Valhalla Rising

It never manages to rise above its one trick.

Nicolas Winding Refn directs and Mads Mikkelsen stars in this ponderous exercise in arty veneers. Refn boldly strips back the dialogue and plot to reveal a picture big on ideas but poor in execution. As the story plods along, stopping only briefly for some guttural violence now and then, it becomes evident that the makers have made a painfully boring movie. At first the drained out colour photography looks like a masterstroke of ethereal atmospherics, but this also wears off and only compounds the overall feeling of monotony that pervades the pic.

Hugely disappointing venture from a director capable of so much more. 3/10

Twilight of the grim, grey… um…

RELEASED IN 2009 and directed by Nicolas Winding Refn, "Valhalla Rising” takes place in the 11th century where a one-eyed mute thrall (Mads Mikkelsen) obtains his freedom in the Scottish Highlands and joins a band of Viking Christians on a voyage to the Holy Land to fight in the Crusades, but the expedition doesn’t go as planned.

The movie definitely LOOKS and SOUNDS awesome with an ambient score reminiscent of Agalloch, but without the heavy riffing or manic drumming. It’s an artsy non-blockbuster with a tone akin to "Aguirre, The Wrath of God" (1972) and "Black Robe" (1991). “Apocalypto” (2006) is a good modern comparison, although the story isn't as compelling as “Black Robe” or “Apocalypto.” It has elements of “Apocalypse Now” (1979) but the thin story just isn’t anywhere near as fascinating. Still, it’s okay.

There are some weak points, like the Viking chief saying "It's a river" when this would've been obvious about an hour earlier when the mist first cleared (aduh). I'm sure the director would chalk it up to artistic license. Another issue is that the film is slow with not enough events to justify its runtime. As such, we get needlessly drawn-out scenes like the discovery of fresh water (which was obvious from the get-go of the sequence). The whole episode could’ve been done in a third of the time given.

THE MOVIE RUNS 1 hour, 33 minutes and was shot in Scotland. WRITERS: Refn, Roy Jacobsen and Matthew Read.

GRADE: B

INTERPRETATION ***SPOILER ALERT*** (Don’t read further unless you’ve seen the movie).

The silent One-Eye is the incarnation of Odin. He is invincible and holds the power to see the future. He disdains the Christian Vikings who’ve usurped his influence over his people. He tests many in battle to see if they’re worthy, but finds none. Nevertheless, he sullenly sees his people off to their new (holy) land, America, where Scandinavians were the third most numerous immigrants. The Boy is a type of Thor, his son, who will sort of replace him in America once the grim god ironically sacrifices himself à la Jesus Christ.

Rubbish! A true waste of 90 minutes... and of Mads Mikkelsen!

It evidently attempts similar as to what we would later see in 2022 with (the excellent) <em>'<a href="https://letterboxd.com/film/the-northman/" rel="nofollow">The Northman</a>'</em>, though simply falls flat in every department for me. The whole production just looks so cheap and low-budget (which it wasn't), without even noting the (admittedly intended) pure misery of the look of it all too. Editing, notably with the needless chapter breaks, is also a negative.

As mentioned already, a mute Mikkelsen is completedly wasted... may as well have cast Joe Bloggs. The rest of the cast have very little to work with either, though minutely interesting to see Gary Lewis and Jamie Sives involved. I wouldn't say anyone onscreen deteriorates the film (it does so itself), but they also don't do anything to improve it either.

I was anticipating <em>'Valhalla Rising'</em> to be an entertaining one. It wasn't. Thankfully they had the awareness (or were restricted?) in keeping it 'short' at 90 minutes... a dreary 90mins, albeit.

67/100

As viewers, we ride along and observe an ex-slave / barbarian, a young boy, and a bunch of crusaders, as they travel from the Northern Highlands of Great Britain to North America sometime around 1100 AD. That's about the entire story in a nut shell. However, it's extremely authentic and exquisitely photographed. We get to know and understand the characters explicitly with little dialogue. As slow and somewhat pointless as it turned out to be, I was mesmerized throughout and I think it really deserved a bigger audience. -- DrNostromo.com