francoguarasci Yes they do. 10 minutes of guys with beards and no shirts chopping wood - really? The dialogue is close to non-existent, the sound quality appalling and the 'story line' completely absent. I might have to make it my personal mission in life to destroy every copy of this ever made and thus prevent other people from feeling the same sense of pain as I did after viewing this total garbage. One scene in particular is irrevocably burned into my memory, despite 6 months of therapy - please see title of this review and be warned! Myself and the friends that watched this together still talk about how bad it is, several years later. Utter and complete drivel.

talverri Sorry for the 'spoiler'. Excessive camera work, editing tricks and pushing the envelope of film taboos do not work with what is a period adventure drama. My spoiler - I stopped watching when we got an up close and personal shot of one of the vikings naked bum while he was evacuating. Meaning a graphic filming of voiding his intestinal tract.... I hope you don't get the picture, if you know what I mean. To bring an experimental style to a period piece requires careful consideration and a less is more approach. I do give points to the author for using an actual historical person, Thorfinn Karlsefni. His story is found in Eric the Red's Saga and Saga of Olaf Tryggvason... This story had and maybe has a lot of promise. Maybe somehow it can be resurrected.

hghstick I had high hopes for this film. I love indie, off the wall, quirky movies...but this was terrible. After 10 minutes I thought I was watching a film made by first year students. I had to turn it off half way through it was so bad.I'm not sure how watching a guy taking a crap in the woods (yes, you see feces being expelled from his anus), or setting a dog on fire (the dog's coat is ablaze when Dork throws the torch at the pack of wolves), or cutting the heads off chickens, or smashing a fish's head against a rock moved this film ahead or told us anything we couldn't easily imagine ourselves. We get it! They were stranded and they had to do gritty things to survive...there was no need to keep reminding us of this fact scene after scene after scene! Thank goodness there was very little dialog. The musical score was atrocious, poorly cut, and edited. I'm glad I don't get motion sick because the jiggling cinematography was enough to make a fighter pilot vomit. The repeated close-up shots were unnecessary and very distracting.Please burn this book and all the terrible chapters! This story never needs to be told again.

bergelmer-bergqvist First of all, some really good points have been made about the directing and whatnot. The movie stinks as bad as his poop did in the pointless shitting scene. Yes, vikings made poopie like everyone else.Did you ever stop to think about the Swedish "dialogue" in the movie?. First of all it is directly taken from Det Sjunde Inseglet by Ingmar Bergman (lawsuit?) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050976/ and it is no way connected to the story nor the subtitles (which are also not connected t the "story"). For example after he sees the Indian woman for the first time he comes back screaming "Skraeling" but in Swedish he is screaming "HÅLL KÄFTEN" which means "shut the f**k up!". The other man replies "Where are they?" but in Swedish he is asking his friend simply "Har du ont i magen?" which means "Do you have a tummy ache?". Does this make any sense? Many scenes filmed through the eye of the Indian woman (Atleast it could have been her, it is all so confusing) is filmed through what appears to be binoculars. This looks as stupid as it sounds, especially when you can see the damn binoculars moving infront of the camera.Someone said that it was good that the movie did not have a lot of dialogue. Both yes and no. The advantages of having dialogue is that people actually get a chance to understand what is going on with the characters and the story. For example, did Volnard turn Christian? Did he like the foot massage? Why was he sad, confused, angry, constipated, jealous, bored, tired, wondering why he did the movie or any other emotion that his ONE facial expression tried to express.What really amazed me about this movie is that it is so frustrating and funny to watch that you have to see it all. Just to see if it will make sense in the end (don't worry, it doesn't. Not in the least).Whether you like it or not, it is a great conversation piece. Watch it with a friend who has some knowledge (unlike the director) of movies and how to make them. Diss it like in Mystery Science Theater 3000, you will have the time of your life.And NO the soundtrack was NOT amazing, it was stupid and made no sense whatsoever. However the nature shots were beautiful but almost always pointless.This is a rape of viking culture and an affront to movie making. It simply leaves you confused and outraged. You want to talk to Tony Stone and ask just two questions; HOW? and WHY?.