"The Viking" is a very old fashioned film, though at the time audiences must how been wowed since it was made using the Two-Strip Technicolor process. This created color...of a sort. These films tend to actually looks more green-orange because those are the two colors that are overlayed to create a sort of color look. However, while other studios were converting to sound, MGM chose to make this epic as a silent--which, along with the rest of the film, is pretty old fashioned in its view of Vikings.True Vikings did not wear the horned-helmets or hawk winged helmets you see throughout this movie. Their costumes also were far more practical than the silly outfits worn in "The Viking". What gives? Well, the costume designer actually was designing vikings according to how Wagnerian operas portrayed them. It was 100% wrong--but fit the image that Wagner was trying to create in his crazy operas. So, the film is sort of like a Wagner story without the music!As for the story, it's actually seemingly true in some ways. Eric the Red really did have a son named Leif who apparently was among the first white folks in North America. Interestingly, however, back in the 1920s. That's because the only 'proof' of this voyage were the Viking sagas--stories sung to celebrate the feats of the Vikings but have no real proof to them. This proof did not come until more recent years when Norwegian expeditions were able to find some artifacts in Canada that must have been brought by Vikings.So is the film any good? Well, the plot involving a captured slave who captures the heart of a Viking girl is pretty silly. The part about Ericsson and his voyage is a bit more exciting however, and makes up, a bit for the silly romance and dumb costumes.Overall I say you'd be much better off watching the 1958 film "The Vikings". It's more historically accurate, much more exciting and has just about everything you could want in such a film.

THE VIKING of 1928 still appears to be, in a way, a strikingly absorbing picture. Although it seems that any commitment to viewing this movie may be a privilege of some little group of film scholars, claiming that it leaves no impression whatsoever would surely belittle the significance of silent cinema along with its unique appeal. Obviously, it could not stand a chance against many modern 'pseudo-epic adventures' that heap us with cheap effects which, at moments, cross dangerous borderline placing us at risk of being deprived of imagination. With that in mind, its two strip Technicolor effects would merely appear laughable for some but, paradoxically, renewing for others. Yes, some of its awe-inspiring charm that initially contributed to its adventure merit, still remains.A misleading assumption lies in a viewpoint that solely two strip Technicolor (for which the movie is most famous) makes THE VIKING worth seeing. Of course, it is impossible to miss this point when even mentioning this movie. Nevertheless, what strikes me most about this film is its storytelling and the fact that it evokes the courage of the Vikings no less than their cruelty. Meanwhile, it does not fall into temptation of reducing them to sheer savages from a purely subjective standpoint of 'baddies.' So to say, such an early achievement becomes authentic and, at the same time, gains realistic targets. It is not only executed in the character of Leif Eriksson (Donald Crisp) who travels towards the new shores but, even, in Erik the Red (Anders Randolf), his father. The sophisticated nature of his character is prompted by contrast within him. On the one hand, his axe is used against his political and religious enemies, even his own son when he discovers his new faith. One the other hand, he draws a very humane conclusion in a memorable scene: 'Leif is my son after all.THE VIKING with no great stars of the time (being an MGM production), contains all the pictorial elements that we find in cinema of any decade. It substantially depicts love, revenge, fight. We have a Northumbria context of Alwin (LeRoy Mason), taken as a slave, we have a beautiful prototype of female warrior, Helga played by Pauline Starke (of course, a blonde beauty as it is a movie about the Vikings after all), we have kings of two opposing policies, we have this eternal conflict between Christian faith (represented by King Olaf of Norway and his followers, including Erik Leifsson) and pagan cults (represented by Erik the Red, Leif's father, the king of Greenland). Predictably, the Christians are depicted as loving, understanding and forgiving while the pagans are cruel. Yet, there is some nobility in both groups (again with reference to a more psychological approach). Their confrontation, however, is one of the most authentic moments of the theme ever found in silent cinema. Finally, we have the theme of new land, promised land, America (yes, long before Columbus) so much appealing to the audiences of the late 1920s.But the film is no serious stuff and it should never be treated like one. It is, first and foremost, adventure and entertainment. Just to recall some scenes that have truly stood a test of time and are no less entertaining than they must have been in the late 1920s, including the depiction of Greenland, Vikings' feasts (less savage than in 1958 Fleischer's film), love plot between Alwin and Helga, Egil/Alwin vibrant fight. On the subject of Helga, the beautiful warrior blonde, much credit to Pauline Starke's inspiring performance. The idea of such a female character was not new in this period of silent films. We should remember the lost film QUEEN OF SHEBA and the famous chariot race of the queen and princess Vashti. Nevertheless, Starke's portrayal must have occurred revelatory as early as in 1928 combining appeal and authenticity.I agree with the opinion of those viewers who praise this film and recommend others to seek it out. Perhaps, it is flawed historically; surely, it is no towering entertainment for viewers used to most dazzling spectacles of our decade. Nonetheless, I believe that anyone may find something for themselves in this early Technicolor treasure and find its reasonable running time fruitful and memorable.

THE VIKING is a film I happened to come upon on TCM the other night, immediately recognizing DONALD CRISP as Leif Ericsson. I was very impressed with the female lead, PAULINE STARKE as Helga, whose lovely face, high cheekbones and steady gaze withstood all those color closeups in fine style. She also happened to be well cast at the headstrong heroine who takes a wealthy nobleman for her slave.But what really amazed me is the quality of the Technicolor photography, at least ten years before Hollywood was making use of color photography in some of its major films.The TCM print featured some incidental sound effects and background music. At times, I forgot I was watching a silent film and the use of title cards was minimal.Well worth watching as a curiosity, but not for historical accuracy.

I attended a screening of THE VIKING last evening at the Silent Movie Theatre in Los Angeles, California. Yes, the 2-strip Technicolor is lovely, and I agree with one of the other reviewers here who stated that the muted colors serve to emphasize the film's setting in the distant past. However, if you're expecting any degree of historical authenticity, forget about it.Anyone who knows something about Viking history, including the figures of King Olaf of Norway, Leif Ericsson, and Eric the Red, will have to work hard to suspend disbelief. The story is preposterous, the costumes straight out of 19th-century productions of Wagner's RING cycle, and the synchronized soundtrack also depends heavily on Wagner's music for many of the film's themes. In this sense, the film is very much a product of 1928 and the way the Viking era was envisioned in the popular imagination and by film-makers of the time.The standout performer here is Pauline Starke as Helga, who with her flowing blonde hair, perfectly chiseled cheekbones and Nordic facial characteristics, is the living personification of Arthur Rackham's drawings of Brunnhilde and the other Valkyries. She of course is accompanied by Wagner's "Ride of the Valkyries" on the soundtrack every time she approaches a horse. Helga finds herself in a love quandary as the object of desire of not two but three men. Starke is a compelling performer, steely-eyed and fierce as nails, but also soft and ravishing.This is a film that I am hard-pressed to recommend, because I can't get past the absurdity of its story. Yet for those who can accept it on its own terms, it is indeed a lovely film, and even oddly fascinating in the sort of way that bad films can sometimes become cult classics.