Ritter auf heißen Öfen

OK, besides Ed Harris and Tom Savini, who else is in this amazing biker film from the early 80s? Well, it doesn't really matter because sometimes things just come together in a way that transcends what the likely original intent was, to patch together a biker movie about jousting knights who engage in feudal combat from motorcycles instead of horses. Yep. The costumes are a bit cheesy, the acting is a bit raw and amateurish and the story..., ah, the story: The story is the Arthurian tragedy of innocence, self sacrifice, honor and unfaithfulness. The tale works around the triad of the King, the very young Ed Harris, the villain, the wonderful Tom Savini and the knight protector, Lancelot, Gary Lahti. Each of these figures represents an archetype which very likely unbeknown to the film makers and they come through wonderfully in the way in which this tale is patched together. Billy,as the King Arthur prototype is idealistic, uncompromising loyal to his own mythology and like the legendary Arthur, ego-less. His loyal knight retainer, Alan, is Lancelot in his nobility and loyalty to his sovereign while coveting his wife all the time. Savini is purely delightful as the Modred counterpart, even taking Morgan le Fay's name as a pun. Morgan covets the crown and tries to usurp it by going off only to discover his new realm is a forest of paper tigers. The final scene and resolution of the tragedy works wonderfully, giving a the only glimpse of the famous story-teller and raconteur, Brother Blue as the wizard, Merlin.

As an anthropologist and mythologist, I saw this tale back in the early 80s and was impressed how the underlying mythology of an essentially low budget film held together in such a wonderful way in spite of a few flaws. I consider it a cult classic.

I saw this film when it first came out as a kid and just recently found an out-of-print video on it. The movie still holds up. The acting is quite good, especially Ed Harris, who stands out as the "King Arthur" leader, Billy. Tom Savinni did a good job during the scenes where he "sold out" his image. You could see the transition in his face, sans dialogue. Yes, it does need to be shortened by about twenty minutes, but overall its an enjoyable film with many underlying lessons to learn from. Two outstanding, bittersweet scenes are the "Lancelot" character having to return the woman that loves him back to her home and the transition at the end where Ed Harris gives a young boy, who hero worships him, his sword. The stunts are fantastic as well. Sit back with some popcorn and enjoy! Look for the cameo by Stephen King as the "Loudmouth Spectator."

This, quite possibly, may be my favorite of Romero's films. I adore Night of the Living Dead and Dawn of the Dead, but this one is quite special and is a complete surprise, even to Romero's hardcore fans. I remember renting it a while back because it was by Romero (and it is pretty long, 145 minutes, and I love long films). Many reviews simply stated that it was "a change of pace" for Romero, and yes, this is true, but they missed the depth and substance that this film has. It is Romero's most moving film, completely heartfelt and sincere, one that, should I say this, stirs the soul. Romero elicits incredibly naturalistic performances from his cast. It's made up of Romero regulars, including Ken Foree from Dawn of the Dead, and Tom Savini, makeup artist extraordinare and a surprisingly good actor here. It also stars a then unknown Ed Harris, who Romero discovered. Ed shows his intensity and power early on. You really feel like you're watching real people and their traveling show. Nothing feels phony, smug, or "ironic" here. The final 20 minutes is the most stirring thing that Romero has ever done (with the best scene in a school where Ed Harris gives his sword and helmet to a young school boy he met earlier in the film. The kid's performance is wonderful in a film filled with them). So, this film is much more than just a change of pace for George A. Romero. It's a deeply moving, sad film, one that should be appreciated not only for its change of pace (which Romero succeeds wildly), but for its deep, humanistic message. A wonderful piece of film-making....

From what I gather, "Knightriders" didn't do very well at the box office when it was released. Upon watching it, it's easy to come up with plausible explanations for this. While the poster seemed to promise wall-to-wall action, there isn't that much of it, and what action there is often becomes monotonous. The movie tries to do so much that many of the plot threads feel unfinished at the end. And of course, the unbelievably long running time - 145 MINUTES!!!

Yet at the same time, I can't really call this a BAD movie - I would lean more to calling it "misguided". That's because as problem-filled the movie is, there are some good things about it. The actors give their characters a lot of heart - Brother Blue is especially good. (And I thought Savini actually wasn't bad in his role as well.) While the action scenes become monotonous, there are some impressive stunt sequences. The medieval-style music score fits like a glove. And there are some moments that are just *perfect*, the best being the opening sequence.

If you do watch it, I recommend that you split up your viewing into several sessions, so that you don't become too bored by how the movie keeps, well, spinning its wheels. There's a great movie hiding in there - perhaps with a lot of work (and a little magic), it might one day be successfully remade.

The same person who turned me on to "Black Christmas" loaned me this little gem of a movie. It's highly original, well acted and written, and has some surprisingly good stuntwork. The story is great and there are some poignant scenes toward the end that just make you cheer. The ending is downbeat and uplifting at the same time. If you're looking for something enjoyably different in a movie, check this out.