Skip to main content

The Northman is a Visceral, Mythic Epic of Futile Vengeance


There’s a reason the old stories never die.
A boy, heir to the throne, is called to heroism in lieu of the death of his father at the hands of a traitorous uncle. Cast out of the kingdom he was once to rule, his mother made to wed the murderous villain, he must become a man before returning and righting the wrong done to his family honour. He must avenge his father, he must save his mother, and he must kill his uncle.
It is a story we’re all familiar with, likely in its’ most ubiquitous form: William Shakespeare’s Hamlet, arguably the most famous play in the western canon (others will probably identify the story most with The Lion King -to each their own). But Shakespeare, for all his brilliance, was of course not the originator. His source was Saxo Grammaticus’ record of the tale of Amleth, a Scandinavian legend that itself is likely not the first telling of this classic story of revenge and family honour. It is simply too primal, too universal, too raw -a story that has always existed and will always remain powerful.
But it’s this largely overlooked iteration, perhaps the most important given its’ direct descendant, that Robert Eggers chose to showcase in The Northman, his most expensive and ambitious movie yet: a viking epic of bloodshed, vengeance, and raw masculine rage. Through his particular interest in old systems of power and superstitions, and his unique skill for faithful period linguistics, the filmmaker behind The Witch and The Lighthouse, crafts here one of the most fascinating, subversive, and authentic sword and sorcery films that has been seen in more than a decade.
We first meet Prince Amleth as a wide-eyed excitable child in some kingdom of ninth century Denmark. His innocence goes away though when his father Aurvandill (Ethan Hawke), returned from some great victory in war, inducts him into manhood through a tense and visceral ritual that involves hound-like howling, blood bonding, and an oath of vengeance towards any harm that would befall the father. Shortly thereafter he is indeed slain by his younger brother Fjölnir (Claes Bang), and in the midst of the revolt and carnage, Amleth alone flees -thrust so quickly into a determined mantra of violence and hate.
Eggers is extremely fascinated by that mentality, and by a culture that emphasizes such harsh values. He maintains a certain objectivity towards it though, in many regards he simply wants to recreate the viking world with an accuracy often overlooked in adaptation (you’re not going to find any horned helmets here). But there is something curious in how he portrays this obsession in Amleth, as an adult played by Alexander SkarsgÃ¥rd. He hones in critically on his singular focus, that desire for vengeance that is so omnipresent that it dwarfs the root catalyst. It simply must be carried out because Amleth has been bred to believe it should, even if he never truly knew his father well, and has little desire for kingship himself. As situations change and the circumstances around the original crime are revealed in greater complexity, Amleth is further challenged. It’s of course the very thing his more famous successor would grapple with, but Amleth has no soliloquies, no impetus to reconsider. He is bent on his mission, and the force of cosmic responsibility and brute justice outweighs any desire for escape. By the time he’s there, face to face with Fjölnir ready to duke it out one last time, the death of Aurvandill has no bearing -it’s been so long and so much has shifted. His rival already reduced to running a simple farm village in Iceland, there’s no glory in any conquest over Fjölnir; the feud is no longer about anything -and Amleth can no longer hold any true sense of righteousness.
A salvation figure exists for him in the form of Anya Taylor-Joy’s Olga, a slave with mystic powers who becomes both his vengeful partner and lover. With implicit ties to an ancient and more natural world order, she questions his motives and mission, draws out of him a hidden tenderness, and even at one point briefly succeeds in pulling him out of the violent cycle. But unquenchable bloodlust, the power of conditioned rage proves his ultimate tragedy.
Tapped into this clearly, Eggers allows the film to have this provoking conversation without either glorifying or excoriating this society in focus. It exists on its’ own terms, Old Norse culture simply working as a compelling backdrop to explore deep themes of masculinity. We see copiously barbarous violence, inelegant ruggedness, rowdy primitivism. And just as the directionless fury driven by patriarchal rite is inane, resulting only in more chaos and misery, it is objectively pretty silly this display of a primeval maleness -Eggers is sure to exploit that, his camera lingering on the animalistic cries, the blunt carnage, all the while asking why this should be the base image of man.
Alexander SkarsgÃ¥rd is great -an actor who I’ve never much had strong feelings for, certainly not as a leading man, delivers an extreme dedicated performance. A producer on the film, he’s been wanting to make a viking project for some time, and goes all in on this opportunity, playing well both the brutal warrior (Amleth is a battle-hardened berserker) and the sad, brooding human beneath the toned killing machine. He’s surrounded by even heavier hitters though -Anya Taylor-Joy proving once again how formidable an actress she is as perhaps the films’ most enthralling character, barely upstaging Nicole Kidman as Queen Gudrún, with far more power than Hamlet’s Gertrude ever had, and dominating with that power the most critical scene of the movie. Ethan Hawke and Willem Dafoe are of course great in their small roles, as is an enchanting Björk as an enigmatic Seeress -her first film appearance in over twenty years. The discovery for me though was Claes Bang, who successfully brings dimension and nuance to Fjölnir, a figure to whom a certain sympathy is cultivated even as he too submits to doomed patriarchal law. It’s also cute how in addition to Taylor-Joy, Eggers cast in small roles both her parents from The Witch, Kate Dickie and Ralph Ineson -now in their fourth film together.
Eggers and cinematographer Jarin Blaschke create a rich grungy look for the film that as dark and moody as it gets, is pleasantly versatile -and delights in showing off the incredible scenery and the meticulous design of every facet of this viking tale. The architecture, the clothing, the weapons are all deftly constructed with an eye for authenticity. The buff bodies, which maybe aren’t so authentic, match the machismo aesthetic and the athleticism of classical myth (the climax could be the scene from Grecian art). And though the film is not as stylistically bold as Eggers’ previous efforts, its’ long takes are a thing of beauty, as are its’ uses of natural lighting, and the clever ways it develops the mythic side of the story. Amleth’s run-ins with each spirit or witch are conveyed with an eerie though essential air that reminded me a lot of The Green Knight. Like that film, aspects of Amleth’s journey are episodic: otherworldly figures direct him to avatars and small challenges on the road to slaying his uncle. Every so often he envisions his family tree and what is deemed the fate of his own line, and in one captivating haze conceives of his own conveyance by a Valkyrie to Valhalla. It’s a beautiful, hypnotic way to emphasize that all-encompassing mythos that informs the context behind everything, enticing and foreboding in equal measure; and it’s the kind of thing Eggers would never have been able to pull off in his previous movies. But with a larger scale comes the resources to articulate a vision more succinctly. The world is so full and palpable, its’ avenues of the paranormal so intriguing, its’ set-pieces broad and exciting, its’ action dynamic -much befitting a grand foundational story told through a lens so distinct yet palatable.
I don’t know that The Northman is Eggers’ best film -it drags a touch through the middle and its’ masculine tropes are perhaps too easy to dilute. But it is his most thrilling, probably his most immersive too. A wild, robust, intricately crafted, exceptionally performed film that tells its classic story in a decidedly critical, subversive way, without losing any of its’ necessary lustre. Old stories made new again -you love to see it!

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Strange History of the American Spoof Movie

Parody movies have been around for a lot longer than we tend to think of them. Even from the earliest days of Hollywood there were movies meant to satirize a particular subject or genre. In the silent era, Buster Keaton was responsible for a few. And in the early sound era, almost as soon as the monster pictures took off did you see comic versions of them -Abbott and Costello hosting a few. But parody movies tended to be subtle for most of cinema history, or parody came in conjunction with another goal of the comedy. It really wasn’t until the 1980s and 90s that it took off and became popularly understood. And there is perhaps a line to be drawn to the counterculture comedy explosion that began in the 1970s through avenues like  Saturday Night Live , which frequently parodied from even its earliest years popular movies and cultural properties of the time. But that is still a way’s back. To my generation though, ‘parody movie’ is perhaps a less known term than the more blunt ‘s...

Notes on the Title Cards of The Lord of the Rings

It might be sacrilege for one who both considers The Lord of the Rings  trilogy to be one of the greatest triumphs of cinema and has been an avid lover of the films since adolescence, to declare that the original theatrical cuts of the films are better than the much beloved extended editions. Easily it’s my most controversial opinion regarding these movies. Don’t get me wrong, I do like the extended editions quite a lot, especially as someone who just enjoys spending time in that universe. They flesh it out more, add extra flavour, and in increasing the length by about an hour really emphasize the epic quality of these films. But I find that the original cuts are generally more cleanly paced, more seamlessly edited, and much more accessible to audiences. All the stuff there is to love about The Lord of the Rings  is there in the original versions, the plethora of new and extended scenes merely add to that for fans. And of those, they fall into three camps for me: 1....

Back to the Feature: New York, New York (1977)

New York, New York  is a two hour forty minute musical movie largely about a toxic relationship and I understand why it was Martin Scorsese’s first big flop. Some have blamed its poor reception on the kind of movie it was, of a style and tone Scorsese wasn’t known for, but I find that hard to believe. Even after only five films, he’d proven himself an extremely versatile director, and Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore  found an audience. Sure this jazz musical love letter to New York City was following up Taxi Driver and its’ far more cynical take on the city, but then it’s also ‘from the director of Taxi Driver ’ which itself was a big hit. Was it a matter of public appetite for musicals, or mere word of mouth and early critical reception that dissuaded viewers? Irrespective of that, I was stunned to discover this movie was the origin of the titular song, which I’d assumed was much older (it’s definitely got the sound of something that might have come out of the Jazz sce...