Printable View
.
The 13th Warrior
I like it. It's great as a movie that I watch each time they broadcast it. (Finished five minutes ago. ~D) How about accuracy, if any?
Is that "Ibn Fahdlan" (sic. "Fadhlan" would be legitimate, as indeed there is at least one Ibn Fadhlan) a real person or a fictified Ibn Batuta? What about the Norse spoken? Warfare and other things?
:book2:
ADD: I've read the Beowulf connection on IMDB and it seems this Ahmed is indeed a fictious Ibn Batuta.
.
The Norse spoken is a collection of Nordic languages. I remember hearing Danish and Icelandic at the very least, but there could be more.
The story of good old Ibn Fadhlan... The Arab that visited the Rus, then went to Poland and on to Hedeby in lower Jutland. Jup, he existed and it is clear the guy in the movie is based on the historical person. But I think the historical person was nearing 50 years.
The stories of Ibn Fadhlan with the Rus, fits greatly with parts of the movie. But beyond that I think you should just consider it a pleasant movie to watch.
The Rus he told us about, lived on the riverbanks on very flat lowlands with few forests and cliffs. Further at this time the Rus and the Slavs were still fairly destinct as groups in Russia. Thus other people (the Slavs) would have been around further inland from the Rus visited.
I enjoyed it. It seemed a bit messy at times, slightly disjointed, but overall a very entertaining movie; I particularly liked the scenes where Ibn Fahdlan learns to speak with his companions.
.
Yes, the Norse(ish) turning into -dubbed- English is one of the best scenes. :yes:
I decided to give an end to my total ignorance about Beowulf by decreasing it to 90% ignorance and learned that the plot is identical except Ibn Fadhlan and the condensation of that evil chap and the dragon into a single element.
As for Ibn Fadhlan himself, I remembered looking him up after I first watched the movie. Ibn Batuta stuck to my mind as the one travelling furthest, thus overshadowed him. Thanks Kraxis. ~:thumb:
.
You know... there is actually a connection between Ibn Fadhlan and the Jomsvikings. It is weak, but it is there.
I got most pleasantly suprised to see him talk about Wolin (Jomsborg) and how its warriors were great and a lot of other stuff.
I love the film, yeah its abit daft at times but you can't help liking it.
For Ibn Fadhlan's actual account go here.
Apparently Ibn Fadhlan's and other Muslim writer's accounts of the Rus are a source of big controversy between some Russian scholars who argue for and against major Viking influence in Russian history.
.
Thanks for the link to the accounts tsyed. :book2:
.
the book,on which the movie is based is very good.so good i devoured it in 1 hour.it is called Eaters of the Dead by m. crichton(guy who wrote jurassic park,not sure on his name spelling) good movie.awesome book.
I love this movie. It's pretty good if you ask me.
for me, there were a couple of interesting things michael crichton wrote for his interpretaion of beowulf in eaters of the dead. he chose to have the narrator be from the caliphate because he felt that that would be the closest viewpoint to a modern day reader. he also linked grendel and gredel's mother, the captain and the priestess, to being orcs and being the last outpost of neaderthals left being displaced by homo sapiens. by far the most interesting was that he basically said he created false entries in the bibliography for the work and at the end, he had no idea which ones were real and which ones were fake anymore.
great movie, and based on true accounts in some respects but just about everything i was about to say has already been said~:mecry: .
The movie was good -- up until they start to dismantle the problem of the dragon on the hills. Then it just got wack-assed.
I loved the depiction of Norse settlements, though.
That movie was great for the first 15-20 minutes. It made me feel like I was about to embark on a great pseudo-historical adventure flick in the mold of films like 'The Man Who Would be King'. Tragically after those 15-20 minutes were up The 13th Warrior quickly degraded into a mediocre B grade action flick with only a few bright spots here and there.
Good god, I hated this movie... as previously stated, the book was really good, especially for Michael Crichton, who has reused the same characters and basic plots more times than Horatio Alger. (But the book Jurrasic Park was pretty entertaining. ~D)
The child and the old sage woman are Norwegian actors and spoke fluently Norwegian (though with an eastern dialect). Same with Eben's friend Herger; a Norwegian actor and thus spoke Norwegian as Norse. They should have spoken Icelandic as that is as close to Old Norse as you can get.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mouzafphaerre
The worst was Buliwyf (aka. Vladimir Kulich), I guess he didn't rehearse his Norse parts with a linguist.
The strong man Bjørn Riis (Dane) spoke Danish.
About the general attitude among the Norse; “That is not a horse, it is a dog”, “You sound like a woman”, “Give a sword to an Arab and he makes a knife” and other small taunts and fine humor is the kind of humor you’ll find with the older generations here in Norway (and possible in the rest of Scandinavia).
Maria Bonnevie cleaning Banderas’ wound could as well be my grand mother. In fact if my extended family gathers, this kind of humor is present. Thinking about my encounters with people from other Scandinavian nations, this dynamic is also present when the brothers meet (Norway, Denmark and Sweden) and possible more so.
It is by the way taken with good humor on the receiving end.
I just watched it. It's been one of those "Well, the movie just could not 'bang' ".
I mean it sure feels to have the potential, however I just could not get excited with any of the scenes through out the movie. I think, Le Pacte Des Loups is a parallel one considering the fiction-focused-historical-ish theme (At least LPDL's story evolves around 18th century France), and felt just more epic to me (No, it's not only because of Monica Bellucci..Ahem..).
It's a matter or taste, though.
ASbjørn... AS+bjørn.~;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Sigurd Fafnesbane
A former wrestler and professional strongman (you know those strongman contests). That was the guy I remembered when I thought of Danish in the movie, though I would have to say that he actually speaks a lespering Jutish, which is quite different in grammar (only spoken though) and pronouncation. It is interesting to think that it can be so different within such a small country as Denmark (and there are far stranger dialects than what he speaks).
My opinon of the movie... a real SUNDAY movie. A movie that comes on when you are hungover, tired or just lazy. You need those almost-there-but-somehow-not movies, and sunday is their niche.
Yup. The best part was when they woke up and all started to wash using the same bowl. Man that was disgusting . But it did seem believable.~D It was an alright flick. I enjoyed it.Quote:
That movie was great for the first 15-20 minutes. It made me feel like I was about to embark on a great pseudo-historical adventure flick in the mold of films like 'The Man Who Would be King'.
It is you who called him an AS* not me...~DQuote:
Originally Posted by Kraxis
from tsyed's link:Quote:
Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny
Ibn Fadlan's main source of disgust with the Rus bathing customs have to do with his Islamic faith, which requires a pious Mohammedan to wash only in running water or water poured from a container so that the rinsings do not again touch the bather. The sagas often describe a woman washing a man's hair for him, often as a gesture of affection. It would be likely that the basin was actually emptied between each bath: Ibn Fadlan would still have felt the basin contaminated by previous use. It does seem here that Ibn Fadlan may be exaggerating a bit for effect.
The vikings were a cleanly bunch with well groomed hair and beard. I doubt they would have used the same bathing water full of snot and spittings. If you got that in your beard it would freeze solid outside and you could cut yourself on it. ~D
Aryan Piglets or Blond Locked Titans of Cleanliness? Wiki Speaks!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viking
So the Anglo-Saxons were the piglets of Northern Europe. Now it all makes sense... ~;pQuote:
Uncleanliness
Inscenated fight during a Viking festivalThe image of wild-haired, dirty savages, sometimes associated with the Vikings in popular culture, has hardly any base in reality. The Vikings used a variety of tools for personal grooming such as combs, tweezers, razors or specialised "ear spoons". In particular, combs are among the most frequent artifacts from Viking Age graves, and one can conclude that a comb was the personal equipment of every man and woman. The Vikings also used soap, long before it was reintroduced to Europe after the fall of the Byzantine Empire.
The Vikings in England even had a particular reputation of excessive cleanliness, due to their custom of bathing once a week, on Saturdays (as opposed to the local Anglo-Saxons). As for the Rus', Ibn Rustah explicitly notes their cleanliness, while Ibn Fadlan is disgusted by the women sharing the same vessel as the men to wash their faces in the morning. Ibn Fadlan's disgust is thus probably motivated by ideas of personal hygiene particular to the Muslim world (for instance, Muslims are required to wash only with running water), while the very example intended to convey the disgusting customs of the Rus' at the same time records that they did in fact wash every morning.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. I know it's wiki but I'm too lazy to do the proper research on the topic. To confirm Sigurd's statements it seems the act of both sexes washing with 'still' water was the greatest offense commited in Ibn Fadlan's eyes.
The practice of keeping so fresh so clean was Germanic -- combs etc. as described in the wiki article have been found in many graves from the Great Migrations period. It was the dirty Romans that turned clean Germanics into dirty feudal peasants ~;) ~D
Those dirty Romans with their heated public baths and running water. Filth is all their fault!
Ajax
Drat. Forgot that. But that was the city. We're talking the peasants here... and the soldiers weren't that clean... at least the Germanics liked to look their part prior to joining battle... and the Turks at least had mobile bath houses. ~D
Maybe it was the Jews. Crazy Christian sectists closed down the bath houses in Constantinople and turned them into prisons, after all ~;)
I got the book, and I'm reading it and I really like it. I can see the specific refrences to Beowulf, like Hrunting and Herot and Hrothgar. I wish it was a bit more specific what was the fake stuff and the real stuff...
Though reading one of the links, it is the same as the first few chapters, so I guess he used the beggining of his account.
I think a lot of people here are using their modern prejudices and ideals to evaluate this movie. As far as "realism" an "historical accuracy" I think they did a good job. Although I'm not sure where they got the plate armor from :no: . What was this, 8th or 9th century Scandinavia? If you're looking for superb acting or plot development I think you're looking in the wrong place. If you're looking to see how people of this time would think, act, and respond to the situation I think you would be pleased. Character development (as developed as a Norseman would be at that time) was good and I can appreciate the leadership characteristics of that Vlad guy (whatever his character was called). I also like the soundtrack. On the other hand I could think this because this is the movie that I always sit and watch while enjoying some rather expensive mead ("Honey, it's made from honey! :laugh4: ", love it!).
:medievalcheers: :barrel:
Hence, the legionary bath-houses on Hadrian's Wall, and at many other legionary sites? :no:Quote:
Originally Posted by The Wizard
I liked it, especially some of the taunts. I don’t know if some of the actions were realistic but they seemed convincing to me, like the boy standing at the boat to let everyone see that he was real. Overall a good “Sunday” movie for sure.:2thumbsup:
I like the film, although obviously its not accurate really, I mean don't get me started on the armour.
I scream with pain every time he mutilates that beutiful pattern welded sword!!:laugh4:
.
Dumping seperate historical and mythical materials into a single jar has had its use elsewhere. I remember a "classical" movie adaptation of Jules Verne's Journey to the Centre of the Earth with dinosaurs, Atlantis, subterranean oceans and much more all jammed together. (I don't know how much of it was from the book for I haven't read it. :embarassed:)
.
I like the movie, but am confused by certain parts of the Norsemen's appearance, the one with the knot-pattern facial tattoo in particular. Also, that guy didn't wear pants. Was there supposed to be some kind of Celtic influence in there, or was it just so that each persona had more character?
Yeah, that acter is in every action movie ever. He's a Scot and in the fil he wears a kilt.