PATHFINDER

[John Dailey]

~ Hate to say it, but, that's really all it is; yet, if you liked the original CONAN (remember 'Ahnold', 'fore he came to actual political power?) This is little more than such; but, it is well done, for what there is, to be sure.

~ Strictly speaking, visually, it's a cross 'twixt CONAN and THE CHRONICLES OF RIDDICK (assuming one accepts that they're all that different), really; not even (though as superficially similar to concentration on the sword-fighting) as 'deep' as THE GLADIATOR, gotta admit. - The Vikings were 'here' before Columbus. They gave a bad time to the locals, and left one of their 'royalty' boys for dead. He was (reluctantly) raised by the natives, and remembered the horrors his guardian-brethren perpetrated; growing, he practiced with the one sword he had from then. A decade and a 1/2 later, 'they' returned. He did not 'identify' with them.

~ Probs ensued.

LLAP

J:D

PS: Oh, what does the title refer to? Heh...definitely not him! Check it out on a slow night.

[Ross Barlow]

John, I liked *Pathfinder*, although perhaps not everyone will. It was quite popular here. Seeing cold, snowy, steep mountainsides made me a bit homesick.

.

-Ross Barlow.

[John Dailey]

Ross:

~ LOL! 'Homesick'? (Well, considering where you are...) Yes, the cinematography made me look around for a sweater or blanket myself, and I'm here in New England; I mean, I like snow, and have no prob even with driving on ice, but, I really, really hate the 'cold' temp they result from. Yet such makes for beautiful (though desolate) country, ntl.

~ As I said, the movie/story was well done, as simple-basic it be: a protector of an adopted, nomadic, and threatened-by-his-blood-conquerors 'family'.

~ I won't say it's a 'no-miss', but, it's worth a watching.

LLAP

J:D