Scanialara You won't be disappointed!

Evengyny Thanks for the memories!

TrueHello Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

Humaira Grant It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

elcoat I loved this film when it came out. The portrayals of Ivar the Boneless - actually Ragnar Lothbrok's son, elsewhere - the berserker and the others were fascinating.I liked the game of Fox and Geese between the kings.The battle scenes were authentic and gripping. Alfred's personal struggle was meaningful.As an epic film, it ranks right up there with Jerry Bruckheimer's historically questioned but no less great film Arthur.The other reviewer's mention of Leonard Maltin savagely panning the film reminded me of an unpleasant memory I have about it.I wanted to see it again, and I took along a pretty Swedish-American girl with me over to the Coronet Theater in Davenport IA for a Saturday matinée, for her to see and appreciate my Anglo-Saxon heritage.By chance, the local synagogue youth groups came in. They were lively kids and full of fun, but once the movie started they began making really deprecating remarks about the film and what it showed.Having watched films like Ben Hur and Ten Commandments with respect and appreciation and been deeply moved by them, I did wonder how they would feel if someone had behaved like that during those - their - films. I had thought respect for ethnic heritage would and should be mutual. They were just kids, but I have never forgotten that.In any case, it is a great film which should be out on DVD.

lorenellroy Alfred ,King of England was a man of vital importance in the history of his nation -the first to set down a written legal code in the vernacular and a staunch defender of the realm against the incursions of the Danes ,he also can be regarded with some validity as the founder of the English navy ,throughout history the great barrier against foreign invasion .Sadly these are only touched on in this proficient but not terribly gripping late sixties movie . It opens with a Danish raid on England .Alfred is about to take holy orders but is summoned to lead the resistance ,taking over from his charming but distinctly unmilitary brother Ethelred the Unready .The strategy is successful and the Danes temporarily repulsed and Alfred is reluctantly propelled to kingship by the death of his brother . When the Danes return he is forced to buy time to regroup by paying the Danes to stay away .giving the Danish leader his estranged wife as hostage. Miltary defeat forces him into a guerilla campaign until -with the aid of an outlaw band -he is able to face the enemy in the final battle. The battle scenes are well staged conveying the reality of close quarter combat ,and there is an admirable and accurate description of the tactics used against the Danes .Some striking location photography helps a lot too. There are some fine peformances among the supporting cast -a dignified Ethelred from Alan Dobie and strong turns from stalwart character actors like Peter Vaughan ,Julian Glover and Colin Blakely while a young Ian McKenna impresses as the outlaw leader . David Hemming takes an intelligent stab at the title role but comes over as lacking in charisma and power and thus the core of the movie is somewhat hollow a fact not aided by a lightweight performance from Michael York as the Danish leader and a lacklustre performance from Prunella Ransome as Alfred's wifeIts a decent introduction to the story of an outstanding man but it could have been so much better with a more incisive script and sharper playing from the leads .

Jonathon Dabell Alfred the Great is not really a sweeping epic, nor is it a blood stained sword-wielding blockbuster. It's quite a quiet picture, with lots of talk, lots of emphasis on the lovely background landscapes, and a degree of fair amount of precision in terms of costume and weaponry.At the beginning, young Prince Alfred is moments away from turning his back on his duty as the future monarch and is preparing to become a priest. However he is persuaded to forsake these religious ambitions when a Danish invasion force start massacaring people on the coast. He leads the armies of Wessex and Mercia against the invading Danes, and in so doing he earns the first and only label ever to be proclaimed upon a king of England as "somebody the Great".Generally, the film is a bore. However, that gives the impression that it is a complete failure, which in all honesty is probably a bit unfair. Hemmings gives a notable leading performance, York is in uncommonly good form as the main Dane, and there are a couple of bloodily staged battle sequences. Alfred the Great is definitely a missed opportunity, but it remains watchable thanks to a handful of worthwhile moments.

alberto f. cañas When this picture first appeared en 1968, several critics complained that it had not make up its mind whether to be a swashbuckler or a lesson of history. After all this years, it is easy to see that it succeeded in both accounts, and also as a depiction of the psychological development of its chief character. Perhaps in 1968 swashbucklers were supposed to be only action, movement and blood, and the serious treatment given to this movie was ahead of its time. even in its careful explanation of the strategy Alfred employed to defeat the Danes in one of the better staged battles the cinema has seen since Griffith gave us Gettysburg in 1915.David Hemmings' work as Alfred is brilliant, and Michael York gave here what was perhaps his finest performance in films. A misunderstood movie, that deserves to be recovered after 30 years.Of course, director Clive Donner should be given almost all of the credit.