The Long Ships
|
List Price: Our Price: $6.96 You Save: $8.03 (54%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $5.77 (click here) Category: DVD See more DVD releases |
|---|
Buy this DVD movie at online store in your country
Canada
Canada
Movie Reviews of The Long Ships
Movie Review: Ala Baba and the 40 Viking Thieves
Summary: 3 Stars
Love Richard Widmark but this movie would have been better with a lighter weight actor like Tony Curtis. Entertaining but only worth renting. Russ Tamblyn is not the stature of Sydney and Richard.Beautiful photography and effects but not a must see movie.
Movie Review: They don't make em like this anymore!
Summary: 3 Stars
Get ready to smile at the antics of the flim flam man Viking hero! An old fashion style movie with much comedic relief. Very light and good entertainment.Movie Review: Strange Movie
Summary: 2 Stars
Generally I watch a movie like this for nothing more than entertainment. As such, I really didn't expect a lot from it. Even so, this movie was a disappointment. The acting is marginal and the story line impossible. For example, Vikings taking over a Moorish fortress in the desert? Or a solid gold bell that is as high as three tall men that floats when it hits the water? Or how about a viking ship towing that bell (which would weigh several tons) on a small raft? All in all, this is one strange movie.Movie Review: Not all that good.
Summary: 2 Stars
This one would have been impossible to watch were it not for its pretty good costume and set design. It looked as though at the beginning that this was going to be a decent medieval tale of adventure, but horribly cheesy dialogue and subpar acting soon put an end to that. Sadly not even the presence of Poitier can save this movie. There's only so much a great actor can do with such a bad script, surrounded by bad actors, and forced to sport such a lame hair-doo.Movie Review: History As Balderdash; A Rich, Cultural Tradition
Summary: 1 Stars
Anyone tempted to believe this racist nonsense should give themselves a small history lesson by reading what happened to the Vikings when they raided the coast of Moslem Spain in 844, and again in 859. Nor should your interest in world history end there. Contrary to what the film makers, among others, would have you believe, Islam in that day was perhaps the most enlightened society in the world. European nobility sent their children to universities in Cordova and elsewhere in the Moslem world. Science, mathematics, and medical technologies were greatly expanded in the Islamic lands. Since their empire had spread primarily through military conquest, they were for a long time the world's sole superpower. I have more than a passing interest in history, and so I don't care for blatantly bad portrayals of it. This film serves mainly as an outrageous example of Western style propaganda, pandering to the tastes of xenophobic ignoramuses and directed against the peoples of the Near East, a time honored custom that goes back at least as far as The Song Of Roland (the hero of which was actually done in by Basques, not Moslems). Speaking of which, Charlemagne himself thought twice about invading the kingdom of Moorish Spain (which remained firmly entrenched on the European continent for some 500 years, its later period spanning almost the entirety of the Crusades). But in this film, a band of Viking raiders takes over an entire walled city (even though, as I understand it, Moslem military strategy at this time relied more on mobility than fixed defenses) because the Moslem warriors were so afraid of them. Right. With this kind of propaganda continuously churned out by Hollywood (one exception would be 1935's oddly even-handed production The Crusades, historically inaccurate though it is) and other film industries, not to mention other media, it's no wonder that these attitudes have long helped to color foreign policy.
Continuing the long tradition of portraying Near Easterners in Western media as inept, cowardly villains, the torch was passed into the Twentieth Century through the fiction of at least two prominent writers (though there are of course many others) of note: Robert E. Howard and J.R.R. Tolkien. Much as I love and admire the respective works of both authors, their colorful, if disparaging, representations of the inhabitants of that part of the world should not be mistaken for history, as many seem to do. But thusly is the multimedia stereotype maintained even when a casual reading of actual world history should indicate otherwise.
I love a good, challenging, period war drama along the lines of Spartacus, Excalibur, The Warlord, Cromwell, The Last Valley, Waterloo, Lawrence of Arabia, just to name a few, but this doesn't come anywhere near that level of quality.
I give this flick a one star rating, mainly for Richard Widmark's performance, who was convincing in his role as the dickering, resourceful and quick witted Viking chieftain. Also for a portion of the cinematography and, if my memory serves, at least some of the rousing and catchy soundtrack (would that the movie itself had been worthy of it). Sidney Poitier, miscast as the Moorish prince, unfortunately turned in one of the worst performances of his illustrious career, portraying his character with the abysmally heavy hand the director no doubt required of the role.
A better movie of this type would be The Vikings, if you haven't already seen it.
© 2008 RAPWreckerds