Jeanskynebu the audience applauded

Holstra Boring, long, and too preachy.

Donald Seymour This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

Nicole I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

Smoreni Zmaj Old school fairy tale, with princess, elves, fairies, dwarfs, unicorns, goblins and, of course, prince of darkness. I'm not one of those who think that fairy tales are for children only, moreover I like them very much. But this one is really just for kids. It's beautifully done, with, for its time, stunning visuals, nice soundtrack and good acting (as good as possible considering Tom Cruise in leading role), but, targeting mainly children, story is too linear and predictable and whole movie is too restrained for my taste. The strongest impression on me left makeup of fairy tale creatures, especially Tim Curry as Darkness. For these masks, this movie deserved the Oscar, not only the nomination.7/10

hellraiser7 Fantasy stories were always my favorate kinds of stories but they are also the darkest of stories as each of them contain rather dark undertones but are always about the forces of good and evil clashing. These things are always there because they are a part of life, it doesn't mater whether you believe the legends or not, the existence of good and evil will still be there.This film another one of my favorate fantasy films, it's also another one of my childhood gems. As I stated before as a kid I love fantasy, I loved listening to Grimm's Fairy Tales from my mom, seeing this film it was one hell of a fairy tale. However this isn't a fairy tale for kids entirely but it's one that is for teens and adults, which give the film greater accessability.The production value is just supurb it is just a feast for the eyes, as most to all this was done within a studio which is great and kinda a lost practice in most films. I really love all the set pieces from the forest land down to Darkness's hellish fortress which are all practical, no CGI bullcrap; the world is made so well it really looks like a place that could of existed. The make up work great done by my favorate make up effects artist Rob Botin, the creatures as well as Darkness look real almost like they could exist.The music score is supurb as it's a mix from both Tangerine Dream and my favorate composer Jerry Goldsmith, there are lots of memorable tracks . Action is decent which I'll admit one weak point in the film for me I honestly felt the choigraphy could of been better or a bit longer, but all the same there are some good scuffles like a fight in the kitchen as well as the sword fight between Jack and Darkness which was cool.Characters are soild, Tom Cruse is soild as Jack whom is sort of Tarzan like character just like Tarzan has lived in and with nature so his contact with the outside is limited except for Princess Lily. Mia Sara whom I think is a bit of an underrated actress is soild in this role. Both have a pretty good back and forth, it's true it's not a deep romance, fairy tales were never really known for that what are you going to do. Both have one thing in common as both are naïve as both despite how much in touch they are in the two different worlds they are from and inhabit they are also out of touch with those worlds and the darkness that lies within.However the best character and my favorate in the film as well as one of my favorate fictional villians is Darkness whom is played by my favorate actor Tim Curry. The make up and costume work of the Darkness is just supurb as it is spot on to the Devil figure known from the old legends. He is just an intimidating and slightly terrorfying figure from both his physicality and that commanding voice, I'll admit just looking at the guy as well as hearing his voice made me really nervious as a kid. But what makes the character stand out is that despite what he's suppose to represent there are shades of grey. In his mind he doesn't see himself as evil he never even mentions it once. Despite his hatred for the sunshine he longs to walk and be a part and inherit that world which he has been denyed access to; and we see he's going to do it one way or another. What makes Darkness also interesting is in a way he sort of a dark mirror, most of what he says and feels are is sort of what we all sometimes feel deep inside everyday even when we don't want to admit it. On one hand the film is pretty much a straight forward fantasy adventure which is fine by me, most of the time that's how I like most stories. But on the other hand the film does have some deep substance which complicates the story but in a good way, because it keeps itself simple but at the same time not so much.I really like how the film has some underlying tones of coming of age and the loss of innocence which is reflected in both the fantasy world and both Jack and Lilly, as we see the beautiful fantasy realm turned into a dark forboding icy hell. There is even a beautiful dance scene where Lily is dancing with a dark figure and then suddenly both become one basically Lily's loss of innocence ( on a side note I'll admit Lily looks a lot better that way, what can I say I have a think for girls in black and goths). There's kinda some biblical aligory, in a way you can says Jack and Lily are like Adam and Eve, and the fact that the land has turned is much like Adam and Eve's fall from grace.But also some philosophical territory on the perception of good and evil. Most of what Darkness says as well as a great final monologue at the end really makes you think because there is truth to it, what is it that really creates and cements the existence of good, can good really exist without the other? What truly makes a person good or evil are we ever really one or the other, or are we just a mixture of both walking a razors edge thoughout a dangerous existance? And even if evil is vanquished is it ever truly gone?Like any great legendary story it won't be forgotten.Rating: 4 stars

evanston_dad "Legend" plays out like the movie a bunch of guys would get together and make under the influence of serious hallucinogenic drugs, and who knows, maybe that was the case? In many ways it's a rather bad movie. It's not good at all in telling a narrative -- the editing is confusing and disjointed, Ridley Scott's direction is awkward and clunky.But on the other hand, the visual look of "Legend" is stunning, and it's worth watching for that alone. It's clear that Scott had a distinct tone and vision in mind when making the movie, and that comes through strongly despite the weakness of the film making in other regards. I found myself fascinated by the film and could easily overlook its flaws.The film received a much deserved Oscar nomination for Best Makeup but lost the award to "The Fly." Tough category that year.Grade: B+

James Hitchcock Heroic fantasy films can be divided into two categories, Before Jackson and After Jackson. Peter Jackson's seminal "Lord of the Rings" trilogy was the first great cinematic masterpiece of the twentieth century, and although never equalled it has at least influenced some very watchable fantasies, notably the "Chronicles of Narnia" and "Harry Potter" series. And Before Jackson? "Legend" reminded me of how bad fantasy films could be (and generally were) during the seventies, eighties and nineties. About the best of a bad bunch was Ron Howard's "Willow", and even that only achieved the modest distinction of being a mediocre film rather than a truly awful one. Having a famous director at the helm didn't always help matters. For a long time I always thought of Richard Fleischer simply as 'the idiot who made that rubbish "Red Sonja" – an unfair assessment, as Fleischer had earlier been responsible for films as good as "The Vikings", "20,000 Leagues under the Sea" and "10 Rillington Place". "Red Sonja", together with the equally dreadful "Conan" films, probably damaged Arnold Schwarzenegger's career by establishing him in the public mind as a musclebound hulk with minimal acting skills. "Legend" was also the work of an otherwise distinguished director. Indeed, Ridley Scott's previous film had been "Blade Runner", in my view one of the greatest science fiction films ever made. "Legend" probably represented a desire to follow it up with something as different from it as possible. Scott's original aim was to produce a film based upon a traditional fairy-tale or legend, but could not find one which suited his purposes and so had the idea of commissioning an original story. The film is set in a sort of wooded fairyland which would forever be a place of beauty and enchantment were it not for the principal villain, the Lord of Darkness (or just "Darkness" for short). You can tell he is a villain because he looks just like traditional depictions of the Devil, except that his horns are more like a cow's than a goat's. As the film opens, Darkness has just decided to kill off the world's last two remaining unicorns, as (contrary to what astronomers may inform you) it is unicorns which cause the sun to rise every morning. A world bereft of unicorns will therefore be a world of eternal darkness- from Darkness's viewpoint, a Good Thing, but from everyone else's a Bad Thing. Darkness also has lustful designs on the beautiful Princess Lili (or Lily, depending on which version of the film you see). The task of foiling his evil schemes falls to Lili's sweetheart, a young man named Jack, who has the assistance of various characters lifted straight from the pages of some sub-Tolkienesque fantasy novel. Among these are a lisping, effeminate faun named Honeythorn Gump (brother of the more famous Forrest), a fairy named Oona and two dwarfs named Brown Tom and Screwball. (Or are they elves? Or perhaps leprechauns, given that they speak with a strong stage-Irish brogue?) There are also goblins, but as in Tolkien they are the bad guys, so they bat for Darkness's team. You can work out the rest of the plot from here. The lead role of Jack was taken by an up-and-coming young actor named Tom Cruise, at this time in the middle of his 1980s "pretty-boy" period, but he never does anything to show why he was, within a few years, to establish himself as a major Hollywood superstar, although, to be fair, he was possibly unlucky with a dull, hackneyed script and some stilted, ponderous dialogue. Cruise was fortunate that he followed "Legend" up with "Top Gun", made by Scott's brother Tony. This was probably the best of his pretty-boy movies and a huge box-office success. As for his leading lady, the teenage Mia Sara, she shows all too clearly just why, despite her striking beauty, she was never to become a big name herself. The best acting comes from Tim Curry as the spectacularly-horned Darkness, but even he cannot really manage to rescue the film. Indeed, he may have inadvertently made it worse. In a film where the villain seems more real than the heroes, the audience might start rooting for him, which was probably not anybody's intention. Scott originally wanted to film in Yosemite National Park, but financial considerations precluded location shooting, and a complete forest set was built at Pinewood Studios. A lot of effort was obviously put into this, and yet the result is still oddly unconvincing. (Even fantasy films need a certain grounding in reality, and Yosemite might have done for "Legend" what the New Zealand landscapes did for the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy). The same can be said of the whole fantasy universe in which the story is set; it never seems to hang together as a coherent whole in the way in which, say, Tolkien's Middle Earth does. I think that the difference lies in the fact that Tolkien spent many years working out all the details of his imaginary world, whereas all the details of the imaginary world of "Legend" were probably worked out on the back of a fag-packet during someone's coffee-break. "Legend" is not the worst fantasy film of all time; compared to "Red Sonja" or "Prince Valiant", which continued the tradition of the execrable sword-and-sorcery epic into the nineties, or to "The Scorpion King" which continued it even into the After Jackson era, it can look quite presentable at times. Compared to something like the "Narnia" or "Harry Potter" series, however, to say nothing of "Lord of the Rings", it seems sadly wanting, a low point in Ridley Scott's career. 4/10