Valhalla Rising take 2 (the real first time) / No. 152 (B)

On December 5th, 2010, I started to watch this movie.  Apparently I didn't get too far, because I don't remember most of it.  I also sort of remember falling asleep and being totally bored out of my mind, followed by me hating on it the next day and telling friends not to waste their time.  However, last Tuesday I listed to the Mondo Movie podcast in which they reviewed Valhalla Rising.  I believe it was an old show from around 2010.  One where they also they reviewed Solomon Kain, another movie to add to the queue as it sounds quite good.  After listening, and because I'm a sucker, I was sparked to give it another go around and see what this "magic" is all about.  The guys on the podcast also mentioned how they can understand the movie might not fit well for everyone.  How it might be boring to some, but that this was okay.  However, they then proceeded to rave about the mystical beauty (or something) and how amazing of a film it was.  Discussing the landscape, story line, etc. - how it all worked so well together.  Just enough of a push to make this guy want to give it a 2nd try almost 2 years later.  Also in this episode of Mondo Movie podcast, they had a listener question for "movies you hated the first time and liked after subsequent viewings".  Quite a good topic and I wish I had them all written down so I could watch a few.  Anyway, as you'll see below, Valhalla Rising did just that for me.

Let's start by saying Mads Mikkelsen is by far one of the best actors ever.  Watching him play Tonny in Pusher was amazing.  He's becoming my new Vincent Cassel.  Unless he starts doing stuff like Driving Mrs. Daisy 2 or some kind of sell out nanny movie like Vin did, I will see everything each of them have ever done (Mads and Vincent).  Small goal for me for the remaining years in my life.

This movie was broken into 6 parts.  Here is my initial reaction after watching part 1 for the 2nd time:

"Holy effing shit, holy effing shit, holy effing shit.  Watch this again man!  To anyone that has ever seen parts of this, and/or tried it but thought it was just okay.  WATCH IT AGAIN.  This might be one of my favorite movies EVER!!!!!  Mads mothertooting Mikkelsen!!!"

Okay, I can admit it's not THAT great.  It is no Braveheart.  But that was my actual reaction and, after all it is very good.  Part 1 is very much full-out action.  Down and dirty, dark and beautiful - all at the same time.  Some crazy wicked death scenes, which is why I was swearing above.  Just a reminder for those who didn't remember....but the neck scene, the intestines scene, and the head scene were super fierce and intense.  I do think that the neck scene might be one of the best film deaths ever.  No lie.  Mads puts mad passion into it.  Push play and see for yourself.

Valhalla Rising is slow, drawn out, poetic, and totally awesome all in one.  But the feel you get when you ACTUALLY WATCH and don't fall asleep is a good cinema feel.  You really get to know Mads' character.  I swear he (One Eye) could kill a predator without issue.  While trying to wrap my fingers around what to say from a plot standpoint, I decided to read some reviews on-line.  I saw this one and had to add it.  It's from a Netflix (c) viewer who got 99 out of 100 "helpfuls".  I agree with all except for the last part about the acting.  I thought the acting was very well done.  There wasn't much talking at all and when they did talk, it wasn't horrible in anyway.  Apparently not to this guy's review below.  That is except for the annoying fact that I needed to have the remote in my hand for the ENTIRE film.  Some scenes would need to be on volume 44 just to hear what they were saying, and then next thing you know *BLAMMO* - something crazy happens and I need to quickly turn it down to about 25 so that I don't wake the entire neighborhood.  But alas, I agree with just about everything else he wrote here:

To be sure, Valhalla Rising is not an easy film. It relies on atmosphere and demands a great deal of interpretation from its viewers. This being said, the film is well worth the effort. Visually, Rising is spectacular and the soundtrack builds intensity even when you are at a complete loss as to what is happening. Many have critiqued the lack of a plot, however, this is, in my opinion, the genius of the film. By simply presenting a vision of violent realism, Refn underscores the fact that narrative is something we impose on events. Life only makes sense retrospectively as we shape it into narrative form. Thus, Rising forces us to interpret its events, to shape a narrative to make sense of a brutal and disorienting reality (and one can interpret Rising in many ways). In this regard, I am surprised more reviewers have not noted the seeming connection to Herzog. I do not know Refns views on or connection to Herzog, but this film makes much use of atmospheric techniques similar to Herzogs controversial style. Valhalla Rising seems to be, at some level, a more gruesome, less witty version of Aguirre, The Wrath of God. Rising is inferior to Herzogs work in only one regard, the absolutely atrocious acting. The delivery of the few lines is painfully strained and ultimately distracting (and for some reason, Refn seems to feel compelled to beat us over the head with the Christian crusades are bad; Nordic mythological redemption theme. Im sorry, but after the fourth or so scene in which a crusader dramatically paused and claimed the land for Christ, I sighed and thought, Okay, I get it already.). Ultimately, Valhalla rising is a moody meditation of violence and meaning that repays multiple viewings.