Valhalla Rising [Blu-ray]

This is one crazy movie, and I imagine many viewers will find it too slow, or too graphic, or too obtuse or any combination of the three. Yet, it is also mesmerizing, gorgeous and somehow hypnotic. The ever gripping (and in this film, completely silent) Mads Mikkelsen plays a Nordic/Viking warrior-type in the early middle ages who is being held as a slave by a group of pagan Vikings. He is used to fight battles to the death, perhaps for money, and his brutally effective and creative in staying alive. His only “friend” is a young boy who is also a slave and seems to be incredibly devoted to Mikkelsen, whom the boy dubs One-Eye, and that’s the only name he has. Eventually, the two escape and end up on the crew of a Viking boat, manned by converted Christians who are determined to go to the Holy Lands and fight in the crusade. These guys are fanatics: their credo appears to be “convert or die” as they are first encountered at the scene of a slaughter of their own doing. Things don’t go well, and their journey becomes hopelessly lost and ever more cryptic. The men are consumed by greed or religious fervor, yet tormented by personal demons and driven to the brink of madness by what I can only call the “alien-ess” of the land they’ve encountered. We may have an inkling of where they are, but eventually, they believe they are literally in hell. Imagine thinking you’ve just sailed to hell. You’re maddened by fear, or by desire to leave or for some, the opportunity to claim even this land for God. Meanwhile, One-Eye soldiers on to his own drum. Sometimes helpful, sometimes a team player and sometimes brutally cutting down his compatriots, he is a deeply inscrutable character. The movie looks terrific. No doubt director/co-writer Nicholas Winding Refn had a low budget for this singular film. And he takes advantage of it. Landscapes are sometimes sweeping, but for the most part, he stays tight on his people. Lots of closeups and many early moments in particular are filmed on hillsides (so that the mise en scene can be contained more easily). Many scenes at night or dusk or in the fog. It all feels contained, and yet very specific. The idea of being in 11th century Europe is convincingly conveyed. The music in the film is extremely effective and forward. It’s a fairly modern score, but works well with the portentous goings-on. It’ll give your sub-woofer a spin if you have a good sound system. And the costumes and makeup are great; everyone looks suitably muddy and unaccustomed to bathing. And in the midst of it all is the wonderful Mikkelsen, who (aided, I’ll admit by some great makeup) is always riveting. His is a performance of complete physicality, and it’s amazing to watch. But I’ll conclude by circling back to what I said at the beginning. The film is very slow. Despite the fight scenes, there are MANY moments of men walking, sitting or staring. It’s tough. And the fight scenes are quite graphic. I found them very in keeping with the tone of the film, but many will certainly cringe. And the film clearly grapples with many themes: religion, fervor, imperialism, faith and man’s inhumanity to man (to name a few). And it’s tough to say it all ties together. Yes, it seems really full of meaning, but good luck feeling like you’ve understood the film. I think everyone CAN come up with a meaning and underlying theme. But it’s doubtful there is one “right” answer, and you’ll never feel you’ve fully grasped it. If you can live with that, and if you’re up for a challenge, I think VALHALLA RISING is a fantastically creative and original film, unlike anything you’ve seen before.

An invigorating, mystical and very bloody look at human nature. One-Eye, a mute fighting champion who is kept locked in a cage by his Pagan captors, escapes and runs into a group of early christian, witch-burning crusaders who are about to embark on a journey to the holy lands to build a new jerusalem. Their contempt for non-christians drives them and they stand firm by their beliefs. One-Eye's captors also stand hard by their own pre-christian beliefs, which doesn't really get them very far - they spend their time pitting men against one another in pointless fighting to the death. Upon his escape a small boy follows One-Eye and the Crusaders into their longship and an eerie, timeless Ocean voyage wherein they are becalmed in an all enveloping fog and slowly, one by one they begin to lose their powers of reasoning. But this is only half the journey, the ship is carried inland up a river and the half-dead group find themselves alone in a strange and apparently empty land.. You have to read between the lines here, Valhalla Rising is no ordinary film about Vikings. The films most telling moments are in its silences and sweeping photography, pitting the handful of warriors against an empty land and against,ultimately, themselves. Only the amorality of the captivating Mikkelson is left unscathed as he decides what is to be his own fate. His axe cuts through the ignorant dogma of the crusaders or the greed of the warriors, gambling upon his fighting abilities in the films opening sequences. What gives anyone the right to claim somewhere as their own? to impose their will upon another culture? Western imperialism in the 9th Century or just territorial squabbling from ignorant barbarians? What really drives the film is the fact that although it poses many questions, offers many solutions and even comments on itself - there is never a moment when it offers up deciding arguments or solutions to anything and its characters are left to work it out for themselves. If you were looking for a straight up action film this will disappoint you, for it isn't an action film. Hypnotic and dreamlike in the manner of Aguirre the Wrath of God or The Thin Red Line, brutal and bloody in the manner of more recent films such as Ironclad or Beowulf and Grendel but on a different level entirely. Director Refn has created an intellectual, unflinching and raw examination of the dark parts of the human animal (as he did in the equally stunning Bronson and his earlier Pusher sequence of films) which has been confounding people since its release. Even the trailer seems to be struggling for a way of describing what lays within and has opted for the easy, action film route. The DVD is a slim package featuring the film, it's trailer and nothing else. So no extra's, not even a commentary- which is a shame as it would be interesting to see what Winding Refn's thought processes were during production. Oh well.

It's not often that I watch a movie where the protagonist never says a word. In fact the only sounds are those exhortations during fights-to-the-death wherein Mikkelsen's character is chained or bound to a large pole in a quagmire or those sustained during combat with weapons. One-Eye is a prisoner of a Viking-like band. By day and night, he is relegated to a barred prison cell lodged against an inhospitable rock wall against yet open to all the elements. A young boy takes care of his needs. Periodically, he is taken out by his captors to fight one or two opponents. He takes whatever punishment these men dish out, but One-Eye always vanquishes them in the end--even though he is handicapped by a tether around his neck. He is eventually sold to another. During his trek to a supposed new home, he breaks free and kills his captors, then joins a Christian Viking clan seeking to fight in the Crusades. On the voyage, they become becalmed in a fog that never lifts until they reach a land unknown to all of them but supposedly North America. Talk about a wrong turn. The survivors are forced to deal with the solitude of the new, unfamiliar land, natives they cannot communicate with yet who pick off members one at a time, the loneliness and isloation, and the fact that their leader is probably going mad. The scenery is spare yet breathtaking, a testament to the cinematography of the Scottish highlands and mountains. Mikkelsen established a name for himself in Denmark. Here, he can convey volumes with just a look from his one good eye. He wrestles with his past, his warrior tendancies, and the friendship of a boy who has been with him since early in the movie. The child is probably the only friend One-Eye really has. Having only relied on himself for so long it seems difficult for One-Eye to accept the friendship of another or indeed the need to protect a weaker person. He seeks to balance that with his natural survivor tendancy. In the end, he is willing to sacrifice all that for another. I'm not sure I liked this movie or not; I think so. It bears watching again. I gave it four stars largely because of Mikkelsen who gave a good turn in mainstream movies like "Casino Royale" and "King Arthur." He seems to be one of those enigmatic actors who will take on a difficult role (the cold and grime in "Valhalla Rising" are pervasive). There is no warmth in this movie. It is hard to create it when there is no dialogue from the lead actor, but good actors should be able to play their roles well without having to speak, which Mikkelsen does here.

▪︎ Blu-Ray looks & sounds great. ▪︎ All the disc specifications including art, extras, and special features are exactly as listed. 🎬 🎞 🎥 🎦 📽 🎟 🎬 Forced for some time to be a fighting slave, a pagan warrior escapes his captors with a boy and joins a group of Crusaders on their quest to the Holy Land.

I purchased this based on a trailer and synopsis, which made it seem like a more gritty version of the 13th Warrior. It did not quite live up to my expectation. There is not a lot of dialogue in this to carry the story so much of the story line is left to the interpretation of the viewer. It starts out with the protagonist (?) fighting for the amusement of his warlord captors and quickly evolves. He escapes and then joins a band of Christian vikings on their way to fight in the Crusades, they become lost at sea and end up stranded on a unknown island. At this point the movie goes into strange territory. The individuals of the party become separated and go on different spirit journeys which leaves only a few surviving. Don't expect any catharsis to this film, you may have to watch it two or three times to come to any conclusion about the film maker's vision.

Ok, don't read this review unless you have already seen `Valhalla Rising'. Because a lot of people still don't seem to get it, here's a capsule explanation of exactly what happens in the film, from someone who examines evidence of crimes and from that puts together suspects' MOs, serial killer methodologies, etc: A mute slave, One Eye, is forced by his captors to fight. One day, he finds an old arrowhead by submerging himself in a waterpool located on some mountain upland, after having a dream about the event. Later, One Eye uses the arrowhead to free himself and kill his captors. From this, his mind forms an abstract construct about submersion in water giving him the key that unlocks his freedom. An unnamed slave boy accompanies the newly freed One Eye, and they encounter a group of Christian Scots-Gaelic warriors who are on their way to the Crusades. One Eye and the boy board the Christians' ship, and with them sail away into a dense sea fog that does not lift until they find their ship has somehow left the sea and floated inland along the course of an unnamed river. Their location is uncertain and soon becomes a point of contention among the travelers. In this unfamiliar land, One Eye and his companions encounter some signs of human habitation: raised wooden biers holding decayed corpses and tribal religious paraphernalia stand in a lightly wooded area. Pay attention here, and you can see near this location a waterpool or small pond with the trunk of a dead, sun-bleached tree rising out of the water, or from the shore. There is a scene where the group is approaching the biers, and the waterpool/tree is there between them and the biers; another waterpool/dead tree tableau can be seen briefly for a moment behind and to the right of the leader of the Christian warriors. One Eye somehow makes the connection that these waterpool/dead tree tableaus have spiritual significance to the land's native inhabitants, else they wouldn't have chosen to honor their dead in that place. Later, the leader of the Christian warriors, who was allowed to travel through the unnamed land unmolested up until that point, is shot dead with arrows while standing waist-deep in a small pond. Note: to his left stands a dead, sun-bleached tree rising out of the water. Was the warrior-leader shot for violating the native inhabitants' "holy ground" by standing in the pond? Recall the earlier scene in which all of the characters drink some unnamed psychoactive liquor from a carved wooden bottle, and then all proceed to succumb to various kinds of drug-induced mania and/or religious ecstasy on the shores of a still lagoon. After drinking, One Eye glances over his shoulder toward a distant rocky promontory, where the native inhabitants are presumed to be hiding and watching; One Eye does this to let them know he's aware they are there. Then, standing apart from the maddened, drug-dazed crowd, One Eye constructs a column-like structure of stones on a small islet near the shores of the lagoon. Note that when he begins this task, One Eye sets the first stone atop the stump of a dead tree. He is sending the watching tribesmen the message that he understands their religion: he knows what their holy places are, where spirits are presumed to dwell. And so One Eye himself constructs a new "holy place." At the end of the film, before One Eye is beaten to death, he envisions himself (his spirit?) walking into the waters of that lagoon where he built the stone column; then he (or his spirit) is submerged, the head disappearing under the water's surface, like he did near the beginning of the film when he found the arrowhead that eventually aided him in freeing himself. Only this time, the audience is supposed to surmise that the freedom One Eye seeks (and gets, through the death of his physical body) is spiritual freedom, as opposed to his physical freedom earlier. One Eye's physical body dies, and his spirit enters the waters of the lagoon where he built the "holy place" marker, to become one of the native inhabitants' gods.

If you are interested in Kung Fu Flicks - with actors jumping twenty feet into the air - this film is definitely not for you. This film is probably more historically accurate than most - with the possible exception of the movie based on the Gisla Sage(Gisli Sursson's Saga) - made into a 1981 Movie - Útlaginn (1981)- and - which is also excellent. For those of you truly interested in "Viking Origins" - I suggest that you get hold of William Morris' translation of The Icelandic Sagas - and - read those portions pertaining to Harald Fairhair or Harald Finehair, (c. 850 - c. 933)- he first king (872-930) of Norway - and - those first Christian Kings who followed - e.g. Haakon I, (c. 920-961), given the byname the Good, who was the third king of Norway and the youngest son of Harald Fairhair and Thora Mosterstang.[1] But - enough of history - and - back to the movie. We are at a time when Christianity is brutally eradicating all traces of traditional religions - with Christian Vikings erasing all trace of their Viking Brethren - who still choose to practice the traditional religions of their forefathers - burning homes and villages to the ground - and - slaughtering everyone in sight. We are "thrown" into this world where a one-eyed warrior - a slave - kept alive only be his hate - is forced to fight to the death for his very survival. We follow this slave - now - become free - as he transcends the warrior - and - his hatred - and - makes the ultimate sacrifice - sacrificing himself so that his young companion might live. We view this transcendence - in the shadow of the Christian Symbol of the cross - symbolized by the hilt of the viking sword. Is it just accident that One-Eye does not carry a sword - but - rather an ax as his weapon - and - hence is not tied to this symbol of Christianity? Is it just an accident that his enemies die with sword in hand - still tied to this symbol - while - he transcends his warrior spirit? Ah - this is for you - the viewer to determine for yourselves. Beautifully filmed - Wonderfully acted by Mads Mikkelsen. No Kung Fu tricks here - just raw and pure magic.

a lot a people are going to absolutely hate this movie.its a halucinatory ultra violent voyage to [hell] ? there is hardly any dialogue in it, mads doesn't speak a word. for thoses afraid they might have to read a subtitle its in english. if this sounds interesting you might like it,if otherwise stay away

Firstly I can only echo the positive reviews of the film and also agree with those who find the dvd cover misleading. If you expect an action packed viking saga then I'm afraid you will be left bewildered. Personally my review is biased as I consider Mads Mikkelsen to be the greatest actor of our generation whilst the director has delivered in the past with Pusher and Bleeder. One of the first things to grip you about the film is the use of colour, how darkness and shadow are used to convey the bleak and barren surroundings. The violence is minimal yet very brutal and straight to the point. The character 'one eye' takes the role of an angel of death as well as a guardian angel for the young boy who speaks for him. The film does drag somewhat through the mid way point on the journey to the holy land as the main characters start to unravel and their numbers dwindle. For a role with no dialogue, Mikkelsen is fantastic. However I think many people will view the film in the same way the look at bovril, you'll either love it or hate it! The extra features were a letdown as the 20 minute making of documentary is shot by one of the directors assistants who seems thoroughly bored through most of the shoot and wastes time rabbiting on about making buns for the crew. The director gives some info about the project but there is nothing of Mikkelsen which was rather poor as it would have been nice to hear his thoughts on a role with no dialogue. Still I enjoyed the film but I know it won't be to everyone's taste.

Götter-und-Heldensagenfilme sind normalerweise nicht mein Ding. 'I don't need another Hero' würde ich mit Tina Turner sagen. Hier habe ich eine Ausnahme gemacht, weil ich den dänischen Regisseur Nicolas Winding Refn für einen hochbegabten kreativen Filmemacher halte und den dänischen Schauspieler Mads Mikkelsen für einen Star, der selbst in James-Bond-Filmen die bekannten Größen an die Wand spielen kann. In der Tat, hier gibt es keine Hollywood- Saga und Odin sucht man vergeblich. Keine Heroen, nur Verlierer, und Mikkelsen trägt diesen Film mit einer schauspielerischen Intensität wie man sie nur selten zu sehen bekommt. Der Film beginnt mit einer Ansage (nur Text auf schwarzem Grund): Am Anfang gab es nur den Menschen Und die Natur. Männer kamen, trugen Kreuze, und trieben die Heiden an den Rand der Welt. Wo am Anfang nicht das Wort steht (Gottes) wie in der Genesis geschrieben, hat man es mit Ketzerei zu tun. In einem nicht genannten, nebeligen Nordland, wahrscheinlich Schottland um ca. 1000 n.Chr. sitzt ein Gefangener eingesperrt in einem Käfig im Freien, an Ketten gelegt, ein Auge ist zermatscht, der nackte Oberkörper geschunden. Er ist Leibeigener eines heidnischen Wikinger-Clans. Die Männer ziehen durchs Land und verdienen ihr Geld mit Schaukämpfen, wo der Einäugige gegen Leibeigene anderer Clans antreten muss. Eines Tages kann er sich befreien und schlachtet seine Herren ab. Zu sagen 'er tötet sie' ginge an der atmosphärischen Qualität des Films völlig vorbei. Er zieht weiter und begegnet einer Gruppe von bekehrten Wikingern, also Christen, die als Ritter mit Bibel und Schwert nach Jerusalem aufbrechen wollen, um Gott zu dienen, die Juden zu schlagen und sich nebenbei an Land und Leuten zu bereichern zum Ruhm und Ehre Gottes. Der Einäugige schließt sich ihnen an, gefolgt von seinem einzigen Freund, einem halbwüchsigen Jungen. Das Heilige Land erreichen sie nie. Sie landen in Kanada und haben die Neue Welt entdeckt. Großmäulig wollen sie die Indianer bekehren, kleinlaut gehen sie zugrunde. Nur der Junge überlebt. Einauges Schattenbild schwebt nach seinem Tod in den Wolken. Also hat Odin seinen Krieger doch nach Walhalla berufen. Um diese Botschaft vom ggf.zweifelhaften Charakter christlicher Missionen oder Missionare zu vermitteln, kommt der Regisseur fast ohne Dialoge aus und mit ziemlich wenig Personal. Die Geschichte wird fast nur in Bildern erzählt. Zum Vergleich: Ronald Joffe hat 1986 in seinem Historien-Epos 'Mission' zum Thema 'christliche Mission' drei Spitzendarsteller (DeNiro, Jeremy Irons, Liam Neeson) und unendlich viele Dispute um die Moral eingesetzt. Ingmar Bergman hat 1956 mit 'Das siebente Siegel' einen außerordentlich symbolbeladenen philosophischen Film zum Thema gedreht ' von Max von Sydow getragen ' den sich aber in der Regel nur Cineasten zumuten. 'Walhalla Rising' muten sich die Thor-Fans zu und merken wohl, dass sie im total falschen Film sitzen. Der Film bricht mit allen Konventionen des Genres und wird entsprechend abgestraft. Also, wenn Sie mit Walhalla Rising ein Helden-Epos oder Schlachtenspektakel erwarten, Finger weg! Sonst bekommt wieder mal ein hervorragender Ausnahme-Regisseur unverdient miserabele Quoten. ..-..

This blu-ray authored in the 2020’s includes ads for some reason. I’d steer clear.

Altamente incomprendida, Valhalla Rising narra la historia de un vikingo repudiado por la sociedad y usado como arma, en un momento en el que los escandinavos comenzaron a recibir las visitas de los misioneros cristianos. Visualmente es espectacular. Para enterarse bien del desarrollo y sobre todo del final, hay que situarse un poco en el contexto histórico escandinavo, si no, va a resultar una absoluta pérdida de tiempo.

A small masterpiece of cinema. Beautifully framed and shot. Slow paced, thoughtful, then explosive. Raw and gorgeous. It captures the cruelty, kindness, madness of the transition from paganism to Christianity in the Viking world. Brooding, metaphorical, mythological - a view into a fighting slave's drive to rise up from meaningless survival toward spiritual redemption and purpose. Very much more than a standard action movie. Watch the movie extra on the making of the film to better understand the director's intent. This is an art house film.