Viking Siege

source: Viking Siege

Moviecut—Viking Siege

Or so the box says. I was not expecting Viking Siege to live up to that crazy billing (DVD Rule #1: Don't believe the quotes on the box), but I have to say this movie was real entertaining. First of all, the title makes no sense (guess they didn't want to call it "Tree Siege"). Also, ignore the dragon on the cover. No room in the budget for that -- creature effects are strictly bargain basement. The bulk of this movie takes place in one location. Here's a medieval flick that doesn't take itself too seriously, which is kind of a nice change of pace. The opening shows us what the "Tree Bastards" are all after... a meteor that fell from the sky. Apparently it's real powerful! Then the credits roll, and the director is credited as... "Jack Burton"?! Guess someone's a big John Carpenter fan. A band of murderous harlots plan a Red Wedding-style massacre on a brotherhood of crooked monks, who enslaved their families. Complications ensue when a Lord shows up to the party, oh, then the vikings crash the proceedings, being chased by a horde of God-knows-what. The monks also have a group of thugs locked in the basement, awaiting a ship to send them off into slavery. Lots of different factions and agendas collide, but they've somehow got to work together to stick it out and be rescued by morning. Actual diverse and interesting characters in this, it's nice that attention was paid in that area. Ok, the guy who called this Evil Dead, I'm assuming he's referring to trees coming alive, and at one point the dead come back to life, then they actually steal a (turn of a) phrase from Evil Dead (and repeat it, just like, well you know). I was somehow expecting it to be real gory. Oh well. Let's see, what else does this movie need? Apparently the filmmakers felt the answer to that question was "kung fu." Don't expect great special effects (or even good blood, for that matter), this is strictly a B-movie. But what it does have going for it is a lot of fun, character, and comical dialogue. UK production.

Low budget as it may be, I enjoyed the hell out of this film. The story was unique for this sort of movie. The dialogue was snappy. The characters were different from what you usually see in a fantasy movie. Not to mention that yes the women were hot. Very entertaining.

This story of supernatural tree shaped men attacking a motley group of people in the middle ages has the look of a story with too many cooks spoiling the broth. There were just too many characters who had superiority complexes, and the ones who would have the superiority complexes had the opposite. The monks are depicted as ridiculous middle ages version of Frank Burns, and the other characters are just as one dimensional. On the bright side, as contrived as it is, there is a bit of non contrived fates. A bit of "let the cards fall where they fall" look, instead of a deliberated goal appearance. The biggest problem is "character". These characters all look like they were written by or for certain actors, which was probably the intention, but it looks too obvious. Way too many are too Hollywood, and few make sense for the era. For instance, the monks are depicted as cowardly weak mercenaries, when in fact the monks of the era could either be weak or mercenary, but couldn't be both. There were too many Hollywood characters for the movie, too. Had it been a mini series, maybe it would work, although the characters were so standard and Hollywood that it would only work for the geekiest people. More ridiculous was the woman who never ran out of arrows. I don't know where the arrows all were. They just appeared out of the air. I guess they dropped from the ceiling. Probably from an elaborate mechanism she devised that dropped three arrows every ten minutes.

Yes, it was a ridiculous movie, but you just cannot walk away. It has only BEAUTIFUL WOMEN(what are the chances of that ), MONSTERS, GOOD AND BAD VIKINGS, EVIL MONKS, and a ASIAN WHO KNOWS KARATE. Yes you must leave your brain at the door, but it's action packed and some kind of funny. Lots of twist to keep you on your toes. Give it a look see, you won't forget it

Viking Siege is a competent Viking film with a tone much lighter than what is mostly found in this particular cycle of the historical epic genre. It has a sense of humour about itself basically, but it's not that great. It's a character driven story this one which is super rare for a viking film and even rarer, it's all set in one location, and more rarer than that, the film manages to pull that off in a competent fashion. My expectations, ever foolishly piqued by the BBFC label on the back, were that Viking Siege would be a lot more trashy than it turned out to be. This was directed with Carpenter and Raimi in mind rather than Prior or Myer, or god forbid, a Franco or Fragasso. Now that approach would have really surprised me, though i'm not sure how much i would welcome it. Though i don't like this relatively classy and self-aware approach that much either. But all of this is just aesthetics anyway. When it comes right own to it, Viking Siege displays a lot of focus and enthusiasm which is infectious at times. Unfortunately however, i cannot fathom who would appreciate it. It's too small in scope for those looking for an epic film, too fairy tale like with it's period for viking enthusiasts and for T&A trash hunters like your sex lord truly, nudity and inanity and insanity is sparse. Making just a decent independent feature doesn't cut it anymore really. The clue to the identity of the real audience for Viking Siege lies within it's title. If you love the siege scenes in zombie movies, war movies, crime movies, etc, then this is for you. You get all the hallmarks, claustrophobia, increasing tensions amongst survivors, foreboding sense of doom. So if that's your bag, as well as character driven narratives, then this will be the only viking film you'll need.

Seen far worse film's. But in the end I was a fast forward through the weak 'story'! Until something happened. I have given it two points 1. for the hot women and 2. the gore effect ...... Which were better than usual film of this budget. (Although they do become very repetitive) ......acting wasn't that terrible. But I'd say avoid by keep an eye out for the woman who did all the effects in the film. Potential. (no.......she's not my wife ha ha)

Really enjoyed the pulpy nature of the film, it's just a shame that the branding didn't reflect that, like the old artwork on their website. Definitely worth a watch if you're into B movie style features.

!BUYER BEWARE! This is NOT a serious film, DO NOT believe the marketing into thinking this movie is about vikings or the famous siege of Paris in 845, this film is pure fictional and quite frankly bananas! Luckily I do like a low budget movie from time to time, 'Viking Siege' must be one of the cheapest produced movies out there! I do believe this perhaps to be intentional by the developers among with the sheer amounts of ham passed around the actors, super cheap special effects which boils down to ketchup 'everywhere' with surprisingly a half decent soundtrack. SO why is this film called Viking Siege? Where is the sieging? I did enjoy it to be fair, some odd pacing issues toward the middle but I had fun with it. Leave your expectations at the door and you should be able to get through this, this is not for the serious of heart out there, I repeat this film does NOT take itself seriously. 5/10 Oodles that could be improved but a forgivable attempt for a first time director. Less ham next time, ok?