Viking: L'Invasion des Francs

This movie could have been better with higher quality screenwriting. There's an excellent cast including some beautiful actresses. The costumes were okay, and locations were very good.

But some of the writing is absurd. The Frisians did not sacrifice young women to Freya, burning them alive (another people hundreds of years earlier, the Celts, did sacrifice perverts and criminals to the gods by burning them in wickers). The Friesians although pagan were somewhat more advanced than as shown.

Redbad's life was very different than shown in the movie - he was an older man when he won his victory over the Franks at Cologne, and the Friesians were allied with the Saxons not Danes at that time. Redbad had ruled the Frisians for at least 20 years before that battle. He had never been exiled or put out on a boat to die.

Charles Martel was a fierce warrior but not an evil man, he did not murder his little nephew as shown in the movie. And neither were Pepin nor Saint Willibrord as cruel and vile as shown in the movie. Although he is killed in the movie, in reality Willibrord died in 739, 20 years after Redbad's death in 719.

This could have been a great movie, if the much more interesting REAL history was shown instead of a silly storyline we've seen too many times in other movies.

If you have watched any of Michael Hirst's "Vikings" series then you will probably find this to be a potted version of some of those stories condensed (though it doesn't always feel like it) into 2½ hours or so. Essentially our eponymous hero (Gijs Naber) is the Fresian lord who is constantly at war with "Pepijn" (Jonathan Banks) who is the king of the Franks and his sworn enemy. The narrative focuses on the weaponisation of Christianity by the latter as a means of subjugating - frequently quite brutally - all who do not accept the doctrines of the Papal legate who insists on baptising everyone - on pain of death. What ensues here isn't actually a bad film, it's just long and plodding with some mediocre acting and a script that uses ten words when two would have done. The action sequences look good and there are plenty of them as the battle ebbs and flows, the advantage constantly switches from North to South and the violent nature of the all conquering church is laid bare for us to appreciate - and that's quite a plausible exposure, too. If someone had taken a razor blade to it and shortened it by forty minutes to so, then we could have had a decent action adventure based on a rich seam of history and mythology, sadly it all takes just too long; there are too many unnecessary sub-plots and there is even a bit of romance to ensure the pace is well and truly nobbled. I like the genre and it's watchable enough, though just a bit disappointing.

Redbad was an unexpected epic on the stale state of today's cinema. Epics are on shortage, both in quantity and quality, this one was quite above average. Acting wise it's not bad, main character has charisma enough to carry the movie and overall not bad. If you compare it to "Vikings" seasons 4,5 and 6 (Ragnar's sons), this guy would give the main "toons" there a run for their money - at least he looks the part. The movie, although based on the Frisian warrior, has a "Viking" feel to it, from the weapons to the costumes and art, it has a Viking theme overall. Fights were also not bad, they had some great moments and looked realistic at least, compared to the average low budget movies out there with over the shoulder cameras and messy combat, some solid combat here with nice head to head battles. Horses were a must, I saw a scene of a horse stumping the shield of a warrior with is feet, great action overall, but there were also some silly moments, like a shield-maiden head stumping a warrior with a helmet on. Some plot-holes and nonsense choices around half an hour in, that made me afraid of being another silly movie, but keep the faith cause it gets better. Negative points... a bit too long, mainly because of too many slow motion scenes that could have been cut to half (or even more) - could the series that came after (based on this movie) be the reason? Sometimes I had the feeling if I put a heavy metal song over some slow motion scenes, you would get a quite good videoclip. Music wise, goes from great to repetitive, during half an hour I though I was watching a Christopher Nolan Batman with repetitive rythm, not necessary at all. Overall, a solid movie, rare this days, with quite a large cast, setup and wonderful, wonderful photography and landscape. A bit shorter, less slow motion scenes and bit better CGI here and there, would make this a masterpiece, as it stands it's a very watchable Epic. 7 for the effort and up the rankings. A realistic 6, could be a 9 with better script and less slow motion scenes.

I actually really enjoyed this film. I expected much less than what they delivered. The set designs were amazing and for the most part the acting was above par. I particularly liked the cinematography, the shots were spectacular and really sucked me in, it alone is well worth a watch. Obviously the history was a bit jumbled, but much less than most Hollywood pics. I actually loved the use of Dutch in the film and feel that it lent a lot to my over all submersion into the world. My guess would be that most Americans will hate this movie because of the subtitles alone; they are very slow readers. I didn't mind at all. I'm going to watch it again this weekend!! Marvelous job!! Look what $8,000,000 can get you when you get creative instead of Hollywood.

Had high expectations but the script ruined it. Acting wasn't too bad but because of the script it seemed funny some times. However the scenery and costumes were great.Overall a missed opportunity to make it a classic.