fritz

I saw it quite a while ago and it didn't convince me much, except for the very evocative landscapes, particularly the Highlands filled with clouds and fog. When it comes to Viking themes, I still prefer Fleischer's loud movie with Kirk Douglas and Tony Curtis over this dull and pretentious film. Nevertheless, I invite you to check out the ridiculous and misleading cover of the DVD released in Italy. Subtitle "regno di sangue" and behind One-Eye there’s a bunch of poorly added Viking reenactors (badly) Photoshopped. Can you imagine the disappointment for someone who buys the DVD expecting a sequel to "The 13th Warrior" in a film lacking great action scenes? :D Valhalla Rising - Regno Di Sangue - dvd film in vendita

A lot of anachronisms, sometimes even amusing; after all, as you say, it's more of a period-action film than a historical one. An hour and a half that's still entertaining and visually quite rewarding! They hardly make any costume dramas these days... thanks for the recommendation!

@ Geo: Far be it from me to praise the artist with a capital A who speaks to the tiny snobbish elite of the moment! On the contrary, it's great if one can also communicate with a larger audience while maintaining high quality; in this respect, Eastwood has achieved excellent results in the past (Iwo Jima, Gran Torino, to name the latest)... however, in this case, I think he simply missed the mark, and I don't say this because I hold anything against him (quite the opposite!).

@ Hardrock: I don't understand what perspective you're talking about: the banality of the characters is a pretext to move a banal story that is a pretext to assert that life is driven by chance, beyond what we hope or think. It’s an interesting theme, but also as old as the world: it’s not the first time this has been discussed, and I believe that in general, it has been and can be talked about in a much better way. Setting aside the theme, there remain stereotypical and bland characters, stumbling dialogues, a highly contrived plot, largely redundant moments, and absolutely dispensable parts for the sake of the story, all stretched out over three hours, which is decidedly too long.

@ Geo: Far be it from me to praise the artist with a capital A who speaks to the tiny snobbish elite of the moment! On the contrary, it's great if one can also communicate with a larger audience while maintaining high quality; in this respect, Eastwood has achieved excellent results in the past (Iwo Jima, Gran Torino, to name the latest)... however, in this case, I think he simply missed the mark, and I don't say this because I hold anything against him (quite the opposite!).
@ Hardrock: I don't understand what perspective you're talking about: the banality of the characters is a pretext to move a banal story that is a pretext to assert that life is driven by chance, beyond what we hope or think. It’s an interesting theme, but also as old as the world: it’s not the first time this has been discussed, and I believe that in general, it has been and can be talked about in a much better way. Setting aside the theme, there remain stereotypical and bland characters, stumbling dialogues, a highly contrived plot, largely redundant moments, and absolutely dispensable parts for the sake of the story, all stretched out over three hours, which is decidedly too long.

For me, already from Invictus (maudlin and rhetorical, as well as a feel-good advertising postcard before the World Cup), it's in free fall. And here it plummets further, insisting on the fair of predictability and banality. The theme of death and the afterlife is tackled through three characters who couldn't be more clichéd (the career woman in crisis, the weak child who must become strong, the chosen one who feels alone because of his gift/curse and no one understands him...) who remain unchanged throughout the film except for an awkward intersection in the last half hour.
And then there's the pathetic and swirling musical score (especially during the chilling finale), the undoubtedly atrocious dubbing that worsens a screenplay that can't be much better, the afterlife visions (very kitsch), the dialogues of the psychic with the dead ("Heaven is cool!")... and then the chilling character of the Italian cook who listens to opera; I haven't seen something so mediocre and irritating since Captain Corelli. It seems to me that the name Clint Eastwood lately is enough to make the crowd shout miracle no matter what he does because "Clint is Clint": I obviously admire his career, significance, and prolificacy, but if this is the quality, perhaps it would have been better to retire gracefully after Gran Torino, which I believe is a splendid requiem for his "character."
Despite everything, I remain hopeful of seeing a nice little film, perhaps less sentimental, thinking of the upcoming biopic on Hoover, with DiCaprio portraying a first-rate villain (which now seems to have become his specialty lately).

Regarding porn, from what I read in a Friday blurb in Repubblica, you would have really hit the mark!

How can one laugh at a secular religious war and be profoundly horrified by a wart? Simply brilliant and always relevant.

Wonderful.
Then for the same series, also look for Barefoot Gen (here known as Gen of Hiroshima).

I could never finish this game. The memory card auto-formatted when I reached the last part. And it was the tenth time I was starting it... I must have been around 13 years old then.
I don't think I ever fully understood the plot, but I remember the emotion this masterpiece gave me, every single time. An emotion far greater, despite the outdated graphics and my poor knowledge of English, compared to what I experienced with the two subsequent chapters.
How I wish I had the time and the desire to start it all over again and finally, having also understood the plot, take care of that bastard Sephiroth...