The Vikings
|
List Price: Our Price: $7.38 You Save: $7.60 (51%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $5.00 (click here) Category: DVD See more DVD releases |
|---|
Canada
Movie Reviews of The Vikings
Movie Review: could have been a classic epic
Summary: 4 Stars
This film exhibits a curious blend of meticulous attention to detail in presenting historical accuracy and gross historical inaccuracies and anachronisms. According to the director commentory on my DVD, the Viking ships were constructed as authentically as possible. The horses were genuine fjordland horses, distinctively small to survive in that habitat.
The Viking village was built according to our information. The bounding from oar to oar as the ship entered home port was said to be a real Viking tradition.
Perhaps the most glaring anachronism to the casual viewer is that Norman-style castles, such as the restored fort La Latte, where the action takes place late in the film, didn't exist in Britain until after the Norman invasion, several centuries after this story takes place. No doubt, this anachronism was ignored because this Norman castle provided a visually much more dramatic structure and setting for the final confrontations than anything actually in Britian in this historical time frame.
The historical Vikings this story is based upon were from Denmark, not Norway. No doubt Norway was chosen because of the dramatic fjord scenery and because Americans tend to associate Vikings with Norway, ancestral home of Eric the Red and kin.
When Tony Curtis(Eric) was staked at the ocean shore to drown at high tide, he should have died of hypothermia long before drowning. A striking brunette, such as Elizabeth Taylor, would seem a more attractive prize princess than the blond Janet Leigh, to these Vikings, surrounded by blonds. The dramatic, if misogynistic, incident where Prince Einar cuts off, with thrown axes, the pigtails of a wife accused of adultery is (of course) pure historical hokum, if entertaining(especially since the audience knows that the womanizing Einar has been bedding this comely woman). The victorius Vikings are portrayed as spending most of their spare time in drunken orgies, in competition with some of the classic pirate films and the Roman orgies in some of the historical spectacles of this period. Nothing is shown of the farming, animal tending, fishing, and weapons and clothing making that occupied most Vikings when not on raids.
There is the question of why Einar held off killing Eric when Eric's sword broke during their duel. Only Einar knows for sure, but the obvious possibilites include 1)He was not clear if Eric was his half brother 2)He decided a hateful queen Morgana(Janet Leigh) was not worth killing Eric for 3)He was afraid of the sorceress's prophesy that he who killed Eric would be cursed. Perhaps a blend of all these considerations caused Einar's fatal hesitation.
The script would appear to have pretentions of Shakesperian greatness, with one(Eric) of 3 rivals for the hand of Princess Morgana being a mere Viking slave, but unknowingly by birth, having a claim to the thrones of both the English principality of Northumbria and the Viking settlements ruled by Einar, after his father's death. The former rulers of each kingdom vanquished and his true heritage revealed, Eric now represents the potential amalgam between the various prior settlers of the British Isles and the encroaching Vikings, who not only loot the English, but also establish settlements and petty kingdoms, culminating in the Norman invasion of 1066. As I see it, the greatest failing of this film as an epic story is the failure to exploit this symbolism after the funerary rites for Einar. In the parting scene, Morgana appears to be wearing the same crown that the previous queen wore, suggesting she is queen and presumably Eric is king of Northumbria. If so, this change is status happened unbelievably quickly, before Einar's funeral! It would have been much more definitive if we had observed Eric's successful campaign to convince the powers that he was the rightful king of Northrumbria, if not also the Viking settlement he was a former slave in, and to witness his conversion to Christianity(if he was not already a Christian) to fit in better with his queen and English subjects and to symbolize the potential union of northmen and English. In the absence of this extension, this film is merely an elaborate swashbuckler tale.
Movie Review: A good-looking epic in which you can almost feel the harsh climate...
Summary: 4 Stars
The Dark Ages in the cinema have to live up to accepted connotations of pillage, murder and rape--within the limits of the family picture, of course...
Richard Fleischer's film is photographed with all the visual grandeur of Technirama, with some mystically beautiful shots of the Viking ships in the fjords of Norway... The film presents fearsome warriors who glide silently out of the mists in their great dragon-shaped long ships to pillage towns and villages before disappearing once more out to sea... These are the Vikings and their fighting prowess, feared along the England coasts...
Led by fiercest warriors, they live for adventure and combat... The Vikings believe that a warrior dying a glorious death will gain immortality as his exploits will be forever remembered by those left behind... To this end, the Vikings (calling upon their god to help them) continually seek combat and fear little as they look for a way to enter Valhalla...
The Vikings, worshipers of Odin, the god of war and death, try to conquer England, which at that time was a series of small, divided kingdoms... The film plays against the background of lust and blood, love and hate, as Eric (Tony Curtis), symbolizing the traditional rebel slave emerges from obscurity and performs the deeds of a proud warrior, predestined to win with the steel of his sword...
The opening scene presents a vivid introduction to Norse savagery as Viking leader Rainar (Ernest Borgnine), invades the English coast and pillages everything in his path... He kills the king and rapes the queen, who later has to admit to her confessor Father Godwin (Alexander Knox) that she is pregnant...
Twenty years later, Aella (Frank Thring), the successor, announces that in order to strength their defenses against the Vikings, he will unite the kingdoms of Northumbria and Wales by marrying the Welsh princess Morgana (Janet Leigh), a price the young lady was not willing to pay...
The mean king also turns upon his upright cousin Lord Egbert (James Donald) and accuses him of being an English conspirator, and has him thrown into jail... Egbert is rescued from a cruel death by Ragnar...
Back in Norway, Ragnar is greeted by his son Einar (Kirk Douglas) who is instantly hostile to the Englishman...
While showing Egbert some 'barbarian' customs, Einar comes across a pair of slaves, one of whom is Eric...
Apparently captured as a child, Eric has grown up among the Vikings, but he and Einar become enemies when Eric turns his hunting hawk on him...
Eric stands trial and is punished by being cast into a slop-pool to be eaten alive by giant crabs...
Egbert notices a royal pummel-stone Eric wears around his neck... Aware that the Queen mother had placed such an ornament on her illegitimate offspring, he suspects the identity of Eric and asks Ragnar innocently: 'If Eric survives, what then?'
When the king's intended bride is kidnapped by Einar, and brought to Norway, Morgana finds herself drawn to Eric to the consternation of Einar, who would like to have the lovely princess as his Viking queen...
With the help of Eric, Morgana is able to escape back to England, but this only intensifies the hate between Einar and Eric--whom we know are half brothers...
The jovial humor of the script (by Calder Willingham, later co-author of the script for 'The Graduate') is nicely captured in a scene between British princess Morgana and her older and less well endowed companion, who are in the power of the Vikings, held prisoner in a boat moored in the fjord by their stronghold... Both are expecting that violation is on the way, a possibility which is worrying Morgana very much more than her companion...
'The Vikings' serves as an illustration of the lifestyle of the ferocious Norsemen whose idea of fun and games was pretty much as lethal as their warfare...
Movie Review: Based on history-but who cares?
Summary: 4 Stars
This is a "popcorn" movie- one of those movies you just see and enjoy. In other words, don't think too much about the plot or the accuracy of what you are seeing.The story of the movie is based on an old saga- or legend to be rest accurate. There was a real Ragnar. He lived around 850 A.D. He was said to have been captured and executed by an English king- supposedly a king of Northumbria by the name of Aiella- just like in the movie. Ragnar's sons came to England to get revenge- just like in the movie. Unlike the movie, the sons were Ivar the Boneless (rather than Einar), Halfdan, and Ubbe. They were real- they were part of the Great Army that took over half of England and which was finally stopped by Alfred the Great.
The ships in the movie are beautiful. (We have a "real" one in Geneva, IL- a replica of one of the ships that is now in the Viking Ship Museum in Oslo. The replica was actually part of the Norwegian exhibit at the Chicago World's Fair in 1893.) Unfortunately, there are only three ships in the movie. Too bad the movie wasn't made today. Computer graphics could have turned three ships into 300! (-which is probably closer to what the real Einar (Ivar) had.)
The castle is out of place- stone castles didn't come to England until the Normans in 1066. (The Normans were actually "transplanted" Vikings= Normandy is really the land of the Nor(se)men.) The only "castles" in England before the Normans were made of earth and wood. The assault on the castle is spectacular, though, and the Vikngs are shown as an inventive people- which is consistent with history.
Michael Douglas is actually in this movie! He's one of the children who flee to the castle when the Vikings land.
All those nice Viking warriors were real Norwegians who trained for months to handle the longships- part of the movie was actually filmed in Norway. A good part of the way into filming, the Vikings demanded a raise. Kirk asked his people if they had enough footage to complete the movie. They did- so Kirk packed up his company, and went back to England, and left behind some very surprised Norwegians!
After the movie came out, Kirk had all of those cool swords and shields and other props left over, so he decided to produce a TV series= "Tales of the Vikings". It was on the air, I think, in 1959 or 1960= lasted one year. Now that's something I'd like to see on DVD!
Obviously, I'm a big Viking history buff. As I said, the movie isn't really historically accurate, but it's still one of my favorite movies.
Movie Review: 4 Stars
Rousing 50's classic exposes Kirk Douglas as a really bad actor. But I like it anyway. Some memorable scenes, and pretty good overall content for the time. Too bad the crabs had to go hungry.And I think almost anybody would have been better as Prince Einar, but I heard Kirk owned the script or something. He makes a better smirking newspaper reporter than he does a smirking Viking prince. Lee Marvin would have been interesting in that part, or Jack Lemmon, or maybe even Jack Klugmann. Ernest Borgnine was great as Ragnar, King of the Vikings. But I swear if I had heard him pronounce "What A Son" one more time I'd have had an apoplexy, and they are normally reserved for rich old Southern ladies. Maybe a mild conniption or something would be better. Never heard him talk like that about Tim Conway. And Tony Curtis ... well, he was usually pretty good in these roles ala. The Black Shield of Falworth, but something's missing here. He sort of scoots around with this fake intensity and a stunned wide-eyed look on his face. Maybe it was because he suddenly realized Janet Leigh was going to ruin his life, and give him a daughter that would be known as the "Queen of the Slasher Flicks." She was a Cancer Tony, what the hell were you thinking? Or it could have been that he knew Kirk was going to draft him for the part of that sweet little bathhouse slave that was always working Caesar or one of them Pretorians into a lather in Spartacus, if you know what I mean? ; ) O'dddiiiiiin!
However, I do really admire the logic behind the Viking "Test of Unfaithfullness." Put your wife in stocks, nail her pigtails at 12, 3, and 9-drop back about 15 feet, down another horn of frothy ale, and hurl your battle ax in the direction of her pinned up hair. If she survives she's innocent, if she dies...well, she was guilty anyway. Should have watched this a long time ago. The Ex never would have made it. Anyway, the scenery is nothing short of phenomenal. The colors and textures on the DVD are as good as I've ever seen, and the score is typical of the 50's...very very good. Also see The Long Ships and Taras Bulba for more of the same-maybe better.
Hey, anybody ever wonder where those 10 foot long Alpenhorns come from. Are goats that big over in Norway? If I was a Viking shipbuilder, I'd pray everybody got killed on those raids. Good for business. Bury me with 4 broadswords. O'dddiiiiiin!
Movie Review: Goofy Fun!
Summary: 4 Stars
Ah, to be a Viking! According to this movie being a Viking meant looking a lot like a member of the Hell's Angels motorcycle gang- matted long hair, bushy beards, and sleaveless vests. It also meant hanging around the ole mead hall drinking buckets of spirits, carrousing with "wenches," and throwing axes at stuff while all the time shouting "ODIN!" Ernie Borgnine as the Viking leader "Ragnar", Kirk Douglas as Ragnar's son "Einar," and a gang of bewigged extras look to be having a grand time in the 9th Century.Not having a grand time is Tony Curtis as "Eric" a slave of the Vikings, but is also unknowningly the real heir to an English throne. Not only has poor "Eric" been deprived of his birthright, but he also has to walk around most the movie in an embarrassingly short mini-dress.
In contrast to the Vikings are their enemies, the English, who come across as rather effete. According to this movie, Englishmen in the 9th century wore long dresses and tights. (Come to think of it Englishmen in the 21st century really haven't changed their style habits much, have they?)
Enter Janet Leigh as Welsh Princess "Morganna." Promised in marriage to a creepy English king played by the creepy looking Frank Thring, Morganna is kidnapped by Einar. Upon seeing Morganna in a tight fitting bodice which accentuates her more than ample bosom (did Ms. Leigh ever wear a costume which did not show off her famous "assets?"), Einar goes wild with lust. Of course, Morganna detests Einar and has eyes only for the mini-dress wearing Eric. Needless to say complications arise which results in a hawk scratching out a someone's eye, another character being forced into a pit full of starvation mad wolves, another person having his hand cut off, and a big battle in which the macho Vikings whale on the effeminate English. All in all just terrific fun!