The Phantom of the Opera (1989)

You all think I'm going to talk about the 2004 Gerard Butler, Joel Schumaker adaption of Andrew Lloyd Webber's musical don't you? That's adorable.

Directed by: Dwight H. Little
Released: 1989
Staring: Robert Englund, Jill Schoelen, Bill Nye,
Rated: R
Times Viewed: 4

  There are certain movies you watching thinking...I'm really enjoying this, I know I shouldn't because it's probably a ridiculously cheesy horrible movie, but I really am enjoying this. You watch it about three or four times, making jokes in your head but it doesn't matter because it's still a good movie. Then you watch that movie with other people and you realize all those jokes you made to yourself were totally justified and you should probably hide the fact that you bought this movie off of Amazon and you really love it from the general public....Anyone else have that movie?
        Anyone?
                 No?
  Well the 1989 adaption of The Phantom of the Opera staring Robert Englund and Bill Nye is mine. It's 80's, it's gore, it's ridiculous, it's not an accurate adaption of the book, and it is AWESOME. This being said, I have to let you all know....

  The bane of my existence presents itself in two forms. Bad Dracula adaptions {we'll get to this in a review later this month} and bad Phantom of the Opera adaptions. Is it really so impossible to produce a faithful adaption to the book??? The book has all the elements of an awesome horror/romance/mystery movie because it's an awesome horror/romance/mystery novel!
As of 2007 there were over 40 adaptions of Gaston Leroux's book. 
  I really love Phantom of the Opera. I got hooked thanks to a cassette of the Andrew Lloyd Webber Musical my parents bought after seeing the production in the early 90's. I forgot about the show for a while until 2004 when Joel Schumaker made it into a colorless, sub-par, yet enjoyable adaption. After being reunited with the story I hunted down the book and basically every other adaption I could get my hands on...let me tell you, there are A LOT of adaptions of The Phantom of the Opera. Most bad, all cheesy, but all (save the Dario Argento adaption) have their redeeming qualities.

  The 1989 adaptions' is it's 80's thrill and gore and Robert Englund....Poor, poor Freddy Kru... I mean ROBERT ENGLUND. The poor guy signed his action soul to the Devil the day he decided to do Nightmare on Elm Street. I'm sure he's made quite the pretty penny on the series, which boast 7 sequels to the first as well as the 2010 remake, but they've limited him creatively. ROBERT ENGLUND IS A GOOD ACTOR, I truly believe he is. Sadly, like make villains of 80's horror, he's been typecast to no end. Whenever he DOES land a role that is not Kruger, the character still haunts him. Marking people are mainly to blame for this and I have to say whoever was captain for this ship should have been fired because this is not acceptable...He's basically a marketing strategy

Seriously, I don't mean to be rude, but what assholes. From what I've read on the web Englund wasn't too happy about this either, and for good reason! I would not want people to go to a film because they expected to see Freddy, I would want them to go to see what else Freddy can do!
.

  This all being said, the character Englund creates is brilliant but he does offer several Freddy-esque characteristics. He has some great, macabre one liners, creepy laugh, and dream-like presence...In reality this has nothing to do with Englund's acting and more about screen writing. This may be a strong statement, but Robert Englund's interpretation of The Phantom is the closes to what I had generated in my mind from the book.
The Phantom is not a nice, cuddly guy chilling in the basement waiting to watch The Notebook with you *cough* Charles Dance *cough* he's a bad ass, crazy stalker. I say this with nothing but love in my heart, but he is out of his mind. He kills people, he LIKES killing people; but he's some how charming and intelligent!

  The rest of the cast is mediocre at best, even Bill Nye is odd in the role of the Opera House manager. Please don't even get me started on Christine...the young Jill Schoelen is not the worst Christine to grace stage or screen but she's not the best either. Her singing voice {which I don't believe is her own, is no where near "angelic"} I don't think I've ever seen a performance of Christine Daae (outside the musical content) that I enjoyed. Always winy, annoying, just uh...Not much praise can be showered upon this cast apart of Englund of course.


Now let's talk about the movie itself. This is NOT accurate adaption of the Leroux novel, it takes many, MANY heavy handed liberties included name, location changes, and TIME TRAVEL. The Paris Opera House becomes the London Opera House, I see no reason for this...it's not like they actually shot in either location...Daae becomes to American DAY a change which I despise and Erik disfigurement comes for the Devil in the form of a midget in a brothel....ya I'm just gonna let that one sink in.  LIKE I SAID, heavy handed liberties...they were taken. I've seen so many adaptions I've learned to take them as they come and all the changes in this adaption, while crazy and outlandish WORK with the film and I *screams quietly* love this movie!

  One of the main reasons, it's gross. Just sick...and so good! While no one has ever gotten anywhere close to showing Erik's true disfigurement on screen, the 1989 adaptions offers a pretty nasty take. Instead of wearing a mask made of any synthetic material or fabric, the Phantom chooses to cover his burned face in HUMAN SKIN...that's right a la Buffalo Bill, this Phantom does some patch work sewing on his own face. This is where that 80's gore and horror come in. We the audience get several scenes of Erik skinning people, sewing the skin to his face, the skin be ripped off...and it's awesomely disgusting. There are some top notch make-up jobs in this film no matter how Nightmare on Elm Street inspired they may appear. Having The Phantom wear a mask of human flesh really bumps up the gross out factor that the original novel held so close {in the scene where Christine takes off Erik's mask he takes her hands, and digs her nails into her skull, pealing off dead skin}

Did I mention, Erik has a really AWESOME Red Death costume in this adaption?

  It's not perfect, it's occasionally ridiculous in it's retro-ness, and it's ghastly gory, but it's for those reasons I enjoy it! I don't take it seriously, and you shouldn't either! So if you've watched your collection of Nightmare on Elm Street so many times you can pin point the second a prosthetic tongue worms it's way out of a cored phone, give The Phantom of the Opera a try. Not as hokey as Nightmare but retaining a similar atmosphere and leading man of course. Robert Englund's performance is reason enough to watch Phantom but the gory 80's style are PERFECT for a Halloween viewing. Someday I hope this film will worm it's way onto the cult classic shelf along Nightmare, Halloween and Friday the 13th.

  I was going to talk about the Charles Dance tv miniseries of Phantom from 1990 but it's quite an extensive review all ready. All you need to know is I like it for unknown Charles Dance-y reasons.

I love Charles Dance...he is my favorite character on GOT and I didn't even know this until I rewatched season 2. Dance is no Lion in this miniseries however...he's almost the opposite.

  Charles Dance is an adorable English man who plays a French man with an American accent while everyone else around him keeps their English accents. I'm sorry but when I hear the voice of an Angel he doesn't sound like he's from Iowa. He is a cute and cuddly phantom who actually sings. Possibly one of the worst Christine's even if she is blond like she is in the book. It's both horribly bad and charming all at the same time. If you're bored you can watch the whole whole mini series on youtube.

 You guys...Tywin Lanister was a total FOX.

NOTE: This is definitely NOT from the 1990 adaption of Phantom.

He's just fun to look at

Evil Dead & The Conjuring

This past week I jumped back on the adrenaline pumping wagon that is Horror movies.

  The horror genre is without a doubt one of my favorites. A couple of my favorite movies are horror films [The Shinning, Bram Stoker's Dracula '93, The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari] That being said, it's in my opinion the hardest genre to do correctly and successfully.
  A great horror movie isn't just something that presents scary faces, ghosts and gross out moments, it's all about the feeling. A heavy lingering atmosphere is was accelerates an ok scary movie to a great horror film. The sensation of unease and primal wrench in your gut is what a great horror film should create; and not just through it's images. Music, camera angles, lighting are the biggest factors in creating that eery, haunting feeling. Last Friday I dragged my friends along to The Conjuring and was thrilled that after years and years, we have finally got a solid, no nonsense horror classic. But first....

  My review of The Evil Dead has the most hits out of any reviews on Miss Morgan At The Movies.
Now when I originally watched The Evil Dead I was quite terrified. I did not have a good time. BUT THAT'S WHY IT'S SUCH A GREAT HORRO MOVIE. It freaked me the hell out. And for that reason I did NOT want to check out what I thought would be the ultra-ultra-mega-super gross/violent/CGI filled reboot "Evil Dead", but by the end of the review I broke down and admitted I would probably end up seeing it with my friend and fellow cult film lover, Thomas Hacker whom I also watched and enjoyed The Evil Dead 2 with...no Army of Darkness yet...

Evil Dead

Directed By: Fede Alvarez
Released: 2013
Staring: Jane Levy, Shilo Fernandez, Lou Taylor Pucci, Jessica Lucas & Elizabeth Blackmore
Rated: R

  Oh The Evil Dead with it's undying horde of fans, spin offs and even a musical! It truly is a genre of it's own. Zombie-ish, Cabin Teen genre right? Right. Anyway...Evil Dead I can't say I watched this film completely untouched by the influence it's predecessors. I mean...having watched Evil Dead 1 & 2 and ultimately enjoying them both for what they are, I feel like I am apart of the fandom...I know what real fans of the series want and expect. And all I have to say is there are only two opinions for hardcore Evil Dead fans. Love and Hate.

Jane Levy get's in deep in Evil Dead (2013)

   Here's the first thing I must note. Evil Dead is NOT a remake. It's a new story, a new group of kids, but.....The car is there, the deer (anters) are there, the cutting off of the hand is there, vomiting blood in the mouth is there, the sawed off shotgun is there, the CHAINSAW IS THERE. It's ALL there. Evil Dead, to me, seemed to say "Hey! We respect the original, we love the original and guess what? All of that still happened! This is just 30 years after the fact" Repercussions, a loop in events almost. Think J.J. Abrams Star Trek (please don't kill me for that one) It has the same...stuff, but obviously has been modernized and doesn't contain some of the hoke that a low budget movie of the 80's was bound to have.

Jane Levy as Mia sits atop a familiar car in Evil Dead (2013)    

"Cut it, CUT IT!"
No turkey to carve, but plenty of rotting flesh
Evil Dead (2013)

    You have character that represent the past characters. At first Thomas and I kept asking "Where's Ash? WHERE THE HECK IS ASH!" But as the film went on we caught it...Ash has three letters in his name, Mia has 3 letters in her name...MIA IS ASH! And for me...it all worked. Once that hit me, the re-imagining with nods to the past, I sat back and let the references come. This is what I think will split the true fans...they'll either enjoy it for the clever, sometimes subtle sometimes not so subtle nods to the past, or they'll hate it for "shitting on the original" Whenever a film has such a passionate group of people behind it, someone is gonna get upset. I just really hope fans can and will enjoy it for what it is...don't try to make it into the new Evil Dead because it's not and nothing ever can be, but there's no reason why we can't all just sit around a burning cabin chanting the incantations of The Book of the Dead TOGETHER!

What I liked most about this new take was there was actually a plot line. The group taking Mia to the cabin to help her quit drugs is not only justification for them being there, but also ads a bit of psychological creepiness to it...the friends first think she's just hallucinating, it's gets worse blah, blah...but yes. I liked that part. BUT WHERE WAS BRUCE CAMPBELL? #LOLZ #ForeverBadass

Horror soundtracks are sometimes difficult because of drawn out pauses for effect and the screechy scratchy can get annoying and not particularly enjoyable to listen to, but Evil Dead composer Roque Baños did a fantastic job.
Crazy scary, fitting, and unique. Check out this track that accompanied the final scene. Sirens, Chanting, Piano it has it all.

  

Final Thoughts

1. Did I like it? -Honestly I have to say YES. It's gross. Horribly gross, but so was the original. And I'm sooo happy it's not just a remake with the exact same characters and plot line...it actually HAS a plot line now. I wasn't too thrilled with the ending...I won't tell you what happens but the end end did bring it down a couple notches...no sunshine...NO.
  -Also, MAKE-UP. They used REAL MAKE-UP, fluids, and PROSTHETICS. This is one of the reasons I think my expectations were surpassed. I truly thought majority of mutilations in the film would be done with CGI (it must die) BUT for the most part, it was REAL...well real make-up. LIKE THE ORIGINAL. I think I'll cry from happiness.

2. Would I recommend it? -Uhh...unless you are a fan of the original or ultra gore-horror I have to say no. For the average movie goer who wants a good ol' horror movie for a couple jumps and scares this is not the movie for you. It's just too much (as with the original) tree rape, blood vomit-in-mouth, razor blade tongue-cut, chainsaw motherf*cker dismemberment...I mean Thomas and I were laughing, and cheering but for the average person...No, I can not knowingly suggest this to my friends who are not gore-enthusiast.

  While it has it's fair share of scares, Evil Dead is without a doubt a gross out horror film. Created to scare it's viewers through blood, guts, and severed limbs. You'll be watching through your hands, but that's because of the mutilated bits of flesh and body parts flying across the screen...not from genuine suspense and scares...The Conjuring on the other hand proved to have all these kinds of scares and more!

The Conjuring

Directed by: James Wan

Released: 2013

Staring: Vera Farmiga, Patrick Wilson, Lili Taylor, Ron Livingston, Joey King & children ensamble.

Rated: R

  It's been quite a while since I actually went to the theater to see a horror movie; the last one I remeber was 1408 with my sister back in 2007! Besides mockumentary superstar Paranormal Activity, my generation is not one to flock to the theater in great throngs to catch the newest horror flick; however, smart and classic, The Conjuring might be just the film to change all of that.

  With it's trending on twitter almost every night since it's release on the 19th, The Conjuring is an undeniable hit with a sequel soon to come.
The Conjuring is laden with suspense and eye covering, jump out of your seat moments.

  The 70's and 80's were cinema's golden years as far as horror films go. They were everywhere and they were good. The Exorcist, The Shining, The Omen, Poltergeist, these are good old fashion horror films that terrified audiences and for good reason. They're not hokey (well the Exorcist might be now but back then it was horrifying) and they play on a level of psychological horror as much as physical.

I quite enjoyed Vera Farmiga as Lorraine Warren
The Conjuring (2013)

   Just as Evil Dead has has it's own (multiple) sub-genres, {Gore, Zombie, Devil/Demonic Possession ect.} The Conjuring is primarily a haunted house film. The Hunted House movie has to be one of my favorite sub-genres of horror. The Conjuring sticks to the atmosphere of the classics without becoming old and tiresome. A familiar story is refreshed by clever camera angles & tricks, and unexpected scares.

  The Conjuring tells the story of demonologist, ghost hunters, and married couple Ed and Lorraine Warren as they attempt to shed the Perron family of the ghosts who inhabit their home and torment their children.

So I when I wasn't cowering in my seat, I was admiring Patrick Wilson...He's kind of a fox...and as I whispered to Sarah "Him...nice butt"
Patrick Wilson (NOT Will Arnett) in The Conjuring (2013)

 While it starts a bit slow, The Conjuring develops into an epic of  engaging and spine tingling suspense.  The scares, as in any horror/ haunted house film start slowly, quietly and innocently then escalate to a scream inducing collage created by a creepy score, even creepier back story, and prime ghost effects.
  The special effects weren't over done or ridiculous, and when a certain character was possessed I was again thrilled that the scary visage appeared to be created by make-up and prosthetics...maybe Hollywood has been reading my blog!
 
  As I said before a great horror film isn't just in it's scary images and gross out moments, it's in the atmosphere; the feeling, and The Conjuring consistently carries that feeling of apprehension and dread. You really don't want to know where the clapping is coming from, you don't want to see what's reflected in the mirror, you don't want them to go in the basement, but at the same time you NEED to! THAT is exactly the uneasy feeling a horror film should generate for it's viewers. That is exactly what The Conjuring brings to the table in old school fashion. According to interviews directed James Wan stated that he modeled the "cinematography and atmosphere after vintage 1970's horror films" This was very evident in the title sequence...color, font, scrolling and all.

How can a font and color be so scary?

  For me one of the most horrifying parts of the film was something so small yet had a huge impact in the creating of an atmosphere full of terror and panic. Near the climax of the film, there is a scene where Ed Warren & Roger Perron are attempting the rescue Roger's wife Carolyn from the locked home after discovering it's her the demon spirit is after. The camera is situated behind the two men as they attempt to break open the front door and once the door is finally flung open there is this unholy sound that rushes out of the house and seemingly into the audience. It's simply part of the score, nothing the characters react to as the camera flies above, but as they charge into the house a blare of deep horns, and voices, engulf the audience as if all the tortured souls of that house are bleeding through the speakers.
...is that too dramatic of description? Well it had me sinking about 6 inches lower into my seat. I felt like my soul and just dropped into the pits of hell...at first I didn't even know if it was in the movie because it was sometime I had never experienced before in a film. Such perfect blending of camera work and musical score...utterly terrifying.
   Music by Joseph Bishara

We are NEVER playing the clap game.
Lili Taylor in The Conjuring (2013)

"Based on a True Story" as always is fabricated for film, but after some research it's been discover the house in which the Perron family lived did have quite the history. As far as the questioned credibility of the Warren's...They worked deeply in the Amityville Horror case which is alluded to in the end of the film and therefore a possibility for the sequel...to say their work was or wasn't real would force one to admit whether one does or does not believe in the supernatural, demons ect. Either way they were a  fascinating couple; both in real life and on screen.

  The Conjuring is not without it's flaws. Like I said, the first 20 minutes are a bit slow but pick up quickly. The recurring instance concerning the Annabelle doll was unnecessary. It was perfect for an opening and character introduction but not needed after that. I felt the same away when the Warren's daughter kept getting brought up. It seemed like something that was thrown into the script as an after thought and doesn't really do anything for the film except remind the audience that the Warren's have a daughter too...other than these minor flaws this was, without a doubt, the best horror movie I've seen in a very, very, long time.

Ok I could have gone without literally a ghost in sheets but I see what you were going for.
The Conjuring (2013)

Final Thoughts

1. Did I like it?
     -Yes. Yes. Yes. I am particularly particular about my horror movies and The Conjuring took the haunting and suspenseful vibe of the classics of the 70's & 80's and modernized it.

2. See it in Theaters or wait for DVD?
     -I say see it in THEATERS for sure! When was the last time you went to a horror film in theaters? I hadn't since 2007 and I had forgotten how fun it can be! That sound ridiculous, but when you watch a horror film with such a large group of people you have the chance to see how differently every reacts to  films like this. Some scream, some jump, some talk nervously throughout the who film, and other's just cover their faces completely. It was filmed in scope and really utilizes surround sound. Even though some may pass it off as "just a horror movie" I really think this is one to see NOW and in theaters!

Drive & Valhalla Rising

A Nicholas Winding Refns Double Feature

Drive

Released: 2011

Staring: Ryan Gosling, Carrey Mulligan, Bryan Cranston, Albert Brooks, Oscar Isaac, Ron Perlman & Christina Hendricks 

Rated: R

Times Viewed: 2
Available on Netflix Instant Streaming

   I feel like many young (women) people have this pre conceived notion about Ryan Gosling. They think he, like his sweater, is perfect boyfriend material.  Soft and sensitive. Strong and hot to trot. Just a funny, good looking guy. They know The Notebook and they know Crazy Stupid love...they know Ryan Gosling's abs. A lot of people think Ryan Gosling is just a Rom-Com leading man...I like to think that I know better. I know that HE is better than that. Truth be told, Ryan Gosling is a helluva lot darker than the uninformed public knows. There is a quiet brutality and insanity in him that echoes throughout many of his lesser known and more violent films. 

  If one was to look at his profile on IMDB one would see that the only real "Rom-Coms" that he's been in are The Notebook and Crazy Stupid love. I like to think of these films as the skeleton that holds Ryan Gosling acting career together, but the real flesh and blood of his work are films like Blue Valentine, The Ides of March and one of the films I'll be reviewing today, Drive. 

Drive is an expertly crafted homage to the 80's filled with impeccable performances, blood & tears violence, and shot with great style.  Refns' modern action masterpiece.

 Ryan Gosling plays a part time stunt driver part time get away car for hire who, after becoming invested in the lives of his pretty neighbor and her young son, finds himself in deep with the wrong tank of sharks. 

  Everything in this film works. From the color scheme to the FANTASTIC soundtrack, Drive is the complete package in first rate film making. There is a deception in the first half of the film. Like Ryan Gosling's character (who is never given a name...billed as "Driver" in the end credits) it's a quiet film. But quiet does not by any stretch of the word mean boring. When I say it's quiet I mean there's action, but it's a subdued action, not thrown in the audience's face from the opening frame. This is prepping the audience for the ultra blood and guts violence that's to come later.

  Refns couples actions with suspense and character intent. There are no unnecessary, loud and brash conversations as there are in many action films. The script is clean and concise; it's a story of human experiences. There are no over blown conspiracy theories, unwarranted explosions, or ridiculous plot lines. Everything that happens in the film could have been taken from an unpublished memoir of a Driver living in Los Angeles. It's (the script's/story) simplicity allows the actors to really shine and when it is time for the action to erupt boy does it taste good. 

  Gosling is FANTASTIC. As I said before his character is quiet, but you KNOW that inside his head gears are turning; he's planning, thinking, and calculating. This stubble nature makes the performance all the more brilliant when he really hits the gas and starts hunting down the scum that threaten Carrey Mulligan and her son. Calm and collected he walks into a strip bar and beats the brains (quite literally) out of a man. Only until he pulls back and the camera focuses on his shaking hand do we see an once of humanity it his action. Truly it's breathtaking. The last 30-45 minutes of Drive is a violent roller coaster ride. Those who've had some difficulty with the "quietness" of the first half should stay put because the car chases and beatings taken in the second more than make up for the first half.
        (I personally loved all of the film, but I know a few people who didn't enjoy the first half as much)

A blood bathed Ryan Gosling in "Drive"

  If Bryan Cranston is as good in Breaking Bad as he is in Drive perhaps I should start watching the series. He's just so damn amazing. 

Ryan Gosling & Bryan Cranston in "Drive"

  Finally we need to talk about Albert Brooks. Describing someone like Albert Brook's character is difficult, but him being a relatively unknown actor to many in my generation worked for him. He comes out of no where and knocks it out of the park. He plays it like a snake slither through the grass, cool and collected until he strikes at the end...leaving more than one dead body in his wake. Brooks received a Golden Globes nomination for the role.  

Now I need to talk about the whole reason I'm here. Director Nicholas Winding Refns, a native of Denmark, is a relatively new Director but boy does he know his stuff. He knows what STYLE means, especially when it's applied to film. Drive is a film of complimentary High Key day shots and Low Key night shots where the shadows take charge and the main lighting sources are the stop lights ahead. This effect is gorgeous and really enhances the 80's feel the whole film has.
The soundtrack is definitely one of the best parts of the film. The 80's synth and heart-beat like bass that accompanies the dark, midnight drives through the streets of L.A. build suspense when the violence has been suspended for a while. Even if you don't watch the movie, I highly recommend the soundtrack.

Drive is one of my personal favorite modern films. 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

Valhalla Rising

Released: 2009

Staring: Mads Mikkelsen, Gary Lewis, & lots of other unknown scruffy actors 

Rated: R
Times Viewed: 1
Available on Netflix Instant Streaming

One review called it a "masterpiece" another called it "unbearably self-important." Via Netflix, one viewer compared it to drinking their own urine. "Stylish Brutality" is another apt description of Refns productions. So what's my verdict on this visceral, religious and physical piece from Nicholas Winding Refns? 

  Valhalla Rising is without a doubt a visual journey that is either a close hit or a far flung miss for most of it's viewers. It takes patience, an open mind and a bit of imagination to interpret this enigmatic film.

The film follows the journey of an enslaved warrior who kills his captors and travels with a young boy and a group of Viking Christians to Jerusalem. Only they never arrive in Jerusalem. Lost at sea, they soon discover it is not holy ground they've landed upon, but a new world as unforgiving as Hell itself.

The Film is broken into 6 Parts

Wraith 

Silent Warrior

Men of God

The Holy Land

Hell

The Sacrifice

  I'll just put it out there right now and say this is not a movie most ladies will enjoy. It's medieval brutality and ambiguous story are not  for the faint of heart.  And for those of you watching just so you can see Mads Mikk's awesome body. GET OUT. Yes it is definitely an enjoyable feature, but if you watch a film just for the body...I'll run after you fillet you. I believe I made it very clear in my review of the Hannibal series that I too possess a strange attraction to the Dane prince, but the majority of that attraction is to his talent.

  Mikkelsen is superb in this film. His performance only garners more praise because his character was a  MUTE. Yes that's right. He doesn't say a single word through out the whole film, but oh my stars is his performance incredible. OH! And he only has one eye. So now he's lost two of the key essentials that actors use in delivering a performance and still kills it. Mikkelsen uses his physicality to act as his voice, simply turning one way, or lowering a shoulder that way he concisely communicates the character's state of mind and stance. His presence speaks for itself.  

  The first 15 minutes of the film as I wrote before are stylistically brutal. Lot's of bare handed medieval mud fights where One-Eye literally beats an opponents skull open with a rock. As in Drive, when it finally comes time to show the violence, Refns doesn't hold back on the blood or gore. Honestly I love this. I think it adds emphasis but because each beating (both in Drive & Valhalla Rising) are relatively short scenes and not the entire film, he (Refns) can get away with it without being vulgar.  

  A recurring plot subject in Valhalla Rising is trust and devotion to God. After procuring One-Eye and the young boy, the Christians set out for Jerusalem. At first they believe the mighty warrior will bring them good luck, but when a mist sets in and the ship is lost at sea for an uncountable number of days, the men now see One-Eye as the devil. A bad omen delivering them all to the gates of Hell. 

           They end up on the coast of North America so close enough. 

  Through out the film One-Eye has, what I interpreted as, visions of the future.  The film will cut from a close up of one One-Eyes face in normal print and color to a close up of the injured side of his face filmed in black and red. After this the film cuts again to whatever bit of the future he may be seeing (all done in black and red coloring) An arrow head, where the ocean turns into a river, the native americans, and ultimately his own death. The first time it happened I had no idea what it was but each scene that he sees in red occurs later in the film i.e. seeing into the future.

  After landing on shore and loosing several of their ship mates, the Christian Vikings being to loose faith in their religious leader. They soon turn to One-Eye for guidance and follow him as their leader despite the boy telling them they're all going to die eventually. Valhalla Rising is packed with Religious symbolism near the end. Once the leader of the vikings dies, the events and style of Refns' directing clearly show One-Eye meant to represent some God or Jesus like leader who eventually sacrifices himself  to save the young boy. Valhalla itself is a heaven like structure in Norse mythology.     

"Valhalla Rising" was filmed entirely in Scotland and boast some gorgeous cinematography. 

Gary Lewis finds the light in "Valhalla Rising"

My favorite shot from "Valhalla Rising" AMAZING color spectrum.

 
  While it took some patience to watch, Valhalla Rising is a BEAUTIFULLY shot film with great cinematography, prime beating fight scenes, lots of thought provoking symbolism and an unforgettable, silent performance by Mads Mikkelsen. Final verdict, it was an intense movie going experience although I won't recommend it to everyone.