Outlander, the Vikings vs. alien monster epic, finally had its big premiere in Switzerland last week, and the big media outlets were there. Unfortunately, the Viking epic generated a lot of negative reviews, accusing it of being "too slow" and badly acted. And the more bad reports we hear about our Viking pals, the less likely the chances are for Outlander to get an American theatrical release. Click through for review details, plus a new clip of space-man Jim Caviezel and angry viking leader Jack Huston. Variety's Derek Elley says Outlander's, "screenplay hardly makes a convincing case for being set in the Viking Age rather than any other period," and that, "Hardcore genre fans will turn out, but word of mouth is likely to be pic's biggest enemy." French film site Cinema also called the film slow and is bored by the monster hunt. Besides the slow moving plot Cinema also accuses Outlander of having an easy guess plot and that, The love story is obvious... and the actors' dialogues are filled with testosterone." Critics also said the film only picks up in the second half, when we finally see more of the monster. The only one who had a positive thing to say about Outlander was The Hollywood Reporter, which called it, "entertaining nonsense." These negative reviews hurt my heart. How could they mess this up? It's Vikings versus an alien, just let it happen! Or maybe people actually went to this movie to see something other than vikings fighting an alien? I know that I won't be going looking for the love story from Pride and Prejudice, but there had better be a whole lot of horned-helmeted Viking bluster, and alien gnashing of fangs. [Outlander]
Chip Skylark of Space
With that Michael Crichton time travel flick and this going down in flames, I guess I've see the film version of THREE HEARTS AND THREE LIONS now, eh? Too bad. That would have been Rollicking Good Fun, as the critics would have put it.