User reviews

Enjoyed this. A good family film. Warwick Davis should have been a Hobbit.

I remember seeing this film in theaters back in '88 and long to see it again on the big screen. There is a motherload of crappy fantasy flicks out there and this one is better than most. I was kinda young when I saw it and didn't find it too violent but some parents may think it gruesome at times. I myself feel that gave it an edge. Along with swordplay there are nasty trolls,a 2-headed beast,mean-spirited characters and some intense scenes at the end. Of course there are lots of special effects. This was a technically well made film with awesome cinematography and interesting locations. Every now and again Fox airs the movie but it's 2 1/2 hr running can be really cut. Ya gotta see it!

It's one of those films they starting SUPER GREAT and you saying "Oh my God, what a gem I found"... and as the film continues its getting less better and ends almost bad.

To me, the first 40 minutes are AMAZING, probably equal to "Lord of the Rings" trilogy!!!! Trust me, THAT GOOD! And then... the plot/scenario does a HUGE drop/fall, its getting quite boring and the finale (the last battle) is almost hilarious/joke/comedy!

But... its a remarkable fantasy film, left a mark to the fantasy universe of movies.

(At least I do, every time I see it.) I first watched this movie a long time ago, and have seen it several more times over the years (it pops up on TV somewhat frequently). I have enjoyed it with each viewing, mainly because I just take it for what it is to me – namely, just a fun, escapist fantasy flick that whisks you away to a magical kingdom where all kinds of mystical, cute, clever, and at times even sinister things are happening, all against a backdrop of remarkably beautiful scenery. Oh, yeah: you also get to see Val Kilmer (Madmartigan) step squarely into a fresh pile of troll poop – truly a classic moment in cinema history!

I noticed that other reviewers herein went to great efforts to point out glaring similarities between Willow and Star Wars, and these similarities apparently ruined the movie for them (or at least, they just didn't *like* Willow). Well, to each their own… As for me, I won't even begin to compare Willow to Star Wars, because: (drum roll please...) I've never even seen Star Wars. Not even once. So there!! ("You've never seen STAR WARS!!" I can hear the collective gasp of all you moviegoers out there. Yeah, okay, so just shoot me already!). But similarities shmimilarities! As Bill Murray said in Meatballs, "It just doesn't matter! It just doesn't matter! It just doesn't matter!..."

Anyway, if you haven't seen Willow, then I would recommend you see it at once and enjoy it for what it is: a fun, escapist fantasy movie that (heaven knows, current events and all...) we could all use a little more of in this day and age. If you have already seen it and love it, well, go see it again! And finally, if you have seen it but don't like it because of annoying similarities between it and Star Wars, well, what can I say? I would hazard that, all things considered, Willow nevertheless DOES have its own special charms that you probably won't find in Star Wars. At the very least I haven't heard that Madmartigan's counterpart in Star Wars, Han Solo, stepped in a big wet pile of troll poop!

Well, I'm glad I got all this off my chest. I feel BETTER!!

For its day, Willow was one of the better fantasy movies. The effects look a little dated now (especially the two-headed beastie) but it has enough humour and action to keep most satisfied. It's no LOTR, but then it was made 14 years ago.

Warwick Davis plays Willow, a Nelwynn, a race of hobbit-sized folk who don't have anything to do with "The Big People" as they call humans. Basically, it's the Shire transplanted into this movie, but without the budget. Billy Barty is the village's wizard and basically plays the character Gweldor again (from Masters of the Universe) but without the silly make-up and stupid musical key.

Val Kilmer is Madmartigan, a human warrior who befriends Willow and helps him on his journey with varying degrees of ulterior motive.

The acting is all reasonably good. Warwick Davis was only 18 when this film was released so his performance is very good considering his age and lack of experience (prior to this he'd played a goblin in Labyrinth and an ewok in Return of the Jedi). It's also interesting to see Pat Roach here. Pat was a former wrestler and has carved out a little niche for himself playing villains and tough guys. Here he plays General Kael, the right-hand henchman of Queen Bavmorda, played with gusto by Jean Marsh. That woman is truly frightening.

It's all good fun and the two funniest characters in the movie are Franjean and Rool, two Brownies, who "help" Willow regardless of the latters wishes. They have the funniest double act and reminded me more than a little of Merry and Pippin in LOTR.

All in all well worth a watch if you want some pure, and somewhat silly, entertainment.

I attended a screen writing class once, and the teacher said that the worst movie ever made was "Willow" ... he also defended "White Chicks" (in the same class) as being some sort of underrated theatrical gem.

What an idiot. Obviously, this man has no soul.

Anyway, it must have been this sort of "I'm too good for that" attitude that killed "Willow" in the theaters. I remember seeing previews for it when I was a kid, and there was nothing more in the world that I had wanted to watch. I was raised on "The Neverending Story," "Legend," "Krull," "The Beastmaster," and "The Dark Crystal." So, sure, I loved fantasy. It was my favorite genre. And even though many will say that "Lord of the Rings" is better, I have to disagree. "The Lord of the Rings" is a good melding of drama, real-life struggle and fantasy, but's it not fun to watch. "Willow," on the other hand, is a blast to watch.

The music from Horner's great ... I can still whistle the adventure theme song, and often do sometimes. Val Kilmer as Madmartigan was a great rogue hero, who had plenty of great lines, laughs. Sorcia was by Joanne Whalley, was hot as hell ... a fiery redhead who just refused to be ordered or commanded. General Kael (who was supposedly based on one of Lucas' critics) is awesome. His look spawned an entire decade of me thinking that people with skull masks were horribly cool. The woman who played Fin Razel (sp?) was great. The Brownies were hysterical. And last but not least, give it up for Billy Barty and Warwick Davis, little people with big roles. I think little people probably thank Mr. Lucas and Ron Howard for making them stars for once, for giving them a showcase piece. Davis really had no better role in his life than this one. And he shined in it.

Well, if that particular teacher is reading this by any chance, I hope you go back and re-watch this as a kid. For me, and obviously many others on this website, the movie was more than a fun, little escape ... it was almost a genre-leading film. If there's one thing that pre-prequel George Lucas was good at, it was at giving the audience a good time ... Indiana Jones, Willow, Star Wars ... the best adventure/fantasy films ever to come out. Each of them with charming heroes, obvious bad guys, magic, swords, and humor.

"Pirates of the Carribbean" resurrected this sort of cinema, I think, and the American public responded to it with verve. I still remember hard-nosed critic Lisa Schwarzbaum giving "Pirates" a D rating in Entertainment Weekly. I bet she about choked on her own vomit when she saw how much fun everyone had with the film.

And "Willow" is the same thing. It's pure magic. Pure escape. Especially good for children, but good for the adults, too. If you can't have fun with this one, than you better go get your laughs from movies like "White Chicks" ... just don't be surprised when the kids come out making jokes about d*cks and p*ssies afterward.

Producer George Lucas and director Ron Howard deserve credit for trying. They tried to make a fantasy epic with "Willow" and they came close. Unfortunately, "Willow" misses the mark. It looks great but the story is weak. I first saw "Willow" in the theater and I liked it but I don't like it as much now. The best part of the movie now was the best part of the movie back then, a wildly dreamy Joanne Whalley.

I'm typing this being dictated to by my 11 year old son, in whose opinion this is the best movie he has ever seen. He's outgrown the Disney variety and various animations but he's still not ready for hardcore action movies so what is there for him to enjoy - well as a mom, I can tell you, very little. That's where the fantasy movies are so great. They have mystery, action, a little romance but the greatest value comes from the good moral story of good wins over evil, truth over deceit and small truimphs over powerful.

The most amazing fact is that at the time of first seeing this movie, it is 16 years old - Thank you George Lucas, thank you Ron Howard and thank you for a wonderful cast who have brought this eternal story to eternal life and I'm not joking either. I think we are on viewing #25 already and still going strong.

Movies are about people sharing a story but magic certainly helps get the message across...

I was reluctant to go back and watch "Willow", because it was a favourite of my childhood, and its star, Warwick Davis, was a hero of mine. After I loved "Willow" my mum told me that Davis played the Ewok in Return of the Jedi, and that was it: instant hero worship.

Unfortunately I was right to be wary. "Willow" isn't as good as I'd remembered. I still liked it, but it has long passages where my attention wandered, such as chases and bloodless PG battle scenes.

The charisma of Davis and the chutzpah of making a movie with a mostly little-person cast (including the legendary Billy Barty) still kind of won me over, but I wish that same bravado could have extended to some of the set pieces, which seemed recycled from other movies.

When Neil Armstrong set foot on the Moon in 1969, the whole world paused; now such things are second nature to everyone, veritably taken for granted as more and more science fiction becomes reality every day. In 1977, when George Lucas made `Star Wars,' it turned the cinematic universe on it's ear with it's scope and vision, offering things neither seen nor experienced by anyone before; now his accomplishments are virtually taken for granted, his vision dismissed by many with a shrug. But in this original story by Lucas, that vision is captured once again and proffered to the world via the magic of the movies, in `Willow,' directed by Ron Howard.

A long time ago, in a galaxy perhaps far, far away, a baby comes into the care of the elvish Willow Ufgood (Warwick Davis) and his wife, Kaiya (Julie Peters). The infant bears the birthmark of the one prophesied to come who will put an end to the tyrannical rule of the evil Queen Bavmorda (Jean Marsh). But the Queen, too, knows of the prophecy and is seeking the baby bearing the telltale mark. For the sake of his village, as well as the safety of the child, it falls to Willow to transport the baby to a safe haven beyond the boundaries of his land and the reach of Queen Bavmorda. So Willow sets out upon his journey, and along the way finds an ally-- maybe-- in the person of the self-proclaimed `World's greatest swordsman,' Madmartigan (Val Kilmer), and together (sort of) they embark upon an adventure that will ultimately lead them to a final confrontation with the evil Queen herself.

With some help from George Lucas, Ron Howard delivers this highly imaginative tale-- which bears that unmistakable Lucas touch-- with a touch of magic of his own. A showcase of special F/X-- it pioneered the `morphing' technique so vital to the success of films like `The Abyss' (filmed one year after this one) and `Terminator 2: Judgment Day' (1991)-- it is nevertheless decidedly not a `special F/X' movie. The F/X, though a big part of the film, to be sure, do not supersede the story. And because of that, it makes that necessary emotional connection with the characters possible, and takes the whole film to a higher level. A big part of what has made Lucas and Howard so successful, in fact, is that innate ability of being able to tap into the humanity of any given story (With Lucas, for example, his `American Graffiti' and even `THX-1138,' and Howard's `Parenthood,' `Night Shift' and `Apollo 13') and knowing how to convey it to their audience. It's the difference between being a true filmmaker, and just someone to whom an opportunity is handed who simply hasn't the insight or sense of human nature to know what to do with it (Like Adam Shankman with `The Wedding Planner,' Jeff Franklin's `Love Stinks,' Nick Gomez with `Drowning Mona' or Peter Ho-sun Chan's `The Love Letter.' All movies that suffered greatly because of their director's inability to do what Lucas and Howard do so proficiently and seemingly with facility).

In the title role, Warwick Davis does a good job of bringing Willow to life, as does Val Kilmer in the flashier role of Madmartigan. Joanne Whalley does a decent turn as Sorsha, daughter of the evil Queen, but is overshadowed by the deliciously sinister rendering of Bavmorda by Jean Marsh, whose wickedness is shamefully delightful.

In a supporting role, however-- and with extremely limited screen time-- it is Julie Peters who really captures the attention with a sincere and affecting performance as Kaiya. She has such a pure and natural manner that it's hard to believe this is an actor playing a part; the realism she achieves, in fact, can be compared to that of Harriet Andersson in any one of a number of Ingmar Bergman's films. Her ability is a true gift that endows her with a quality and a presence that would make her an asset to any film, as she certainly is here. And it's a shame she has apparently never been afforded the opportunity of plying her craft more-- `Willow' is her only feature film. It's a singular success, however, and one of which she can be proud. Her portrayal of Kaiya goes far in demonstrating the positive effect a supporting role can have on a film, especially when it's this well acted.

The supporting cast includes Patricia Hayes (Fin Raziel), Billy Barty (High Aldwin), Pat Roach (General Kael), Gavan O'Herlihy (Airk), David Steinberg (Meegosh), Mark Northover (Burglekutt), Kevin Pollak (Rool), Rick Overton (Franjean) and Maria Holvoe (Cherlindrea). With an intelligent screenplay by Bob Dolman and original music by James Horner, `Willow' is an entertaining, enlightening film, rich in characterization and metaphor, with a subtle message and a moral that unobtrusively makes a statement about diversity and the value of an individual's contributions to the society of which he is a part; as well as the fact that one person can, indeed, make a difference. Visually stunning, too, it's a transporting experience truly filled with magic, and a journey definitely worth taking. I rate this one 9/10.

At a stormy and dark night in the bowels of a stronghold whose owner results to be a nasty witch Queen called Bavmorda : Jean Marsh, there takes place the birth of a baby. According to a prophecy, as the innnocent child grows, it means the end of her rule . Howewer, a basket containing the baby carries her at the Munchkins land and darf Willow : Warwick Davis, meets her. Willow carries out his fate by sheperding the abandoned baby on a risked journey to fulfil his destiny as a saviour for good . As Willow discovers that the founded girl is actually a sacred infant who is destined to overthrow the ominous queen and rule the land . On the quest her parents, Willow falls with a plausible roguish adventurer called Madmartigan : Val Kilmer . Both of whom join and set out to destroy the power of evil, the heinous witch : Jean Marsh and her daughter : Joanna Whaley. Along the way they are helped by two small men : Rick Overton, Kevin Pollack.

This epic fantasy picture has more than a few elements in common with Bible's innocents massacre , Moises history, Tolkien's Lord of the Rings, and fairytales as Snow White. This is a great adventure movie with too much action-packed, though strangely predictable and the bulk of plot concerns Willow's mission who is assigned the task of returning a child her security , while attempting to free her from the claws of the evil hag and give the baby to the good witch . The picture contains a lot of weird creatures as Death Dogs, Faeries, Brownies, Trolls, dwarfs and a two-head, fire-breathing dragon . Breathtaking climax full of struggles , muscle and magic, providing a thrilling final confrontation . As you can expect from executive producer George Lucas, there is much action and plenty of high-quality FX made by specialists Dennis Muren and Phil Tippet, in addition, stop-motion monsters by Dave Allen. Cast is pretty good with some dwarf actors as Warwick Davis, Billy Barty, David Steinberg, Tony Cox. And popular actors as Val Kilmer and Joanna Walley Kilmer, marriage at the time . As well as a nice secondary cast, such as : Jean Marsh, Gavan O'Herlihy , Kevin Pollack, Rick Overton, Pat Roach and Patricia Hayes as good witch.

The film displays a breathtaking, enjoyable, and, nowadays classic, musical score by the great James Horner. Colorful and brilliant cinematography by Adrian Biddle. The motion picture was well directed by the famous actor and director Ron Howard. From his starts as an actor, as he played George Lucas' American Graffiti , he's had a long career, as he went on as a filmmaker, shooting successfully, his film debut was Grand thef auto, following other hits, such as : Night shift, Splash, Cocoon, Gung Ho, Parenthood, Backdraft , Far and away, The Paper , Apollo13, Ransom , EdTv, The Grinch, A beautiful mind, Cinderella man, The Da Vince Code , Frost/Nixon , among others. Rating 7/10. The yarn will appeal to fantasy fans and Sword/witchery genre buffs.

Being a university history major, trained to examine documents and videos for hidden meanings, and imbued with a skeptical and analytical mind, one might expect that someone like me wouldn't appreciate this kind of film. It's one dimensional, it plays on typical fantasy stereotypes, and it doesn't really have anything that previous fantasy films didn't except for... style.

Yes, I consider this a stylish film. Mostly because even after 'growing up', I can still watch this film and be as wrapped up in the story and characters as I was when I was a little boy. It's formulaic plot and generally one-dimensional characters are a large part of that reason - the film makes no pretensions of being something it isn't. It's honest, a quality lacking in so very many films these days which seem to be produced only to suit the latest fashion.

The characters are all well acted - there's no ham acting to be found here in my opinion. Clearly, the actors had fun with the roles and gave them as much life as they could. Madmartigan is man with a dark past, clearly an anti-hero redeemed by the end of the film. Airk, the 'good' general is everything one expects in a 'knight in shining armor' - chivalrous, dedicated, brave. Bavmorda is the quintessential 'wicked witch', scheming, maniacal, obsessed with power. It is these characters that play so well into the average person's conception of fantasy fare that is precisely what makes the film a success - it entertains us because it knows what we like, and what we expect to see, and then delivers it with action and a bombastic musical score.

Critics panned it for being unoriginal, but being original wasn't the point of this movie. The point was to entertain, to make us thrill to a tale of high adventure of dragons, of far away lands, of swords and sorcery. On this account, no other fantasy film (with the possible exception of Conan the Barbarian) has ever done this so exceedingly well.

Considering how few really good fantasy movies there are out there, this one has to rate pretty high. It is a rather good movie that is fast paced and fun, but it does contain flaws. The main one is Warwick Davis. In some scenes he is good, but in other scenes his character comes off as a bit too whiny. The story is kind of a take off of The Lord of the Rings books. A man, small in statute, has to keep a baby safe from an evil queen who wants to sacrifice it cause it may grow up to kill her. While protecting the child Willow (Davis' character) runs into a swordsman played by Val Kilmer. He does a great job playing this character and is my favorite character in the movie. Some of the effects are good, and some quite lame (the two little guys accompanying Willow), but considering this was 1987 you can overlook this. The battle scenes are ok (the one at the abandoned castle is the best), but they are just not on the scale of other movies of this type. This movie is worth a look though.

"Willow" follows a lot of the basic high fantasy tropes. There are wizards, elves, a dark lord and a prophecy about a chosen one destined to defeat the dark lord. What helps "Willow" stand out is that the "chosen one" is still a baby. With the dark lord knowing the prophecy, she pulls a Ramses and decrees to search all babies for the chosen one. Through means of trying to hide the baby, she ends up in the hands of Willow. So, the focus of the story is not on "The chosen one" but instead the random person who happened to stumble into the situation. That is an interesting twist. Willow, himself is never mentioned in the prophecy, he just is the one taking care of the chosen baby.

But man, this movie makes a lot of strange decisions. It can become very clear that this was written by George Lucas. The story begins by putting a fellowship of characters together, only to have the group break up about two scenes later.

It is difficult to grasp how the rules of this world work. There is one scene where the evil wizard just turns everyone into pigs, why couldn't she just use that power to begin with? There is a plot point where a love potion is used on a character, and they do the good old Bond style of: kiss her until she likes it. There are a lot of obnoxious side characters and they get far too much screen time. The story takes back seat for a long stretch of the movie and it chooses the oddest things to focus on.

There are bonus points of originality, but boy is it ever strange. I can see it being some people's favorite movie, but for me it is too unfocused, confusing and filled with annoying characters. There is a little magic, but it falls short of coming together.

All the people who are complaining that it's "too much like Lord of the Rings?" How much fantasy have you read? Have you read viking sagas or Greek myths? How about the bible? There are no new stories, just new ways of telling them. It's called Archetypal Criticism and it's one of the most popular ways of looking at literature. And George Lucas and Ron Howard managed to do that excellently in Willow.

I'd rather watch Willow yell at Madmartigan and call him stupid than watch Sam and Frodo "Just hold on a little longer, because everything will be happy because of LOVE!"

There's betrayal, redemption, action, the scariest dragon I've ever seen in my life, love, purposfully corny poetry and lots of jokes. The characters despair, but fight against it rather than just wandering around listlessly saying "woe is me!" People are allowed to be petty and shallow without being influenced by The Greatest Evil Known To Man (tm). There's no one hanging around with no other purpose than to be encouragement- everyone claims Willow won't succeed but he still fights on, and wins everyone over to his side. In my mind that makes him a lot more admirable than Frodo McAngstypants who only keeps on going because Sam keeps telling him he's fantastic and he thinks he's going to die anyway.

When Willow was released in 1988, I was in my mid-teens and though I think I did see it not long after that and have watched it once or twice in the years since, it's not a film that had stuck in my memory or affections. However, with an imminent new Disney+ sequel series, I thought I'd give it another shot and was pleasantly surprised to find more to like than I'd recalled.

The story, written by George Lucas, is a pick-'n'-mix of fantasy genre staples. We have evil sorceror Queen Bavmorda, played by Jean Marsh as though she's in panto, who is seeking a new-born child prophesied to become empress Elora Danan and end her evil reign. We see the baby placed in a river and found by the children of farmer and aspiring sorceror Willow (Warwick Davis), who sets out on a quest to return her to her people, encountering on the way swordsman Madmartigan, who is a kind of fantasy Han Solo played by Val Kilmer, sorceress-turned-possum Raziel (Patricia Hayes), Bavmorda's daughter and general (Joanne Whalley), and some irritating if occasionally amusing brownies (Kevin Pollak and Rick Overton).

But while the story elements aren't original, the film is self-aware enough to realise this and have fun with the tropes. It's not as comedic in intent as near-contemporary fantasy classics The Princess Bride (1987) and Labyrinth (1986), but nor does it take itself seriously, and it has heart in bucketloads.

Warwick Davis, who was 17 during filming, is way too young to play a convincing father of two, and it's a slightly puzzling decision to make him one when apparently the role was written with him in mind after George Lucas had been impressed by his performance in The Return of the Jedi. But I guess I can see dramatic reasons for such a choice, and Willow's journey from farmer to a sorceror who has the courage, if not necessarily the skill, to face Bavmorda is compelling. His relationships with mentor Raziel, reluctant hero Madmartigan and baby Elora Danan feel authentic and are the heart of the film.

Madmartigan is a scoundrel and selfish womaniser and, like Joanne Whalley's Sorsha, you'd quite like to kick him in the face in the early parts of the film. But he's played with such charm by Val Kilmer that, also like Sorsha, you can't help falling in love with him. Whalley herself is great as Sorsha, ruthless and strong but still showing us vulnerability and torn loyalties. There are also some memorable minor characters, such as as Willow's friend Meegosh (David Steinberg) and Madmartigan's sort-of-friend Airk (Gavan O'Herlihy).

Some of the special effects have held up reasonably well but others have dated, and by today's standards the production values are a bit shoddy. And while the film has a sense of humour, it's not quite witty enough to carry off its rather clichéd premise.

Despite this, it's a charming, heart-warming adventure that is still worth a watch, particularly if you're planning to follow the Disney+ series that picks up the story a couple of decades later.

A wonderful fantasy full with lots of wonderful creatures and characters. The plot is great and the cast is brilliant. I wish this movie was more known, it's almost a hidden gem.

The movie is just one exciting ride after the other.

It's one of the best fantasy movies ever made, and if you're a fantasy fan you just got to see this one. I wish there were more movies of that kind, hopefully the upcoming Lord Of The Rings will deliver similar excitement.

I remember really liking this movie as a kid and I was pretty sure it's one of those you probably shouldn't revisit as an adult. Because I want to watch the new TV show that just came out, I went against my gut feeling... and I was right. I'm hoping the little ones can still find magic in this movie but it definitely hasn't aged well, from the uneven pacing, to the overacting, and of course the terrible special effects. There are other similar movies from the 80s that hold up better so I know I'm just not harsh toward a product of its time, and it really suffers from several flaws. So I did not really enjoy it outside of the nostalgia but again, very young kids might.

I have seen this movie in my childhood days that too iam lucky to have this seen in a good theatre. My dad took me to this wonderful and magical movie I really enjoyed this great flick and I still remember each and every single scenes in this movie. Warwick Davis and Val Kilmer were top of their forms truly impressive performance by both. You have to see this movie to believe it's magical world and it's witches and sorcery! See it to get mesmerized an all time favorite for me and it's in my personal movies collection. Two thumps up!.

Based on a story by George Lucas, this lively fantasy adventure is certain to appeal to kids and those genre fans looking to be transported to a different time and place. A well chosen cast acquits themselves well, with young Warwick Davis, who'd made his breakthrough as the Ewok Wicket in "Return of the Jedi", placed front and centre. Davis plays the title role, a little person (or Nelwyn, as they're referred to in this universe) who discovers and protects a Daikini (or big person) baby; said baby has been prophesied to bring about the downfall of an evil queen, Bavmorda (Jean Marsh). Willow grows to love the baby and accept his mission to deliver the baby to safety, acquiring some companions on his way. Thieving sword master Madmartigan (Val Kilmer) is one, tiny imps Rool (Kevin Pollak) and Franjean (Rick Overton) are others.

Extremely well shot in the 2.35:1 aspect ratio by Adrian Biddle, this marked a truly ambitious effort for director Ron Howard, who hadn't done anything of this scope before. He and his crew create some mighty fine atmosphere throughout. Filmed both in the studio and on breathtaking locations in England, Wales, and New Zealand, this carries us from one environment to another - forests, snowy mountains, desolate islands. The special effects are nicely done. James Horner composes a fine score in the tradition of what John Williams had done for Lucas's "Star Wars" series. There's plenty of comedy relief, not just from the Rool and Franjean characters but the rascally Madmartigan as well. So it should keep the kids laughing as often as it enchants them. It does get fairly intense at times, so there might be times when they get scared.

The endearing Davis does a respectable job of being the heart and soul of the movie, and Kilmer, Pollak, and Overton are all pretty funny. Joanne Whalley (who would go on to marry Kilmer) plays the queens' daughter / henchwoman, Patricia Hayes is a sorceress who's trapped in the form of various animals for much of the story, Billy Barty is an old wizard, Pat Roach the Darth Vader like character General Kael, Gavan O'Herlihy is the proud warrior Airk, and Phil Fondacaro, Tony Cox, and Mark Northover play members of Willow's village.

Fans of other fantasy fare like "The NeverEnding Story", "Krull", and "Legend" should take to this one as well. It provides ample entertainment for a well paced 126 minutes.

Seven out of 10.

To sum things up, this was really a George Lucus film-with the then relatively inexperienced Ron Howard hired to direct-under the watchful eye of Lucus. Lucus wrote the screenplay, raiding his bookshelf for Tolkein (especially "The Hobbit") and Lewis ("Narnia"). Then he simply transferred the hero/heroine romance from his "Star Wars" screenplay. Not necessarily a bad thing, it was a simple way for him to build a feature length screenplay targeting younger viewers but sophisticated enough to entertain the entire family. "Willow" has some scary stuff but should not be a problem for the average grade school viewer. My rating is based on comparisons to other films with a similar target audience.

I must confess up-front to a positive bias. My favorite part of "Star Wars" is the caustic romance between Han Solo and Princess Leia; and in "Willow" Lucus has refined his technique and actually improved something that was already close to perfection. Sorsha (Joanne Whalley) and Madmartigan (Val Kilmer) substitute nicely for Carrie Fisher and Harrison Ford, with the added dimension of having them begin the story on opposite sides. The romantic elements are efficiently and subtly inserted into the film. Even though these characters are part of the main storyline, the romance is separate enough to serve as the film's main parallel story. The only downside is that this side story soon becomes more interesting than the main one, so much so that its climatic kiss (occurring about 20 minutes before the ending) unintentionally turns into the film's climax (at least energy wise). The actual resolution of the main story then plays out rather anti-climatically.

"Willow" is a delivery quest story, much like "The Hobbit" where a reluctant Nelwyn (small person) is required to set out on a perilous journey to return a lost baby (even smaller) to a Daikini (tall person). Along the way he is assisted by a couple of Brownies (yet smaller guys who speak with outrageous French accents). The size differentials are the main theme of the film and are especially intriguing to young viewers who easily identify with having to deal with people who tower above them. Howard encourages this identification process by shooting most of the action at child level. If you watch the film with young children you will be amazed at its ability to draw them into the story, this happens because the camera angles intentionally match a child's point-of-view of the world. The viewing child's surrogate is the title character (Warwick Davis-who does a commentary on the DVD), a unlikely hero who inspires audience sympathy as he bravely faces the dangers of his journey while gamely putting up with an ever-changing group of irritating companions. There are frequent cutaways to Elora Danan (the baby), mostly for reaction shots. As in "Raising Arizona", the producers took enough stock clips to match her expressions to almost any situation. Willow learns early on from Cherlindrea (a dazzling fairy) that Elora Danan is a princess who (it has been foretold) will one day vanquish the evil Queen Baymorda (a fun role for Jean Marsh). Things get a bit Biblical/Narnia here as the Queen is seeking to eliminate the Princess before she becomes a threat.

The DVD features: "Willow:The Making of an Adventure" (made during production in 1988) and "Willow: Morf to Morphing" (made in 2001 for the DVD release), really put the film in historical context relative to its place in the evolution of special effects. It was really the transitional point where photochemical (film) effects were subordinated to digital effects. This gave "Willow" a significant place in film history and these two featurettes taken together nicely illustrate the continuing challenge to those involved with special effects; any new development is soon overused and no longer an audience draw. Meaning that effects people have to stay on the cutting edge to simply justify their existence.

Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child.

Overall this is a pretty well done movie. The special effects are dated but the plot is solid. Typical of any George Lucas movie "outside" of the first 2 Star Wars films there are way too many goofy moments and too many instances of poor dialogue that it almost ruins the movie. However, director Ron Howard pulled it together. It's a family friendly Hobbit wannabe story that (just barely) hits the mark.

I literally waited three years to see this movie. I couldn't afford the theater at the time, and I do not have cable (I refuse to pay to watch TV), so I had to wait for it to come out on video.

It was well worth the wait. I own it on DVD now, and I must say the DVD version is outstanding! (but I'm still spun out on how much clarity and quality of sound you get with DVD) This movie captured my heart and never fails to make me laugh, and make me smile. I loved the movie.

The direction and acting were wonderful, the scenery was dead on and the costuming and props were top row. I also loved the subsequent books by George Lucas and Claremont. Forgive me, but I can't remember Claremont's first name.

Shadow Moon

Shadow Dawn and

Shadow Star.

Excellent trilogy based on the introductory "Willow." Kind of like Lucas's Lord of the Rings starting his the Hobbit, which is Willow. Excellent movie, excellent books which I would pay to see on screen.

It's one of the Fiend's many favorites and gets a sure-footed 9.8/10 from...

the Fiend:.

Sometimes you watch a movie as a kid, and you never get a chance to see it again until you're an adult. I'm lucky enough that "Willow" happens to be just about the only such movie for me. I just watched it again last night for the first time in more than ten years.

This was supposed to be George Lucas' Big Fantasy Epic that doesn't involve Jedi Knights and was basically marketed as such. Emphasis was placed on the new "Morphing" CGI animation effects. You know, it's a good thing "Willow" has those then-revolutionary special effects going for it (they scared the hell out of me when I was little) because otherwise, as pretty as it is to look at, this is possibly the most mediocre fantasy movie ever made.

I don't know why I noticed it so badly. I read _Lord of the Rings_ in a college English Lit class and our very cool professor recommended watching the entire "Star Wars" trilogy again if we were finding the Tolkein hard to follow at first. I don't know why "Star Wars" feels like a Tolkein tribute while "Willow" feels more like a direct rip-off. It doesn't help that "Star Wars" zips along briskly, while "Willow" is REALLY slow.

Now, this isn't a terrible movie. It just runs slowly and takes itself way too seriously. It's worth a look, but I'd say they could probably cut a good forty minutes out of it. So long as they leave in the scene with Zaphod Beeblebrox's evil mutant twin. ^_^