Alicia I love this movie so much

KnotMissPriceless Why so much hype?

GrimPrecise I'll tell you why so serious

Rosie Searle It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

Wuchak Released in 1995, "The Viking Sagas" stars Ralf Moeller as Kjartan, a Viking in Iceland who romances a blond beauty (Ingibjörg Stefánsdóttir) and trains to fight with the greatest warrior on the island, Gunnar (Sven-Ole Thorsen), for the purpose of vengeance, honor and freedom.The first time I saw "The Viking Sagas" I had just viewed the first season of the excellent TV series "Vikings" and was almost shocked by the lameness of certain aspects, like some of the acting by body-builder Moeller and the weak story-telling, etc. At the beginning of the film Kjartan is supposed to be some inexperienced farm boy when it's clear that he's at least 35, not to mention a totally hulking badaxx (he's over 6'5"). There's a scene where he takes on a swordsman and is swiftly beaten, but it's not convincing in light of Kjartan's utterly intimidating presence. Even if he didn't know how to use a sword, it's clear that he could've rushed the guy and torn him in half with his bare hands.Seeing it again, I was braced for these deficiencies and was able to enjoy the movie to some degree, at least more so than my first viewing. The plot's fine, it's just that the way the story is told fails to absorb, although there are several compelling parts. Stefánsdóttir gets semi-nekkid during a couple of tasteful love scenes. Some guys find her thoroughly ravishing and she's certainly good-looking; she's just too tall & slinky for my tastes. Some of the fight scenes are quite brutal, but others are kinda unconvincing. So the whole film's a mix of good and bad. Nevertheless, the Icelandic photography and the score are great and it's nice to see Sven-Ole Thorsen (he played Thorgrim in 1982's "Conan the Barbarian"). If you can overlook (or embrace) the film's weaknesses, it DOES take you back to Viking-era Iceland and effectively provides a glimpse of what it must've been like, e.g. the apparel and living conditions. I suppose it's a semi-guilty pleasure, but be forewarned: You'll likely be turned off the first time you see it.The film runs 83 minutes and was shot entirely in Iceland.GRADE: C (4.5/10 stars)

bdmitchell What a refreshing retelling of stories that I read as part of my honors thesis way back when. Unlike recent Hollywood epics, this film gives a real sense of the land, its heritage and its people. I recall seeing a great foreign film in 1969 entitled Hagbard and Signe (The Red Mantle in the rest of the world). This film echoes that earlier epic both in content and beauty. (Unfortunately, the earlier film is nowhere to be found.) I would highly recommend both of the films, along with the original Pathfinder for anyone who shares an interest in the sagas and who also desires realism in a Nordic film. (Note: I would that Hollywood would do away with the horned helmets, dragon boats,etc. in films that deal with the Nordic sagas.)

Dave_Violence This film is GREAT. If you're a viking-phile, you'll love it. Lkewise if you simply appreciate gritty, realistic conflict on rugged scenery.Basic story: Medieval Iceland's ruling classes are in a bit of an uproar. They're also suffering the transition from warrior culture to a less violent, agrarian lifestyle (that includes fishing). The laws and democracy that rule the land are jeopardized by a possible coup. One man (played superbly by Ralf Moller) - sadly the son of a warrior-turned farmer - is prophesied to restore order. But he can't do it without first being taught the skills of battle by a middle- aged outlaw (played equally superbly by Sven Ole-Thorsen).Had this film been done in Iclelandic - and kept its original title "The Icelandic Sagas," it would've been shown at art-houses in all the big cities and possibly garnered an academy award for best foreign language film. In English, since all the actors have accents, it might appear as a barbarian free-for-all at first glance. It is nothing of the sort: The attention to costumes, weapons, makeup, dialog all come from the ancient tradition of epic Hollywood film-making. The acting is excellent. There's nothing tongue-in-cheek about the dialog, so everyone plays their parts seriously. Sven-Ole Thorsen is as if the producers found a time machine and simply went back to film an Icelandic feud between adjacent landowners. Ralf Moller proves himself once again a fine talent. Everyone, of course, remembers Sven and Ralf's performances in "Gladiator," right? Ingibjörg Stefánsdóttir - she, too, comes off as though the producers filmed her from the time machine.P.S.: It's sad what's said about the new film with Ralf Moeller, "Pathfinder." Apparently the actors playing "vikings" wore horned helmets (come on, already; they didn't in "Erik the Viking," why should they in a "serious" movie?) and shoulder pads. Shoulder pads? Come on! Ralf Moller and Clancy Brown don't need no stinkin' shoulder pads. "The Viking Sagas" wasn't filmed with shoulder pads! Sven-Ole Thorsen and Ralf Moller grew their own! See this film, it is art and well worth whatever you pay to see it.

frojavigdis I disagree with the people who consider this movie "worthless." It is the only historically approximate depictions of life in medieval Iceland (or, "viking age" life at all!) that I have ever seen. While their actions may seem "silly" to most viewers, the characters in this movie act appropriately to the ethics and customs of the time. In a nutshell, the movie is realistic, well-acted, and has gorgeous Icelandic landscapes. The film even uses mostly Icelandic and Norwegian actors who *look* like the characters would have. A viewer used to trashy Hollywood-churned movies may not appreciate this film.