Conquest (1984)

Lucio Fulci is a divisive figure: either you worship every movie the man ever made or lent his name to — ignoring continuity errors, bad dubbing, dealing with multiple cuts and names of his films, all while explaining away ridiculous moments like a man patiently waiting for spiders to slowly eat his fake face — and mention how much his surrealist approach points to him as more auteur than simple director. Or you think he's a hack, making the same movie again and again — woman hating paeans to gore, decimated eyeballs, slow motion zombies, gore, glacial plots and oh yes, more gore. I'm not going to change your mind, but I will say that I tend to be more in the "Fulci lives!" t- shirt wearing army that owns multiple versions of his films and can (and will) talk your ear off about how awesome The Beyond is.This article isn't about any of that.Beyond mediations on the witches that really run the world and zombies treating humanity as a never-ending buffet, my love of Italian horror — nay, Italian exploitation film — rests on its ability to shamelessly rip off other films. According to the liner notes of the 2010 DVD reissue of Zombie 2, Italian copyright law allows any film to be marketed as a sequel to another work. Therefore, any major trend in horror or sci-fi will be answered by an insane amount of spaghetti remakes. Most of these films would be a splinter into the eye of a normal person (Olga Karlatos, eat your heart out). But these celluloid copycats are my bread and butter. I blame a childhood of waiting for more Star Wars and being "rewarded" with Star Crash (part of the greatest double drive-in bill I've ever seen with Battle Beyond the Stars), a movie that I endlessly daydreamed about when I really should have been paying attention in grade school.To wit: 1982's Conan the Barbarian was a huge hit worldwide to the tune of nearly $69 million dollars, leading to a horde of Italian imitators: Joe D'Amoto's Ator, the Fighting Eagle; Umberto Lenzi's Iron Master; Antonio Margheriti's Yor, the Hunter from the Future (you just knew I was going to bring up Yor and his fine meats, right?) and so many more, as well as American cousins such as Albert Pyun's The Sword and the Sorcerer (starring Lee Horsely of TV's Matt Houston) and Phantasm creator Don Coscarelli's The Beastmaster. That's but a sprinkle of the veritable ocean of barbarian rip-offs out there that you could dip your toe into. But we're here to talk Fulci's take on the whole sword and loincloth subgenre.Conquest comes at a crossroads in Fulci's life. After six years of working with screenwriter Dardano Sacchetti — a collaboration that led to the golden (err, red is a better color to use here) era of his films, like Zombie 2, City of the Living Dead, The Beyond, New York Ripper, Manhattan Baby and House by the Cemetery, a murder's row of, well, movies about murder — Fulci unexpectedly went off on his own to create this film. For some reason, it was believed that this would be a big budget production and Sacchetti felt betrayed (their relationship would worsen with lawsuits and recriminations forever dividing them). The failure of Conquest would hasten not only the decline of Fulci's career, which would see him lending his name to films that he hadn't even worked on (the jury is out, but it seems for all intents and purposes he was a bloody version of Dali, wily nily signing his name onto any project that'd float him some cash) and facing worsening health.Perhaps Fulci was battling the criticism that his films were becoming repetitive. Maybe he saw the film as his chance at the big time, as one of the reasons why this was funded was to push Mexican matinée idol Jorge Rivero to be a bigger star. Perhaps he wanted to try something different.Read more at bandsaboutmovies.com/2017/08/17/conquest-1983/

I must apologize all sword and sorcery fan's, but this films sucks! And i must say that is a pity. Im a fan of fantasy\sword and sorcery movies. But "Conquest" is on one of the most boredom sword and sorcery flicks i ever seen (when i say that, i don't even refer flicks like "Gunan il guerriero", "Wizards of the Demon Sword", "Ator 1 and 2" or even "Deathstalker" sequels, because after all, we must say that "Conquest" its much better movie!), the plot is horrible, the soundtrack is really, really annoying, the sound design (no comments), the narrative losses completely along the film. Yes, i known that the budget is really, really, really low, but sometimes is no excuse to do such bad plots and nonsensical narratives, that are so terrible in most of the "B" and "Z" sword and sorcery movies. One thing i must say, Lucio Fulci creates a great ambiance, he capt beautiful landscapes that emanate a strange mystic atmosphere, that sends us too a dreamlike fantastic world. But unfortunately is very few, and the rest of the movie fails completely. If you like this one i recommend: "The Sword and the Sorcerer"(Albert Pyun - 1982), in many ways have a similar aura.

Bored with watching Zombie Flesh Eaters? Fed up with trying to figure out the End of City of the Living Dead? Scared that you'll waste money on 500 late era Fulci horror flicks? Well, Conquest is the film for you....if you like drug-snorting wolfmen,people being split in two lengthwise, topless sun Goddesses, and a director who must have replaced his corn flakes with LSD, replaced his milk with LSD, then ate all that LSD with a special spoon, made of LSD.Fulci just goes beyond the call of duty in the 'creating another world' stakes, messing up just about every shot on purpose by pointing the camera in the direction of the sun. Otherworldly? How about 'throw out any notion of reality whatsoever'. Don't take this the wrong way though, the insane cinematography just helps this movie.And as for plot, well there's this guy, see, and he sort of appears on a beach with a whole bunch of transparent people, then gets sent on some sort of mission of some sort, with a magic bow. He ends up, erm, somewhere else, and ends up getting his arse kicked over and over again until an animal rights barbarian shows up and helps him, and the two of them travel the land, fighting folks, heading for the topless Godessess place. For some reason. Conquest is one of THE finest Italian insanity flicks I've sat down to watch - Here's a quick rundown of some of the madness:1) Grenades made from leaves and rocks 2) Plenty of gore, including feeding from a severed head like it was a coconut. 3) Dolphin rescue teams 4) zombies, and bizarre cobweb monkey things. 5) The most awful special effects of flying arrows you'll ever see. 6) Great almost techno-like score. 7) Gore galore 8) Sudden plot twist that comes out of nowhere for no reason. 9) Concrete Nunchuks!Great stuff all the way through - As it's a Fulci film, it has that dream-like quality that's almost like a sedative, but this film is a must for fans - get the Blue Underground, cleaned up, uncut version.

I have noticed that "Conquest" is one of those divisive films that the viewer will either love or hate. Before watching, it is important to remember that this film was not done on a big budget, nor is it meant to be seen as anything more than a fantasy film. It is not realistic, as so many of Fulci's other films are.Fulci achieved an ambiance of cosmic proportions with "Conquest." The fog and the monsters and the creatures are fantastic, I think. Is it cheesy? A little, maybe. But it's not unlike a dream you wake up from and think, 'what the hell was that?' He treats us to more than you'd expect amounts of gore in "Conquest," more than any fantasy film I've ever seen. People getting ripped apart, bludgeoned, etc.Another thing I really like about "Conquest" is the music and the setting. I think they work so well together. I wonder where he filmed it, and how he achieved the overall darkness. It's like he only filmed on hazy days.Anyway, I recommend this to Fulci fans. Other people won't get it or appreciate it. It's too ahead of it's time.8 out of 10, kids.