It's almost like, Hollywood intentionally buries certain films through lackluster advertising. Maybe I missed the advertising. But it still doesn't explain how majority of people never mention this movie when discussing movies like LOTR or movies set in medieval times. This movie is not only well acted, but the action, set design and the plot is really well done. The only problem I had was with the CGI. Then again, for a 2009 flick with a budget of just $40 million, CGI is passable.An entertaining movie, ignored by so called "critics" and pretty much forgotten by audience. A real shame.

story is good with certain missing links. Too much is tried to show in short duration. Actors are good but it failed to make impression on me so that i could talk about the movie with my friends. Story is about the fight between the devil and humans. Direction was good but needs improvement in casting. Lead actor does not have enough physique to show case as the savior but leading lady is beautiful enough to attract the leading male. The scene where Solomon kane changed his attitude from 'man of peace' to old himself, ---- dialogues, acting, direction and screenplay needs vast improvement. The scene was very critical but it was taken as B-grade movie. The best scene of the movie is the opening scene. Similar scene is needed at the climax also but failed to do so.

Being an idiotic teenager, I am easily pleased by the good ol' ridiculous violence and overwhelming amounts of fake blood when it comes to films — or even games. As expected, this film is filled to the bloody core with it, and as it is well choreographed, visually impressive and with bloody amounts of blood, it's great, as bloody action goes.Nonetheless, it's by far the best thing the film has to offer. A slightly cheesy script, some hammy performances and a definitely- not-influenced-by-The-Lord-of-the-Rings plot mean Solomon Kane's not exactly a work of genius. However, I happened to like the 1600's west country setting, which is fittingly gloomy and pays homage to the cider drinking farmers' land — even though Axemouth Castle unfortunately does not exist. I forgive 'em for that though, because I don't really care about that nitty gritty stuff; especially considering all the great villain designs.The cheesiness is a bit of a problem though, and a lot of the performances are indeed hammy, as the film also doesn't try that much that's new. Even if there is some great action in a good setting Solomon Kane has its fair share of flaws and isn't one for the ages. For a teenage boy like me it is enjoyable for what it is, but, I think I've made my point.66/100.

Wow,James Purefoy nailed it. I feel obliged to write a review here as this movie seems to be overlooked at every turn,which just seems wrong. After consuming all of Howard's Conan stories I searched for more and that is where I found Solomon Kane.i never expected to see his exploits on screen,yet here we are,with a magnificent James Purefoy in the role. People have mentioned how much he resembled Hugh Jackman in Van Helsing,but sorry folks,Solomon was here first and this flick does him the honor he deserves.The movie is beautiful,scenes of forests and snowy fields are gorgeous,doesn't look cheap for a second.The costumes, sets and makeup are great,yes,I could have done without the CGI near the end,but the rest of the flick delivers in spades. Purefoy just gets the part,it was page brought to life like few others I have seen,he is electrifying as Solomon,the West Country accent,the Puritanism,the badassery...all of it. When he 'becomes' Solomon? Boy.... It's amazing. Well done to all involved,I love the movie,you did Howard proud.