Iceman (2017) User Reviews

Otzi's Story

[Foutainoflife · 7/10 · 15 February 2019]

I loved that someone took the initiative to create this story for Otzi. We can never truly know what Otzi's life was like or what lead to his demise but we can speculate. That's what this film does. It's a fictionalized story about the Otzi's days.

The plot summary is simple. Otzi is a highly regarded member of a small tribe. He sets out to do some hunting and while he's gone a trio of men rape his woman, burn their homes, kill all but one member of the tribe and steals an important relic. This sets Otzi on a path revenge in the final days of his life.

So, let's start with the fact that there is no need to understand the ancient dialog that is used. It was easy to interpret what was going on. The actors did well with their roles and really had a way of drawing me into the film. The costumes were what you'd expect to see for this time period and I liked that they incorporated some of the artifacts found with Otzi's body into the storyline. One that stood out was how he wraps a large ember in what appeared to be leaves so that he could transport fire from the village to his campsite while hunting. I thought the settings were great. It was rough terrain and it was filmed in a way that really helped convey his loneliness, how small he was in a big world and how hard it was to survive.

I really don't have a lot to complain about. I wish there had been more focus placed on his relationships within his tribe and while I liked the film as it is, I would've liked to have seen an actual dialog and made this a bit more dramatic.

I liked it and I would think that those who have been intrigued with Otzi would find it enjoyable as well. I'm not sure as to how historically accurate things may actually be but I thought that this was aimed towards being as accurate as is possible. I would recommend this as a decent movie.

stunning environment

[ferguson-6 · 7/10 · 14 March 2019]

Greetings again from the darkness. Some writers struggle with how to end their story. In this case, writer-director Felix Randau had his ending served up in newspaper headlines almost 30 years ago, and his challenge was to come up with an interesting beginning and middle (as well as meaning for the ending). In 1991, at almost 10,000 feet above sea level, a body was discovered. Originally thought to be a missing hiker, it was determined instead to be a 5300 year old Neolithic man. Thanks to the ice, he was well-preserved along with his clothes, tools, and supplies.

Nicknamed Otzi the Iceman since he was found in the Otztal Alps (Italy), some basic information could be derived about his existence and death. Filmmaker Randau then created a fictional account of his final days, speculating on and imagining the life he led. German actor Jurge Vogel stars as Kelab (Otzi the Iceman), and we get our first glimpse of native Neolithic life in the community of his clan. The mother of his child dies giving birth, and we see Kelab display a magical box used as a shrine of worship to pay respect. The contents of the box are not revealed until near the end of the film.

While Kelab is out hunting for food, the village is violently attacked. The invasion kills most of the inhabitants and destroys their homes and supplies. Kelab takes the surviving infant child with him as he sets off to seek revenge. As he tracks those who attacked, we see him balance his incredibly strong survival instincts with his emotional need for revenge. Another community led by the legendary Franco Nero offers Kelab a place to rest and a safe haven for the infant child that couldn't possibly make the trek that lies ahead for his father. The scenery is breathtaking and environment treacherous.

Very little dialogue is spoken, and what there is must be interpreted by the situation. The filmmakers and researchers decided on an early form of Rhaetian for the film, so unless you are a world renowned linguist, you'll likely have to join the bulk of viewers in interpreting meaning. Mr. Vogel is quite believable in his performance ... at times we forget he's an actor rather than the Neolithic man he's portraying.

The costumes and makeup are excellent and realistic, while the setting, scenery and environment (nature) are the true co-star. We feel the cold and grasp the harsh conditions. This was a violent life ... typically out of necessity, yet sometimes out of emotion. QUEST FOR FIRE (not CAVEMAN) and the brutal elements of THE REVENANT (without the bear) are recalled; however, Mr. Randau's dramatized account of Kelab's last days in pursuit of vengeance are a perfect fit for this coldest of all cold cases. Otzi the Iceman's preserved mummy can be viewed at the South Tyrol Museum of Archaeology in Bolzano, Italy.

A Harrowing Glimpse at Human Prehistory

[makleen2 · 7/10 · 13 April 2019]

A Neolithic revenge story seeks to explain the mysterious man found frozen in the Alps. Written and directed by Felix Randau, and originally release in Germany in 2017 as Der Mann aus dem Eis, Iceman purports to tell the story of a Copper Age man preserved in the frozen Alps for 5,000 years. Beautiful landscapes and harrowing authenticity help balance what might otherwise be a one-dimensional revenge plot.

Kelab (Jürgen Vogel), Kisis (Susanne Wuest), and their clan are living in the Ötztal Alps around 3000 BC, where Kelab protects a fetish called Tineka. The clan is blessed with the birth of a child, but grieved by the loss of its mother. When Kelab is off hunting in the woods, a trio of raiders attack his village, slaughter its inhabitants, and steal their idol. Filled with a desire for revenge, Kelab rescues the newborn and pursues the raiders.

Along the way, Kelab interacts with other Neolithic people, including an old man, Ditob (Franco Nero), and his daughter Mitar (Violetta Schurawlow), in their sparsely populated valley. Can Kelab survive the harsh elements to exact revenge and take back his sacred Tineka?

Iceman was inspired by Ötzi the Iceman. In 1991, Alpine hikers discovered a mummified body partially frozen in ice. Shockingly, scientists dated its age to somewhere between 3400 and 3100 BC. The adult male was so well preserved that scientists were able to determine precisely what he ate in the days before he died. Most intriguingly, they discovered his cause of death was an arrow impaled in his back, compounded by other injuries.

It's impossible to say for certain who this man was and the larger circumstances leading to his death, but evidence gathered from his corpse informs Iceman in a credible and convincing way. Scientists identified blood from at least four other people on his weapons and clothing, so we know he was involved in a violent struggle. The film is so authentic its characters even speak an early version of Rhaetic, a language related to Etruscan and spoken by pre-Indo Europeans living in that region.

Like Alpha (2018), Iceman has great cinematography, was shot in beautiful and sweeping landscapes, and tries to authentically re-create prehistoric culture. Unlike Alpha, however, Iceman has a realistic story. When one man falls from a sheer cliff, he breaks his back instead of being conveniently saved by ridiculously improbable circumstances.

But for all its good qualities, Iceman left something to be desired. The 1981 French film Quest for Fire, in which the the dialog is also spoken in a prehistoric language, benefited from rich interactions between the characters. In contrast, Iceman was oddly solipsistic. Interactions between characters were kept at a bare minimum. I expected much more, particularly when it came to Kelab and his encounters with other humans. I'm not an anthropologist, but I'm pretty sure we were able to communicate and express emotions other than anger back then.

Iceman was generally praised by critics, but left audiences shrugging their shoulders. It currently has an audience favorability rating of 54% on RottenTomatoes. I probably would've had the same reaction if I didn't love historically authentic films. For me, seeing this primitive man's world come to life more than made up for Iceman's deficiencies.

a revenge story

[Kirpianuscus · 5 December 2018]

...interesting for the reasonable version of Otzi life, for cinematography and for the status of experiment, for the tension and desire to recreate a lost world. I t is easy to critic this movie but, in my case, preserving the fascination about the discover of the Otzi mummy, the film represents a decent answer to a history who could only be imagined. So, easy to propose comparations or discover mistakes. But the essence remains interesting and the effort is not minor for recreate an entire fascinating universe. So, a not bad revenge story.

prehistoric western

[SnoopyStyle · 7/10 · 5 April 2021]

In 1991, a frozen dead man is found in the Alps. He's been there for 5300 years. "This is his story." Kelab returns from hunting to find his settlement burnt down and his family massacred. A three man war party had come to steal a relic.

It's a little slow to start. It's trying to be authentic which includes limited dialogue and everybody looking like the same caveman. The sets and the costumes seem very authentic. Rather quickly, this gets brutally violent and it's a revenge plot. It becomes a harsh western and that's quite compelling. This can be slow at times especially with the quiet. Nevertheless, this is a simple and effective tale of a brutal age.

More a revenge drama than living history

[IndustriousAngel · 6/10 · 6 December 2017]

Not a bad movie, "Der Mann aus dem Eis" gets weighed down by its "plot" which concentrates on Ötzi's violent death and the days before, creating a murder and revenge story with lots of violence but no levity at all.

The movie gets plus points for trying to get its history right; I liked how it highlights the fact that even then, in the late stone- / early bronze age, humankind was already far removed from the nature it still depended upon. A good idea in this respect were some rituals, plus of course the story's MacGuffin, an obsidian shard used for rituals which is kept in a pretty wooden box.

On the minus side, the amount of violence was maybe historically accurate but if you already go the length of portraying a stone age society halfway correctly (including made-up speech), you might as well include the nicer aspects of human life. A few tender looks and embraces during the first five minutes is all we get.

From the technical POV, the production is OK, out of their limited budget they got everything which could be expected and then some - the sets were fine, the costumes great, casting and acting good (nice lengthy cameo by Franco Nero) and of course the spectacular outdoor locations are an asset. Yet in many instances the camera-work stays rather pedestrian, so while the story shares some genes with "The Revenant", the photography is of lower quality (no big deal, Lubezki is a genius and no mistake). There's only two scenes where the pictures really take flight - one chase along a ridge filmed with a drone or cable-camera against spectacular backdrops, really vertigo-inducing that one - and one lengthy sequence where the hero is trapped in a crevasse below the glacier. Both scenes only emphasize that there was a better movie somewhere but it got buried under a too-simple and violent plot.

Recommended all the same, especially for the realistic portrayal of those early societies.

Recommended For Its Uniqueness.

[redrobin62-321-207311 · 7/10 · 29 March 2020]

It's not that "Iceman" is a great film - not in the caliber of, say, 'Amadeus' or 'The Godfather' - but it does have its own story to tell, and in a way you won't see that much. At the beginning of the film, there's this disclaimer: "The characters in the following film speak an early version of the Rhaetic language. Translation is not required to comprehend the story." And it's true. 'Iceman' is basically a revenge film akin to almost every Chinese martial arts (Wuxia) movie or even Lone Wolf & Cub. Apart from the scarcity of language, the cinematography of the eastern Alps is breathtaking. You can almost call 'Iceman' neolithic Nordic noir for the blues on display as well as the general moodiness and bleak surroundings. Interesting in this day and age to release a near-silent film, but I think this one works.

Last man standing - 3300 BC

[marius-bancila · 6/10 · 1 September 2018]

When I found this movie I was very curious what kind of story they put forward. Knowing that there is not spoked in a modern language or translated made it even more appealing. However, it turned out to be disappointing.

For the good part, I have to say that I enjoyed how they tried to show how people used to live five millenniums ago. I don't know if it was really like that or not, but I appreciated the attempt. You don't see often that kind of undertaking.

However, the story that unfolded was nothing but modern day Hollywood blockbusters set in another era. Put Tom Cruise in the main role and you have everything. Was that all they could come up with? The hero leaves home and in his absence his entire family gets killed so he sets on a journey of revenge. Liam Neeson could not be more convincing. Of course, we all know what happened to Otzi, although you have to watch the movie to see what led to that.

It's an overall 6 stars from me.

Worthy of attention!

[ryan-elliotte · 9/10 · 20 January 2020]

Loved the simplicity of this tale, brutal & stunningly beautiful from the get-go! Stunning cinematography & excellent camera work. I won't say anymore because I believe going in on this one blind, is absolutely the way to go!

9/10 - Solid ancient & epic tale of revenge.

How Ötzi got into the ice AKA The German Revenant

[Horst_In_Translation · 6/10 · 4 December 2017]

"Der Mann aus dem Eis" or "Iceman" is a German 95-minute movie from 2017, a very recent theatrical release, and the newest effort by writer and director Felix Randau and actually his first directorial effort in a decade if IMDb is right, his 3rd full feature film in total and I think this has the potential to become his most known to date. First of all, it needs to be said that you can watch this one no matter where you are from because it includes spoken language only in the first 25 minutes or so and none at all afterward and this spoken stuff early on is in an old extinct language that you are not supposed to understand, don't need to understand in order to understand what is going on. It was a nice idea in fact, but it was almost destroyed by the decision to explain that right away in written text at the moment the film starts. It is a creative decision. No need for justifications. If people complain early on that they don't understand what's going on and where the subtitles are, then let them leave the room and theater. They won't be missed. But no worries, like I said earlier: It's not even the first third of the entire film.

The main character here is played by Jürgen Vogel, one of Germany's most known actors these days and he is really having a strong year. His turn as Knecht Ruprecht in another recent release is already top-notch and so is this one here and we see him as a very hairy and bearded man in both these recent films. In general I would say that the more physical a role is the better it is for him and as this one here is almost 100% physical, he really makes it work magnificently. Took me a while to really get into this one, but when I finally did, then it was a pretty captivating watch. Hennicke and Wuest are decent too with what they were given I would say. Now as for the contents finally: This is the story of a man who lived roughly 5,000 years ago and whose body was found frozen deep into the ice not too long ago, which made it such a spectacular find because of how well-conserved it was. So this film is the story of an actually existing person, even if it is entirely fictitious as we know nothing about him really other than very vaguely how he must have died, which means that the only thing Randau had to make sure that if he includes the death, then he must be somewhere up in the snow or mountainside or anything.

As for the title of my review, this film reminded me a lot of "The Revenant", the film that got AGI and LdC Oscar wins. Okay it plays in a different country, different time (way earlier) and includes different languages, but the looks were really similar in terms of sets, cinematography, the big fur costumes and also story-wise a bit as the main character was on a ruthless path of revenge. And it was an okay watch I guess. There weren't too many weaknesses here, one would maybe be the inclusion (the second time) of the guy who he saves from his antagonists, but also that was nothing serious, just a bit random to be honest. It absolutely needs to be stated that this is not a nature documentary or little snowy fantasy/history film for families during the holidays. This is a really bloody and brutal movie that is not scared of graphic depictions of murder (on many occasions), rape and other pretty severe stuff. Maybe somebody should have told the kids in my viewing too (how were they even allowed in there, there's no way they could have been old enough is there? What is the age restriction here), so they would not have left the film at the end with a mix of being genuinely bored and genuinely shocked. Okay what else? As there is so little talking in here, major focus is on the score and sound effects of course and I can see the movie score some awards attention in these areas (no pun intended), even if the music was over the top missing the right notes on 2-3 occasions. Still these are the areas as well as Vogel in the lead where I can see the film getting in at the German Film Awards for example. Overall, I give this one a thumbs-up. One of the most different German films from this year, I recommend checking it out, even if this is definitely not a movie for everybody.

Watchable

[sbrookes-15808 · 5/10 · 7 October 2022]

A reasonable film, which certainly beat a previous film of a similar subject that I watched recently. The scenery in this was spectacular, and for that alone, it is worth a watch. The costumes were believable as was the sets, they were so good I could almost smell them (stinky!) Slightly slow start, but that seemed to take the watcher into the age, there was little in the way of dialogue, unless you understand an ancient language. Soon though the gory bit began, and gory indeed it was.

Shortly later the film, in my mind became a little tedious, along with a bit of guess work due to the lack of dialogue. But picked up again in time for an ending to fit in with the real life find of an ancient man in the mountains. Most likely none of this was his real story, but it all fitted, and gave an insight into living in those days, which would have been a pretty grim if short life.

Important perspective

[jimbowclock · 8/10 · 6 February 2020]

This film is important. It has a great perspective and shows you how far we have really come. I great story of evil and good and their coexistence. It actually lowered my anxiety in a weird way. The sound is just fantastic in this film. As well as cinematography and direction and performance. Nothing really bad to say about, its effective and is bare bones story telling. Not pretentiously overlong. I loved it.

WATCH AGAIN AND AGAIN.

[sagar-iftekhar · 7/10 · 18 January 2020]

A history of our ancestor. Love for the Iceman. Salute to his vengeance.

Modern twist on an old genre

[Leofwine_draca · 5/10 · 19 January 2020]

ICEMAN is a modern variant on that old '80s sub-genre of prehistoric adventure that did away with dialogue to concentrate on stories told by action and adventure alone. QUEST FOR FIRE was the most famous of these movies, but the genre also spawned such oddities as the Italian gore flick MASTER OF THE WORLD. ICEMAN, a European production shot in Italy, doesn't skimp on the violence either, essentially telling a revenge story about a stone age man whose settlement is attacked with many deaths; he survives and essentially seeks vengeance over the course of the running time. It's a nice looking film in terms of cinematography, although the direction leans towards pedestrianism at times and the performances are nothing special. Still, it's nice to see a film that takes historical accuracy a bit more seriously than most, even if the small scale drama turns out to be oddly unaffecting.

Too long

[tomasajdari · 7/10 · 13 January 2019]

Would have been a 9 if it was only 40 minutes long and it needs more of a human inter-connection .

Decent movie by arrogant filmmakers

[canuck3141 · 6/10 · 23 May 2021]

The intro states that the film won't provide subtitles and that they're not needed to understand the film. Perhaps, but they are needed for me to give this film more than 6 stars. This touch of arrogance by the filmmakers cost them 2 stars ...

Yep, exactly what I thought it'd be

[walkingwithprimeval · 6/10 · 30 April 2023]

I'll just admit it right off the bat, I had my reservations about seeing this prehistorical picture from the get go. For starters, it takes place during the post-ice age world of Neolithic earth, the "New Stone Age" period which was at a point in time when most of the late-surviving Pleistocene megafauna had already become extinct and early mankind evolved to a far more familiar state of anatomical modernity in terms of physical appearance and cultural behaviours (a lot less animal-like with regard to instinctively primal characteristics then how their older cave-people ancestors were acting). As someone who is just enamoured with primitive Palaeolithic prehistory, I had an inkling I wasn't exactly going to be all that riveted about watching this film. Despite the prospect of me not enjoying it all that much, I ended up giving it a watch and these here are just my own personal thoughts.

Evoking the pure visceral nature of a survival movie such as this doesn't come easy and is basically a huge feat in and of itself to pull off, one which I feel was conveyed quite adequately in this film (there's no denying). The authentic true-to-life-life costumes, natural surroundings of the rural wilderness setting, and advanced hunter-gatherer village lifestyle with domesticated livestock is ever present and nice to see done some justice to in a project that isn't a historical documentary for once. The pretty standard structure of this speculative story is obviously one of ambiguous guesswork, with dramatising a rage-engulfed Otzi who is essentially spurred into going on a "revenge mission" (of sorts) in order to avenge his savagely slain loved ones after they were all barbarically assaulted by a brutal band of malevolent marauders from another far-off settlement (hypothetically, him seeking out his own personal form of vengeance in accordance with his ancient people's ways and customary beliefs). The performances were solid all-round, with the actors really bringing out that certain sense of true grittiness in hopelessly bleak and extremely grim situations.

When concerning its level of accuracy, the film totally knocks it out of the park; featuring beastly portrayals of just how evil and vile the very nature of the Homo sapiens species could be in some rather disturbingly shocking scenes (carrying out heinous doings with apparently little to no remorse). So I didn't have any issue with potential inaccuracies or anything like that, it's just that it seemed like the movie was going to be average judging by the fairly mediocre plot (and I was kind of right). I know they say it's all about the execution of how these things are done when put into practice, which is all well and good for some but to me, this felt so generic (regardless of how it was executed). Sorry to say but when it comes down to raw movies of this ilk which additionally have prehistoric beasts featured in them, Quest for Fire (1981) and even the superior director's cut of Alpha (2018) are undoubtedly the more compelling (plus entertaining) prehistorical films to me, personally; the former of which I'm well-aware was always envisioned to be a bit more along the lines of a fantastical epic. But hey, at least it's closer in spirit to those types of flicks (even if it does lack some much-needed levity). I'd rather take something similar to Iceman (2017) any day over a period piece about the Roman Empire, Imperial China, or the Old West because I ain't no history buff (I'm a PRE-history buff).

Can't even say I'm all that disappointed because I never had high expectations for this film from the very beginning, to be completely honest. Also, another element of this movie's unoriginality comes in the form of its main story setup; "pillaging hunters mercilessly killing innocent members of an unrelated clan during a premeditated raid in their tribe's territory" is a near-on identical premise as that initially seen in the first act of Ao: The Last Hunter (2010) - I kid you not! And so with all that, I see this as a "one-time thing", where I'm glad I've seen it at least once but don't really have any inclination to rewatch it all over again. It was certainly competently made and all, sure, but I just can't see myself actually wanting to go back and revisit it due to the minor boredom I experienced halfway through. But just because I personally didn't gel all that much with its Bronze Age vibe, that doesn't mean the film won't get you invested in it (I encourage you to see the movie for yourself and to make your own judgment on it).

Drags towards the middle but engaging experience

[pcrprimer · 6/10 · 8 April 2024]

An interesting concept, with not a word of understandable dialogue. Yet it still manages to portray an engaging story. I really liked the filming locations and the costumes. Although it had a small cast, you can tell that they used the budget efficiently. At times it was hard to keep track of the various characters because they are all dressed so similarly. The final climax is also a little anti climactic. It is still a fun movie that transports you a bygone world. Although a minor nitpick, I was hoping the relic would play a bigger role and it was shown how they interacted with it regularly..

Much more then I thought it would be

[deadbull-95171 · 9/10 · 24 April 2021]

This is a serious attempt to recreate the life of a Neolithic man. The story is likely fictionalized, though one might wonder why the actual person it is based on, why his body was located where it was..... The acting's good. The incomprehensible is dialect irrelevant as the story is completely visual. The landscape shots are often spectacular. All in all, way better then I expected and definitely an interesting worthwhile movie.

My mistake - I thought it would be realistic

[harvbenn · 2/10 · 29 June 2019]

Don't ask me why, but I though this film was going to attempt realism. Realistic prehistory seems to be a rather difficult undertaking, but watching this film, I was soon sadly shaking my head until my neck started to hurt. Painful moments in the first fifteen minutes: everyone's wearing and sleeping in skins, so what's she doing at a loom? Water is needed for the ritual with the baby (some things never change), but why does the boy bring water in a large thrown pitcher, with a classically curved handle yet? The house is wattle; where's the daub -- they can't get enough of that freezing wind? And within the house, a floor? Come on. Same with the bed. "Mann Aus Dem Eis" filmmakers need to check out poor places today -- people don't have beds, they have skins (or cardboard or whatever) on the ground. The big wild hairdo's on the blond babes look great but tied back might be a tad more realistic. The total impossibility comes fifteen minutes in, the raid. People subject to raids do not live in a tiny permanent settlement (looked like about 12 people total including children?) with pigs and goats in the pen and a fire burning, advertising your presence for miles, with no lookouts, no security of any kind? They had pigs and goats, so where were their dogs? The raiders walk up and literally stab them in the back! Then the woman with the baby props a stick against her door -- huh? She would take the baby and run like a deer out the back door. Victims of the raid run between the huts -- running straight into the woods might make more sense. Then the raiders, in total control of the hapless settlement, torture the woman instead of raping her, and although there are skins hanging everywhere in the house, they burn it all down. What was the point of the raid again? For a few additional dollars I salvaged the rest of the evening with a romantic comedy.

Beautiful and thought provoking

[ryan-wheeler-152-848754 · 9/10 · 17 February 2022]

Beautiful landscapes and the film really makes you think what it might have been like to live there some 5300 years ago.

On the face of it, its a simple story, a revenge story, but the intrigue of how these peoples daily lives worked and how they thought makes you stop and think.

The religious side to the film has concerning contrasts and lessons to be learnt even today.

This film is worth a watch, its like an art project.

Disappointment

[alightinthedarkfilms · 4/10 · 1 February 2023]

The lowest common denominators paraded here. Uber violence for violence sake.

Shallow and leading. Weak story with stupid twists and turns. The only thing between this and the switch off are some of the acting, scenery/camerawork and a sense that something had gone into it. But the way they burst into the village etc there is no motive. Gang type Psycho violence during this period in history? Seriously? I don't think so.

Not well thought out and an immature script spoil this before it can begin. Pity because the premise was good.

Still a somewhat brave effort, less of the Hollywood none sense please and you could have had a film.

fascinating

[Bone3011 · 8/10 · 6 February 2021]

Fascinating. An unconventional film that shows the lives of simple people a long time ago. When there was almost no language, there were few tools, and the world seemed a different place.

Mostly A Waste Of Time Other Than The Visuals

[TheAnimalMother · 3/10 · 31 January 2022]

The film captures some amazingly beautiful landscapes. Visually the film looks quite tremendous. It's suppose to be the story of a Neolithic man whose body was more recently discovered in the Ötztal Alps. As far as the story goes, there really isn't much of one here at all. Even though there is no dialogue a modern person can understand, some parts are still so typical that they are sadly overly predictable. Other parts are just silly and don't seem well thought out. Story wise, this is so obviously a work of modern fiction. That's the main problem here. While the film looks good visually as I said, the people behind the film just don't seem to be very good storytellers. It's standard, overly simple, and even somewhat illogical at times. There are certainly much better films about prehistoric people than this. In my view, this won't be worth most peoples time.

3.5/10.

inspired by ötzi facts

[cissonius · 9/10 · 16 July 2018]

The story tries successfully to merge the scientific facts about ötzi ( 5300 years old alps ice mummy) with an challenging story. I love the movie, maybe because i have the same paternal haplogroup as ötzi :)