UNLIMITED STREAMING
WITH PRIME VIDEO
TRY 30-DAY TRIAL
Home > Horror >

Berserker

Berserker (1987)

July. 04,1987
|
4.4
|
R
| Horror

Six young adults in the woods run afoul of a berserker, a viking warrior who dons the fur and snout of a bear, and are slain in turn by him.

...

Watch Trailer

Cast

Similar titles

Reviews

Wordiezett
1987/07/04

So much average

More
AshUnow
1987/07/05

This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

More
Bea Swanson
1987/07/06

This film is so real. It treats its characters with so much care and sensitivity.

More
Fleur
1987/07/07

Actress is magnificent and exudes a hypnotic screen presence in this affecting drama.

More
BA_Harrison
1987/07/08

Boasting an insane, bear-mask wearing, cannibalistic Viking for a killer, Berserker promises to be a cut above its mid-80s slasher contemporaries. Unfortunately, director Jefferson Richard does nothing to capitalise on this cool concept, instead preferring to travel down a path already well-worn by countless other stereotypical horrors.Dumb, horny, pot-smoking teens vacationing at a remote cabin in the woods; a country cop with no patience for city kids; a creepy campfire tale to set the scene; alfresco sex followed by death: this one packs in the clichés whilst neglecting to make the most of the one thing that could possibly have saved it from mediocrity—its bad-ass-sounding Norwegian nut-job.For most of the film, all that is shown of the titular berserker are fleeting shots of a clawed paw; frequent shots of a grizzly bear wandering in the woods even go to mislead viewers into thinking that the killer has somehow taken on ursine form (although a fight between the berserker and the meandering grizzly eventually clears up this confusion). In the film's closing moments, we finally get to see the killer, and it soon becomes patently obvious why Richard decided to keep him hidden for so long: he looks crap!Also serving to make the production look super cheap and unconvincing are the terrible lighting and smoke effects designed to create a creepy atmosphere, but which just look plain daft, and the crap gore effects which consist of a few naff claw scratches and a smattering of fake blood.Thanks heavens for the fact that the film has a half decent cast (including a turn from prolific genre legend George 'Buck' Flower) and that gratuitous outdoor shagging scene—otherwise it would be a complete waste of time.

More
lost-in-limbo
1987/07/09

Six college friends camping in the woods for a week-out retreat, learn the history of the area where they're staying at. Supposedly an old Nordic legend tells of a blood-thirsty warrior known as a berserker, which they would be dressed up in bears' fur and wear their snouts as a mask. Vikings used them for raids. Well, it's only a story, but the young adults find out it might be reality when they start being killed off one by one, by an unknown figure, but maybe it's the grizzly bear that seems to be wandering the area.Awful, awful, awful. Sure I read nothing but damaging opinions on it, but I'm a sucker for backwoods horror films, so I just couldn't pass it up. In all, it was mostly a weakly done and very tatty cheap third-rate woodland slasher item with the usual textbook plot slanted within its tiredly predictable stalk and slash structure. Sometimes being an inept production can raise some unintentional fun (like "Don't Go In the Woods"), but "Berserker" was a incoherently lifeless drag. Sex (a rather hot and heavy scene) and blood runs freely, but these attack scenes are plain insipid. The killer basically rubs the blood on its victims and delicately scratches them to death with its claws and teeth. Oh, it's laughable! Something even more eye-boggling was that we had in one corner a caring grizzly bear and in the other the Berserker, which they came to blows in one oddly interesting, if senseless clash. The bear (maybe on its search for a picnic basket) does get plenty of screen time (more than the Berserker) thanks to the questionable editing, but it goes on to feel redundant to the story. What we get of the berserker is disappointing, and lacking with more talk of it than action. The grimy look of the film can get sinisterly atmospheric, but they indeed went overboard in letting the fog creep into all of the night sequences. Sullen lighting works at times, the open locations standout, a brooding score keeps right at it and so does the louring sound effects. Too bad that the stringy direction fills up the plodding running time with stuffy shenanigans, aimless strolls in the woods, moronically exasperating collage twits and numbingly old-hat jump scares. It's pretty empty on the suspense front, because were lampooned by a ghastly terrible rock soundtrack and bland photography telegraphs everything in an straight-forward fashion. This lazily amateurish handling, really lets slip of an more than decent and fascinating folklore belief. Instead of working something good from this inspired premise, it goes up the same worn-out path and falls into ridiculous patterns with a mundane script. I didn't think the performances were overly cruddy, but Beth Toussaint stands out for a particular reason and a cocky Greg Dawson. The versatile veteran actor George 'Buck' Flower's fervent performance was a breath of fresh air and a modest John Goff's plays a concerned, washed-up sheriff.A sloppy, grubby and daggy bottom-barrel slasher exercise, which no wonder why it's pretty much a forgotten staple of its sub-genre.

More
Coventry
1987/07/10

The ancient Northern mythology COULD be the most marvelous source for fascinating epics, adventures or breath-taking horror.but instead of this, some idiots decided to turn it into a slasher. I'm not even sure it's worth to be called a 'film' because it's a completely uninspired, lame and annoying mess. The legend of the Berserkers - a tribe of aggressive Viking Warriors during the 10th century - forms a weak base to show one of the crappiest 80's horror films I've ever seen..And I've seen a lot of junk in my days. Except for the slightly different plot-point, all other routine slasher elements are present. Meaning: horny boys, sexy girls, loud and inappropriate rock music, stupidity and a lot of bad acting. I'm convinced that this film will disappoint even diehard slasher-fans because there are too many survivors at the end! What the hell is that about? The body-count in this pile of garbage lies far below the normal standards. Add to this a bit of cheesy make-up effects and an incredibly stupid end-twist, then you've got one of the silliest and unnecessary movies ever made. Skip this one and keep your eyes open for REAL Viking fables.

More
bigpappa1--2
1987/07/11

A group of teenagers (who actually look to be 30) head up to a cabin for some fun and sun, but come under attack by an ancient viking beserker.An awful film with poor acting, direction, and writing, even by slasher movie standards. Sloopy editing doesn't help much either. Features more sex and nudity then usual though, but even that can't make this entertaining. My rating: 3 out of 10.

More