Vikings (TV series)

[Connavar]

Torvi in Finnish is "a trumpet" or "a person, who tends to make stupid things."

Spoiler

I loved seeing Floki struggling with his True Believers. That one woman was the only one, who had balls to go and say "we should follow him," when most of them were prepared to turn around from Floki's safe heaven. The interesting fact is the by the time Vikings found iceland it had 40 to 50 percent of it's land mass covered in forest. Today it's around ten to fifteen percent, because the volcanoes and humans wiped away the rest.

I don't understand Ivar's need to be King of the Kattagat. He is able to raise warparties all on his own, and he doesn't need a throne for that. Besides the point, we would always need a body guard to follow him everywhere, and I don't think dear old Bishop is the best person for that job. He'd rather murder Ivar when time arrives then save his butt.

About Ivar & Ep 8

Spoiler

I dont think Ivar ever had a need to be king of the Kattegat, he is smart enough to know having huge armies to conquer more of England, other lands will became him more famous than Ragnar as he said. I can actually understand, respect his need to attack Kattegat only to avenge his mother, kill Lagertha. She was the only person who loved him despite the damaged body he had as a kid. Its understandable why Ubbe, Vitserk would not avenge her as emotionally as Ivar who she lived for. The last ep proved that was his only goal. What did you think of the last ep? It was refereshing to see Björn outsmart Ivar using his war experiences the years Ragnar,Rollo and co. Ivar is greater general than Ragnar ever was but he is young, inexperienced comparison to Björn.

 

[REBerg]

5.10 Moments of Vision
A truly spectacular mid-season finale.

Spoiler

At the first cut from the start of the fight, I thought that History had copped out on the full-scale battle it had been building. I was delighted to be so wrong.
The continuous before-and-during-battle cuts were brilliant, as were the mid-battle visions. The segments in Iceland contrasted the innate violence of the Viking culture and Floki's vision of a new peaceful civilization.
I noticed that Floki "offered" to serve as a meaningful sacrifice to appease the Gods. I wonder if his flock will accept his offer.
Was Iceland really founded on a philosophy of pacifism?

 

[svalbard]

The answer to your question is no. Icelandic sagas such as The Burning of Njal are ferociously violent.

 

[REBerg]

What, History taking liberties with history?
Now, please don't tell me that Viking leaders of both genders were not at the very front of the battle lines heading the charge against the enemy. That seems so much more noble than today's heads of state, waging war from behind the scenes, ordering the deaths of thousands for questionable reasons, risking not so much as a hair on their heads.

 

[svalbard]

A brilliant mid-season finale. It had it all. Big set piece battle, sacrifice, major character deaths, and a real 'What is all this for?' feel to it as the slaughter went on and on.

And thay final scene. A legendary warrior returns. What will he make of it all.

 

[REBerg]

A brilliant mid-season finale. It had it all. Big set piece battle, sacrifice, major character deaths, and a real 'What is all this for?' feel to it as the slaughter went on and on.

And thay final scene. A legendary warrior returns. What will he make of it all.

Spoiler

A legendary warrior who stayed out of the action.
Has Rollo come to collect his due for sending the Frankish soldiers who may have given the war to Ivar? Has he even met his crazy nephew?

 

[clovis-man]

Spoiler

A legendary warrior who stayed out of the action.
Has Rollo come to collect his due for sending the Frankish soldiers who may have given the war to Ivar? Has he even met his crazy nephew?

Spoiler

Nah. He came because he was invited.

 

[Judderman]

Who is watching the Viking series? I'm somewhat surprised there is no thread on it here. It is very popular. It is not strictly fantasy.... but there is very little fact in it, and there is plenty of mythology referred to. I have just binged through the first four seasons and the first part of the fifth in the last month or so. It is overall a superb series!

It would be nice to know what of it is factual (or close to fact). It seems the main character and his family are based on legendary characters from the 8th and 9th centuries, which were written about in the 12th or 13th centuries so may not have much reality to them. Some of the characters appear to be referred to in histories of other European countries, though with slightly different names given.

Anyway I highly recommend watching it. There is entertaining drama, romance, deception, some good acting, twists and fantastic fight sequences. It is engrossing to see how the Vikings explored "new" lands. There are parts where a particular storyline drags a bit, like one in season 2 that seemed to go in circles for a few episodes. But overall great entertainment. Other than trying to work out what will happen next it is fairly simplistic. It's not Game of Thrones. There is some fun stuff like an ancient seer giving glimpses of the future to key characters too.
Compared to The Lost Kingdom, I would say this seems arguably less realistic (even though Lost Kingdom is a fictional story) but probably better acting and is bigger budget etc. I like them both. Both shows are at overlapping time periods and it is interesting to see how they present the British Kings differently, and about the Viking incursions.

 

[Parson]

But there has been Vikings

I watched for a while, but the violence finally overrode any enjoyment I got from the stories. I think the episode that did it for me was about the "eagle."

 

[REBerg]

But there has been Vikings

I watched for a while, but the violence finally overrode any enjoyment I got from the stories. I think the episode that did it for me was about the "eagle."

That was an especially horrific method of execution.
I was appalled, even earlier in the series, when human sacrifice to the gods was revealed. I suppose the element of violence lends a sense of reality to this depiction of the times.

 

[-K2-]

...It would be nice to know what of it is factual (or close to fact). It seems the main character and his family are based on legendary characters from the 8th and 9th centuries, which were written about in the 12th or 13th centuries so may not have much reality to them. Some of the characters appear to be referred to in histories of other European countries, though with slightly different names given...

Have you performed any searches regarding these characters? Not surprisingly, much of it is based off of actual people and events. As with many historically themed presentations, though drama is added to make it entertaining, truth is often 'as strange or stranger than fiction.'

Elsewhere on the web I'm routinely inspired when discussing 'extreme' events or situations to remind folks to actually do a bit of investigation. My common response being; "you cannot imagine anything that has not already been done before, often well beyond what you're suggesting. And is likely happening now."

Point being (to those put-off by the violence and other aspects), the level of violence and depravity presented in the show is minor in comparison to real events.

I'm not stating that the show is factual (though I feel it has made an effort to be), yet if you want historical fact along with your entertainment, that's what you get. Man is a violent and depraved beast, often spanning from one extreme to the other.

K2

 

[Judderman]

But there has been Vikings

I watched for a while, but the violence finally overrode any enjoyment I got from the stories. I think the episode that did it for me was about the "eagle."

Strange I searched but didn't find that thread. Maybe this thread can be deleted.

I think "The Eagle" was the last of a run of perhaps 4 of the poorer episodes. The story didn't progress and that execution was dragged out.

 

[Judderman]

This thread has just been pointed out to me as the main Vikings thread. What a superb show this is. At least mostly. Some stories, such as with Athelstan and Ragnar (and previously with Jarl borg) were sometimes dragged out. Season 4 suffered a little with needing a refresh, though it was still good. Season 5 definitely refreshes! I haven't quite reached the season 5 midseason finale yet but I thought s5 e4 was one of the best episodes. Great drama.

 

[Judderman]

I found it very interesting in an earlier season when it was revealed that many of the English people in the 9th century AD thought that art such as some of the impressive sculptures and statues left by the Romans were actually made by a group of Giants who had previously ruled the realm. And they didn't know of the Roman people. Actually is plausible if most people had no real education at that time.

 

[ctg]

Actually is plausible if most people had no real education at that time.

Are you saying that there was no giants, or that there is no megalithic ruins or that the people were uneducated to be able to figure out things. The Vikings starts badly because it shows that the English were baboons and the vikings came in with a superior technology and were ruthless bastards, even though since 67 AD Budaka had showed that the British people knows how to behave badly. The celtic people lost their teachers, and much of the knowledge to the Roman slaughter in the druids temple at that year. In a way Romans decapitated the people and afterwards, as Budaka didn't had a great tactical mind, the rebel leaders were put down until the Christianity swept over the land.

I think it's really good that they didn't showed Vikings with great halls, and such things, but actually as nomads mostly living in and around forested Scandinavia. In a way you can see Vikings as tribal warriors or as a band of hoolings compared to English Castles. Britannia and Gallia was so much ahead of the Norwegian, Swedish and Danish Vikings in the technology terms. They however didn't had great leaders, like the one they forget out from Ragnar.

At the end, and where the series is sitting at the moment Ivar is far more capable than his father. I have a love/hate relationship with his characters as I admire his cunning mind but at the same time, I'm upset that he's so bastardly ruthless and completly stupid towards his own family. The power has really gone into his head and that's bad by our traditions. Back then it moved mountains.

 

[Parson]

Elsewhere on the web I'm routinely inspired when discussing 'extreme' events or situations to remind folks to actually do a bit of investigation. My common response being; "you cannot imagine anything that has not already been done before, often well beyond what you're suggesting. And is likely happening now."

I've been thinking about this for a while. It is probably true that "you cannot imagine anything that has not already been done before, I don't think that says anything about what should be broadcast for public consumption. Let me give you a couple of examples. Many years ago I was teaching school and we had a teacher who kept a list of all of the negative behavior that she had encountered and handed out a list at the beginning of the school year. She always had all kinds of those things happen each year. I was convinced that she stimulated ideas by passing out that list. More importantly and less subjectively, about 2 decades ago the small community in which I lived had a teenager who committed suicide, and one other had threatened it. The community got together to fight teenage suicide (churches, schools, businesses etc.) and we made a big deal of "Celebrate Life." What happened? We 4 attempts in the next 2 years, and it wasn't until we stopped making a deal of it, that the attempts disappeared. The leaders decided that by addressing the suicides we gave them the attention and the legitimacy that the children wanted and therefore made the option more viable in their eyes. Something like that must be considered when broadcasting violence or other socially unacceptable behavior.

 

[Judderman]

Parson what you are talking about is partly why there are so many mass shootings. They are publicised and give people ideas. Anyway, we digress.
K2, I did so a little searching. Not much admittedly and lazily asked here. But regarding the Viking main characters it seems many were written about in the 13th century despite being apparently active in the 8th and 9th century. How factual will these legends be? Barely at all.
But yes, the point that there is some basis about the British Kings from history, the places Vikings attacked etc, along with knowledge from Archaeology about means there will be some facts. I never doubted they were violent times! :O

CTG, yes I was saying it is plausible that the Romans were forgotten down the generations and replaced in peoples minds by legends.

Another point. -Lagertha, is never made to age on this show! She is more serious but they don't make her look much older. Some characters age massively. A bit odd as in the first series they already said she was getting old to have children.

 

[REBerg]

5.11 The Revelation
Welcome back, Vikings!
With nearly a year between the "mid-season finale" and this episode, it's commendable that the History channel preceded the continuation with a full-length recap, "The Saga of Bjorn" -- as the channel had done with a recap focused on Lagertha after a previous mid-season gap.

Spoiler

This episode did a nice job of picking up the pieces in the aftermath of the big Lothbrok brothers showdown. Bishop Heahmund's promise of protection for Lagertha & Company if she fled to England might be null and void. His imagined influence may have died with King Ecbert.
They should have let Bjorn execute Rollo, actual historic events be damned.

 

[Av Demeisen]

Norsemen (Vikingane)
Are there 5 seasons already? Now I'm confused.

 

[clovis-man]

Season 6 just started.