Solemplex
To me, this movie is perfection.
Voxitype
Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.
Mandeep Tyson
The acting in this movie is really good.
Myriam Nys
Sadly, the movie does not wholly succeed : it would like to be a window on a far distant, far different time (mostly pre-Christian or not- Christian), but both its knowledge and its imagination fall short. When and where it tries to fill the gaps, it veers too much in the direction of, say, renaissance fairs, cosplay or sword and sorcery. On the plus side, this is a pleasantly clear and understandable introduction to the Nibelungen saga. It whets the appetite and invites the viewers to go on their own voyage of discovery into a world of poetry, myth and history. It also works on its own merits, as a reflection on the difference between real accomplishment and genuine merit on the one hand and pretend heroics on the other hand. It's also a pretty watchable tale of love, treachery and calculation. (By the way, you're not human if you don't want to kick Kriemhilde in the behind.)The music, I suppose, isn't too bad, but it is used too liberally. There are things in our world which have a deeply evocative sound of their own - such as, for instance, a sailing ship moving at considerable speed or a wood filled with eager hunters and hounds - and it's both annoying and redundant to cover such sounds with layers of music.
derin_halo
best movie ever the movie really touched me. Never saw such awesome and beautiful movie especially about brunhilde that see had to watch her love marrying some other girl i liked there was a lot of science fiction in the movie a lot of action a big story and it was a beautiful love movie watch out here comes a spoiler!!!!!!!!!but i hated so much that siegfried had to die and siegfried couldn't remember brunhilde it broke my heart that they couldn't be together and alive so the ending actually f*cked up the movie for me i would of been so happy if that bad guy missed the spear and siegfried remembered he loves brunhilde:) sorry for the bad language
fearfulofspiders
This two-part made-for-TV film claims to be the inspiration for Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings, when in fact, Tolkien has proclaimed many times that the only similarity between the two is that both have a ring. Just to get to that before heading further on. Tolkien's inspirations came from all over the place, and for this trash to claim it is the main source (though not declaring itself the main, only implying) is entirely dribble.Now, Dark Kingdom is a very lackluster production, though it's easy to watch, and it makes for something good to watch when nothing else is on. I recommend watching it on TV, but if it gets to you that much that you HAVE to have it, then buy the DVD -- but be warned, the cut for the DVD is shorter than the one televised; much of the scenes that actually made this film deeper is now edited to seem more rushed, a h-u-g-e mistake on whomever the choice came from.As for the acting, Dark Kingdom is full of bad accents and monotone deliveries. From the poor job by Benno Furmann as the main hero to the ever-crying performance of Alicia Witt. Everyone else tries and tries, but all it eventually adds up to is... dull and lack of enthusiasm. Kristana Loken is okay, but she has too deep a voice to play some parts -- though she may be a barbaric queen in this film, she needs to work on her tone.The music is really overbearing at points. It takes our focus off of events so many times, that it doesn't add to the mood, but just distracts. The themes work here and there, even if it gets redundant and with little, if any, evolution in sound or composition.The ending is pathetic in terms of faithful to the source material. The story has actually been cut in half... all the deaths of everyone is fit into about 6-minutes of yelling and sword fighting. The further mishaps that occur in the writings is basically thrown out the window, so that the budget could fit in with a four-hour slot. Then why bother making it? Also, Benno Furmann's portrayal of Siegfried as he is killed by Hagan is so laughable, my sides were splitting -- which I'm hoping is the opposite affect they were going for with their audience.Overall, there's a lot that works and doesn't work in Dark Kingdom. While the film has some nice visual effects, the story as a whole is too rushed and trimmed to provide any satisfaction as to what this truly could've achieved in terms of being better. This is really a film worth watching when nothing else is on or as background noise, so I'd only recommend it to you under those conditions.
ntsci
I tuned into this film about half was through and kept thinking, man this seems rather familiar... Then realize egad they've filmed the Rings -- the Goddammring cycle (Götterdämmerung or the Twilight of the gods. WOW. Its not great (heck its a TV movie) but they do a good job of depicting a great epic... boiling 20 + hours of opera or countless Nordic saga down into a 2 or 3 hour TV movie -- pretty impressive. I've recently seen the beginning and it confirmed my opinion. A decent attempt to bring an ancient legend to the screen. Its much truer to the original than say the recent movie version of Tristram und Isolda.There are many different versions of each of these Sagas. Wagner picked out those elements that form a coherent narrative about the end of the ancient Norse world -- the twilight of the gods. The most fascinating aspect of the original story from these various Norse sagas (The Twilight of the gods) is that one sees a pagan (pre-christian) population who is aware of the impending death of their religion and culture (through conversion to Christianity) and this is tied in with misbehaviour of their own gods themselves. It is a legend of the end of their pagan world. Volton's selfish quest to regain the ring of power for himself through his grandson (Seigfried) ultimately brings about the end of the ancient culture.My only real complaint is that they don't follow the cycle of the ring... which started out in the river guarded by the Rhine maidens, was stolen by Alberich, then stolen by the gods (Voton), reluctantly given to the Frost giants (Falsalt and Fafnir) for building Valhalla, seized by his brother Fafnir (who killed his brother) who turned himself into a dragon to protect his treasure, taken almost accidentally by Seigfried (who fought the dragon to learn about fear because he was too stupid to know what fear was -- hes a bit of a moron in the opera), Hagan then kills Seigfried and seizes the ring, then the river rises and it is at last reclaimed by the Rhinemaidens. Without the cycle, some of the story elements don't make sense. The most powerful parts of the opera cycle is (1) Alberich's vow to swear off love in order to seize the gold, and (2) his curse when the gold (in particular the ring) is taken away. The story needs his vow to swear off love, to make sense of his curse. I didn't expect it to depict the entire cycle (20 hours is a bit much for a movie), but instead of using the old ghosts to give the back story, they could have use the mermaids (as is done in Wagners Götterdämmerung). I don't understand why they made the beautifully seductive Rhinemaidens into old male ghosts and depicted the Nibelung as the rightful guardians of the cursed gold (rather than thieves). And anyway, why is the gold cursed? Other than that I found it very entertaining. Two thumbs up!
