Prince Colwyn (Kenneth Marshall) rides a white horse through a rocky forest with mounted companions
Film review

Krull

1983 · Directed by Peter Yates · 2h 01m

In a sentenceThe spider makes more of an impression than the prince, which is awkward for the prince

Prince Colwyn (Kenneth Marshall) and Lyssa (Lysette Anthony) inhabit a fantasy world alongside Ynyr (Freddie Jones), Torquil (Alun Armstrong) and Ergo (David Battley). Its other figures include a Cyclops (Bernard Bresslaw), the Seer (John Welsh) and the Widow of the Web (Francesca Annis). Kegan (Liam Neeson) and Titch (Graham McGrath) also appear in an adventure that mixes a quest with science fiction. Directed by Peter Yates from a screenplay by Stanford Sherman, Krull runs for 121 minutes and carries a PG certificate.

Fi1m review

Peter Yates gives this science-fiction fantasy some dignity, and the creatures occasionally unsettle us. But thin characters and faltering momentum make Krull a mixed prospect, even for viewers inclined to forgive an unconvincing effect.

Krull is a patchy fantasy adventure with enough curious sights to make its thin storytelling frustrating. Peter Yates approaches the combination of science fiction and fairy tale without embarrassment, which helps when the material threatens to look faintly ridiculous. There is pleasure in being invited to accept it all so earnestly. Stanford Sherman’s screenplay, however, does too little to make us care about the people moving through this world, or persuade us to follow them for two hours.

Kenneth Marshall gives Prince Colwyn the requisite earnestness, but little that makes the character feel particular. Lysette Anthony has much the same problem as Lyssa: the performance cannot supply the emotional connection missing from the writing. Freddie Jones brings more interest to Ynyr, while Alun Armstrong gives Torquil a welcome firmness. The supporting actors help the film maintain its dignity, though we kept wishing the leads had something less dutiful to do than carry the adventure.

Stephen B. Grimes’s production design is rewarding to inspect, particularly the miniature fortress. Its visible craftsmanship is part of the pleasure; we need not mistake every surface for reality to enjoy looking at it. Peter Suschitzky’s photography gives the fantasy settings enough weight to keep them from feeling merely decorative. The effects are uneven, but their more successful images remain worth studying through passages when the human drama has gone slack.

We were unsettled by the spider imagery, which makes the danger feel unpleasantly close in a way the broader action rarely manages. The creature gives us something specific to recoil from, and the film briefly stops feeling so polite. Such moments explain why we cannot dismiss its practical effects as an embarrassment. They also make the less convincing effects harder to excuse, because there is evidence here of how much a carefully chosen creature can contribute.

Ray Lovejoy’s editing keeps individual stretches moving, but the action does not accumulate into much suspense. Each new passage seems to require another effort to get us interested, rather than benefiting from what came before. At 121 minutes, that repeated loss of momentum becomes wearing, especially when Stanford Sherman’s characters remain so thinly drawn. We do not need complicated psychology from this sort of adventure, but we do need a reason to worry about the people undertaking it.

James Horner’s music supplies enthusiasm that the drama often fails to earn. It helps the spectacle, lending the images a conviction we sometimes wish the performances shared, though it cannot repair the weak character writing. By the standards of quest fantasy, a familiar story is hardly a disqualification; the lack of urgency is a more serious fault. A strange creature can renew our attention for a scene, but this film asks that trick to work too often.

An interest in handmade fantasy will help, provided that interest runs deep. We would be cautious about choosing it simply for an evening’s adventure: the pleasures are intermittent, and the long stretches between them matter. Those already fond of this sort of film may be more forgiving of the thin characters. Everyone else should be prepared to spend rather more time inspecting the scenery than fearing for anyone in it.

Critical consensus AI synthesised

41
Positive
1
Mixed
2
Negative
4

Most critics find Krull a derivative fantasy adventure whose action fails to sustain an absorbing story. The praise centres on its fantasy world, with the more receptive reviews finding charm and excitement in the effects and imagery. Even some sceptical responses allow it modest pleasures: Variety credits Peter Yates’s professionalism and the mainly British cast with keeping the material from becoming laughable, while finding it never quite dull.

The spread is wide, particularly on the effects and the question of whether the quest entertains. /Film offers the clearest positive dissent, praising the practical effects, spider sequence and miniature fortress, and arguing that familiarity need not spoil the enjoyment. Other reviews find the effects poorly realised and the action clumsy. Eye for Film is especially severe, finding too little imagination, humour or character development to establish an emotional connection. The central divide is between enjoying the fantasy trappings and finding them insufficient.

Time Out
· SGr
64*

The available description highlights the film’s fantasy world as its main interest. It compares that world to Mad Max 2 and Excalibur, but the full review’s verdict is unavailable.

Read the full review →
Radio Times
★★★ · David Parkinson
60

Parkinson finds the fantasy engaging but not enthralling, while noting its poor box-office performance. He praises the charming world created by the effects and the excitement they add to the quest.

Read the full review →
Variety
31 December 1982 · Variety Staff
35*

The review finds the film derivative and its action sequences unable to form an absorbing narrative, though it never becomes genuinely dull. It credits Peter Yates's professionalism and the mainly British cast for keeping the film from becoming laughable.

Read the full review →
Empire
1 January 2000 · Ian Nathan
30*

Nathan finds the film derivative and dreary, though mildly distracting. He singles out the poorly realized effects in the final confrontation as a major weakness.

Read the full review →
Little White Lies
· Adam Lee Davies
15*

Davies delivers a sharply negative verdict, portraying the film as a dull, failed fantasy adventure. He singles out its contrived flying-horse rescue and clumsy Glaive fight as especially inept.

Read the full review →
/Film
22 February 2025 · Witney Seibold
75*

The critic argues that Krull is genuinely entertaining despite its derivative reputation. The film’s practical effects and imagery, especially the spider sequence and miniature fortress, stand out for praise.

Read the full review →

Straight answers AI written, from our review

Is Krull worth watching?
Krull is a mixed prospect we score 54 out of 100, with most to offer viewers who enjoy handmade fantasy effects. The miniature fortress and unsettling spider imagery reward that interest, but thin characters and faltering momentum make its two hours harder to recommend as an evening’s adventure.
How long is Krull, and what is it rated?
Krull runs 2h 01m. It is an action and adventure film.
Where can I watch Krull in Hong Kong?
Krull is not on any streaming or rental service in Hong Kong at the moment. It is available in 25 other countries; change your country at the top of the page to see where. Availability is checked daily.
How does Krull compare to The Dark Crystal?
Krull is the weaker choice beside The Dark Crystal for viewers drawn to handmade creatures and detailed fantasy worlds. We find more personality in The Dark Crystal’s creatures than in Krull’s dutiful leads, though both adventures struggle to sustain attention. Krull offers a science-fiction and fairy-tale mixture, with intermittent pleasures in its scenery and effects.

Cast

If you liked this, try…

  1. Dragonslayer (1981) · not reviewed yetA sterner fantasy quest whose creature gives the danger convincing weight.

  2. The Dark Crystal (1982, Fi1m 78)For handmade creatures and a fantasy world worth examining closely.

  3. The Fabulous Baron Munchausen (1962) · not reviewed yetPlayful fantasy whose deliberately artificial images remain a pleasure to explore.

  4. The Thief of Bagdad (1940) · not reviewed yetA generous helping of fantasy spectacle, with rather more narrative spring.

  5. Tale of Tales (2015) · not reviewed yetFor adults wanting stranger creatures and less reassuring fairy tales.

Free account

Know what to watch tonight

Two lists that know where things are streaming, collections you can share, your own score beside ours, and Discover that remembers what you have seen.

  • Want to see, sorted by what is streaming now
  • Seen, with your score out of ten
  • No adverts, ever