Amazing movie about survival and never giving up on your beliefs. great acting, Great cinematography, great story Everything outstanding!!!!

A superbly filmed reconstruction of Thor Heyerdahl's expedition. Even though the actual voyage at sea is surprisingly short in the film, he manages to embed the story in great pictures and the Norwegian actors, who you don't know from every Hollywood movie, let the characters come to likeable life.

Even with an inspiring subject at hand, the creators could not figure out how to make the plot seem thrilling without adding a boatload of forced and overly dramatized conflicts that seemed as artificial as that CGI crab stowaway on the raft. Granted, low-grade CGI can be forgiven, seeing as there are some instances of it actually looking favorable, like the shark attacks. On the other hand, the low points, which almost by the numbers imitate Hollywood shlock, where the crew must come together at the end of this second act of ours and "HAVE SOME GODDAMN FAITH," are so distasteful it stings. None of the characters, aside from Thor and Watzinger, are memorable in the slightest outside of their roles on the raft. Watzinger is notable for all the wrong reasons since the script decided to make him the christened infidel and the odd one out who needs some goddamn faith, which he obviously obtains at the end. Thor's tenuous relationship with his wife also seemed overly trite until he actually read her letter. That part definitely elevates his entire character and gives his obsession more gravity, for his adventuring feats don't give him an advantage in all other aspects of life.

This was surprisingly good and a decent adaptation of the book! Good performances, and a good reminder of the adventures and advancements made since the 40's.

The worst 01 hour: and 58 minutes in ****ing y Norwegian!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It feels like a documentary more then anything else, but some just don't make any sense...

Adoro biografias baseadas em pessoas egocêntricas, determinadas, corajosas e um pouquinho loucas, aqui temos um belo exemplar muito cativante e apaixonante... Um filminho bem bonitinho, passado quase que inteiramente dentro da Jangada, como não amar, aventura, atritos e união, linda biografia... E todos viveram por muitos anos, a fé, coragem e dedicação... Beautifull…

Es una aventura muy épica. ¡TOTALMENTE RECOMENDABLE!

What an interesting slice of history... and it's told extremely well. This movie has an international feel with the productions value to match it. Filmed beautifully and acted well, the movie keeps you intrigued throughout. But what I really loved about it was that it was filmed in both Norwegian and English, it wasn't given the Hollywood treatment by casting English speaking Americans with Norwegian accents. This, and the fact that it also focusses on the beauty of nature, make the movie all that more cerebral.

The film tells the story of Thor Heyerdahl (played by Norsk actor Pål Sverre Hagen) a Norwegian explorer who we meet on the island of Polynesia. There he discovers plants native to South America and the idea sparks in his mind when he hears the story of Tiki, the sun God, who had traveled on a raft to Polynesia. He writes a theory that is almost immediately rejected, one person telling him that if he could build a raft and sail from Peru to Polynesia, they'll believe him. And that's exactly what he ends up doing. The visual direction is just stunning! Kon-Tiki is reportedly Norway's most expensive film that they've made, and it shows! And while it is flawed, it is mostly faithful (at least compared to a lot of Hollywood biopics) with its storytelling. Most of what Rønning and Sandberg's direction style is to take the real events and crank up the intensity. And while it does result in misrepresentation of facts, it works relatively well thematically. If you cannot tell, the movie does show and feature inspirational messages about persistence in the world of skepticism. Mr. Heyerdahl is one of those fascinating and inspirational figures in history that's never talked about in American schools, I don't quite know why. While this movie started off slow and was having hard keeping me, my attention caught on right when the characters set out on sea. Content wise, it's pretty tame. Mostly six guys and a parrot on a boat resting, but there is some peril. There is also one scene involving the killing of a shark that would be disturbing to the faint of heart.

While "Life of Pi" powerfully shines with impactful, compatible visuals, this dramatized retelling of another perilously isolated journey of factually experimental discovery relies on genuine old-fashioned adventurous narrative with natural wonders and diegetic reflective pacing that justifies the story's significance while also compels its documented counterpart. (B)

How do you turn one of the greatest adventures of the 20th century into a dull movie? Like this.

A beautiful depiction of this daring adventure in the vast and not always so pacific pacific ocean. My only criticism is that a bit more could have been shown of the day-to-day life within the incredibly primitive conditions.

I loved this movie! It's amazing true story. Watch it!

I hate the now overused word, 'awesome'. This was really well told and acted. Show this to the misfit children and say, "You can do anything."

read the book a couple times back when. very good story. nice to revisit. didn't move out of my chair until the movie was over.

Interesting story and all the nature shots and CGI sharks, fish etc was done really well

Kon Tiki is a bit of a letdown in that everything included in the movie is excellent, but you miss elements that are not included. I loved the film's visual variety--beginning in Norway in 1920, jumping to 1930s Polynesia, then 1940s New York, before embarking on a 5000-mile man vs. nature ocean voyage from Peru to Polynesia. Along the way are amazing visuals and tense set pieces with seamless special effects. All of this stuff earns the movie 4 out of 5 stars. Where the movie is lacking is in character development and potential man vs. man conflict. We could have gotten to know the crew better, rather than having the characters' purposes literally explained to the audience: These are the radiomen, this is the navigator, this is the engineer, this is the cameraman. The movie jumps from the harrowing first couple weeks of the voyage to the final few hours, with the characters' facial hair denoting the passage of time. The months in between could have played up the tensions between the men confined to a small space on a boat of rotting balsa wood. These aspects could have been explored in a longer running time, as this is a relatively short movie given its scope. (Also, Thor Heyerdahl's hypothesis Amerindians populated Polynesia from the east has since been disproved by linguistic anthropologists, who show the islanders' linguistic heritage from Southeast Asia. This irony makes the characters' dumb and death-defying voyage across the Atlantic all the more fun for me, though.)

A very traditional, very formulaic adventure true story, but don't be misguided, this is great fun. In every way the 'Lost City of Z' didn't work, this does. We're onto the raft as quickly as we can but not at the expense of backstory or character development. It's a story I knew nothing about but one I now would love to find out more of, really good film.

brilliant film of exploration