I never heard of this flick and being released nowadays, almost 16 year after it was shot it does mean a thing. It must be bad, isn't it? Shot in 2002 it stayed for 3 years on the shelves before it was finally released but even then it was failure. The reason it came out in 2014 under the new title Black Plague do had a reason. Pick up the DVD or Blu Ray and just have a close look. Lena Headey is sitting on a throne. Does it ring a bell? Sure, it looks like Game Of Thrones. And they are picking in on the success of that series. The cover of the DVD is never seen in this flick. But don't get me wrong. Mostly it's a bad sign but this flick do offer a few things. It shows Lena as the main lead and is showing what she can do. It's clear that she was ready to move on to bigger projects. Further the look of this flick do show how people lived in the Dark Ages just before the plague entered Europe. Just look how they lived, how they looked, look at their teeth. Look how religion is important. And it do has a good story. The only nudity comes from soldiers standing naked who are controlled by a doctor looking for signs of the plague. Even as the plague enters England there's more going on. Not bad at all.Gore 0,5/5 Nudity 0,5/5 Effects 2/5 Story 3/5 Comedy 0/5

This should get more, but I can't go past 5/10. The basic structure of the movie is 'inspired' by more famous classics, notably Sergio Leone's 1.ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE WEST (remember how Charles Bronson's character is gradually introduced via short flashbacks, so in the end we learn he's come to exact revenge on Henry Fonda's character who had once killed his brother ). 2. PER QUALCHE DOLLARO IN PIU' (Lee Van Cleef's character hunts down Gian Maria Volontè's character...only in the end we learn he seeks revenge because his sister had been raped and murdered ). Remember how the link is a carillion watch the bad guy amuses himself with, which in the end we learn belonged to the departed sister?3. The mass rape as punishment for adultery also came in REVENGE with Anthony Quinn (and the old nobleman/husband IS portrayed as another "Tiburon" ).This movie basically mixes'n'matches the above plots...we get a necklace instead of a carillion watch, the flashback device and all the rest to a T with the notable exception of the medieval angle.Movies like French SECRET DEFENSE do a better job at being more cryptic. This one here aims higher than its class should allow. Historical reconstruction is good, scenes are also good, but the whole lacks something important...maybe because Leone's masterpieces sprung to my attention immediately.Of course you also get bits&pieces of NAME OF THE ROSE (=the enigma of the words on the corpses ) , MASK OF RED DEATH etc etc...again...give you the feeling of having seen all devices in an overall better product.The storyline is at times inconsequential...instead of feeling guilty for the punishment -however excessive- of a crime, people could have easily killed the 'mesmerizing stranger without a name'...but I realize that we'd have a ten minutes movie, then.Maybe the botched state of the movie explains why it was released 3 years after being produced, as some say.Won't watch it twice.

"Anazapta" is one of those movies about the medieval times which does not have any characters boasting a bright, ultra-white-teeth Hollywood smile. The whole so to say "medievalness" is shown very naturally, i.e. people are dirty, rude, there's violence and brief nudity, etc. And this is great. This is the only thing that provides the movies with above the average rating IMHO. The story is twisted just perfectly for ending-guessers to figure out the grand finale some 20 to 15 minutes before time, but the very ending scene has left me wondering. Anyway, in my TV-program the film was described as a historical thriller and thriller it was indeed.

Being an avid admirer of director Alberto Sciamma´s first film "Killer Tongue" I did not hesitate to watch his new movie while it was shown at the "Fantasy-Filmfest" Germany. I cannot say, I´m disappointed. But i did not turn out the way I expected it. Compared to his first movie, an extravaganza beyond compare, "Anazapta" looks too arty to capture my benevolent attention. There have been some great movies on the middle ages, like "Flesh and Blood", "Jabberwocky" or "Hour of the Pig". In all these movies the middle ages are so dirty, amoral and violent as you always thaught thy would have been. "Anazapta" makes no exception, and that´s the biggest failure. It does not show anything you haven´t seen before. The movie looks very tv-like. There is no spark. Compared to the in some aspects similar "Hour of the Pig" it´s a major disappointment. Although it´s twisted, you lose interest in getting to the final twist. Don´t misunderstand me. It´s not a bad movie. I have seen much, much worse. But my expectations were higher.