The Gaelic King (2017)

Absolutely the worst movie.

It's fun, it's light, [but] it has a hard time when its tries to get heavy.

I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

One of the film's great tricks is that, for a time, you think it will go down a rabbit hole of unrealistic glorification.

The film starts out in 790 AD (not to be considered historical) with a Pict/Gael conflict with the Gael king being killed and his two sons go into exile. The film picks up 10 years later as our sons are incognito as they visit a village in peril...and by village I mean a half dozen thatched huts. They is some internal drama as they go after those who are stealing the village people, all children. Not to give away too much, but it is the evil sorceress and her minions who wear sunglasses at night, but don't listen to Corey Hart.The first half of the film was tolerable even though it was clear neither Jake McGarry nor Noah Irvine were going to win any award for acting. The small community was forgivable because of the budget. And then the fighting started and it was clear there was zero fight choreography in spite of the nine listed stunt co-coordinators and their assistants. At times the fighting hit the Ed Wood level of "so bad it was good." I didn't know how to take the eye laser thing. Not as good as the real budget alternative history films.Guide: No swearing, sex, nudity, or acting.

Having watched 10 minutes of this flick my one and only reaction was "oh dear".....In my opinion this really is an amateur effort.It reminds me of the sort of thing you might expect a volunteer dramatic society to put on for the oldies. That said, it would not matter how old I got I don't think I could sit through The Garlic King or Gaelic King or whatever this is supposed to be. My advice steer well clear. One out of ten from me.

Firstly, when compared to other films in the indie/action/low budget genre, this is exceptional. It doesn't fall into the trap of pretending to be a Hollywood blockbuster, but accepts its limitations and works within them. The story is simple, but works well in its context, and is refreshingly satisfactory, though not at all deserving of a '15' rating (Interestingly my DVD copy has been rated a 12 by the IFCO- a much more appropriate audience) Also, it is really nice to see an good original score- makes a great change from the royalty-free tracks so often used! The beautiful Scottish countryside obviously inspired the producers, and seeing some of the shots you wonder why it isn't used more by higher budget movies. When compared to the larger genre, the film still holds up against criticism, especially in its story and the quality of the editing and score. The visual effects are not fantastic, but don't massively impact the overall watchability of the film. Certainly not a retelling of history, but an interesting interpretation of the few details known about the period.In many ways, a historical/fantasy action/adventure is an unlikely candidate for a budget production, but this film manages to pull it off.

Considering the budget for this film, I thought it was pretty good. While I noticed a couple of continuity errors (hey, you see them in big budget films, too), and had some sound issues (on my TV, anyway... sometimes the music was louder than the actors' voices), on the whole I really enjoyed it as a fantasy story told quite well. It had humour, light and darkness... all aspects which make for an entertaining 90 minutes. It's nicely filmed, with beautiful scenery in Scotland of course. And the original music was especially good.I hope that the lad who played the youngest prince will continue his career in acting, he has presence.Interesting flash at the very end, after the credits... a sequel in the planning, perhaps?