Vikingos

I couldn't make it past 10 minutes. The English dubbing is horrible. I'll try to find the original Russian version with subtitles. The movie looks like it has potential. Just not dubbed.

I really do not understand the rating and the hate for this movie. Is it because it was made by a russian and they speak russian in the movie? I can understand if thats the case, the hate for everything russian is strong in the world, and the language can be quite off putting. I had a bit of a hard time trying to remember the russian names...

BUT, this movie is really great. Definetly looks like a lot of money has been put into it. It definetly looks very authentic and realistic. I have no idea how historically correct this movie is with the story since I dont really know anything about Vladimir, but there are so many other things that would compensate for it. The fighting scenes for example are excellent. Never seen so realistic fights in a "viking" movie, not even in the show Vikings. It is also really nice to see that they make a good use of spears in this movie, which very rarely happens in viking movies, despite being the most cammon weapon.

I found the story exciting and there were not many dull moments in this movie, despite it being quite long. As a Swede it was also really nice to hear some swedish in this movie, and to see the swedish actor Joakim Nätterqvist, who played the swedish templar Arn in the movies about Arn.

I feel this movie is a strong 8, especially when you compare it to other "viking" movies the last decade. Like "Viking Legacy", "Viking Quest", "Viking the berserkers", "Vikingdom", "Northmen - A Viking Saga" etc. Those movies are a complete joke compared to this movie. Worse acting, worse dialogs, worse story, worse realism, worse budget etc.

I would definetly recommend you to give this movie a chance instead of trusting the rating and the reviews of this movie. They are absolutely not fair against this movie according to me.

A beautiful movie about Vladimir I of Kiev and a fine chance to get more familiar with Eastern Europe's Medieval History.

Shot with artistic talent and historical accuracy, the movie shows the clash between Scandinavian, Rus, Greek-Roman and Turkic populations at the dawn of the second Millennium.

And Russian historians are among the finest on this period (those who have an interest in Byzantine History know very well who Georg Alexandrovič Ostrogorsky was) so I would not agree with those who complained on this matter.

Calling the movie 'Viking' shows a sophisticated knowledge of Saint Vladimir's life. But it might be deceiving for greater audiences.

It is always difficult to make a movie based on historical facts. One must do a thorough research and properly put those facts in the movie. But one should also try to make that movie interesting and entertaining. Otherwise you'll get a protracted documentary.

First of all, the title has almost nothing to do with the story. The story indeed follows the historical facts, but is told in such a messy way, full of illogical, irrational and unjustifiable events and decisions that it is tiresome to watch. You will find illogicality and complete idiocy even during the fight scenes. Moreover, this movie has no specific plot, no higher agenda and no epic moments, which all makes it difficult for the spectators to connect with the story.

The story is practically about just one person and I kept wondering why it is so. Throughout the whole movie, the main character is completely and utterly useless, failing each and every challenge in front of him. Call it a paradox, but he somehow managed to fail even when he was winning. I wonder if director's decision was to purposely make this character so weak and clumsy. If it was, it's a bad decision because no one wants to watch a 2-hour movie where the main protagonist is a weakling and an idiot. If it wasn't, then the director has totally failed at his creation. I didn't "see" the main character. I didn't believe in him for one moment. He is not strong, he is not smart, he is not a great warrior, and not a great leader. So why is he the main character?

I do not blame any of the actors, they really did their best. I blame the writers and the producers for ruining the potential this story had. Thus, I do not recommend this movie, there are far better ways to spend your time than watching this nonsense.

A visually sumptuous examination of the introduction of Christianity into Medieval Russia slyly disguised as a blood-and-thunder action epic. The complexities of the storyline might put off action fans seeking an adrenaline rush, but it's a rewarding watch for those looking for some thematic depth to go with their visceral battle scenes.