I really can't imagine anyone watching Gor and thinking, "What a great movie." It's got problems galore - bad acting, ridiculous dialogue, poor special effects, a horrible plot . . . you name it, it's probably bad.With all that in mind, I understand I've most likely overrated Gor. But it's just too much fun! Three things I enjoy - 1. The Cheese - I really hate the expression, but for me, Gor is the definition of so bad it's good. Fortunately, the movie never seems to take itself too seriously. 2. Oliver Reed - I doubt Reed could have passed a sobriety test while filming, but he's got so much presence, he's always worth watching - even with the ridiculous dialogue. 3. Rebecca Ferratti - What's not to like - WOW! And that hair - puts most 80s hair bands to shame.Even with the many obvious problems, the thing that bugs me the most is the ending. The last 5 minutes is tacked on to setup the sequel. Jack Palance is also featured in the ending. You'll be forgiven if you forget he's supposed to be in the movie. He's only there to plug the followup.

I have never read the novel from which this film was derived, so I approach it untainted by literate expectations.I muse at the notion people got dressed, got into motor vehicles, traveled at least a few miles, and paid cash money for a ticket to enter a cinema in order to sit and watch this thing on the big screen. I was never among those ranks, and having just experienced the movie for free (save the electricity required to operate the TV) while sitting on my couch, I'm torn between Schadenfreude and sympathy for the ones who were.Unlike other reviewers, most of whom seem to have read the Gor novels, I declare this movie has measurable golden turkey value. The art direction is where I found redeeming elements.The 80's hair is to die for, and I was especially taken with the mullet sported by one of the comrades with whom our protagonist aligns. The idea that hairstyle would be the single common thread between the civilizations of Gor and earth is quirky and cute.I was also impressed with the quantity and diversity of injection-molded plastic props and wardrobe accessories. Molded *rubber* spear points in a vast array of shapes and sizes also appear on screen. (Some of the blades of the swords seemed to be actual tin or aluminum, and not painted/colored plastic/rubber.) I am not sure how they managed to color and paint all these things so well (and that is not sarcastic, the finish work on the props and wardrobe is exemplary; no "Attack of the the Eye Creatures" detail treatment in Gor), yet still betray the counterfeit nature of an item's composition material. Typically, when the detail work is this good, items pass for genuine articles, but not in Gor. The bejeweled crown Oliver Reed wears looks very similar to items I have seen in the toy aisle at many dollar stores, even though I have never seen any of the toys look so much like actual precious metal and stone.Another worthy point: Oliver Reed, as a blonde. It's a surprisingly good color for him. Oliver Reed, alone, is a worthy point. I missed the opening credits, and came to IMDb as soon as I saw him on the screen, as the film was already so bad I was not expecting to see anyone with as much film cred as Reed, and as a blonde??? Surely this must be some Reed look-alike, but no... it *is* Oliver Reed. I was hooked at this point, and spent much of the time, while watching the movie, trying to imagine the circumstance and how Reed came to the decision to accept this role.It's true this is a movie that exploits heterosexual men's vulnerability to t&a, but there is also some fine presentation of male buttock and overall physique that we don't often get in such scripts. I was pleasantly surprised.One reviewer wrote that this would be good with (a few cases/kegs of) beer and lots of bored friends looking for a laugh, and I have to second that. (If you live in California, you may choose to substitute beer with medical marijuana for even better results.) Ignorance of the content of the Gor books also seems requisite for maximum enjoyment. If you watch this movie for the celluloid it is, without anticipation of visual presentation of some previously learned story, it is bad enough to be entertaining.I'll never forget that brunette boy's 1986 mullet juxtaposed with his ?first century AD? semi-barbaric attire, fashioned from cloth and plastic resins. That, alone was worth the time it took to watch the film.Still I am left with the question: Why, Oliver, why?

If they made a movie true to the book, it would have been great. This is the first science fiction series of books I ever read starting in 1973. Instead of the Priest Kings being immense, highly-intelligent sophisticated insects that communicate via smell, we get Jack Palace as a man. Instead of traveling via tarns (immense hawk-like birds) and tharlions (mini T Rex like lizards) we get horses. I think a limited budget might have played a large roll in all this.I'm hoping they will remake these books into movies with modern special effects. The original story from the book is very well done too. In fact, the first 8 books are pretty good.

I've read several top 10 worst sci-fi/fantasy movies lists, and on most of them at least 1 if not multiple Star Trek movies were listed. Even the WORST of those movies are like works of DiVinci or Shakespear compared to this movie. There was no sense of time in the movie, so many "clipped" areas, where the scene jumps from one to the other, in no apparent order. The combat scenes were some of the worst I've ever seen, one punch or a hit on an enemy's shield kills them. If you like "B" rate movies, you won't even like this one. If there was more lettering I would call it a ZZ rate movie. Avoid this one like the plague.I would rate it -4 out of 10