1. Trailers and impression from commercials
The movie trailers have given the impression that this is an action movie, with lots of battles fought with swords and spears in addition to dramatic spoken scenes. This have appealed to people that especially enjoy action movies. Those people are greatly disappointed when they after a first introduction action scene, are turned back to calm scenes in the description of the Arn's childhood and youth. I asked myself several times why the makers of this move haven't been so honest and told what kind of movie that this actually is: a historical drama that happens to include some battles? Then the movie would have appealed to the right kind of people: those who like to be seduced by the drama of dialogs and calm scenes. At the cinema I was sitting next to some teenagers that obviously was waiting for the great battles, and while waiting they were talking and "play fight" with each other. They were in addition totally unable to understand the impact of Christianity at that time and were lacking background knowledge of the historical events (just the word "Tempelridder"/"Knight Templar" made them laugh!). My point is that they had been fooled to see this movie instead of some other "Lord of the rings"-like movie.
2. The motion picture
The three books by Jan Guillou about Arn Magnusson are so extremely brilliant in construction of the story and in the build-up of the sentences. The only actions that had to be taken to make these books to a movie-success would simply be to translate the books into a manuscript! This would have given a brilliant drama movie with lots of conspiracies, political plots and a description of the forces that was between the rivaling families (as described in the first book). Unfortunately this movie never reaches an acceptable quality as a drama movie, nor as an action movie, but falls in between as unsuccessful in both genres! The life of Arn and the events in Sweden is told so swiftly and with so little depth that it is impossible to get familiar with the characters and to develop feelings for them. Do people that haven't read the book even get the chance to really understand the drama that happened at this time? Even Arn is described in few details, and it is impossible to understand his deep religiosity (trusting that everything that happens to him is God's will) and respect for all living creatures he developed during the years in the monastery. Instead, Arn is as a grown-up presented with an anxious and frightened look during the whole screenplay in Sweden. I am really sorry that the actor didn't get the chance to get deeper into his character. How would the audience be interested in the rest of the movie, if the feelings for Arn, Cecilia and the other persons are missing? (While reading the book, I even got feelings for Arn's horse! And that tells very much about the greatness of the books, and not about myself as a reader.)
The motion picture is stuffed with to many cliché scenes (children playing and running, Cecilia's joyful dancing in the garden, the free horse riding in the woods, love scenes) in addition to the motion of the camera itself: focusing on something exterior (the sky, tree tops, building etc.) and then slide into the center to capture the people.
3. Music
I am a person that is very fond of classical music, and have also interest in orchestral music in movies. Some music found in movies really has great quality and originality. However, I cannot give the same statement for the music in this movie. The music is too simple and flat! The clichés are so obvious and annoying: all joyful scenes are accorded to "beautiful" music of strings and woodwind. It really made me sick! And the few action scenes are accompanied by brass instruments and complete orchestra in a typical manner. Sorry, but this movie will not give you a great music experience.
Nevertheless, I should remark that I previously have read Guillou's books with great enthusiasm. My similar great disappointment of this first movie is thus inevitably coloring my comment posted here.
The movie trailers have given the impression that this is an action movie, with lots of battles fought with swords and spears in addition to dramatic spoken scenes. This have appealed to people that especially enjoy action movies. Those people are greatly disappointed when they after a first introduction action scene, are turned back to calm scenes in the description of the Arn's childhood and youth. I asked myself several times why the makers of this move haven't been so honest and told what kind of movie that this actually is: a historical drama that happens to include some battles? Then the movie would have appealed to the right kind of people: those who like to be seduced by the drama of dialogs and calm scenes. At the cinema I was sitting next to some teenagers that obviously was waiting for the great battles, and while waiting they were talking and "play fight" with each other. They were in addition totally unable to understand the impact of Christianity at that time and were lacking background knowledge of the historical events (just the word "Tempelridder"/"Knight Templar" made them laugh!). My point is that they had been fooled to see this movie instead of some other "Lord of the rings"-like movie.
2. The motion picture
The three books by Jan Guillou about Arn Magnusson are so extremely brilliant in construction of the story and in the build-up of the sentences. The only actions that had to be taken to make these books to a movie-success would simply be to translate the books into a manuscript! This would have given a brilliant drama movie with lots of conspiracies, political plots and a description of the forces that was between the rivaling families (as described in the first book). Unfortunately this movie never reaches an acceptable quality as a drama movie, nor as an action movie, but falls in between as unsuccessful in both genres! The life of Arn and the events in Sweden is told so swiftly and with so little depth that it is impossible to get familiar with the characters and to develop feelings for them. Do people that haven't read the book even get the chance to really understand the drama that happened at this time? Even Arn is described in few details, and it is impossible to understand his deep religiosity (trusting that everything that happens to him is God's will) and respect for all living creatures he developed during the years in the monastery. Instead, Arn is as a grown-up presented with an anxious and frightened look during the whole screenplay in Sweden. I am really sorry that the actor didn't get the chance to get deeper into his character. How would the audience be interested in the rest of the movie, if the feelings for Arn, Cecilia and the other persons are missing? (While reading the book, I even got feelings for Arn's horse! And that tells very much about the greatness of the books, and not about myself as a reader.)
The motion picture is stuffed with to many cliché scenes (children playing and running, Cecilia's joyful dancing in the garden, the free horse riding in the woods, love scenes) in addition to the motion of the camera itself: focusing on something exterior (the sky, tree tops, building etc.) and then slide into the center to capture the people.
3. Music
I am a person that is very fond of classical music, and have also interest in orchestral music in movies. Some music found in movies really has great quality and originality. However, I cannot give the same statement for the music in this movie. The music is too simple and flat! The clichés are so obvious and annoying: all joyful scenes are accorded to "beautiful" music of strings and woodwind. It really made me sick! And the few action scenes are accompanied by brass instruments and complete orchestra in a typical manner. Sorry, but this movie will not give you a great music experience.
Nevertheless, I should remark that I previously have read Guillou's books with great enthusiasm. My similar great disappointment of this first movie is thus inevitably coloring my comment posted here.