How can the sequel be any worse?!
I accidentally saw this film. I thought it was the same Ator movie that was currently ranked #40 on IMDb's Bottom 100 list--only to discover that was ATOR 2, not this first film. You see, I've got a crazy quest to try to see as many of IMDb's Bottom 100 as possible! However, after seeing ATOR I wonder how the sequel can possibly be any worse?! However, while ATOR has overall score of 2.3 (which is terrible), ATOR 2 is significantly lower at 1.8!!! Yikes...that's bad. But how is this possible as ATOR was 100% craptastic?!The 1980s were an odd time and I remember lots of enjoyable but silly films of the day, such as BEASTMASTER, the Conan films and KRULL. However, there really isn't much about ATOR that is enjoyable.
The film begins with a prologue read by someone with a deadly serious voice. In fact, the incredibly serious nature of this film was one of the worst things about it--it was so oppressively somber and there wasn't a second of mirth or fun about it. According to the narrator, the land has long been ruled and oppressed by the Spider King--for 1000 years to be exact. But, now there is a child who will one day destroy the Spider King and his minions. Oddly, however, you never see more than about 20 men working for this king and controlling this vast kingdom! It's obvious the film had a minuscule budget, as there are only a few baddies and Ator and his army to battle the king consist of him and a woman....oh, and a baby bear. Talk about lame!
The star of the film, Miles O'Keefe is an odd sort of hero. Compared to the man other mythical heroes of the 1980s (and there were many), he looked awfully pretty--with Farrah-like hair and a rather effeminate outfit. Personality-wise, he's also a pretty dull guy. Perhaps this is because the crew and many of the actors were speaking Italian (much of the film is dubbed) or maybe he's just got the charisma of balsa wood....I'm not sure which.
I'd talk more about the plot and the many adventures, but they were all so forgettable. The only really memorable thing was the finale. First, killing the Spider King and his pals turned out to be incredibly easy--so easy, I had to laugh. But the biggest laugh came when I saw the giant spider that was apparently the arachnid behind the throne. It was hilarious to see--with the most obvious wired making it's legs dart up and down--making the spider DUMBER than the octopus in BRIDE OF THE MONSTER (an Ed Wood crap-fest).
Overall, you have a very dull story, a dull leading man, a very dull villain, little adventure and a giant spider on wires. So how, then, can the next film be any worse?! And, if it is, how is it legal to show this to anyone in any country?! I thought they had laws to prevent this sort of travesty.
score 1/10
MartinHafer 20 February 2010
Reprint: https://www.imdb.com/review/rw2210366/35740
Pages:
[1]