Amundsen (2019) Poster

(2019)

User Reviews

Review this title
21 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
5/10
Emotionally flat about one of the greatest polar explores
Ravnehjerte9318 February 2019
AMUNDSEN is another exploration of a key figure in Norwegian history by director Espen Sandberg, whom previously has been a part of MAX MANUS and KON-TIKI. Two films that also highlights great achievements by Norwegians. As a very small country, us Norwegians have a tendency to root for and glorify people that achieves the spectacular, and we celebrate them as heroes. AMUNDSEN is a film about Roald Amundsen, a Norwegian polar explorer that lead the first expedition to traverse the Northwest Passage and the first first expedition to the South Pole amongst other things.

It's a film that attempts to explain and provide insight into who Roald Amundsen was, more so than to retell his expeditions. This is not an action-oriented film that focuses on the fight between man and nature. Much of the film is kind of told through a conversation between Amundsen's brother and Bess Magids, one of Amundsen's romances. This is the framework of the film, with Amundsen's achievements plotted in between throughout this conversation. It's a fine enough structure in theory and I appreciate that the filmmakers have decided to not just show an expedition and leave it at that, but instead to fully explore the man behind these great achievements. It doesn't glorify him or lift his hero status in any way. He's portrayed as a very flawed and slightly bitter man outside of his accomplishments. Unfortunately, the film only seems to scrape the surface of who he was. Heck, I would say that the film only touches the surface of everything it introduces.

The huge issue with AMUNDSEN is that it feels like a PowerPoint presentation with bullet points from Wikipedia to jump into every aspect of his life. The film is focused on trying to tell so much that it barely tells anything, but more importantly, it feels dramatically flat. Amundsen's relationship with Bess Magids is never properly explored. We're never told why they really care for each other. Amundsen's relationship with his brother, which is one of the biggest parts of the story, never leaves the emotionally impact that it should. It's too quickly glossed over. Even Amundsen's journey to the South Pole feels underwhelming. We're constantly told throughout the film that it's a dangerous expedition, but they don't show us that. When Amundsen finally reaches the South Pole (which is very early in the film), we should feel a sense of triumph, but instead I just sat there with a shoulder shrug. And that's the thing, the structure of the film doesn't work. It never lingers on the moments that are important in defining who Amundsen was, what the people around him meant to him, or what Amundsen meant to the people around him. It moves too quickly, but yet so slowly.

The performances are fine. Pål Sverre Hagen does a solid job as Amundsen (though the make-up used to make him look older is slightly distracting). The cinematography is great. There are couple of beautiful shots in it and you could see that the budget has been well-used. Which is why it's such a shame that film is struggling on a narrative level.
54 out of 63 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Interesting study of Amundsen.. a bit slow
thegulls111 July 2020
I ordered this after reading a few reviews--we are big fans of the PBS production "THE LAST PLACE ON EARTH" made a few decades ago. So, anything on Amundsen is a must-see for us.

As others have noted, the pace is a bit slow, but the cinematography was quite good. The South Pole expedition included a gripping sequence wherein one of the party (and a sled) falls into a yawning fissure that suddenly opens up (possibly fictional, but it illustrates the danger of polar travel). After Amundsen returns form his 'successful' South Pole trip (I say that instead of 'victorious'), he is obliged to return to North Pole activities, and is attacked by a polar bear. Scary moment, well-filmed.

Usually, a slower pace will allow the Director to develop the protagonist's character more, but I am still mystified by what made Amundsen tick. He could not abide opposition to his ideas, and seemed to have a 'you cross me--we are done' outlook. Nonetheless, he was the kind of Project Leader you needed when you travelled in the Wild: a meticulous planner, and a tireless worker who did not play mind games with his companions--he kept 'aloof' somewhat to avoid currying 'favorites' & sought the counsel of his team. That was exactly what was wrong with his South Pole competitor, Robert Falcon Scott--a great gamesman and author, but a terrible guy to work for when your life is on the line.

I would recommend the film, if you have an interest in the subject. If you can find 'The Last Place on Earth' (book or dvd), though, I think you will find it longer, but quicker-paced, and give you more insight into Amundsen (even though it splits between him and Scott). 7/10
10 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Holds all the ingredients to create a riveting film, but unfortunately it doesn't
r96sk24 November 2020
Had the potential, but sadly 'Amundsen' underwhelms.

It's a fascinating biopic idea, given it's about the life of Norwegian explorer Roald Amundsen. It holds all the ingredients to create a riveting film, but unfortunately it doesn't reach the heights it perhaps should've.

I think the biggest annoyance/frustration with this is how the story is unveiled. They reveal it in boring fashion through the voices of others, with it being told in both the native tongue and English. Both those things stopped me from creating a connection to the characters.

I like the cast, though. Pål Sverre Hagen leads strongly in the main role, while Christian Rubeck gives a good performance too. The rest of the support cast are solid if forgettable, with Katherine Waterston being the most memorable.

Cinematography is nice, though the ageing effects aren't the best. All in all, it isn't one I'd recommend.
9 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Great movie that left me "high" after watching it.
Interlepos1 March 2019
The Norwegian critics haven't been too kind to this movie, but it is much better than the critics would have you believe. It was a fascinating and thoroughly interesting film, about a great man who lived a highly prominent life. I liked the scope, and that they focused not only on one major achievement, but gave time to all of Amundsen's accomplishments. It reminded me a bit of Richard Attenborough's Chaplin (1992) starring Robert Downey Jr. in the way it was told, and I liked that it was done in this way.

Pål Sverre Hagen was great in the lead role. The film rests on his shoulders and he was impressive. He captured the weight of the character, and was particularly successful in portraying Amundsen as a middle aged man. He was totally believable. I don't normally gush about Norwegian actor's, like most I tend to focus on the American and British actors, but Pål was a real star in this film. He captured a lot just with glances, without even speaking.

As perfect as most of Amundsen's achievements were, this film showed that a great man has to be ruthless at times to bring about such success. That single focus to succeed and relentless pursuit, was captured well in the film.

I will also applaud the director for not spoon feeding the audience. He didn't spell everything out, and he trusted the audience to be active participants in the telling of this story.

When you get that "natural high" feeling after watching a film, you know you've watched something good.
31 out of 40 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A challenging film to make, but needs to be seen without distractions
allanmichael3013 December 2020
The film is one to watch without distraction's, but a story of endurance and determination to break new grounds and go to places no man has ever been. The film has great cinematography and gripping real life story. The film is better on second viewing.
7 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
what drives the man
ferguson-61 April 2021
Greetings again from the darkness. Director Espen Sandberg continues his string of movies highlighting the heroes of Norway. Previous movies include MAX MANUS: MAN OF WAR (2008) and the Oscar nominated KON-TIKI (2012), the tale of legendary explorer Thor Heyerdahl. And then to earn some coin, Sandberg also directed PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: DEAD MEN TELL NO TALES (2017). This latest project, written by Ravn Lanesskog, takes on another legendary explorer - this time it's Roald Amundsen, the first to traverse the Northwest Passage, the first to reach the South Pole, and the first to reach the North Pole by plane.

Pal Sverre Hagen stars as Roald Amundsen, and he also played Thor Heyerdahl in Sandberg's KON-TIKI. Hagen bears a striking resemblance to the photos of Amundsen, and utilizes a low key, yet very direct communication style to give us a look at the relentless commitment to achieving his goals. We learn he held grudges - against the Brits and even against his own brother - and used this as motivation. Director Sandberg uses a conversation as a framing device throughout the film. Roald's estranged brother Leon (Christian Rubeck, SWIMMING WITH MEN, 2018) and Roald's lover Bess Magids (Katherine Waterston, THE WORLD TO COME, 2020) share their insights and perspective while awaiting word on Roald's latest excursion. This begins after the opening sequence where we see Roald's prop plane crash land on an Arctic ice shelf.

Of course, this is the story of one of the greatest explorers and adventurers in history, so there is a nice blend of that conversation, some backstory, and a first-hand look at some of Roald's expeditions. The elements are incredibly harsh, but Sandberg never lingers too long on any one piece of this puzzle. It seems he is more interested in what made Roald tick - what drove him to these pursuits at the expense of most relationships. The rivalry with the Brits is clear and we see the humiliation Roald endured after besting Robert Falcon Scott to the South Pole. Rather than accolades, he faced criticism and judgment of his methods.

Roald Amundsen was clearly not a man to rest on his laurels, even after being presumed dead on more than one occasion. He was always a body in motion. We see his childhood fascination towards unexplored areas. No map? No problem. Roald's harsh treatment of his brother is explored, and it's interesting to note the differences in how Bess and Leon describe Roald. Amundsen went missing while on an Arctic rescue mission in 1928. He was 55 years old, but looked 20 years beyond that. This film is not hero worship or even a traditional tribute. Then again, maybe it's the type of tribute a man like Roald Amundsen would appreciate. For those who wish to learn more, search out the 6-hour 1985 PBS mini-series, "The Last Place on Earth." Opening in Virtual Cinemas and VOD April 2nd.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Exploring
kosmasp1 August 2021
Just because the film is going places (a few of them actually), it doesn't mean its pace is a fast one. Quite the opposite is the case. Therefor making it I reckon almost unwatchable for some. Having said that, if you are curious about the will and curiosity of men, that won't stop you (no pun intended).

I don't know the real persons/individuals and how truthful this is to what happened (and their interactions/rivalries), I just know that it does work decently on the big or small screen and for the movie and its purposes. Very nice cinematography and the acting is more than just solid too. Not for everyone, but that I reckon is true for many other movies too, in a different way.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
End was pretty boring,
ivstefko1 January 2020
But cant say it was bad. I really enjoyed some parts of the movie.
8 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Could have been better with more balanced soundtrack
truls-g-paulsen20 April 2022
Much to loud background "music and noise"! When Roald speaks it is set to low on volum, when background sound effects sets in it explodes in noise because of very poor mixing of sound. It almost destroys the movie for me. To bad. It would have been a much better movie with a decent job done on the sound.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Historically factual, but the flashback storytelling makes it a bit too dry
JurijFedorov30 July 2023
Historical accuracy: 9 Acting: 8 Camera work: 8 Editing: 7 Budget: 8 Story: 5 Theme: 7 Pure entertainment factor: 6 Video quality: 8 CGI: 7 Pacing: 5 Suspension of disbelief: 8 Non-cringe factor: 7

I have heard about an Amundsen movie project just about the first initial attempt to race to the South Pole. The one where they went out way too early in extremely cold weather and could have died. He really wanted to reach the South Pole first and made an unsafe trip. But this movie actually shows them reach the South Pole itself in the first 50 minutes which is a bad way to go about this story really as this is what made him famous. The South Pole race with Scott is the interesting event here. The event they even made a mediocre mini series about based on a book. I'm an avid reader and one of the best books I have ever read is "The Last Place on Earth: Scott and Amundsen's Race to the South Pole" by Roland Huntford. It's spectacular and so was this race. It's one of the greatest events that has ever taken place on Earth. The story has everything.

The movie meanwhile focuses on the man himself. He was known for being a dry and boring public speaker unlike many other explorers. As an explorer you need to seek money from rich people and big companies for everything. So the British explorers were often charming aristocrats with a flair for writing and speaking and putting their country first. So I get why people call this part of the movie boring. But this is really how he was in real life so this is how they should have depicted him for sure. The magic and fascination has to be created from events happening besides him. Only a few autobiographical movies trying to depict a full life are interesting. No matter the man there are slow and boring periods and overall a life is not a clear story with a goal. Hence why a single trip would have been a better idea to focus on. Then make a series of movies. Each one about each trip and the drama related to it. I did like the acting and history lessons. Much of this stuff is totally new to me. But they did mess up the connections between the events.

The movie focuses on his 3 big relationships. His 2 lovers and his brother. And all fail at the end and are historically not relevant. It's quite a dull thing to focus on overall too. He for example, in the movie, meets his first known lover when he meets her husband in England. They then show the movie trope scene of the guy keeping eye contact waaaay too long clearly showing a hidden connection in a cringe way where even a blind man in their company would notice something is up. And then they are dating for a few scenes and ... not much else. He goes on a new expedition and we never see her again as she was married and just stayed in Britain. This is all happening as his very, very irritated and negative brother is telling about Roald to Roald's new lover to scare her off. And therefore we experience Roald's life story in flashbacks. But she is clearly in love and refuses to listen to the brother. The brother goes on and on telling her how evil and cruel Roald is in his social life. Initially I thought it was smart and curious. Instead of doing the Indian, Chinese, or American thing with just depicting a heroic patriot the movie presents the man. And the man was weird and did indeed spend so much on expeditions that he was basically bankrupt or living on loans. This is an extremely costly lifestyle. So his brother was right. Yet this just goes on and on forever. This irritation and negativity drills a hole of boredom in your brain because it keeps coming. We seldom feel the magic of exploration or the magic of Amundsen being the first man to achieve quite a few things becoming one of the greatest explorers ever. It's all subdued and dulled down as the film focuses on the mistakes in his personal life like adopting 2 small girls and then sending them to Siberia when he can't take care of them. Did it happen? Yet. Is it overly exciting to watch these personal drama stories? Not that much. This is why movies about athletes for example focus on a single or maybe 2 partners even though the athlete may have been married 5 times. It just becomes a mess and unfocused. Big George Foreman (2023) is an amazing movie for this reason. All his life steps makes sense in the scope of surviving and fighting for something better. We don't need to see all his 5 marriages. 2 were significant and those are the ones we focus on in the story. The other marriages could have been mentioned in a scene if needed. We focus on the wins after periods of bad events.

Because Amundsen was a bad writer and a negative person his book is just him whining about not getting the respect he deserves. It's counter to most other explorers and makes for bad reading. The movie unfortunately basically takes this storytelling. It goes into his brain and tries to tell us how it felt to be him via flashbacks. Which is sad and boring. But again, things around him were magical and we should have felt it more strongly. It's not all sad and dry, it's just a misstep in script writing.

And this is how the movie fails as entertainment. Keep in mind I did like that I watched it even though it at times is slow as molasses. The movie is flashback sequences. We move from the plane crash to his brother talking about his initial expeditions. Then back to his brother as we see how his negativity makes Roald's girlfriend angry as he only pans Roald. Then back to Roald on a new expedition that's yet again quite slow with more complaints. Then we see his brother try to greet Roald and Roald ignoring him - more negativity. Then to a new expedition with yet another failure. We get the full life story, but it jumps so much that it's actually not easy to know where we are or why. They show a plane crash then show a plane taking off. I figured it was the same expedition yet we find out it's 2 different events as one is a flashback and the other is the old flashback now turning into real time storytelling. When you don't clearly know where you are or how we got here it's easy to lose focus even though the effects are good and the sets are accurate with a few curious details.

I would recommend it for people who like history and want to see cool technology of the past like an airship, planes, and historical ships and events. The movie also has quite a few minor history lessons as they refer to big people and events. But never really give you more than they have to like just presenting history overall. They for example don't even mention WW1 with a single word and basically never talk about news stories, movies, books. We seldom see anyone have fun and joke about. Keep in mind Norway as a country practically was recreated while the movie story is ongoing yet it's not mentioned at all even though the movie is basically about Norway with Norwegian flags everywhere.

I feel the TV series is too cheap to recommend. And it has the same type of story lack as it has to keep to the truth too. This movie looks way better and more expensive. Yet it also lacks story focus. I would say this gives you a bigger history lesson. But the TV series is a bit more engaging and energetic as I remember it. At any rate if you are not hugely fascinated by the history in this both are very easy skips. Don't watch either and expert some grand story that takes liberties with real history to create a proper hero and focused storyline. This is not it. If recut this could become quite good. You would just need to remove the flashback storytelling style which practically never works in ANY movie.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Dreary film about a great explorer
miked-2680023 January 2021
Somehow this film manages to turn what should have been a celebration of a great explorer into a tedious and dreary story. The direction and editing at some points is clumsy and creates confusion. For some peculiar reason much of the dialogue is produced in hushed tones as though the actors were worried about waking up a baby somewhere. Could and should have been an epic story. Shame
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
the hero that was afraid of oblivion
ops-525354 June 2019
Nansen and amundsen are superheros in norwegian history, thats a fact, but to make a believable account of his life on film is not an easy task, because he was a controversial person , also in norway. but they try and the result are within reason with a few flaws , a good presentation of roald amundsen . i wish the makers had used a bit more room for his companiogns, who more than thrice showed to be the beams that kept the house of cards standing.

its a slow paced movie, and i had expected even more action than presented here. the way the narrative is presented, through his brother leon, are pretty original, i liked that. the acting are not more than average, quite boring at times, but maybe life then were boring and a waiting game for news from the abyss. there are vast use of vfx and cgi, some are good,others pretty second hand. the end sequens, were amundsen flies the latham and dissapears are speculative,and people still speculates what happened,i dont know, maybe he flew to the gran canaries instead, living a silent and withdrawn life???.

its a norwegian film and the grumpy old man are quite proud by the product made by my countrymen, its well worth a view.recommended
16 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Dry sensations
MatiasLaurent30 January 2024
Warning: Spoilers
In a harsh and stark environment you only ever experience dry sensations, no matter where you look. Therefore, the creative decisions to make this film's style likewise suits it well and drives the tone further.

This film shows the eager and sometimes pitiless polar explorer Roald Amundsen diving into unknown terrain, despite death lingering in its wake. Despite hellish conditions at times, I never feel fully feared to explore its nature as the film otherwise would want me to, which sadly is disappointing. At times I was obviously engaged by its brutalities, but nothing made me jump out of my chair or cling harshly to my table.

Its magnificence however is captured in the films beautiful cinematography, supplemented with a wonderful score and editing. However, there is a narrative key-point which I would say degrades this film.

The pacing is ridiculous considering the loss of explored events, characters and relationships. For example, some characters are left forgotten, the relationship between Roald and Bess have no motivation and becoming the first of ANYTHING seems to have such a small impact when in the moment (certainly there are celebrations, but the emotions in those exact scenes of triumph are bland).

This is a recommendation for some interested in Amundsen, his life or polar explorations in general. Otherwise I would let you know this is a film you'd learn from if pursuing filmmaking.

6/10.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Not the hero movie it should have been
sirtorch6 June 2019
In these PC-days, a movie about a hero is made into a dull, slow moving internal anguish type study of the spineless brother of the great hero. Hope another director will make the great explorer justice in the future.
24 out of 55 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Too long n slow
ks-6050023 January 2020
The hero story telling is too long. 2 hours totally make me sleep. Cut it to 1.5 hour is better. Money not well spent on the production.
7 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Amazing life story of the greatest adventurer
afgalli8 September 2021
Great historical drama, well detailed and documented, cinematography is stunning.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Low quality movie
gtufeanu-903352 September 2019
It's a shame that this movie was badly done. It could have been a hundred times better. Instead of that I was left with a dull feeling of emptiness and waste of my time. Not well made, mediocrely played and lots of important facts missing. Whatever the director chose to highlight in this movie it didn't sparked. Left out a multitude of better facts which would have been much more interesting. Never mentioned the international team who accompanied Amundsen to the South Pole is one of the shameful facts. It's an affront to the others members of this celebrated team. His despotic and neurotic figure, the fight to be the first with any price it made him an unattractive character. At least to me. According to this movie he did all that expedition for himself and his glory , not for Norway or the rest of humankind. It brings his efforts to nothing ! Bad movie !
10 out of 45 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
God awful
SplatDcat28 August 2021
I've seen grass and paint go faster than this dirge. What kind of idiot can stay awake through it I do not know.
3 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Not for Philistines, but Cognoscenti
fireflyglow-1328012 July 2023
A well-researched and truly gripping film that gets so much right. Pacing might be deliberate for frenetic gamers, but for those who focus and pay attention, this film offers tremendous value. The selection of vignettes and focus on the human desire to know, understand, discover, is balanced by the equally human failings, frailties, and despairs that make the achievements of Roald Amundsen so worth the exploration. Deeply emotional, considered, and coordinated, the casting and characterizations intrigue, and will send those who relish historical drama to finding out more - which is always a great result of an effective cinema experience.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Very Disappointing.
crumpytv31 May 2020
Overly long and pretty uninteresting after the South Pole expedition early on in the film. The beginning was mighty confusing when the same scene appeared to visited without any explanation about 30 minutes from the end of the film. It wasn't the same scene, but there was no insight as to what was going on. Very poorly done.
3 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Laughably bad...
philip-0019711 March 2022
If you chopped up Amudsen into selet pieces - it would probably feel at home on various display screens in a museum. Speaking of museums... it feels like many of the scenes may have been shot in one. The cinematography is crap, so is; directing acting and just about anything that has to do with filmmaking - so at least there is consistency.

If you have an enormous interest in polar exploration, there is probably nothing new to discover here - if you don't, Amundsen may vary well kill off any emerging interest.

Move along people, move along, nothing to see, nothing to see...
1 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed