A fairly poor attempt, to save on money the costumes are terrible, the sets are pathetic, the editing is shocking.

It gets a 2 because I like Viking shows but this looks like it was made by the high school film club, probably best avoided.

As others have noted, the plot of "Viking Blood" (2019) is ripped from Leone and Kurosawa. I would argue this film owes more to Leone for several reasons:

First, if you have 90 minutes to kill, attend to the close-ups. Straight from Leone's playbook.

Second, the plot element are identical: two sides of a town fighting for control. "The Stranger" (e.g. "The Man with No Name") moves back and forth beteen these two side, enriching himself along the way.

Third, tho' note as compelling, the soundtrack is a pale echo of Ennio Morricone. However, if you are struggling thru this film, note how the score is used. It appears at just the ket times, just as in Leone's work.

Besides this obvious and painful debt to Leone, there are others things that are disturbing about this film:

This work is clearly exploitive to ride the tide of the TV series "Vikings" which is far more superior in plot, acting, set design than "Viking Blood."

Consider in this film the cheesy costuming. Clearly it looks to me as tho' the designer raided the 'Party Store" at Halloween time.

At about one hour into this abysmal movie, catch the sequence where "The Stranger" is crawling away in the dark. Damn, this director even stole the plot boards from Leone!

Lastly, I can't help but wonder about where this film was shot. I swear that in the Christian enclave there are bamboo plants clearly waving in the breese.

Bottom-line: you must clearly have been in COVID isolation too long (like me) if you bother to watch this piece. It might be worth it to show how powerful Leone is with film making, but otherwise, I would suggest not to bother.

For a movie with the word Blood in it, you'd think there would be more blood. There wasn't a lot of action scenes, and the ones that were there, were pretty short. I do think the writer did a good job at showing the Vikings, and the Christians lack of knowledge of the Christian faith. It was either a lack of knowledge, or a fear of one another, that drove them to the violence. I mean, the pagans just started chasing Edwyn and Freya and it never said what they did. Sounds like to me, the Pagans didn't want another faith on their land. And that pretty much started the feud between them. There was no backstory on why the Earl expelled the Christians from the village other than he didn't want another faith coming in. It also never mentioned what things the Christians did to ruin the village that the trading post guy mentioned. Not a lot of backstory to fill you in on things that happened before the movie began.

Also, at the end when the Stranger told the Earl "This is for my father, the King," I don't believe it ever mentioned what the Earl did to the King. Or if it did, I missed it. Only thing I remember hearing about the King, was that Gudrun said the King sent ships to protect them. Other than that, I don't know what the Earl did to the King and what made the Stranger say what he did at the end.

Overall, an average movie, a lot of backstory that wasn't told, that if told, would have made it a bit less confusing. Very little action and very little blood for a movie with the word Blood in the title.