Boring!


I found this movie rather boring and way too long.
I havne't read the books, but from what i've heard, this film is based on the two first books and maybe that was a mistake, because it seemed far too long and some things are not really explained. For instans i found the close friendship between Arn and Knut very strange. In the film they only meet once as kids and then they are somehow best friends when they meet again as adults?

There is also the central lovestory between Arn and Cecilia. I found the Arn character rather dull and could'nt figure out why Cecilia fell in love with him in the first place.

Abd why did every other scene have to open with a shot of the morning mist over some swedish lake or snowcoveret woods. Alltough these images were very beautifull, it was just a bit too much in the end.

And the final battlescene was a bit anti climatic and generally they could have put some more swordfights in the film, you never go wrong with swordfights!

reply

I agree with pretty much everything you just posted. The two main characters didnt
come off to well in my humble opinion. Arn was awkward and not at all charming, and
cecilia just didnt feel right. There was to much focus on the back story, which
resulted in to little action, and to much rushing to get through the whole story (which is pretty dense).

However I did like the little we saw of the holy land, allthough we didnt really get
to know anyone, not ever Arn, so it all seemed at bit distant. The fighting was cool
though, since it wassnt your typical hollywood CG extravagansa. It just seemed more real, even without the vast armies and hundreds of thousands of troops fighting.

reply

Saw this movie today! . I have no words for it ... I have NEVER been so pisst-off on a movie before. I just *BIP* hate it! it was so *bip* *bip* crapy!
I don´t understand, here they get 210 miljons kronor (ca. 26 miljons dollar), moste money an Nordic movie ever had, and do an movie based on the proudest history (in time) in our Swedish history (proudest time is between 700 (vikings) to 1800 (between 1500-1700 the Swedes ruled all Scandinavia, the blodiest time i oure history and so on), and they do a *bip* drama/love movie ! 2 hour and 30 min i never get back in my life !
Exept Stellan skarsgård, almoste the intire movie "stars" was so lame, almoste like the read the script under the scenes.

I am SO *bip* disepointed. And in the end when its seems to become som war/fight, its onley last for a few min. and it was so lame and crapy done.

I am so angry at the time

p.s sorry for my english .

p.s 2.
Under the movie many people left the cinema, and after the movie people bued (yelled) and screamd "*bip* crapy movie and things like that.

reply

p.s 3 .

I wonder where the *bip* money did go / get spend !!??

reply

Seconded. More than anything, this was a wasted opportunity.

The Scandinavians are great film makers, Lars von Trier, Lasse Hallström, Thomas Vinterberg, and many other Danish directors at the moment. They have many capable actors, quite a few with international recognition like Viggo Mortensen (speaks Danish), Connie Nielsen (Princess Lucilla in Gladiator), Peter Stormare, Stellan Skarsgård (Pirates of the Caribbean, Good Will Hunting), and I'm sure there are heaps more.

What I don't understand is why Scandinavian film makers aren't getting busy with Norse myth/Viking film projects. If the right minds get together, there's no limit to how potentially outstanding movies based on Scandinavian history or Norse legends could be.

Scandinavians grew up with these legends, they are culturally connected to them, they have access to historical locations from the myths. The myths have MASSIVE international appeal, especially after Lord of the Rings. So why isn't this happening?

reply

Just to correct a little.

Sweden never ruled all of Scandinavia.
They ruled a good part of Scandinavia, but never all of it!


Sorry, but a critical historical error like that won't go unnoticed!

Anyway, yeah, the movie was long and boring.
It was quite well made, nice props and so on, but the script was just poor.

And Arn must just be world champion, at looking sad.

reply

[deleted]

Even though I think this movie is very good, considering that they turned two books into one movie, maybe they should have turned every book into one movie? In that case, the first movie would let us find out more about Arn's and Cecilia's parents, and we would know get more insight to Arn's and Knut's friendship. The first movie would then end as Arn and Cecilia parted, and the second movie would be about their long time apart, when Arn was in the Holy Land and Cecilia was a prisoner in the convents back in Gothia, and the third one would be about their years as husband and wife. But I think the movie turned out good anyway.

Yes, it's true! IMDB has reached Sweden!

reply

ive red the books, this film is basically the first book and the first half of the 2nd book. with some stuff from the end of the 2nd book they put in the movie to save some time for the 2nd film i guess. the films dont bring any justice to the books, they waste time on useless crap like in the mont gisard fight where arn and saladin look into eachother eyes for roughly 15 secs.
might make a decent adventure film for ppl who havent read the books, for me though its a disappointment and its like watching a poorly explained version of the story.

i was hoping it to be atleast close to the quality of lotr films (in the matter of accuracy) but its not even close, they have left out major plotlines and filled it up with useless and inaccurate info.

for those who have seen the film, read the book and you will know what im talking about.

P.S sorry for my poor punctuation, but its late and im tired :D.

reply

I think we should blow you up, bro.

reply

[deleted]