Highlander: Endgame (2000)

good back-story, and good acting

A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.

The movie is made so realistic it has a lot of that WoW feeling at the right moments and never tooo over the top. the suspense is done so well and the emotion is felt. Very well put together with the music and all.

This is ultimately a movie about the very bad things that can happen when we don't address our unease, when we just try to brush it off, whether that's to fit in or to preserve our self-image.

My apologies for the awful joke above, but I do feel it was a just one in this case. Especially as this film is very much a bad joke. A poor and disjointed effort. A foul punch-line."Highlander" is a superb and woefully underrated fantasy adventure released in 1986. A high-concept swashbuckler, the film followed the notion that throughout history, a race of immortals have slowly risen- their everlasting life often the result of a traumatic original "death." Now undying, these figures have lived among us for centuries. But it comes at a cost- immortals are destined to eternal battle, only able to be killed through decapitation. Once one is slayed, their powers, memories and abilities are absorbed by the victor through a mysterious transfer known as "the quickening." In the end, there can be only one, and the last remaining immortal will be bestowed with "the gift"- an enigmatic ability that goes largely unexplained throughout the series. However, should the gift be bestowed upon one with a treacherous heart, it may very well spell a dark future for the world...Part of the issue with the "Highlander" universe is that by virtue of the story, it's not a concept that supports the idea of a franchise. It's a one-off adventure. A self-contained tale with a distinct beginning and end. And through trying to endlessly sequalize the franchise with follow- ups, spin-offs and even animated series, it leads to an ever-growing level of contrivance and convolution. And nowhere is that more apparent than in 2000's "Highlander: Endgame."An attempt to close the gap between the outstanding original film and the admittedly fun television franchise, we follow original movie hero Connor (Christopher Lambert) and television series lead Duncan (Adrian Paul) MacLeod, two immortals born in the Scottish Highlands centuries ago. Connor has grown cold and disconnected, as an evil immortal from his past called Jacob Kell (Bruce Payne) has been following him through the ages, and has began killing off those he holds dearest. Duncan soon learns of this treacherous villain, and of another revelation- an immortal who was once his own wife (Lisa Barbuscia) is one Kell's most devout followers. And so, our two immortal protagonists must band together to try and stop this deadly threat... but at what cost?To give what little credit is due, there is a bit of fun to be had from time to time. Adrian Paul seems to be having an absolute blast, and there's a handful of entertaining flashback sequences to his adventures with Connor throughout the ages. It is these scenes where Lambert also is able to loosen up, and the two share a nice chemistry. It's also great fun seeing Martial Arts superstar Donnie Yen in one of his earlier American roles as one of Kell's followers. And a few of the new concepts introduced, while half-baked, are intriguing enough for long-time series fans and help expand the universe a bit.However, any fun to be had stops with these limited and highly infrequent sequences. The script courtesy Joel Soisson is a fundamental mess. As is standard with the film franchise, continuity is thrown right out the window, with the film constantly and consistently contradicting not only previous films, but even elements from the television series. Many scenes feel forced and abrupt, and there's no real sense of pacing to be had. It's both jarring and boring all at once, causing you to check out almost instantly and never look back.Performances outside of Paul are routinely foul and never connect with the audience. While he is given the occasional light-hearted flashback, Lambert is otherwise settled with dreary material as a man hollow from his loses, and comes off as all too bland. A real shame given how powerful he was earlier in the franchise. Barbuscia is just flat as a pancake, lacking charisma or emotion in what is merely a substandard love interest. And Payne. My god, Payne. The man doesn't chew the scenery... he swallows it whole. Alternatingly shouting and whispering his lines on a whim and over-emphasizing words at random, Payne is just a horrible joy to behold. Seriously, dude. Ease up on the caffeine!But at least the action is good, right? Nope! Director Doug Aarniokoski seems in over his head, with the entire film imploding around him. He has no sense of style or scope, and his direction lacks basic composition and flow. Shot after piled on shot are all just bland and often uninspired, relying on first-year film-student logic, with little thought or effort. Key moments in the film lack dramatic weight or impact as a result of the haphazard staging. And even the action comes off as boring, with an over-reliance on static wide shots mixed with hilariously misjudged uses of visual effects and slow-motion. I can only assume at least once, the camera crew was confusingly told: "Well if we put the one camera somewhere vaguely over on the one side of the room... and then put another one at the other end of the room facing the opposite direction and maybe with a different lens, we can kinda cut between them and make a scene, I think? That's how directing works, right?"The really hilarious thing though is two rather amusing side-notes to the film. First, even though it's still a mess, the DVD release has an unfinished workprint available as a special feature, with the intent of showing the audience how much a movie can change during production. And the kicker? The workprint, even in its unfinished state is a significantly better film that the final version! And the second: even the trailer was incompetent, being comprised mostly of fake footage created specifically to sell the film without being in it!If you have to use fake footage to get people into the theater, you know your film is a mess. And so, "Highlander: Endgame" gets a very bad 3 out of 10.

Connor Macleod is back, and this time he's brought the English bloke from the TV series with him. When his friend Rachel is killed, he gets all misty, and goes to a place called The Sanctury, which is like The Colony from Double Team.Then the confusion kicks in, which is just what you'd expect from a Highlander movie. You see, Lambert killed Bruce Paynes dad, so Payne has taken his time getting revenge, and now wants it. He has a few hench men, and Paul is along for the ride, because the show was quite successful.Immortals are not supposed to age, but what really distracts you from the film is how different Lambert looks in this dreadful movie.It's not the fact that he's aged, it all happens to us, but its the fact that he looks like he has a rare skin condition, and it really takes you away from the paper thin narrative.If you've seen Bruce Payne in any other film, you know that he is a pantomime villain, but he is the best thing in this, and really lifts the film whenever he's in it.Paul is in it for no other reason than to fight Lambert, and for both Highlander completists, this is something big.For everyone else though, its a really poor sequel to an average film, with trashy effects.At least Highlander 2 was funny....

...then you can enjoy this movie. yes, there's the killing on holy ground and the flashback were Methos and Kronos are suddenly buddy-buddy despite being explicitly stated during the legendary horsemen episodes that they haven't met for 2000 years and Kronos was still holding a grudge, and oh yeah, what upset me the most, that stupid head count. i mean, come on, what happened to hard training, a good sword and an ounce of luck to win a fight? if the headcount alone would decide, no new immortal would ever stand a chance...and they could have simply send Methos. yes he's been avoiding in fights in recent centuries, but given his not so peaceful past i'd say that his headcount got to be above all others.....but as i said, if you're ignoring all this and can stomach that Connor is just a wreck who basically commits suicide then enjoy!oh yeah, one more thing: about Duncan never marrying....that gypsy did not predict him to never marry but cursed him (he had deflowered her but refused to marry her afterward which enraged her quite a bit, big surprise)her curse wasn't exactly that he would never walk down the isle but would never be able to enjoy a peaceful married life. which is why he refused to marry Tessa for so long, convinced that it would jinx them - and just when he started to think seriously about proposing she gets killed. well, and his marriage to Kate was certainly everything but happy.

I am a fan of the original Highlander movie and an even bigger fan of the Highlander TV series. I was excited to see that both characters were going to be in a movie together. I was even more excited because I saw that characters from the TV show like Joe Dawson and Methos were going to be in it too.Here is the disappointment: Joe & Methos are in the movie for roughly 5 minutes. They serve no other purpose than to unite Connor & Duncan. The other disappointment came when I saw character Jin Ke. He was awesome & should have had more screen time. The last complaint was that this movie was about an hour and a half. The story line and characters needed a little more development.I would recommend this movie because it did kick butt.