Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: lasersailor184 on February 20, 2005, 12:31:24 AM
-
I heard somewhere that the 13th warrior was made out of the book Eaters of the Dead by Mike Chrichton.
Is it any good?
-
Yep same guy.
The book is way better but the movie was ok.
Nothing great just ok.
-
I haven't seen the movie. The book wasn't one of Crichton's better ones, but it was still decent.
-
I've had the movie for about 3 years or so, still haven't bothered to watch it through.. It seemed very dark and unimpressive to me.
-
Haven't read the book, but have the DVD. It's a decent flick. Nothing incredible, but that's part of what I like about it. Doesn't try to be a pretentious over the top epic story.
Also think it's one of the better roles I've seen Antonio Banderas in for the same reasons. He's not trying to be some sword swinging super hero. He's just a guy in the movie.
-
I kinda liked that movie. Had no idea it was chrichton. Would imagine the book is a lot better. That kind of movie, something about your imagination will always be better than what hollywood can do.
-
I read the book and thought it was a 4 out of 10
saw the movie and thought it was a 5 out of 10.
-
I thought it was a very good movie. I have never read the book.
I thought the movie was well done on a couple points:
1) the authenticity of the Norsemen's equipment, attitudes, way of life, etc. There weren't any unbelieveable characters.
2) Bandera's character, though the hero of the story, was not "the best" at everything the way many movie heros are made out to be - he did what he could as he tried to adjust to the Norse way of life and being thrown into an impossible battle against fiendish creatures.
3) I really liked the way they portrayed Banderas learning the language as he travelled with the Norsemen. No subtitles to benefit the viewer; we struggled right along with him, trying to figure out what they were talking about. But as he learned more and more of the language, more of the dialogue was spoken in English - it was a well-done, gradual transition.
Anyway, I gave this one a 4 out of 5. To me it was like watching a Dark Ages version of Saving Private Ryan.
-
It's actually Crichton's retelling of Beowulf (Buliwyf). I was not that impressed with the movie but it's one of those that the more you watch the better is it. Now it's one of my fave's. The mood and tone in the movie is awesome. The contrast in cultures is really stark.
-
Oboe summed the movie up nicely. I'd give it 6/10. Actually, it's a 9/10 when compared to what's been released over the last 2 months.
-
I haven't rwad the book, but I enjoyed the movie thoroughly. It conveys the terror of waiting for an enemy the you can't even see coming really well.
Banderas was pretty decent in this movie, though not as good as in Interview with a Vampire. The supporting actors were excellent though, especially the guy that gets killed at the end in the final attack.
All in all, it really takes you back to the dark ages when superstition ruled the western world and the center of civilization, art and science was in the Middle East.My how things change in 1000 years ...
-
Wow, quite mixed reviews.
I am intrigued though, gonna have to stop by the bookstore (if I can find it again).
-
ive read the book. The movie does follow the book pretty close.. of course the novel has a lot LOT more detail and events that dont pop up in the movie.
The book though describes the enemy as a tribe of people who ate the dead and were very primitive and dangerous and stuff from the start; not like the movie putting them as some sort of mystery demon-monster things and later on showing they were some deranged version of Clan of Cave Bear.
The book has a much darker mood as well, heck a good portion of it is the arab describing how he went along with the norsemen and how disgusted he was at their filth and barbaric ways.. and when he begins to hear of the eaters of the dead it gets even darker.
-
It's a good movie. One that seems to improve after each viewing.
I'm not a big, big fan of Crighton but I also enjoyed reading this book.
Sure, there are better movies and better books, but there are also plenty that are worse.
-
The movie was actually filmed near here.
Ill have to watch it again.
-
Originally posted by Pongo
The movie was actually filmed near here.
You've got some beautiful scenery around there.
-
I thought it was a pretty good movie. Well worth watching.
-
Ok movie except for the stunted spaniard tony flags. the book was interesting I read it in '77 and it did remind me of beowulf.
-
hmmm..never even heard of this film. Must give it a whirl...just to see what you guys are talking about. Sounds interesting enough to watch already.
I saw "The Nineth Gate" the other night and didn't fall asleep...almost, but not quite, so at least it is better then "I Robot".
-
its a pritty good movie ... i saw it in the theatre when it 1st came out ..
"only an Arab would bring a dog to war "
id give it 4/5 also .
-
The story is based off the chronicals of Ibn Fadlan an Arab who travelled with the vikings. That's why there's so much disgust, he really did think them ignorant savages and wrote out of his own prejudices.
Crichton was intrigued by theories that remnants of the Neanderthals may have still existed in Europe, and they were written into the story as such (that's what the mist monsters/cave people are). There was no use of the Grendel/Beowulf tales, but he does believe that coexistance of modern man and the neanderthal could explain a lot of those myths.
Surely at least one of you who read the book read the forward and the appendix?
-
Who is this Fatty?
Never heard of him.
Gawdamned newb infestation.
-
Originally posted by Fatty
The story is based off the chronicals of Ibn Fadlan an Arab who travelled with the vikings. That's why there's so much disgust, he really did think them ignorant savages and wrote out of his own prejudices.
Crichton was intrigued by theories that remnants of the Neanderthals may have still existed in Europe, and they were written into the story as such (that's what the mist monsters/cave people are). There was no use of the Grendel/Beowulf tales, but he does believe that coexistance of modern man and the neanderthal could explain a lot of those myths.
Surely at least one of you who read the book read the forward and the appendix?
From IMDb:
Adapting "Beowulf" for his novel and then for this movie, Michael Crichton changed some of the original names for ones that sounded similar: Beowulf is here named Buliwyf, Hygelac becomes Hyglak, the Grendel transformed into the Wendol, etc.
Since Michael Crichton published his novel "Eaters of the Dead" in 1976, the basis of this film, it has become regarded as one of the most notorious hoaxes in Librarianship Circles. The Ahmad Tusi Manuscript that Crichton referenced in his bibliography as being the source of this story, is completely made up. The name of the translator Fraus Dolus is in fact two Latin words meaning both 'hoax' and 'fraud'. The University of Oslo, where this manuscript is supposed to be kept, have (since the book was published), on an annual basis had to send out letters telling enquirers that they have been the victim of a hoax.
Count another victim.
-
"arab, draw what I speak"
"what troubles this place old man?"
Ibn Fablan wrote about the Rus, not the vikings. But that's where crichton got the idea from. It was good movie I liked it alot. Vikings called home to defend their shrinking kingdom from a cannibal tribe, now there's a story! I imagine the book goes into the historical aspects such as the tremendous civilizing influence on european culture that came from bagdhad, as well as the role the vikings played in shaping western civilization.
There's two kinds of movies, one you see and thing "that was pretty neat", then the next day as you think about it, "man that movie was the suck" (pearl harbor)
And then there are movies like 13th warrior where you think, "that movie was pretty cool", then after you think about it for a day you're thinking "that was actually a good flick". And you watch it again and appreciate it better.
I've been wanting to read eaters of the dead for years.
-
Ya I read the apendixis fatty.
I think that is what turned me off the book.
-
Oh no, I've been rebuked by an intern at IMDb!
Canada sucks.
-
Originally posted by oboe
3) I really liked the way they portrayed Banderas learning the language as he travelled with the Norsemen. No subtitles to benefit the viewer; we struggled right along with him, trying to figure out what they were talking about. But as he learned more and more of the language, more of the dialogue was spoken in English - it was a well-done, gradual transition.
Agreed. This was very well done. A refreshing change of pace.
Movie was just on this past weekend.
Not a bad flick. Not a GREAT one. But pretty decent.
"Where you come from you have one God. Up here we are in need of many. I shall pray to all of them for you. Dont be offended"
-
Yup, that's exactly what resparked my interest.
-
Originally posted by spitfiremkv
Banderas was pretty decent in this movie, though not as good as in Interview with a Vampire.
Speaking of Banderas
This is due out in Sept
(http://www.geocities.com/auzziek/zlogo1.gif)
(http://ffmedia.ign.com/filmforce/image/zorro2_banderas_zeta1_1097822027-000.jpg)
The Legend of Zorro.
Everyone had their superheros.
while I always liked Batman. Superman and all that
ZORRO
was always my favorite.
Something about Swords and whips I guess LOL
-
I thought it was a good movie. Good enough to buy the DVD.
I like the humor the vikings had. Even towards death.....
Overwhelming odds coming down the tunnel and they all know they are gonna die, then one hears thunder and says "aw damn... it's gonna rain!" and they all bust out laughing.