AllanHy I you have read the book by Poul Anderson and had the assumption that the book had a shard of intellect as to what 13th Century feudal Englishmen would do if they had access to (what we would regard as) 23rd Century technology, then you are in for a horrifying disappointment with this movie. Apparently the directors thought that if you could take the story of Christ and turn it into a satyric comedy, then you could do the same thing to Poul Anderson's book. At least the "Life of Brian" had some humor. And the special effects were actually better. This movie is a total waste of time. And intellect. And the money I paid to buy it thinking that it had any resemblance to the book which I just bought and read for the third time. Read the book which is about how guile and barbarity can overcome civilized sloth and don't waste your time with the movie.

halfpapp at first i must say that i'm german. considering this film to be made by a german producer/director, my comment is influenced by a different way of life than the american one. this film is made by european and made for europeans. the humor, the jokes appearing in this movie are hard to understand when you're u.s. american.ok, i don't know the book. but my personal experiences tell me that nearly every movie is disappointing compared to the original book.this film is simply "cool". a weird story, british black humor mixed with some intelligent jokes. not made for broad masses. "underdog" would be a good word to describe it. it's a pity that it had not a sucess like the blair witch project. a european film has to be extraordinary to be succesful in the u.s. the last try to make a good film was "das boot", directed by wolfgang petersen, now being a great director in hollywood. a great story, great emotions, great actors (juergen prochnow, e.g.),a surprising end and a perfect technique was not enough to prevail in u.s. cinemas. the same happened to "high crusade". not lacking on famous actors, not lacking in good fx, the film was not good enough for the u.s. market.what more to say. it had no success and it won't have any success. but i will watch it everytime it is shown on tv.

Doke This film has almost everything it needs to be first class science fiction, except a decent screenwriter. The effects, makeup, photography, and direction are all perfectly acceptable for the story. However, the script is a disaster. This is a highly inept adaptation of Poul Anderson's classic sifi novel. Most of the basic premise, and introduction, are preserved. However, the rest is terrible. Anderson's competent crusader knights are replaced by idiots and buffoons. The subtle humor of the original is replaced by inane slapstick. The result is implausible, and embarrassing. If they had simply cut for time, without trying to replace or add, the film would have been vastly better.

Ironwolf When I found this movie listed at DVD Express, I was excited. I've been a serious fan of Paul Anderson's work since I started reading. "The High Crusade" has always been one of my favorite books by Anderson and I have long thought that it would make an excellent movie. I still think it would make an excellent movie. Unfortunately, this is not it.I was completely surprised by the direction taken by the screen play and direction of this movie. Or maybe shocked would be a better word. It had simply never occurred to me that Anderson's book would be interpreted as a comedy. Certainly, there is humor in the novel, but it is basically a story of high adventure with some very serious elements balancing the humor. There is none of that in the movie. Brown (the screen writer) and Knoesel & Neuhauser (the directors) extracted elements from the book and used them as a skeleton on which to build a second rate "Monty Python and the Holy Grail."This movie was almost painful for me to watch because I could see enough of the novel on the screen to know that a good movie could have been made from "The High Crusade." The SFX, though a little cheezy by current standards, are still acceptable. The cast was adequate, though some of the parts would have been cast differently if this were not a comedy, I'm sure. Certainly, John Rys-Davies makes an excellent Brother Parvis and he is one of the few redeeming factors of this film. And the few scenes taken from the novel were almost watchable. But the overall tone and direction were not even remotely true to the novel. Frankly, even fans of "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" will be disappointed because it's just not that funny.If you have never read the book, then you may find this movie mildly amusing. If you are a fan of this classic science fiction novel, then I recommend steering clear of this movie. It will taint your good memories of the book forever.