gutsthealchemist I didn't enjoy it because the romance felt forced, the CGI isn't good, and the acting isn't very good either. I only liked one of the fights in the whole movie

dundgren a "simple" Disney-like film. It does not have depth in neither the characters nor the story. Indeed, the story of Sigfried is mixed up with another story, that of Tristan et Isolde, so if you have read either of them (I know, there are several versions) you are a little baffled by the liberty the director mixed both. Its a pity though, that the mix did not result in a great movie but rather in this rather simple, oh-my-hero film. a "simple" Disney-like film. It does not have depth in neither the characters nor the story. Indeed, the story of Sigfried is mixed up with another story, that of Tristan et Isolde, so if you have read either of them (I know, there are several versions) you are a little baffled by the liberty the director mixed both. Its a pity though, that the mix did not result in a great movie but rather in this rather simple, oh-my-hero film. All in all, I would not recommend you to watch the film.

Blueghost After shelling out lots of dollars to sit and watch some of the latest romantic comedies, I decided it was time for a little indulgence. Surfing the net I casually caught a still from a film about a ring and dwarfs. The charter's name in the caption was Brunhilde. I thought to myself, that sounds familiar.Well, it looks like someone finally took a crack at bringing Wagner's ring cycle to film format, only this time shot as a Movie of the Week for TV audiences instead of as a feature film for theatrical release. With that in mind, I have some observations to make: For a TV film it gets a passing grade, but only just. I remember ABC's "Movie of the Week", and seeing all kinds of popular TV and film stars being dragged into projects that would be shown once on the network to garnish ratings, and then vanish into the ether to be only shown on Sunday afternoons or late night shows before the national anthem and test pattern. Well, that's kind of what we got here.Only "Curse of the Ring" gives the audience some very high production values in terms of art direction, but not much else. We see the Nordic and Germanic setting of the tale, and are given some decent support cast members, but the two leads nearly slay themselves as they deliver lines with as much enthusiasm as a local weatherman telling us about the latest cold front. The acting from Benno Furman was that difficult to watch. Kristanna Loken wasn't much better, but at least her character had some fire in her. Benno walks through the project like a star eyed school boy who's concentrating on remembering his lines, all the while Kristanna is doing her best to tell future directors that she actually can act in spite of the collagen in her lips and a blonde dye job that would have put a 1950's pinup to shame.Seriously, there's lots of visuals to be proud of here for what the project is. The SFX are quite impressive for a low scale TV production, and the amount of energy and care that went into the art direction is also something of note, but the two leads are as flat as a local theatre troop being recruited as extras for that Hollwood production that rolled into town. Their acting is that bad... or worse.Had the producers pumped a few more dollars into this thing, and cast not necessarily well known talent, but competent talent into the roles, and then re-aired the project several times, then guaranteed this thing would have made its sponsors proud, and then some by boost DVD sales. As it stands now this thing is only five bucks to buy on the open market, and believe you me there's a couple of reasons for that; they are Furman and Loken.Technically, other than the art direction, the shots are simply okay. Better lensing as well as overall direction could have saved this thing, and pushed into beyond its niche, and into the realm of general audiences appreciating a well crafted and acted film. As it stands now it simply appeals to the Tolkien and D&D crowd. And again, this didn't need to be so, but the film is what it is.Dramatically the film tries to go into the realms of love and betrayal, and we get a taste of that by virtue of the story. Even Loken starts to shine a little as an actress when she does her scenes that address this concept, but we're weighed down by the fact that nobody seems to really care about the lines they're reciting. Well, perhaps that's unfair, because most of the supporting cast do an okay job.Overall I'm glad I saw it finally, but it's not something I'd readily recommend.Definitely watch at your own risk.

shardofmany Watched this on TV was disappointed that it was split into three chunks of viewing which really spoilt the watching of it. That said it has all the elements of a fantasy tale without the nasty Hollywood glitz that was Lord of the Rings. Its a simple story rather akin to Romeo and Juliet I wonder if its this tale Shakespeare got his inspiration from? The main actor came across as a little dumb but the supporting cast more than made up for his wooden performance. Have to say the actress playing the queen of Iceland was something really special and will be wanting to see more of her acting works in the future. Sadly I think most people will try to compare this with Hollywood blockbusters like Lord of the rings etc and miss the storytelling not the whizz bang special effects that seem to be current fashion in tinsel town.