Bergorks If you like to be scared, if you like to laugh, and if you like to learn a thing or two at the movies, this absolutely cannot be missed.

Mandeep Tyson The acting in this movie is really good.

Bob This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

Geraldine The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

scottgerry This movie is difficult to fully dive into without rewriting the story Michael Crichton original wrote to begin with. I'll say this to start, Michael Crichton's Eaters Of The Dead was better. That doesn't denigrate this film, but I do feel it sets the bar beyond what this film achieved. Antonio Banderas was... both good and bad in this. He seemed to hop back and forth from motivated to bored. The supporting cast however was on from start to finish. The Northmen in this film were great. Their portrayals were fiercely accurate and their emotions were well balanced based on the source characters. Of all those featured in this film Dennis Storhøi gave the best performance by far. Clearly he embraced the role and his dedication makes up for much of the lackluster sequences of the movie. Omar Sharif made a brief appearance but did an excellent job setting the stories path. Praise aside there were clear problems. The pace is incredibly uneven with certain scenes dragging on and others being over too quickly. I excuse the battle sequences being too quick at times as in reality most historic battles are fought in five minutes followed by a lot of battle statistics, tactical planning, and contingency planning. If I go into the film anymore I'll ruin it for those who haven't seen it or only saw it in passing so here's the breakdown.Audio Experience: 6.7 Reason: The score was alright, it was kind of forced whimsy (meaning over-the-top for the sole purposes of appearing mystical). It didn't ruin the film or counter the scene setting but it came across a bit lame at times.Visual Experience: 7.0 Reason: It was somewhat gritty and realistic but not to the point it advertised which makes some less entertained. I'm not saying it needed more violence, but it certainly advertised itself as having more.Emotional Experience: 7.0 Reason: It really isn't about that. It's a journey tale but the main protagonist's self-discover isn't rewarding in this format. The book better utilized character building than the film but the film, due to format, didn't really need to.Overall: Fair. It wasn't as good as it could (or probably should) have been but it was at the least watchable.Recommendation: If you enjoy action films, war films, period pieces, or even realistic fantasy I feel you would enjoy this film or at least find it worth seeing once. If you're looking for something profound or life changing, I'd continue searching.

Fluke_Skywalker After a troubled production that saw the budget balloon to nearly $160 million and writer Michael Crichton step in and take over directing duties from John McTiernan ('Predator', 'Die Hard') on a series of re-shoots, 'The 13th Warrior' (Based on Crichton's novel "Eaters Of The Dead", well worth reading on its own), opened to scathing reviews and weak box office. According to Wikipedia, it's the biggest box office bomb in history. Quite a pedigree, eh? But here's the thing. It's a really good movie.Featuring a classic stranger in a strange land formula and moving without any wasted motion--without sacrificing story or character, 'The 13th Warrior' is a rousing, old fashioned adventure tale. Antonio Banderas leads a cast of mostly unknowns, but everyone really makes the most out of their characters; particularly the 13 warriors themselves. Accompanied by a stirring score from the great Jerry Goldsmith, The 13th Warrior sits atop my list of the most underrated films of certainly the last few decades, if not all-time. Forget the naysayers, if you like the action/adventure genre, I think You'll like this one.

Python Hyena The 13th Warrior (1999): Dir: John McTiernan / Cast: Antonio Banderas, Diane Venora, Omar Sharif, Vladimir Kulich, Clive Russell: Savage blood bath of fear as cannibals behead victims in all its gory detail. It doesn't make one bit of difference what number Antonio Banderas is. We know he is suppose to fight off these cannibals and basically kicked their asses. These warriors come across a village that live in fear of cannibals known as the Eaters of the Dead. They attack when the mist is out and take the heads of the victims. The warriors realize that they may have to seek out the cave of the enemy. Predictable, repetitious and extremely graphic. The visual elements succeed and director John McTiernan provides tension. This would seem fitting material for him, having previously made Predator. Both films are similar in that faceless warriors are killed by a nearly unseen force, and it boils down to one person to make the difference. Banderas labors under flat material. He never emerges as a personality. He fears, trains then goes out and fights. During this retaliation more warriors are slain in graphic detail. Diane Venora, Vladimir Kulich and Omar Sharif are wasted in cardboard appearances. This film is so relentlessly graphic that it is about as much fun as witnessing a live birth. Pointless encore of brutality and disgust that should be placed in a grinder. Score: 2 / 10

Wuchak The story of "The 13th Warrior" comes from Michael Crichton's novel "The Eaters of the Dead" which combines the legend of Beowulf with a historical account of an Arab diplomat who meets and dwells with the Vikings after being banished from his homeland due to an adulterous liaison.Antonio Banderas stars as the Arab while the hulking Vladimir Kulich heads the Viking cast in the Beowulf role of Buliwyf (pronounced in the film BULL-vie). Speaking of Kulich, he would've made for an excellent Mighty Thor back in the day!The plot of the film is great: Once Banderas meets up with the Vikings, they run afoul of a tribe of cannibalistic Neanderthals who masquerade as fearsome bears and live in a mysterious cave complex. Banderas is selected as the lone non-Viking to assist the 12 Norsemen in ridding the communities of the threat, hence "the 13th warrior." The cast, characters, story, locations (Campbell River, Vancouver Island), sets, costumes, score (Jerry Goldsmith), and cinematography are all of the highest order.At a little over an hour and a half the film moves along briskly with a lot of action. Make no mistake, "The 13th Warrior" is put together extremely well -- this is a Class A film all the way -- but some story elements seem to be underdeveloped. This is probably due to the conflict Michael Crichton had with director John McTiernan. Crichton insisted on reshoots and cut at least 30 minutes of McTiernan's work, reportedly important character-developing scenes.We see this in the very prologue of the film: The story of Banderas' banishment from his homeland due to his indiscretions is literally relayed in a matter of a couple minutes. And at the 8 minute mark we are introduced to the Vikings with very little mystery and zero suspense build-up. The contrast of the sophisticated Arab culture with the coarse, rugged Norsemen is great, but I would have enjoyed seeing these characters fleshed-out a bit more. After all, the more we know the individuals, the more we care about what ultimately happens to them.Which brings us to the final 30 minutes of the film involving Banderas and the Vikings infiltrating the cannibal's cave stronghold and a final Neanderthal attack on a Viking village. The visuals of these scenes are awe-inspiring but they fly by so quickly that the viewer is left disoriented and strangely uninvolved, not to mention unmoved by the story's outcome.All this reveals that "The 13th Warrior" COULD have been an outstanding 140-minute Viking epic, along the lines of "Troy," "Braveheart" or "Gladiator;" instead we are left with a brisk, action-oriented, near-throwaway Viking popcorn flick. I would love to see a Director's Cut some day but Vladimir Kulich opines that it will unfortunately never happen.Nonetheless, I appreciate the film as is. It's a good Viking adventure flick that's very professionally put together, despite the post-production problems. It's one of those films that gets better with each viewing, probably because everything flies by so quickly on initial plays.Despite it's flaws, "The 13th Warrior" isn't too far from rivaling Kirk Douglas' brilliant 1958 "The Vikings" as the greatest Viking film ever made (of course, there aren't many). A Director's Cut could possibly even topple "The Vikings" from its lofty, coveted perch. Better than both though is the awesome TV series "Vikings" that started in 2013.The film was shot in British Columbia: Campbell River on Vancouver Island, Williams Lake and Pemberton, British Columbia.GRADE: B-