Three glaring flaws wrecked this film

this could have been a cool pic. here's what went wrong:

the plot focused on the human alien POV. wrong. from a story angle, this is incredibly difficult because anything you put forth comes across as lame, obtuse and untenable. the focus should have been on the warring nordic tribes, with the warring aliens a sudden, unknown and unpredictable variable from the POV of the nordics. these people would never refer to themselves as "vikings" by the way. a "vikinger" (prounounced vick-uhn-GAIR) was a sea raider. viking is a verb. but i digress.

the casting sucked. a bunch of UK actors and a couple of yanks trying to portray old school red-blood nordics. lame. never works. skandinavians are the most distinctive of all caucasians, physically, intellectually and culturally. it's like having greeks play the three musketeers. i did like the kid that played erik though, he was authentic. other than the english voice, he looked and behaved every bit like a skandinavian.

the premise was beyond flawed. the human alien? come on. the odds that any alien life form would be identical to homo sapien is absurd. a time travel scenario would have played better, but even that would have sucked. the film should have been about the nordics, with a pair of warring alien life forms that emerge on the scene, with immediate physical/psychic tie-in to ancient dragon and angel myths. now THAT would have been cool, if done right. reality-to-myth is a viable premise, because it addresses ancient questions and wonderings about what really walked the earth, or visited the earth, or whatever, in previous epochs that inspired the enduring images we have today of ethereal beings and giant serpents/dragons. this film perhaps tried to engage as such, but failed badly.