I liked this film. It was a solid 7 until the end. I'll get to that in a moment. As others have mentioned, the landscape is gorgeous, the CGI is better than average, and the acting was nowhere near as bad as the Nords think it is. It's a good popcorn movie. I especially liked the Soviet link. Where the story lost its imagination was first, the guide (who ended up a stock character) and second, the ending, where I saw very little Ragnarok and far too much Jurassic Park III. I almost subtracted another vote for calling the thief Allan, but I'm feeling generous (if you don't understand why, go watch Jurassic Park III). Regrettably, novelty and originality is often hard to find. Oh, well. I'd watch it again, though.
Add a Review
-
keith-77422 April 2015
-
niutta-enrico11 May 2014It's always interesting to watch non-English movies. Those overtly original and peculiar to their own roots and culture are undoubtedly instructive and they made Cinema history. Among foreign films, however, I prefer to watch those made on Hollywood models, like the present one. They intrigue me the most.
Ragnarok is a very well written, acted, edited and directed Family Adventure movie. The overall result is not dissimilar from American films of the same genre: a nice film. Some differences, however, are noteworthy and at the first place stands the complete inversion of roles in the couple: in this film the girl is strong and the guy is pretty. He has beautiful hair, good manners and is sweet. She leads the group, takes all the risks, makes all the decisions and physically saves him. And this is probably where he falls in love with her.
I don't want to speculate about how this could reflect different points of view of different societies (about which I know nothing). Everything happens in the most natural way and it is so nice to watch. I guess that many girls will like it.
It should also be noticed that the musical score is Cymbal-free and that characters motives are more simple and realistic than in most American films. But these, of course, are details. -
markwiseman5-988-1032074 November 2015I had been wanting to watch this movie for a couple of months, but I could not find a version that had been dubbed in English - until now. This is a Norwegian film, so you'll need to find it with sub-titles or a version already dubbed in English. The quality of the audio dubbing was not all that great, but it worked. It was a lot better than having to read sub-titles or watch it in Norwegian.
A down-on-his-luck archaeologist is having problems with his job/research into Viking mythology. He's a widower and a single father of 2 children. After losing funding for his work due to lack of progress, his friend shows up from the northern coast of Norway with an ancient rune-stone, which launches them all into their next adventure.
Nothing here is too exceptional, scary, or gory. It's a decent movie for the whole family - and I'm not generally "into" family movies. So, I was surprised that I liked it so well. Honestly, I was expecting a little bit more from the "monster," but it wasn't completely cheesy either.
Overall, the plot was pretty predictable. I think I enjoyed it so much because there were believable characters and good acting - especially from the child actors. I find many child actors tend to make or break a movie like this, and these kids can hold their own. The main character was also a good actor. None of the acting was completely bad, which is why I think the whole thing worked. For being a lower-budget production, this movie holds up very well. It's a bit of a slow start, but once it gets going it steadily builds tension and held my interest right up to the ending. -
rstef129 December 2014I approached this movie with caution after reading a couple of the reviews here, and was pleasantly surprised. It is not a super violent or scary film - it is rated PG-13 after all - but it does have its fair share of tension and holds your interest throughout.
The plot has been given in another review so I'll just give some highlights: The scenery is gorgeous and beautifully photographed. Norway and Finnmark have some breathtaking vistas and the cinematographer captures it all. It's a pleasure to watch a movie where a filmmaker will carefully compose a shot, use a tripod and deliver the cinematic awe one hopes for in a film as opposed to the innumerable, annoying shaky cam films we've been enduring for the last decade by second rate filmmakers.
The CGI is top notch. The serpent actually feels solid and 3 dimensional in its interaction with the environment and actors. Compare this to the crap churned out by The Asylum and found in any SyFy original movie where the creatures look like cartoons badly superimposed on the film.
The script is well thought out. Characters speak and behave in a way that you can recognize. They have real interactions that ring true; these people feel real. Again, compare this with the junk that passes for plot and characterization in many recent SyFy films which present cartoonish, cardboard cutout characters who just pose for the camera and get killed, usually while uttering pointless inanities. In Ragnarok, I actually cared about what was happening to the characters.
And to adrianmurray45 who called the acting here bad - my friend, you need to watch a LOT more films. The acting here, apart from some sketchy moments with the young boy, was fine. You want bad acting? Check out any Uwe Boll film (yeah, I went there) and then get back to me, 'kay? You do not understand what bad acting is.
It's not a great film, but a solidly entertaining PG-13 adventure. -
younngl7 January 2015I absolutely love Scandinavian cinema, and really this was a fun and entertaining film. Like everybody else said it is a family film, but I don't feel that it is something just directed at kids, either.
That being said the most glaring issue I had was no real substantial resolution at the end. They build this entire mythos, based on Norse mythology, and surrounding this monster. However, once we get to the final battle the monster stares the protagonist down and then slithers away.
Norse mythology is a fantastic jumping off point and is relatively neglected compared to Greek mythology. I really just wish the ending was more satisfying than it turned out to be. Still a decent movie to watch, and appears to take a more Hollywood approach in terms of style. -
No problem to watch this one with kids. I does contain a big monster that hunts and kills people but you won't see anything of that on screen. The killing rate is very low too. It is good for what it is, an adventure movie with an old Norwegian mythology as starting point. I for one had hoped it would contain some more fantasy elements but that wasn't the case. There is some excitement at times but nothing really frightening. The events and the characters' actions are pretty cliché and predictable with also an easy solution and happy end. So yes the story was maybe a bit too simple and the characters one dimensional for my tastes, but at least it has some really beautiful nature shots.
-
Overall, I found "Gåten Ragnarok " to be a decent family oriented adventure movie. Considering this category normally contains stock characters, simple story lines, and cliché plot twists, this movie still managed to entertain. I'd recommend it to any kid who doesn't mind subtitles.
Where this movie rated better than average was its production location and Norwegian atmosphere. If you've ever seen a Canadian produced movie for the SyFy Channel, you could say this was the similar, but much better. Here, the budget CGI is used sparingly and to effect and the actors are good enough to carry the story without the special effects department taking over the show. Moreover, the location and the wet and dark Norwegian atmosphere is a welcome change to the Hollywood style we've grown so accustomed too. I felt like I was in "no man's land" near the arctic circle and I've actually lived in Alaska!
*** The following is not a spoiler because it's the beginning of the movie, but stop if you need to. ***
It wasn't all great, though. Like a previous reviewer, I found there were definitely plot devices that I found absurd, cliché and unnecessary. What bothered me most was the beginning. Our protagonist, Sigurd, has recently translated a previously undiscovered "rune" from the famous Oseberg Viking vessel. He believes these "writings" point to unknown knowledge or treasure somewhere in Finnmark near the border of Russia. What is formulaic and annoying is that instead of being congratulated on his discovery, his patrons immediately call it fantasy and withdraw all his funding. Of course this leaves us with the stereotypical hero on his own cliché, but what was the point? The lack of curiosity of these people who use their money to fund archeology was so implausible as to be stupefying; so my suspension of disbelief became simply disbelief. Fortunately, once the adventure began, we are quickly drawn into the mystery, which is what a good adventure should do.
So regardless of that hapless introduction to our character, the travel up North, the meeting of the guide, and the trek through the woods kept my attention. I enjoyed the location and its historical background as the border with Russia. The scenery was splendid and the rusted cold war machinery really added to the ambiance.
What dragged a little in the last parts were the clumsy way at which the necessary formulaic events unfolded. I say necessary, because this is a formula movie, but they only fail when you start to see and predict the formula. So the last third of the movie played a little into what we knew was going to happen, you just don't know to whom.
So like a previous reviewer, I'll list some of the family adventure movies I liked and didn't so you'll know where this one stands for me. Indiana Jones was fun and the formula was played perfectly. Jurassic Park, which still had annoying "naysayer characters", was still a solid adventure. Movies like "National Treasure" and "The Mummy" were a bit cluttered with fast editing, unbelievable plot devices, and and overindulgence in CGI over acting which becomes boring. I'd say this one falls in the middle. Not as CGI rich as Brendan Fraser's "Journey to the Center of the Earth", but more down to earth than that blockbuster.
Decent for me is a 6-7 on the IMDb scale. Entertaining enough with a nice Norwegian take, but not thought provoking or without clumsy plot devices to move us forward. -
Kirpianuscus27 April 2019Adventure, mythology, family life, old spirit of childhood. A beautiful film. Not good, great, ot unpredictable. But the right choice for young public and for their parents for nice memories. A map becoming warning. Idealism and not the perfect father. The truth and the confrontation against it and the end. So, real nice. But not for high expectations.
-
Leofwine_draca30 August 2017RAGNAROK: THE VIKING APOCALYPSE is a Norwegian monster movie that's nothing like TROLL HUNTER, worse luck. Instead, it feels like a movie made up of bits copied from THE RELIC, JURASSIC PARK 3, and OUTLANDER, as a bunch of archaeologists are menaced by an age-old slimy creature that has designs on the lot of them. This film benefits from some okay performances from familiar TV actors, not bad effects, and decent locations. However, it's also completely predictable and has a really hackneyed feel to it, with an air of familiarity throughout robbing it of impact and suspense. I also find the ending a bit limp; the PG-13 rating hurts this one, as a proper adult monster flick would have been more frightening.
-
claudio_carvalho22 June 2014In Norway, the archaeologist Sigurd Svendsen (Pål Sverre Hagen) is obsessed with the mythology about Ragnarok that he had researched with his deceased wife that died of cancer. Sigurd raises his children Ragnhild (Maria Annette Tanderød Berglyd) and Brage (Julian Podolski) alone and expects to receive a donation for the museum where he works to proceed with his research with runes that had been found in the Oseberg ship but the contributors refuse to donate money for his work.
Sigurd meets his colleague Allan (Nicolai Cleve Broch), who also research the myth about Ragnarok, and they decide to go on an expedition with the also archaeologist Elisabeth (Sofia Helin) and Ragnhild and Brage that are on vacation. Allan hires the guide Leif (Bjørn Sundquist) and they travel to a no man land in the border of Norway and Russia. They cross a lake in a wooden raft and they find some relics in a cave but they are stolen and left behind by Leif. Elizabeth spends the night with the children in a container but Sigurd and Allan continue to explore the cave. Soon they discover that the real meaning of the runes is a warning about the danger in the location where they are.
"Gåten Ragnarok" is a Norwegian B-movie with a story similar to "Anaconda" with an ancient serpent in a lake. This predictable movie is an entertaining matinée for the family in a Saturday afternoon and has wonderful cinematography and locations. My vote is six.
Title (Brazil): "Ragnarok" -
hemipristis28 September 2019Interesting premise that falls short. It starts out well enough, but then falls prey to familiar cinematic tropes: Betrayed by the close companion, corrupt hired hand, lead characters fall in love, core characters happy in the end. Yawn.
I was never quite sure if this was intended to be an action-adventuure or horror flick, though perhaps that is due to the language barrier, the film being Norwegian.
The oh-so-predictable plot seems so familiar because it is. It borrows from several better (some only slightly) films: Jurassic Park I and III, and National Treasure
Positives: beautiful scenery, fine camera work, convincing actors, nd attractive male leads
Negatives: predictable and familiar plot, archetype characters, predictable character fate, -
smedleybill10 August 2019I love this movie. It's a movie that doesn't need excess violence, cursing and tons of cgi to tell an effective and gripping story. I also appreciate the wholesome aspect of the story telling. It's nice watching a movie that when it's over it doesn't leave one feeling emotionally dampened. I was invested in the excellent actors and not only cared about them but the movie made me wish I could know folks like them in real life. I just wish there were more movies like this that didn't just strive for the most base common denominator.
-
OJT4 October 2013Coming from a premiere screening of the Norwegian family adventure film "Gåten Ragnarok" I'd have to say I expected more. This is not a big genre in Europe, being a mix between a realistically told Indiana Jones and National Treasure and a tad of Jurassic Park. It's got appraisals from the first festivals it's been showed in Canada and USA, but that might have made my expectation too high.
We meet a couple of archaeologists which do an exciting find just when the scientist's funding are cut down. The find is a stone with old runes, which is old Nordic letter-writings carved in stones and wood. The find is supposed to be lead out of the mysterious find of the Oseberg viking ship, which is a real and factual unique find of a viking ship used as burial ground for two women made at Oseberg in the South of Norway.
The story is of course just adventure, and no answer to the riddle of who these women where, though one of the probably were a viking queen, and the other probably her slave. Still the archaeologist are both looking for a treasure and for more viking finds up in Finnmark in northern Norway.
The film starts up quite good, though the two kids slowly ruins the film for me with a bit to unprofessional play, but for a young audience (this film is rated 11 years in Norway), this will have good entertainment value. The audience in the theater thought so, I understand. Still there where too many plot holes for me, and I also found the story dragged a little too much for my taste. But then again this is not my genre of film if it's not kept more funny or realistically told.
I liked "Troll hunter" because of the great CGI and the humor, and I liked the action in Indiana Jones and "Jurassic Park", though I found "National treasure" to be boring, and "The Mummy" awful. This falls short of the best, but far better than the two worst. But good family entertainment, though too scary for the youngest if they don't have hands to hold. -
Lammasuswatch12 December 2019I've just sat through 100 minutes of time I'll never get back.
The film is about the Norse legend of Ragnarok - basically the destruction of humanity. And if this film is giving clues as to how that's going to come about, it's obviously through collective stupidity.
I have never seen a film before in which every character in the film makes absolutely stupid critical decisions at exactly the wrong time in response to dangerous situations. It is seriously surprising that any of the major characters had earlier survived the intellectual and practical exercise of crossing a road safely long enough to feature in this story, but there you go. You have to find dinosaur fodder somewhere.
Obviously, this is the result of rather appalling scriptwriting and bad direction. Characterisation is so bad you never really care about any of them. The males are invariably predictable bad eggs, or pretty incompetent nitwits (especially the lead who is as incompetent and irresponsible as a father, and as hopeless as a person could be in ever hoping to hold down a job as an archaeologist for any length of time. And the females have been written as vaguely feminist heroes - the action people when the males don't measure up. But those same females are also as prone to silly decision making at decisive moments that is just in no way convincing.
I'm giving this movie two stars because it definitely is a curiosity, and not for any quality but for the lack of it.
Four characters do survive, but for the future of humanity and the avoidance of a real Ragnarok they should never be allowed to reproduce! -
brucepsquirrel26 December 2014I enjoyed the film. It was solid. It is one of those films where you don't see the full monster until the end but it in this case it did not bother me. The build up and the characterization was good. The prop work with the stones and runes were impressive. I think my only criticism would be the fact that the main character did not continue to document things when the adventure began ( at least a disposable camera would have been fine). He seemed to keep adequate journals and notes before the journey. The special effects were good. They did a good job in the "Bunker" scene when the serpent slithers out of the dark corridor. It really did look creepy. Good job with the adapting this Norse creature into a story!
-
This Scandinavian production fails to live up to its expectation. All the actors do commendable jobs and the cinematography is good, but it falls much short in providing the viewers with ample horror scenes and monster action that a scary monster movie is supposed to. With all that being said, the movie does have something to offer in terms of some tensed moments and the way in which it connects certain stories of Norse mythology with reality. The plot revolves around an archaeologist, his family and his co- worker. They go for a trip/adventure that becomes their nightmare as they encounter a giant monster with maternal instincts. However, the monster action in the movie is literally limited to few moments and the viewers don't even get a full view of the creature even once. The movie has some hint of resemblance with "Jurrasic Park" except for the fact that it is not even close to it in terms of the thrill or screenplay. It does manage to keep the audience fairly entertained but for a few dry patches. As an ardent fan of monster movies, I would say that it was kind of a letdown.
-
fedor830 January 2016Already the heroic-like Vikingy folksy music is not encouraging. Sounds like a cheesy power-metal album intro. It's the kind of music that announces a children's action movie, which this dull flick is to some extent.
Predictable from start to finish, a strictly formulaic movie.
The characters would all fail their IQ tests, coz none of them ever realize that the Kermit the Viking lizard is the reason Mother Monster is chasing the bunch in the first place. It gets dumber: the subject of Kermit-in-a-box is never brought up, but somehow the expedition leader turns out to know about it much later. Wouldn't the director have found it prudent to include a scene in which Sigbjorg is informed by the others that they're tagging along a baby monster? Wouldn't that be just a tad too important not to mention? A real little dinosaur dragon? But no, just as Sigfjord's stupid son didn't deem it necessary to report to his father that he found a huge round object which was obviously an egg. Nor was the young child supervised enough to not be on his own long enough to find something crucial and hide it away in his bag like the moron that he is. Clearly Sigbjork doesn't give a toss about his offspring, and frankly I can't blame him either. If anything, kids usually brag about the smallest thing they find, yet this kid kept his discovery a secret – just so the movie could have its stupid, predictable, cliché plot-device. As if we didn't know it's an egg. As if we couldn't figure out that it would hatch and wreck havoc.
The blond chick is very absurdly some kind of a vagabond action-woman, a sort of vapid, homeless version of Lara Croft and Batwoman. There are two young men in this adventure, and yet it's the blond hobo girly who saves the day on several occasions. Oh the feminists, they never rest on their non-laurels. Yes, we understand, Mr. and Mrs. Left-wing Filmmaker, women are just as physically competent as men – and that's probably why men and women compete separately in ALL sports, even in chess which isn't even a real sport. And why women play best-of-three sets in grand slam events – but ask for equal pay. So they must be mental equals to men also, right? If I could have a penny for every brilliant female scientist, I could buy a house – for an ant.
The stupidity of the expedition's members isn't insignificant. They fail to realize that the fat guide is a sleazy, suspicious character who very predictably screws them over and then even more predictably fails to escape but gets eaten by Kermit's maker. Then it takes them a whole half-hour of running away from the Findragon to realize that Kermit is the reason they are being pursued and that to appease the dragon all they need is to hand over the worm to it. -
adrianmurray4529 November 2014I usually like Norwegian films - I loved the Cold Prey series, Headhunters, Troll Hunter, etc, so I approached this with high expectation. What a disappointment! From start to finish, this film was badly scripted, badly acted (apart from Sofia Helin), predictable, and unintentionally hilarious. It's not a Viking movie, it's not a thriller, it's not a monster movie, it's not even a passable family drama, rather it's a tepid mish mash of all those genres, and fails in every aspect.
It's biggest sin, however, is that it is just unforgivably dull. Dire. 1/10 for Sofia Helin (Elisabeth). -
paul_haakonsen12 June 2018When I found "Gåten Ragnarok", I had not heard about it at all, nor did I know what it was about. I browsed through the synopsis and it did seem interesting enough. And the fact that this was a Norwegian move, then I wanted to see what this movie had to offer.
The story in this movie turned out to be rather good actually. It had action, it had drama, it had a supernatural element, and of course a hint of adventure as well. I must admit that I was genuinely entertained with this movie.
"Gåten Ragnarok" had some very interesting characters in the character gallery. And these characters were all nicely detailed and fleshed out on the screen, and that was helped along by the fact that they had some pretty good performers on the cast list.
What really blew me away here was the CGI special effects. They were quite impressive, and I had not expected that level of work in a movie such as this.
I was really impressed with "Gåten Ragnarok", and this is a Norwegian movie that you should sit down and watch, even if you are not able to understand the Norwegian language. -
ksj87019 December 2014There are certain things this Scandinavian production has going for it: the actors all do commendable jobs with what they are given; the wild scenery is beautiful; and there a few moments (not many, but a few) of very well orchestrated suspense. But none of that matters because "Ragnarok" simply isn't what its trailer leads one to believe it is, namely a scary monster movie. There is a monster, or at least a big creature which may have inspired certain stories from Norse mythology, but the monster action is decidedly limited and while there occasional moments of tension there are no real scares. I don't think the filmmakers had any real desire to make a scary picture, but rather an adventure story with a few ideas borrowed from American monster movies. The result is incredibly dry, boring, and unsatisfying, particularly the climax. If you're hoping for the kind of explosive grand finale "Jaws" gave us, forget it. Suffice it to say the creature from "Ragnarok" is only dangerous because our human explorers provoke its maternal instincts. As a longtime fan of both monster movies and Viking mythology, I really expected to like "Ragnarok." More's the pity.
-
I caught this movie by accident, and seeing it was set in Norway and acted in Norwegian I just couldn't help but watching it. As a huge Viking-age buff, and a minor in Scandinavian Studies, I was expecting a lot of familiar lore, as promised by the captivating opening.
Unfortunately it quickly devolved into a "just OK" family-adventure movie, with too much Jurassic Park and too little Edda.
I saw the final twists coming, but that wasn't so bad, as at least I have to give credit to the writer and director for those swerves being well done. Also the family drama subtext was handled in a rather subtle way, while a Hollywood movie would have turned it into the main story arc.
All in all, a decent pop-corn movie that should, and could, have been much deeper and rewarding.
I see how it may have been a case of misplaced expectations, kinda like watching "Troy" or "300" and hoping to find accurate references to the Homeric poems or to ancient history texts...
Gåten Ragnarok is a nice family movie, nothing more, but also nothing less. You won't likely watch it 10 times in the future, but you won't regret having spent time on it, unlike on plenty of other, more popular, expensive and promoted blockbusters. -
williamwilsongoodsonjr5 November 2017Good special effects and visual effects.fine acting. Boring predictable plot with a central flaw. A nest of monsters are supposed to have survived hundreds of years in what is the now Russia/Norway border. However it is clear there were military bases all around the lake and on the island they live in and on.
-
Watch this movie if you love a good story and want to be interested, thrilled and entertained.
I'll skip the critic jargon others posted and cut to the chase. All the characters are completely believable. The good guys are good. The bad guys get what they deserve. Lessons are learned the hard way and relationships are made. Refreshingly, the baddass is a she who is still sensitive and feminine.
Do not watch this movie if you are a self-aggrandizing amateur movie critic who confuses complexity with quality or a history buff who gets put off by the slightest inaccuracy. In fact, if you are either, don't bother watching any movies. And certainly do not review them here.
Although I saw this movie at home, my guess is the theater was full of gripped armrests, cheers and screams of "Look out!" (Or the Norwegian equivalent) during its screening.
To the critic who stated in his review that a board of directors would never scoff at an amazing discovery that flies in the face of what it accepts as fact, check your history. It has happened, happens today and will happen in the future. That is one of the lessons of the movie. It seems you didn't learn it.
The movie is definitely worth watching. (I'm a 41 year old man.) Young children will be frightened, so screen it first before letting them see it.
I'm rating it 10 to balance the dolts who gave it a 1. -
unbrokenmetal19 October 2019A team of archaelogists with 2 kids follows the trace of an ancient Viking treasure map to a small lake with not much treasure in it - rusty helmets and such - but a surprisingly large monster that chases them around.
Sympathetic little monster movie with realistic characters. The historic set-up with Vikings who battled the monster 1,000 years ago is something new. The variety of the area - cave, lake, bunker, forest - demands a variety of escape strategies, thus the chase always remains thrilling. The two kid actors are not annoying, which is always reason to worry when the cast includes little kids. Since the movie was designed to be watched by young teenagers, too, the bodycount is not as high as in many stupid monster movies you regretted watching. All in all, 'Ragnarok' is a surprisingly satisfactory, round, entertaining movie. -
gurumaggie2 November 2020It's a homage to Indiana Jones, like the children's film foundation used to produce many moons ago, it's perfect for kids, exciting in a non threatening way, low budget family friendly. It's an hour and a half of innocent jolly fun.