch, concubines, a deposed noble, and lots of dry ice. This movie was made countless times in the 80's with slight variations: maybe it was "Conan The Barbarian", "Deathstalker", or "Red Sonja." There was probably a role-playing game tie-in. This grand tradition is continued into the new millennium by the laughably bad, Roger Corman-financed "epic" film "Barbarian."In a land overcome by a dark, sorcerous tyrant named Munkar (Martin Kove), the people's last hope for liberation is a swordsman named Kane (Michael O'Hearn). Conscripted by a Witch (Yevdokiya Germanova) to collect some mystic artifacts needed to overthrow Munkar and in return win the hand of Princess Gretchen (Irina Grigoryeva), Kane battles stock villains while collecting his traveling companions. Furry and cute but indescribably annoying sidekick Wooby (Yuri Danilchenko)? Check. Hot amazon babe Gilda (Svetlana Metinka)? Check. Brooding, disaffected solider jealous of Kane's manly jaw and pectoral development Zigrid (Aleksandr Dyachenko)? Check. So where is Brigitte Nielsen in all of this mess?This film has so many things wrong with it that it truly boggles the mind. One of the most noticeable flaws is the cast. The film was shot on location in the Ukraine, and presumably to keep down the budget, all but two speaking roles were filled by local Russian actors whose voices were then later dubbed over by uncredited American actors, often quite poorly. The producers try to hide this fact by placing all non-Russian names in the cast (including non-speaking extras) in the opening credits. Another major flaw is the design of the film, or lack thereof. The costumes and props, including weapons and armor, were culled from at least 20 different time periods and regions, from Bronze Age Greece to 15th-century Italy. Often, the film looked like little more than a second-rate Renaissance festival, complete with the amount of slipshod authenticity that generally accompanies it. That's to say nothing of the stultifying script and ridiculous story, which seems to be either a continuation or a rip-off of "Deathstalker" (and there are even clips from that film in this one), and the poorly choreographed, sloppily edited fight scenes.Most of the blame lies squarely on the shoulders of one John O'Halloran, who wrote, edited, and directed the film (sometimes under the pseudonym of Henry Crum). The film plays out with all the clumsiness of an Advanced Dungeons & Dragons module from 1985, with O'Halloran being the awkward Dungeon Master who takes himself far too seriously. Characters appear and disappear with a randomness and lack of motive, but with perfect timing, that mimics a night spent rolling dice and comparing saving throws. In this case, the game goes on for far too long, the plot becomes far too ridiculous, and when the players get tired, the DM wraps the ending up with far too much haste and too little closure.So what's good about this film? One thing, and his name is Michael O'Hearn. O'Hearn seems to be about the only person in this train wreck possessing anything resembling acting ability. He's not good by any stretch, at least good enough to get his own syndicated action series, but he far outshines the rest of the cast. In addition, he is pretty. So very, very pretty. One of the most successful fitness models in the world, and winner of several bodybuilding championships, O'Hearn has the awe-inducing physical presence to make you briefly forget about the schlock he's surrounded with. He's also got just enough stage combat ability to make some of the fights vaguely entertaining. He even makes some of the cheesy one-liners he's forced to say sound cool, and that takes talent.Fans of low-budget (or no-budget) sword-and-sorcery fare like "Barbarian Queen" or "Ator" will relish this film in all of its ludicrous beauty. Virtually everyone else will be more compelled to watch the opening credits lovingly worship O'Hearn's form, then promptly return the film to wherever they rented it from. And fans of "Mystery Science Theatre 3000" will seek out this film at all costs for their next Bad Movie Night showing. 3 out of 10.