Viking Blood

I watched the movie which lasted almost 2 hours and I was curious enough to check it's ratings. By the time I read the 10/10 rating that 1-2 people reviewed with, I was kinda confused whether or not we watched the same movie. It was a bad movie, I feel like I wasted my time. There was nothing impressive to it. Some of the actors were decent, the rest of them felt like they were paying to actually be in the movie.

I couldn't stop myself laughing from the very first moment the main character and his ridiculous haircut appeared on the screen. An iconic brutal viking figure that's gonna haunt me in my most terrible nightmares for sure.

It is a good film, enjoyable to watch. However, the story is extremely close to the one of the Sergio Leone's film '' A fistful of dollars. "It must be remembered that Sergio Leone himself had drawn the story of his film from a previous work by Akira Kurosawa.

It is a meandering series of half squirts at a coherent plot. The big bad Earl has 10 men plus his wife and himself that the goody takes down. The good thing about it is it ends.

If you are up for an amateurish Viking flick with decent norse theme, this is the movie for you. When the lone hero does his thing some other dudes tries to do theirs. Costumes is decent (armour not so much though It would work in a reenactment society wich it probably origins from). The story is slow, built by a slow storyteller and he has a hard time convincing me to listen. The actors are quite good but the obviously lack directions. Music and sound is decent, but the dubbing has its flaws. I would only recomend this movie to someone who are binging Viking movies. Otherwise, walk away!