Amazon.com: Looking for a rousing Viking adventure that's cheesy and entertaining? The Long Ships is just the movie for you. As England's greatest color cinematographer, Jack Cardiff had filmed 1958's The Vikings, so he was well-prepared to direct this exciting, occasionally grisly mini-epic (a British/Yugoslavian coproduction, filmed in Yugoslavia), which received mixed-to-favorable reviews when released in 1964. Back then, it was a perfect matinee marvel if you were young and impressionable, and it's still worth its weight in hot buttered popcorn. While that most contemporary of actors, Richard Widmark, is clearly out of place as a maverick Norse warrior, he's sufficiently valiant as he guides his Viking brother (Russ Tamblyn, still hot from West Side Story) and a long-ship full of warriors in search of a huge, solid-gold bell coveted by Mansuh (Sidney Poitier), a Moorish prince obsessed with retrieving the legendary bell at any cost. Treacherous maelstroms, lovely damsels, corny battles, and casual humor make The Long Ships a lot of fun--like a Ray Harryhausen adventure without the animated creatures. (Oh, and Mr. Poitier? James Brown called... he wants his hair back.) --Jeff Shannon
The Mother of all Voices Like others I saw this film when I was a kid. Watching it now I still have the sense of fun I did when I was about ten. I'm not blind to it's faults. I love Richard Widmark but a Viking? It's a stretch to say the least. At least he doesn't have that sick Tommy Udo laugh! Russ Tamblyn -- a minor name off WEST SIDE STORY. Edward Judd (probably best remembered for Ray Harryhausen's FIRST MEN IN THE MOON) and Oscar Winner Sidney Poitier. Oscar Holmolka as Rolfe and Orm's drunken Viking lord father who gets screwed by Viking King Haraald for his death ship. A giant bells made of gold, the Mare of Steel ... it's saturday afternoon stuff to be sure. Park your disbelief outside and it's a fun movie. As such movies go, Fleischer's THE VIKINGS is far better.
HORRIBLE! THIS IS ONE OF THE WORST MOVIES I HAVE EVER WATCHED. I ONLY WATCHED PART OF IT BEFORE I THREW IT IN THE GARBAGE. TERRIBLE ACTING. SILLY PLOT. JUST A RIDICULOUS MOVIE.
the longships the product that I bought was described with great detail.I was very pleased with the purchased and the delivery.thanks william
The long Ships Saw this movie when I was 15. It made me a lifelong fan of the late Richard Widmark.
History As Balderdash; A Rich, Cultural Tradition Anyone tempted to believe this racist nonsense should give themselves a small history lesson by reading what happened to the Vikings when they raided the coast of Moslem Spain in 844, and again in 859. Nor should your interest in world history end there. Contrary to what the film makers, among others, would have you believe, Islam in that day was perhaps the most enlightened society in the world. European nobility sent their children to universities in Cordova and elsewhere in the Moslem world. Science, mathematics, and medical technologies were greatly expanded in the Islamic lands. Since their empire had spread primarily through military conquest, they were for a long time the world's sole superpower. I have more than a passing interest in history, and so I don't care for blatantly bad portrayals of it. This film serves mainly as an outrageous example of Western style propaganda, pandering to the tastes of xenophobic ignoramuses and directed against the peoples of the Near East, a time honored custom that goes back at least as far as The Song Of Roland (the hero of which was actually done in by Basques, not Moslems). Speaking of which, Charlemagne himself thought twice about invading the kingdom of Moorish Spain (which remained firmly entrenched on the European continent for some 500 years, its later period spanning almost the entirety of the Crusades). But in this film, a band of Viking raiders takes over an entire walled city (even though, as I understand it, Moslem military strategy at this time relied more on mobility than fixed defenses) because the Moslem warriors were so afraid of them. Right. With this kind of propaganda continuously churned out by Hollywood (one exception would be 1935's oddly even-handed production The Crusades, historically inaccurate though it is) and other film industries, not to mention other media, it's no wonder that these attitudes have long helped to color foreign policy.
Continuing the long tradition of portraying Near Easterners in Western media as inept, cowardly villains, the torch was passed into the Twentieth Century through the fiction of at least two prominent writers (though there are of course many others) of note: Robert E. Howard and J.R.R. Tolkien. Much as I love and admire the respective works of both authors, their colorful, if disparaging, representations of the inhabitants of that part of the world should not be mistaken for history, as many seem to do. But thusly is the multimedia stereotype maintained even when a casual reading of actual world history should indicate otherwise.
I love a good, challenging, period war drama along the lines of Spartacus, Excalibur, The Warlord, Cromwell, The Last Valley, Waterloo, Lawrence of Arabia, just to name a few, but this doesn't come anywhere near that level of quality.
I give this flick a one star rating, mainly for Richard Widmark's performance, who was convincing in his role as the dickering, resourceful and quick witted Viking chieftain. Also for a portion of the cinematography and, if my memory serves, at least some of the rousing and catchy soundtrack (would that the movie itself had been worthy of it). Sidney Poitier, miscast as the Moorish prince, unfortunately turned in one of the worst performances of his illustrious career, portraying his character with the abysmally heavy hand the director no doubt required of the role.
A better movie of this type would be The Vikings, if you haven't already seen it.
Anything Goes Trivia
Megaton Man
Trevor
