Okay, but rather an Errol-Flynn-remake instead of fantasy

Rating: 5/10 (5 May 2016)

I know that this movie is a cult - I just never knew why, not when I watched it first in the 80ies and not now after re-watching it. I do love fantasy movies, I do love the 80ies and 80ies movies, but this is the point: there are sooo much better 80ies fantasy movies: Legend, Neverending story (part 1!), Willow, Labyrinth etc. etc., heck, even the two Ewoks-movies are better fantasy movies than this outmoded attempt of (rather) a newer version of an Erroll Flynn-flick (than a fantasy movie). And if you include newer attempts: try the perfect fairy tale Stardust! This is how it should be done! There is not much magic, no interesting characters or even creatures (the best one being the ever-amazing Carol Kane in a tiny role). The "hero" is arrogant and misogynist, the "heroine" a ridiculously dumb, dependent, damsel in distress-girl, always relying on/ crying for the help of a man - goodbye emancipation... . The boy listening to the story annoyingly interrupts the plot repeatedly - why this lame frame story? To stretch the length? And the most eminent theme annoys me (personally) the most: the repeated romance-BS is simply superfluous - just emphasizes the lack of real/good fantasy-elements. Rather superfluous all over.