Featured Audience Ratings

• Thomas J

  
  Interesting part of history I had missed.

• Aaron N

  
  Kon-Tiki is a film based on a true story, which was already depicted on film in the 1950, Academy Award-winning documentary of the same name, Kon-Tiki. This new film is a historical drama that tells the story of how adventurer Thor Heyerdahl (Pål Sverre Valheim Hagen) set out to… More
  Kon-Tiki is a film based on a true story, which was already depicted on film in the 1950, Academy Award-winning documentary of the same name, Kon-Tiki. This new film is a historical drama that tells the story of how adventurer Thor Heyerdahl (Pål Sverre Valheim Hagen) set out to prove his theory that people from South America could have settled the Polynesian islands in pre-Columbian times. He does so by finding a crew of fellow Scandinavians willing to go on a daring journey on a balsawood raft, constructed exactly as these people would have done in the past. Once at sea, the crew face various obstacles, which includes the weather and various predators of the sea, which is made more difficult by the fact that they are only working with equipment that would have existed in the past as well, as far as sailing the seas goes. I really wanted to enjoy this film more than I actually ended up doing. Being one of the nominees for Best Foreign Film at the 85th Academy Awards and producing a fairly compelling trailer that really had me excited for the movie, I can chalk it up to expectations not quite being met, but at the same time, I believe Kon-Tiki has some obvious issues. It mainly comes down to the characters. Once we get to sea, they are almost all fairly bland individuals. There is maybe a trait or two to separate a couple of them, but for the most part, I didn't really engage with these people that are a part of a harrowing journey. This especially goes for the lead character, Thor, who ends up coming off as quite bland overall. To its credit, Kon-Tiki is a gorgeous film, thanks to both its strong cinematography and visual effects by the company Rhythm & Hues, the team also responsible for Life of Pi (who nabbed an Academy Award for their effects work on that film, which also relied heavily on a great and beautiful depiction of life at sea). Kon-Tiki is happy to show off the boat, the seas, and the various creatures and obstacles the crew comes into contact with and those moments tend to be quite thrilling in the kind of way that has you gripped into the moment, regardless of what actually happened and what is being dramatized. That is the aspect that makes this film worth a viewing overall, even if I am more curious as to what the 1950 documentary is like, given that it was actually shot by the crew, in the moment. I wanted to enjoy Kon-Tiki more, but the film felt like a merely average representation of an interesting story. The characters are too thin to make it more of an engaging feature and the fact that not enough really happened on this journey to make more of a big deal out of this feature ends up detracting from the film. It is no one's fault that adding a shark attack every so often to keep one engaged was necessary, but there just was not a whole lot more for me to sink my teeth into. It is certainly a gorgeous film, with enough moments to make it worth a look, just not any better. read more at thecodeiszeek.com

• Mark H

  
  Kon-Tiki is a pleasant but very conventional movie. The plot is mostly made of the 4,300 nautical mile-journey from Peru to Polynesia aboard a flimsy raft. Heyerdahl is a tall blonde tanned Norwegian. His staff is also made up of the same, well four Norwegians and a Swede, but they… More
  Kon-Tiki is a pleasant but very conventional movie. The plot is mostly made of the 4,300 nautical mile-journey from Peru to Polynesia aboard a flimsy raft. Heyerdahl is a tall blonde tanned Norwegian. His staff is also made up of the same, well four Norwegians and a Swede, but they all posses the same handsomely pale features, indistinguishable from each other. These characters are really generic. That even includes the intrepid star who should've been more exciting. Over three months, the team's scientific voyage is met with a few small setbacks but it's largely uneventful. Oh there's storms, a shark gets on the boat, a whale almost topples the raft. Those developments are gripping so those moments engage. The cinematography is pretty too. But more often than not, the action focuses on the humans. Unfortunately their humdrum conversations are boring. The occasional infighting amongst the team does not a film make. fastfilmreviews.wordpress.com

• Mike S

  
  What would the world be without strongly determined adventurers like Thor Heyerdahl? The Norwegian, whose theory of a kinship between the peoples of South America and Polynesia, would take form of a 101 day-long voyage across the mighty Pacific Ocean. On a raft made of balsa wood no… More
  What would the world be without strongly determined adventurers like Thor Heyerdahl? The Norwegian, whose theory of a kinship between the peoples of South America and Polynesia, would take form of a 101 day-long voyage across the mighty Pacific Ocean. On a raft made of balsa wood no less. All to prove his hypothesis. Ambitions are grand, with Heyerdahl as well as the film-makers, whose portrayal of his epic derring-do would result in the most expensive Norwegian picture to date. And it certainly shows, because there's not a frame that doesn't impress with its lavishly high production values. Obstinate and uncompromising, it's difficult not to admire how Heyerdahl, despite a subject for ridicule and failing support, holds his optimism all the way through. Of course, a journey of this nature, where our main character and five other men share a small space together over an unpredictable ocean, is a hotbed for drama. Sumptuous as well as small-scale such, with tensions between the men, bloodthirsty sharks and the odd tempest or two. In the association's most positive sense, my thoughts gravitated towards <i>Jaws</i> and Ang Lee's <i>Life of Pi</i>. Perhaps not fully as magical as these two films, but common denominators like well-developed characters and eye-catching special effects probably give the Norwegians reason enough to be proud of this nearly seamless tour-de-force. Like many Swedish action films, however, it suffers a tad from the "Hollywood-wannabe"-syndrome. Mainly in the introduction, so it's nothing that gnaws in the long run, but it should be mentioned that it - particularly in the English-speaking parts - has its marginally pretentious moments. A little more wind in the sails wouldn't have hurt either, as the suspense is intermittently broken by a slow-going lull. That the year is 1947 becomes very evident in the film's attribute as a character study. Each and every individual with their distinctive personality, whereof some have been strongly affected by the foregoing war. In triumph and adversity, we touch upon their souls, with Heyerdahl as the glue who enthusiastically keeps them together. His theory may now have been disproved by the help of modern genetics, but that it's a life achievement worthy of the history books - as well as a film escapade deserving of its international kudos - remain as true as the ocean is blue. http://www.facebook.com/pages/Mikes-Movie-Reviews/281824101875153?ref=hl

• Carlos M

  
  An engaging odyssey with a stunning cinematography that uses an appropriate large depth of field to efficiently explore the vastness of the high sea. Also, the characters are complex and well defined in their motivations, in a story that can also be very tense.

• Nicolas K

  
  When I found out that this film was a film nominated for an academy award for Foreign film about a true story of an explorer's (who could not even swim) epic crossing of the Pacific on a balsa wood raft in 1947, i thought it would be at least dramatic if not intense. Instead I… More
  When I found out that this film was a film nominated for an academy award for Foreign film about a true story of an explorer's (who could not even swim) epic crossing of the Pacific on a balsa wood raft in 1947, i thought it would be at least dramatic if not intense. Instead I felt completely disengaged and completely bored by the whole experience. And if it wasn't for a moment of the film where the camera pans up all the way to space and back to the raft, I would have classed it as completely uninteresting. The production is good but this hardly qualifies for a good film.

• Christopher H

  
  A masterfully crafted adventure film, "Kon-Tiki" elaborates off the true story and Academy Award winning documentary about a man bent on proving his theory that in pre-Columbian time, South Americans could have sailed to Polynesia on wooden rafts and settled there. A highly… More
  A masterfully crafted adventure film, "Kon-Tiki" elaborates off the true story and Academy Award winning documentary about a man bent on proving his theory that in pre-Columbian time, South Americans could have sailed to Polynesia on wooden rafts and settled there. A highly unpopular theory and what most people thought would be a death sentenced equates to a highly entertaining and effective expedition. With impressive visuals and graphics throughout the entire film, including sharks and whales that rival that of "Life Of PI", and a completely convincing and powerful performance from Pål Sverre Valheim Hagen as Thor Heyerdahl, "Kon-Tiki" is not only Norway's most expensive film ever, it is also Norway's highest grossing film of 2012, and easily one of my favorite foreign films of the year.

Read all 7 featured audience ratings