|
  Vikings is a new historical drama on The History Channel, created by Michael Hirst (The Tudors, The Borgias)  Ragnar Lodbrok (Travis Fimmel) is the protagonist. A boisterous young Viking who sails and fights and loots. He tires of pillaging East, and has heard tales of civilizations to the West with gold and treasure beyond his wildest dreams.  Unfortunately for Ragnar, the boats used for the aforementioned tomfoolery are owned by Jarl Haraldson (played by Gabriel Byrne) Jarl decides where the Vikings go for plunder, and he will not risk his boats on what he sees as a fools errand.  Katheryn Winnick plays Lagertha, Ragnar's wife. She herself is a Shield-maiden and tough as boots.  Their son Bjorn has just turned 12, and become an adult in Viking society. He doesn't appear ready to follow in his father's footsteps.  Rollo is Ragnar's best friend, and brother on the field of battle. He doesn't appear as convinced as Ragnar that their future lay in the West.  Floki, another friend of Ragnar's. He is a shipwright and lives in the forest. He is able to communicate with the trees in order to know which ones provide the best wood...or something. He's a bit odd. The first episode aired on March 3rd and I have to say I enjoyed it. It doesn't look quite as amazing as Rome, but if you're a fan of historical dramas (or Game of Thrones) it looks like a promising show that at the very least will feature lots of bearded people with axes, which is always good. It's basically about Vikings just doing cool poo poo and looking really sick so it's going to rule probably. If you missed it there's a few repeats coming up. Upcoming Airings: March 04, 2013 - 02:01-03:01AM March 04, 2013 - 03:02-04:02AM March 04, 2013 - 11:02-12:01AM March 05, 2013 - 03:03-04:02AM March 05, 2013 - 10:00-10:59PM March 06, 2013 - 02:01-03:00AM March 09, 2013 - 11:02-12:01AM March 10, 2013 - 04:03-05:02AM and episode 2 airs on March 10, at 10pm. Or if you like just watch the first two episodes, as History have put them on their website http://www.history.com/shows/vikings (This is my first op so if it's terrible or you can think of anything to add please let me know.)
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 16:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 07:02 |
|
|
I enjoyed it too. There were a couple of cringe inducing bits of dialogue, but overall they didn't overshadow the whole pilot. I doubt this will be too historically accurate, but it will force me to read up more on the period.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 17:18
|
|
|
I liked it. It's entertaining despite some weird lines (I was a fan of "...I must go piss now"). It's definitely not a show that's going to be super historically accurate, and there are already a lot of things I noticed which were inaccurate, but it's still enjoyable and it's not completely misrepresenting history with guys wearing horned helmets or anything like that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 18:08
|
|
|
It's going to be pretty hard to be very accurate historically when most we really know about Ragnar Lodbrok are the ancient viking sagas. There are some records made by the french and english about him raiding their lands so at least we know for sure he really existed and raided in europe.
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 21:46
|
|
 Pleasant surprise that a green light was given for a Game of Thrones spin-off series that followers the origins of House Greyjoy.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 4, 2013 22:08
|
|
|
Took me a long time before I recognized Gabriel Byrne. And I watched two seasons of In Treatment.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 02:16
|
|
|
Important to remember that this is not trying to be 'historically accurate'. It's an adaptation of a saga for the screen, and that saga is itself full of exaggeration and straight-up inventions, because people always like to embellish. So bear that in mind. Also, where're the seaxes?! 
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 02:29
|
|
|
The thread title makes me realize what a missed opportunity it was to not license Death in Fire for the theme song. Show's alright, as long as you aren't up in arms about History moving away from actual history. Which I'm not because before this trend they were called The Hitler Channel for a reason.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 02:34
|
|
|
Hell, a show based on a saga is still closer to actual history than Ice Road Truckers and Ancient Aliens.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 02:35
|
|
|
My impression right now 1/3 through the episode is that this show is trying to be half GoT and half Spartacus and isn't as interesting or good at either parts. It is early yet, though! E: The scene with the Lord/Court was pretty cool though. Imma gonna see a beheading bitches E2: Hahaha that lord is a oval office Tom Brady fucked around with this message at 02:57 on Mar 5, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 02:48
|
|
|
Well it is on History Channel and not HBO, Showtime, or poo poo even AMC. I'm still interested though because the sagas of Ragnar Lodbrok are cool as gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 02:55
|
|
|
I'll definitely be watching this show because even though the pilot didn't do anything to wow me it certainly didn't disappoint me
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 03:03
|
|
|
It's fun to see a cool old culture that we don't see so much. I watched both episodes on Hulu and it's completely watchable so far. Does anybody know the background/reason for the communal snot bucket before war?
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 03:05
|
|
|
Communal Thirst Quencher
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 03:06
|
|
|
I'm watching the second episode now. The teacher from Glee's crazy ex-wife is trying her darndest to be Cersei Lannister, and it's just not working, bless her heart. Okay, I have to admit, the Ye Olde Englishe language in the monastery is bizarre and cool as poo poo. Moose King fucked around with this message at 03:43 on Mar 5, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 03:27
|
|
|
Enjoying it so far. I like that they're keeping it "realistic" as in their clothes and weapons aren't all Wagnerian opera style.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 06:43
|
|
|
I've seen the first episode twice so far, this show owns. I love vikings and as a history nerd they have always been one of my favorites.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 06:50
|
|
|
Can you show drug use on the History channel? Or a boob?
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 07:19
|
|
|
As far as I understand it they aren't bound by any more laws than HBO would be. The thing is, HBO doesn't have to generate revenue through advertisement, where as History channel does, so they probably don't want to upset their revenue source by having raping and boobing. I believe the only channels that are truly bound by those types of laws are ABC/NBC/CBS/FOX
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 07:27
|
|
|
Loomer posted:Hell, a show based on a saga is still closer to actual history than Ice Road Truckers and Ancient Aliens. Pretty much one of the couple reasons I'm interested at all in this. Like... holy crap, History Channel showing something history-related for once! Well, that and, you know. Vikings.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 08:40
|
|
|
Loomer posted:Important to remember that this is not trying to be 'historically accurate'. It's an adaptation of a saga for the screen, and that saga is itself full of exaggeration and straight-up inventions, because people always like to embellish. So bear that in mind. Yeah from reading further it seems that Ragnar's history is very vague but the creator has said as Viking history wasn't written by Vikings it portrays them as bloodthisty and warmongering but he wants to show the other side, so I think this will be more heavily drama based and not feature too much boobs and blood. IRQ posted:The thread title makes me realize what a missed opportunity it was to not license Death in Fire for the theme song. I was pretty disappointed with the opening sequence music, they should've gone for something like a folky Finntroll song.  TemetNosceXVIcubus posted:Enjoying it so far. I like that they're keeping it "realistic" as in their clothes and weapons aren't all Wagnerian opera style. Yeah it 'feels' authentic, like it would've been easy to give people obnoxious gold helmets and MMO style armour sets but it feels gritty and organic. It reminds me of Edoras in the LOTR films for obvious reason.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 09:32
|
|
|
DoggPickle posted:It's fun to see a cool old culture that we don't see so much. I watched both episodes on Hulu and it's completely watchable so far. Does anybody know the background/reason for the communal snot bucket before war? 10th-century Arab traveler Ahmad ibn Fadlan once visited a community of Vikings near the Volga river, and wrote about this and other Viking hygienic practices he witnessed: quote:They are the filthiest race that God ever created. They do not wipe themselves after a stool, nor wash themselves thereafter, any more than if they were wild asses. I bet that town smelled wonderful.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 10:07
|
|
|
McSpanky posted:10th-century Arab traveler Ahmad ibn Fadlan once visited a community of Vikings near the Volga river, and wrote about this and other Viking hygienic practices he witnessed: Goonbjornia
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 10:15
|
|
|
Didn't Fadlan also come to respect them quite a bit as well? Or was that some other scholarly Arab dude who hung out with them? I remember reading some account from somewhere, about how the writer felt that the Norsefolk were altogether very attractive, but were absolutely terrible singers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 10:22
|
|
|
And, at the same time as Fadlan was calling them filthy... The Byzantines were obligated to give them as many baths as they liked when their traders came south, the Icelandics outlawed men (permanently) for making someone dirty on purpose, and most tellingly, the writings of John Wollincombe where he records that the Vikings combed their hair every day, bathed weekly, and changed their clothes often - which was so unusual that it made them immensely more attractive to the English women than the local Anglo-Saxons. Arguably, Faldan was exaggerating, and playing up the religious differences.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 11:12
|
|
|
I see no reason both could be true frankly. It isn't like there were only 100 Vikings.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 11:20
|
|
|
I like how the savage raiders bathed often enough to make the other Europeans very uncomfortable. And how comparatively it made the Arabs seem like total hypochondriacs. So, is there anything indicating a particular point in time at which this show is supposed to be taking place? Or is it just sort of vaguely any time during the "Viking Age"?
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 11:58
|
|
|
Mazed posted:I like how the savage raiders bathed often enough to make the other Europeans very uncomfortable. And how comparatively it made the Arabs seem like total hypochondriacs. It's late 8th century. I think the very first shot explicitly places it at 793.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 12:00
|
|
|
IRQ posted:The thread title makes me realize what a missed opportunity it was to not license Death in Fire for the theme song. I was really surprised when I recognized If I Had A Heart. Fever Ray is amazing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBAzlNJonO8 I liked the first episode, it seems accurate enough and the saga of Ragnar Lodbrok is as hell. Is the second one already out?e. ooops, didn't read the end of the OP. Off to see the next episode then. MIDWIFE CRISIS fucked around with this message at 12:27 on Mar 5, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 12:25
|
|
|
It was good enough. Not great, but worth giving a shot. My grandfather immigrated to North America from Schleswig-Holstein, and it's been passed down that our ancestors were vikings (I fit the look). Dunno if it's true or just more interesting than saying we were a bunch of farmers.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 14:14
|
|
|
Well, your average viking was a farmer for most of the year. Depending on where exactly you folks came from its not unlikely that one or two might have gone on the odd raid.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 15:02
|
|
|
I really like the portrayal of Ragnar and Lagertha's relationship so far, it's nice to see a somewhat equal and trusting relationship in this type of historical show for a change. I appreciated that they actually had a conversation and even a brawl over who got to go on the raid, that it wasn't just accepted quietly behind the scenes. It might not be super accurate historically that women got to go on raids, but it's exactly the sort of deviations from accuracy that I don't mind because it makes for more interesting characters. Plus, it obviously fits in with Lagertha being a shield maiden in the saga. And I can't get over how comparatively small those ships were 
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 16:45
|
|
|
Gender roles in old Scandinavian society seemed to be largely a separate-but-equal affair, if I'm recalling right, but didn't some of those cultures have kind of a thing, at least towards women, going something like, "If you want to do a man's work, fine, just expect to be treated like a man"? From what I understand, men acting effeminate was considered to be the far greater taboo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 18:08
|
|
|
I liked this a lot, don't care about historical inaccuracies, it looks cool enough and I like the actors/ actresses, and the crazy boat maker is awesome.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 18:55
|
|
|
Azmodaii posted:I liked this a lot, don't care about historical inaccuracies, it looks cool enough and I like the actors/ actresses, and the crazy boat maker is awesome. Yeah, Gustaf Skarsgard, he's a good actor from a pretty solid family of actors. His dad is Stellan Skarsgard who's been in a lot of Hollywood films (Thor, Avengers, Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, etc) and one of his brothers is Alex Skarsgard (Trueblood, Generation Kill). I really enjoy him as the eccentric shipbuilder, he's played the role very well so far.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 19:27
|
|
|
McSpanky posted:10th-century Arab traveler Ahmad ibn Fadlan once visited a community of Vikings near the Volga river, and wrote about this and other Viking hygienic practices he witnessed: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkcsLFSAS30 The character Antionio Banderas plays in the 13th Warrior is a facsimile of Ahmad Ibn Fadlan and inserted the same story into the film.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 21:28
|
|
|
Show was surprisingly watchable. Opening battle was pretty lame though.. where was the rest of the raiding party? The writing can be pretty cringe worthy though: "going to the thing"
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 21:48
|
|
|
...it was called the Thing. What do you want them to call it? Hell, Iceland's parliament is still known as the Althing, and the Danes have the Folketing, or 'People's Thing', for theirs. There is nothing wrong with saying 'I'm going to the Thing.' Because the Thing is a thing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 21:55
|
|
|
Yeah that was actually one of the historically accurate parts. It's actually where the English word is lifted from (among hundreds of other Scandinavian words). It's meaning has evolved over the years from a meeting or assembly to mean an object, though.
Jamwad Hilder fucked around with this message at 22:03 on Mar 5, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 22:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 07:02 |
|
|
Conquistador posted:I see no reason both could be true frankly. It isn't like there were only 100 Vikings. Maybe they were the grossest of all the Vikings and that's why they were stuck living around the Volga.  I'm enjoying this so far because I find the whole Viking thing really interesting (probably because I rarely heard much about it in my history classes) and because I'm taking it with a huge grain of salt with regards to historical accuracy. It's been helpful to remember this is from the same guy who did The Tudors, which I also enjoyed but which took a lot of license with historical fact at times.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2013 22:08
|
|
