glaur If there's any movie Lucio Fulci made that inspires equal love and hatred, it must be this, the director's lone fore into the Sword and Sorcery subgenre. The general opinion of its detractors seems to be that "Conquest" marked the beginning of Fulci's descent into both commercial and artistic mediocrity, and while the former may be true, I'm not understanding the latter. In light of what Fulci's work aspires to be, "Conquest" can in many ways be seen as a culmination of his style, and if your best criticisms of the movie are that it's "plotless and cheap," I wonder why you're watching a Fulci movie in the first place.Sure, the plot is a rudimentary blob that in the end amounts mostly to characters wandering back and forth as an excuse to get them into perilous situations involving traps and monsters, but Fulci's visual sensibilities are positively ON FIRE here, so much so that the limitations of the story become pretty much inconsequential. They take a back seat to the otherwordly mythic fantasy environment that Fulci is able to create with the most frugal materials. It is the foreboding fog-shrouded swamps, ancient stone temples, grotesque creatures and lurid-colored alien skies that will linger in the mind as the work of an artist who clearly has an eye for distinctive visuals. You could only accuse this of being a movie derivative of "Conan the Barbarian" if you completely ignored this aspect of it, because I can't think of another film that looks anything like this.Other aspects of "Conquest" work to its advantage in subtle ways. The spare, monosyllabic dialogue helps to create the sense of a primitive and brutish world and the minimalist pulses of Claudio Simonetti's electronic score mesh well with the stunning visuals. Bizarre details - the villainess' gold mask and fascination with snakes, the enchanted bow that glows blue, the dolphin rescue - border on the surrealistic. The effect achieved, at least to this viewer, is hypnotic. I find myself wondering how so many filmmakers today, when they are given all the resources in the world and can't give us one interesting thing to look at, can be treated so leniently by critics who would jump on the bahnwagon to slam Fulci without a second thought.

Michael_Elliott Conquest (1983) ** 1/2 (out of 4) Fulci's cash in on the Sword and Sorcery genre, which was at that time was popular due to films like BEASTMASTER, is what many would consider a low point in his career but I call it a fascinating mess that contains a little bit of everything. A young man (Andrea Occhipinti) is given a magical bow and for some reason ends up traveling in a strange place where wolf like monsters and cannibals are. He teams up with an older man (Jorge Rivera) to try and destroy these monsters who are being led by a wicked princess (Sabrina Siani). I think the people who are going to have the biggest problem with this movie are those expecting a horror movie like ZOMBIE or THE BEYOND. It seems Fulci's non-horror films always take a beating an in some cases (MANHATTAN BABY) it's really not called for and I'd say that's the case here as well. This certainly isn't a good movie or a well made one but I have to judge what it is and that's an Italian rip off. There are so many campy and over the top moments that I can't believe the film doesn't have a larger camp appeal. The English dubbing isn't horrible but the dialogue certainly is and some of the lines spoken appear to have been written by ten-year-old boys. The performances are on the fair side but there's really not too much acting required. The gore is also here with some nice looking effects including top of heads being chopped off, body sores oozing pus, the werewolf like creatures getting their heads beat in, cannibals and even a stranger scene where zombies attack. As you can see, just about every genre is thrown into the mix here and on that level the film was mildly entertaining. The adventure aspect could have been pumped up and the movie certainly needs more energy but there's enough goofy stuff here to keep the movie going for its 93-minutes.

Skutter-2 Shlock-merchant Leo Fulci takes a change of pace by making a trashy, barely coherent sword and sorcery fantasy movie instead of his usual trashy, barely coherent horror. A wimpy Orlando Bloom type called Ilias, from some society vaguely resembling Ancient Greece travels across the ocean to caveman territory on some vaguely defined quest to battle evil, where he joins up with a animal loving hunter to battle the wolf-man and mutant minions of a vampiric topless evil sorceress. Wackiness ensues. The sorceress, is oppressing the local cavemen and wants the magic bow for herself. She sends various minions, each weirder than the last, after our heroes who win through in the end, striking a blow for oppressed cavemen everywhere. This movie contains a steady stream of WTF? elements and moments.For some reason the entire movie is shot in soft focus and the picture is further blurred by the constant presence of mist on screen. This may have been an attempt to create atmosphere or to hide how fake everything looks. Either way, it failed. There is no atmosphere, unless it is one of scuzziness and mild bewilderment and there is no hiding how lame everything looks. The wolf-man minions look like a poor man's wookie. For some reason the director fell in love with shots of them leaping through the air in slow motion, Six Million Dollar Man style, toward our heroes when they attack. There are probably about a dozen of these shots throughout the movie and it gets goofier every time. The other minions of the topless sorceress, other than the generic leather clad humans, are some lumpy white mutants who appear to be covered in cobwebs. Needless to say they are slow and unthreatening and when they speak sound like gay Hispanic, lisping Daleks. The fights are stilted and unconvincing and the special effects are woeful. Oh yeah, the music is cheap synthesiser stuff that the makers of Doctor Who would have been embarrassed to have used.Ilias, our nominal hero is bland and forgettable. He also looks a complete wuss, especially with his midriff revealing leather outfit and big hair, and is clearly a moron. Sure, he's a dynamite shot with his magical bow but he only takes about three or four arrows with him in his mission to battle this entire continent of evil. Needless to say he runs out of arrows within a few minutes and has to be saved by more traditional sword and sorcery hero, Mace. When he meets Ilias he establishes himself as the taciturn loner type, claiming he has no friends but no sooner can you say latent homoerotic subtext they are bosom buddies, traipsing the misty hills together. Mace promises to take Ilias with him in return for bow related favours. Ilias asks where he is going. "Wherever my legs take me," is his reply. Good enough for Ilias. Mace is also animal lover and outrageous hypocrite. He proclaims his great love of and affinity toward animals, citing the usual stuff about how he prefers them to humans because humans can be soooo mean. He says he would never hunt and kill an animal to feed himself but he will steal meat off other people who have hunted down animals. He is also not above randomly killing innocent passers by for no good reason. Not long after they meet, he is testing out Ilias' bow and the movie cuts to some random caveman, minding his own business, walking along and Mace shoots him dead. There is no indication this poor soul did anything to deserve this and even Ilias, who supposedly hails from a more moral and civilised society doesn't even raise an eyebrow. The films villainess is quite unusual. For the entire movie she is completely naked except from a g-string and a golden mask that encompasses her entire head. It's like Fulci included her to make the movies obligatory T&A quotient but decided she was bit too much of a butterface at the last minute. She spends a lot of time seemingly being pleasured by her pet snakes and dreaming about being shot by a faceless bow wielding man who is dressed like Ilias. Wow, such symbolism! Later on in the movie she wimps out when she can't beat Ilias and Mace and promises to make herself the sex-slave of some ancient warrior dude if he kills them for her. Hardly the world's most scary villain and not really a step forward for women's rights. I think he sic's the cobweb creatures on our heroes and impersonates Mace in a situation where there is no no-one else around but Mace to fool. Was he really worthy trading your self respect for, Ocron? There are quite a few other WTF? moments. Most of them come toward the end of the movie. Ilias wusses out, I forget why, possibly his permed hairdo got mussed, but realizes the error of his ways and returns to aid Mace in fighting the forces of evil. All of a sudden, for no reason, his bow can suddenly fire out multiple target seeking bolts of energy. The bolts can also shoot through solid rock when necessary. Needless to say his makes short work of the hordes of bad guys who have captured Mace.The climax is also rather nonsensical. Mace decimates Ocron's remaining forces using the bows targeted laser attack capability. He then is able to shoot Ocron from a kilometre away using its shoot through rock capacity. She starts dying. Her mask is ripped of revealing a hideous Muppet head. She staggers around screaming and turns into a dog and wanders off with another dog. Mace smiles. Roll credits.Strangely enough as far as these dodgy low budget sword and sorcery movies this one is reasonably lucid and focused. Any one who has seen Wizards of the Lost Kingdom can tell you how nonsensical and meandering these movies can truly be.

unbrokenmetal "Conquest" is a typical case of a "love it or hate it" movie. The crossover which Fulci tried was: take some of the barbarian hero stuff popular in the 80s (Conan, Beastmaster), combine it with the splatter horror the director is well known for, and give this a psychedelic edge with blurred, constantly foggy visuals and haunting synthesizer music. Surely not everybody's taste, not even for many fans of Fulci's other works. However, if you are in the right mood, "Conquest" is an experience that compares to no other fantasy horror movie...except maybe Bava's "Ercole al centro della terra"! The story can be given in a few lines: Ilias, a young man from a comparatively civilized country, travels to a barbarian land of many terrors. He meets the warrior Mace, and together they fight an evil sorceress who claims to be responsible for the rising of the sun, and is worshiped like a goddess by everyone who believes her (surprisingly many).Fulci doesn't give any explanations, but lets us dive in head first. Don't ask "why do those zombies exist in the swamp?", "why does Zora appear out of thin air?" or "how can Sabrina Siani be beamed from the mountain top into the cave without Scotty around?". This is not the point. What Fulci shows us is a dream where everything is possible. Meet the creatures that lurk in your nightmares, and when there are no more arrows for the bow, it shoots lightning beams. A dream does not require logic. Even death is not certain here. I perfectly understand when people don't like this movie, because it is opposed to what one normally expects from a movie. However, I don't see this as a dumb or sloppy script - to me it appears to be a purposeful experiment that did not succeed entirely, but is unusual and challenging. As I said at the beginning: love it or hate it.