Hammer of the Gods

2013

Action / Adventure

Synopsis


Uploaded By: YIFY
Downloaded 147,068 times
August 11, 2013 at 10:46 am

Cast

Charlie Bewley as Steinar
Clive Standen as Hagen
James Cosmo as King Bagsecg
720p 1080p
758.25 MB
1280*536
English
R
English
23.976 fps
1hr 39 min
P/S 7 / 20
1.45 GB
1920*800
English
R
English
23.976 fps
1hr 39 min
P/S 3 / 14

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by stefgrig 3 / 10

No thunder...

I tried to like "Hammer of the gods", tried really hard. But it reminded me of a bad version of the excellent series Vikings, having none of what is good about it.

No character is developed enough, the action feels cheap and forced. Focus is lost constantly throughout the movie , and the story lacks cohesion. Violence serves no purpose, it is uninspired and dull , even disturbing at times. It is very disappointing to see a classic story and a chance for something good , wasted as much.

Acting is not so bad, I kinda liked Eliot Cowan (Hakan) and Clive Standen (Hagen) whose role is the same as in Vikings, and hes rather good at it. The rest felt direction-less and anemic.

They should have copied Vikings more.

Reviewed by alan-51-111974 7 / 10

A Solid British Film No Less Historically Accurate than "Vikings".

I'm Welsh, so forgive me if I fail the US spell-check.

Firstly I'm bewildered, amused and dismayed by many of the comments: "Funny British Accents" (they're English accents), followed up by "Would be OK in Trainspotting II" (which is a Scottish film with Scottish accents), yes there are three countries in Great Britain. It's not called Great because it's great, it's to distinguish it from Brittany in France, formerly known as Little Britain after some Britons fled the Saxons and colonised the area. There's a bit of history for you.

Then we get into the historical accuracy of it all... and "Vikings" is held up as a better example, when most of "Vikings" is historically wrong.

Unlike "Vikings" this is a fantasy, it's not supposed to represent history, it's also not a Hollywood film, it's a "British" (English) one, that's why everyone talks with a "Funny British Accent".

There's also a fair amount of Old English and a snippet of Old Welsh, I don't think I've heard those languages used on film before.

It's main flaws are in trying to pander to the U.S. market (make it simpler and dumber)... yet it has strong performances throughout, a great lead in Charlie Bewley, fantastic settings, a solid although somewhat bipolar score, solid cinematography and a half-decent script.

People lap this stuff up in Game of Thrones yet as soon as you fix something which is obviously a fantasy to a point in history it get's pulled apart?

It's a solid 7. I'd have given it a 6 yet I find my patriotism roused by indignation at ignorance.

If you want to find something that completely lacks historical accuracy, only happened a couple of hundred years ago yet is revered as a great film, please watch Lincoln.

Reviewed by steeledan 6 / 10

Better than I thought it would be after reading these reviews!

I don't understand the rating this movie has on here right now! This movie is as good as sooo many movies in this genre with much better scores. (i.e. Kingdom of Heaven, King Arthur, Robin Hood, etc...)

Yes, okay, the casting choices weren't great (the main actors were great, although unknown, but the female roles were all poorly cast)and the story was, a little, thin, but this movie gains points from me for it's atheist message.

It was also shot very cool and the soundtrack was AWESOME. I hope the success of this film encourages more independent style period pieces in a market dominated by the big companies.

Read more IMDb reviews

123 Comments

Be the first to leave a comment