Solomon Kane

With Lord of the Rings as a visual template, glossy and attractive camera work, earnest performances instead of actors winking (or sneering) at us, and effective action pieces done on a camera that was decidedly non-shaky... it's very good. In fact I'd say it's the best I've seen for a Horror Fantasy Adventure set in the murky grim-dark of ye olden times, and I'd happily sit down for a sequel. Even though it's a straightforward take on B-Movie material, its competence trumps its genre-rivals.

15 years ago I would've thought this was the raddest movie ever. Sure, it has (a rather Warhammer-y) atmosphere and a few cool individual moments, but on the other hand it's oh so serious, simple and grimy. Seriously, I haven't seen this many dirty people in a film since that day I discovered my grandfather's scat porn collection.

Purefoy kicks all sorts of demon's ass in this straightforward Fantasymovie. Great fights and cool cinematography keep you wanting more despite the sometimes modest budget (especially with the final demon).

Kinda corny and predictable, but you have to expect that somewhat with a fantasy action movie. It's got solid action and decent effects and some cool creatures. You could do a lot worse if you like this sort of stuff.

Very well made and looks fantastic at times. A tad corny at times but really much better than I thought it would be and deserving of a U.S. release.

Murky and lifeless fantasy fluff. If you were offended by the christian undertones in Narnia, I'd steer clear of this one, as there's some full on Captain Invisible worship going on here. In fact, Glenn Beck is probably barfing his yarbles to this particular piece of cinema just as you're reading this. Enjoy that image.

Underrated and underseen, this proves that even genre formulas can be done exceedingly well. Great performances by A-list actors especially Purefoy who makes Kane's sense of remorse palpably real. What's most impressive is how much director Brennant pulls off on a budget of 40mil: he repeatedly delivers beautifully composed shots, stunning landscapes & vivid production design. The sword fights also always have at least 1 moment of brutality for maximum impact. Better than the Conan films

"Solomon Kane" is a overlooked sword and sorcery gem, lukewarmly received by the general public. I can't explain why people don't like it, but I sure did, if you missed hearing about this, check it out, it's a pretty fun fantasy movie. Just try to overlook the part where the 16th century father opens up a locket containing two photographs of his family to show to Kane, we'll forget that happened.

Solomon Kane is precisely the sort of character that a prepubescent boy who enjoys roleplaying games would dream up. A "badass" anti-hero who wears a quaker hat, has jesus tattoos, and dual wields swords is as cheesy as it gets. You can't fault this film too much though because despite its overwhelming flaws it is fun in a B-movie way. The film is surprisingly technically competent but the extremely dumb storyline and poor acting by the lead (James Purefoy) doesn't help.

This movie has it all: zombies, puritans, Marcus Aurelius, crucifixions, Rasta-style armies of Babylon, Leatherface. I can go on. If you're looking for anything other than a sequence of dramatic set-pieces with pretty camerawork, you'd pick apart the paper-thin cliched plot. But Christ look at the cover, that'd be like a food critic going to a greasy diner and complaining about the lack of artisan walnuts in the omelette. A fun, mindless flick.

A lot like the campy adventure movies from the 80s, but with better cinematography. The dirtiness of the sets and characters gives the movie a very authentic feel. No pearly-toothed peasants in this fantasy setting. However, some poor acting and cheesy lines eventually pull the movie down. Though, I do recommend it for a lazy summer-night watch. At least try to get past the first scene.

This movie has a few good points, but mostly it is a dark and dirty story with hordes of fighting barbarians, evil sorcerers, and demons. Solomon spends his life fighting and killing then tries to redeem himself. There are large holes in the story, but a decent attempt was made to make it entertaining. Also it has a few good actors and several decent scenes. A lot of folklore, superstition, witches, religion, medieval mythos, and carnage. Decent music.

Film based on the eponymous character created by Robert E. Howard. Violent soldier cursed by Satan returns to his birthplace in search of redemption. Beautiful photography, good art direction, interesting plot and central character. All that fades into a structure that involves unconvincing effects, good actors underutilized, and a course that rarely involves or touches.

It's been a while since I watched this, but for the life of me, I can't really remember what happened in it. I remember I enjoyed the very dark feeling of the movie and it was watchable, but indeed, you'll forget the movie soon enough after watching it.

works for me ... thumbs up

It's like Lord of the Rings - only with fewer (i.e. no) whiny hobbits and more decapitations. Solomon Kane can kick Frodo's scrawny, little ass any day.

I liked the character of Solomon Kane, especially with his evil-destroying Puritan costume... the movie though was pretty boring. There were a few good fight scenes but for the most part I was hoping that Kane would get snatched up by the Devil just so the movie would end. I do think James Purefoy is a good actor and I also liked his love interest Rachel Hurd-Wood. Max von Sydow had a cameo in this but really didn't add much. A pretty lifeless action film that doesn't inspire.

I liked it. It had enough action and gore to keep me entertained and the religious plot kept me interested. The movie itself didn't offer any surprises or anything new though so its just slightly above average.

WW-a Cornish -JD? --get down from that cross and lop-off some heads is what. Despite the cheese and scuzzy filters I liked it far more than I think I aught to. A bit more 7th seal and a little less conan and this would've been a real blast.

Easy to watch with some good fight scenes. Naturally predictable but doesn't detract from the action.

Pretty bad story but still very watchable.

Sometimes corny and a bit predictable, but generally entertaining if you're into the whole dark medieval/blood/ demons thing.

Well, got this Lord of the Rings feeling, was definetly the creators inspiration. Off course not worthy the comparison, but it was still better than i thought it would be

Rather high production value, a nice score and one cool monster is (yet again) no match for a lousy script, convoluted story and quite a few horrondous performances.

Bland and monotone fantasy-cliché, that takes way to long at getting to what it's all about: Chopping evil minions to pieces with a broad-sword. Even though the notion of a sword wielding puritan hero is a bit laughable, James Purefoy is solid enough to make it watchable, if only just.

Great opening for a film, especially the devil's reaper

Well.....I was never bored, I'll give it that, and it contains some nice cinematography, but the ending is just one big wtf?!!

The story of Solomon Kane was worth to shoot, but not that way. Purefoy's got no charisma and the story how they wrote was predictable and poorly paced. There was some good cinematography and I liked the daylight fearing under the floor people, but director did not get the best out of them and they were acted lame.

Boring story, bad acting, lackluster directing and unimpressive action. Looks good every now and then, but that's it. Like Van Helsing but actually worse

Basado en los relatos de R.E.Howard.Si bien la narrativa es bastante lineal con pocas sorpresas, logra por momentos llamar la atencion o por lo menos a mi =P. La fotografia e interpretacion de los actores es pasable, solo acompañan, mientras que el sonido y la musicalizacion logran darle una buena mano a ciertas escenas. En cuanto a la direccion creo que no fue del todo acertada, por que cuando tenes poco presupuesto lo mejor es simplificar las ideas antes de querer realizar escenas a lo Joligu.

it was decent until kane decides to fight.

If it wasn't for decent soundtrack this would be rated aprox. 30. Very poor acting and overall performance.

Okey, I just kept thinking "van helsing,van helsing,van helsing" while watching this film. The main difference - Van Helsing was way much better.

Gotik atmosferinde kusur yok fakat klise filmin her yerinde. Turun sevenleri icin izlenebilir seviyede, onun disinda izlemeye gerek yok.

Wasn't that predictable?..

Junk film, poorly directed, badly acted, horrendous screenplay, the list goes on

Amusing

ger; [solomon kane]; ein krieger will seine seele reinigen und kämpft dafür gegen das böse.; (phatos hoch drei);

Not a complete loss. The ministories and general mood of the first half are way more interesting than the main arc and frustrating ending. While the 3D job is reasonable, the composites are piss poor.

Injustement méconnu, sorti en catimini chez nous. Sans prétention, beau et punchy, du bon cinéma tourné dans les pays de l'Est. Du gothique pas trop cheap pour une fois. PSI deviné par Criticker au point près !

Orijin film olması sebebiyle asıl konuya tam girilememiş olsa da ünlü çizgi roman karakteri Solomon Kane'in başlangıcı hakkında geniş bilgi veren dolu dolu ve iyi film. Müzikleri ve senaryo çok iyi, tempo ideal ve bu tür filmler için en önemli nokta olarak yakın dövüş ve kılıç sahneleri iyi çekilmiş.

Damn snowflakes/ash crap distracted me throughout.

bad movie

Basic and simple. Combat scenes would have been better with less cut or camera trick, and give more space to each individual action. But heh, no need to be picky here.

Solomon Kane had some good ideas going for it, though sadly much of those ideas were under-utilized and predictable. The monsters and villains had cool concepts, but were only in the film as filler for the piss-poor drama that riddles this film. James Purefoy gives a decent performance, but he would have been a stronger character if he stuck with the anti-hero concept.