Phil Hubbs I'm not sure but this could of been the acorn that sprouted the idea for the titles in the Conan flicks, bare with me. There was a sequel intended for this film that would have been called 'Hawk The Destroyer' (1981), so you can see the obvious similarities with film titles going on here. Probably a coincidence admittedly but I also think this could of been the first swords/sorcery/barbarian type of film that jump started all the rest during the 80's.This is a hard film to review truth be told, its extremely dated and by the looks of things they didn't have a huge budget to play with. The whole thing is a mixed bag as you would expect being a very old fully British, possibly cheap, production. There's a bit of a Tolkien and Dungeons & Dragons influence about the film if you ask me, the plot is your average sword n sorcery affair with a hero trying to avenge the death of his father and love at the hands of an evil warrior (his brother). The evil bad guy wants the power of the mindstone which his brother (the hero) has power of, so he kidnaps an Abbess to lure him. The hero forms a small band of warrior friends...a giant, a dwarf, an elf and a human peasant, the hero himself being a human of course. Each of these men have unique skills in combat with a big hammer mace thing, a whip, a bow, a crossbow and a sword.When I say a Tolkien influence I only mean as far as the characters and fantasy locations, dare I say a certain Mr Jackson may have pinched some visual ideas for 'Legolas' using his bow at lighting speed from this film?. When you see 'Crow the elf' battling there is definitely a similarity in concept that's for sure, although the visual method used to achieve this in this film is pretty crude naturally. Mind you this elf is so damn fast with his bow and arrow there is virtually no need for any other heroes. Other characters aren't made up with special makeup or prosthetics, the giant is played by Bernard Bresslaw who was a tall man, the dwarf is played by a short actor (not a little person), the elf has a small amount of prosthetics for his ears and that's it. But as far as monsters and dragons etc...this film has none of that, its actually a very grounded fantasy which I think leans more towards old English folklore and possibly a touch of wicca and paganism.The musical score kinda typifies this if you ask me with a very odd mix of styles. At times we get this typical 80's pop fused with electronic synth (I think) that to me sounded like melodies from an Abba album!, needless to say I don't think this score fit the film. Other times there is a much better softer score using more traditional instruments to create this olde worlde fairy-esque sound that would suit an old English fable to a tee.I hate to say it but I couldn't help but snigger at some of the things on display in this film. Like I said the visuals are weak, it looks like they've filmed everything in some local woods and shrublands just behind Pinewood studios. The sets are very obvious, very small and tight and sparse on detail, hair styles are still very much 1970's, some costumes are OK where as others look like they've cobbled anything together and I'm pretty sure they retrace their steps with locations a few times. The only expenditure appears to be the use of that swirly double ring thing that was used in 'Superman' as a force field to trap 'General Zod' and co.The other thing that is highly amusing is the fact the big bad evil tyrannical baddie is played by Jack Palance...and even in this film he's old!. This guy has no special powers or weapons, he's just a badass apparently but you don't really buy it frankly. He has a nasty burn on his face so he wears a nifty helmet but that's it, he doesn't look intimidating at all. Mind you the hero is pretty bland himself, he barely talks, looks boring, but he has the mind power to wield his magical sword combined with the mindstone...not that it makes much difference really, just means the sword can float to his hand.I don't want to give this film a low score because despite the dated visuals, cheesy ass fights and effects it does look like people have really tried to make an effort here. It does come across to me that the crew have done their best with the little resources they had which deserves kudos. It is very easy to just churn out any old loin cloth fantasy crap by just tossing in a few blondes with big boobs to attract an easy male audience and slapping in some blood and gore. But I think effort was made here and it does show. A cult film long forgotten, thou should seek it out.6/10

Joxerlives Watched this in 1980 aged 7 as the supporting feature for Saturn 5 and enjoyed it a great deal more. Minscule budget, laughable special effects, terrible acting and astoundingly bad dialogue but it still works and indeed it's brilliant, a great way to pass 90 minutes. Especially love British comedy legend Bernard Breslaw as the giant (a reasonably small giant but when you're accustomed to seeing him as Sid James foil it really is such a different role for him). One scene that really stands out though is the part where Crow, the last Elfin archer speaks to Hawk of his weariness of battle; Crow; "We have waited together like this many times, you and I. Sometimes I grow tired of the fighting and killing. At night I hear my people calling for me from beyond the mountains. One day I will join them and my race will be forgotten" Hawk; "You will never be forgotten" Feels like it comes from a much better film.

boxofficepoison-1 This movie has a troubled start. It's main character looks like a young John Cleese - thus making you wonder if it's just unfunny deleted scenes from "Monty Python's Quest for the Holy Grail" movie you're watching. But no - it's a movie on it's own! Unfortunitely, it has some issues:This movie lacks horizon - literally! You won't find a single distance-shot in the entire movie but the one with the castle at the beginning - and that's a painting! Seriously, there is no scene in which you can see a landscape, you have no way to figure out where this all takes place. Everything's taking place in an ugly forest (behind the abandoned train-station east-end London, I presume ?), and when it's not ugly that's because it's too foggy to see anything. No location (and I hesitate to use this term here) is in any connection to the other. The "hero" even has to warp to his friends as well as into the enemy base (a tent and a fireplace, that is). Come to think of it: Actually, the hero is barely moving at all!Also, this movie lacks depth - and I'm not talking about the plot! Half a meter outside the abbey's door starts limbo, or is it the black studio wall? The river is as shallow as the plot, the abbey's hall is gigantic compared to all other featured rooms with their 4m², a measure fitting any other dull place in this dull movie.Then: People die in this movie - dozens of them. Every two or three scenes some new characters are introduced. That's because they all won't last long. Many, many people die - and most of them are killed by the hero and his cohorts: crooks, lowlifes, thieves, travellers, unarmed spectators - just name them. There's little left to kill for the evil guy but nuns and the hero's party members. Unfortunitely, one of the very few survivors is the "hero"...Don't forget the not-so-special effects: There are some, but it's just the then popular video-effects you have seen in so many other mediocre movies from the early eighties. If it wasn't for the laughable green goo-spray effect near the end of the film there's not a single special effect to remember: no monster, no gore, no nothing but the stolen neon Hula Hoop effect from "Superman 2" and terrible speed-cut-editing...And there are other issues... plot hole issues! The evil guy Voltan looks as old as his supposed father, but must be 30 years ahead of his brother Hawk. How did that happen? Why is Voltan so desperately in need of the few gold from the nuns, and why is he revisiting the abbey again and again instead of plundering the place right from the start? And if it's gold he's after, why has he Hawk collect it from the slave-driver (obviously the only other supply of gold in the entire kingdom)? Is he too lazy to get it himself? What was he thinking?? Why are all the good guys so unlikeable? Who's that evil Overlord? And will our hero ever realize that it was indeed a witch he saved from being burnt as a witch by the pious peasants??What I'm saying is this: It's a movie without a big budget, so this is what you get - the story is simple, the acting is simple, the directing is simple, the music is simple (and better be used a science fiction flick), the humor is simple, the costumes are simple, everything's simple! Keep your expectations low and you might actually enjoy it...Luckily, this turkey was never continued...

jamesmorgan1982 Let me start this review by saying that my friend and I have been regularly watching "bad" films over the last few months. In many cases the extreme awfulness of a film can make it quite entertaining, or in some cases reach genius levels (see Tommy Wiseau's The Room as a prime example of this).Hawk the Slayer is not an example of a funny "bad" film. I would recommend you avoid it even if you generally enjoy poor films for the comedy value.The plot is fairly standard fantasy stuff and is fine for this sort of film. The main issue is that John Terry has the same expression on his face throughout the entire film and doesn't really portray any emotion whatsoever. At one point I wondered if he was some sort of medieval, mullet wearing cyborg, which would explain his non-reaction to events such as friends and lovers being murdered in front of him.The crazy disco soundtrack was a source of mild amusement, and Hawk did have the tendency to just stare at his opponent for what seemed like 5 minutes before the swordfight would begin.There was one other moment in the film which made me laugh, involving an evil guard being incapacitated by being covered in a jet of green silly string, the type usually found at children's parties. These small plus points cannot make up for the poor quality film as a whole.My friend thought that there was a period of 20 minutes in the middle of the film which were actually quite good, but it turned out he'd fallen asleep and was in fact having a dream during those 20 minutes. Really.This film was probably good if you watched it when you were 8, but anyone who doesn't fall into that category should avoid at all costs.