There are some great films that have very little dialogue spoken in them. Pathfinder isn't one of them.
The filmmakers wanted to have a visual film with very little dialogue spoken. And while there are some great films that have very little dialogue spoken in them, Pathfinder certainly isn't one of them.
500 years before Christopher Columbus, a young Viking boy is abandoned in the New World and gets taken in by the tribesman of the Indian village. 20 years later, now known as Ghost (Karl Urban), he finds himself face to face with the people who left him behind and everyone questioning his loyalty.
The result is a rather gory, seemingly edgy and gritty film in the similar graphic novel-type feel of films like Sin City and 300. In fact, when going through some of the special features and featurettes, you find out that the film and its accompanying graphic novel were created at the same time. The graphic artist and filmmaker revel in how 'in-sync' they both were when each had come to the other with pretty much the exact same rendition of a scene. The only difference is that the aforementioned films succeeds where Pathfinder fails, in many areas.
Stylistically - it's interesting how the filmmakers want the audience to work hard at finding expression from its characters in all its shadow and back lighting. It's dark - in the literal sense. Even more amusing is how they mention in the 'Making Of' that they paid special close attention to detail when creating the character's costumes; from the wild, very Norse gothic interpretations of the Viking helmets to the authenticity of the costumes wore by the Indian people. One thinks, "What's the point?" when everything ends up in shadows and the detailing can't even be enjoyed?
Plot - while the idea for the story itself is interesting, it lacks dramatic execution beyond fight sequence after fight sequence. While it attempts to have heart, it lacks the a greater sense of emotional stake. Its plot is patchwork at best with Aboriginal mysticism and philosophy doubling as subtext. The romance which seems to be tacked on, makes it rather questionable. The tone is never consistent. It mixes legend story telling with contemporary nuances which causes the film's pacing to often hiccup.
Performance levels are scattered which is a result of the film not having much of a script and the film being shot in shadows. Karl Urban is handsomely broody, whose talent is obviously stifled in this character and Moon Bloodgood makes the best of her eye-candy/romantic opposite role.
All in all, it's difficult to recommend watching this film. A better bet: read the graphic novel instead.
