229 réponses à ce sujet

[HoonDing]

Travis Fimmel looks like a mix of Heath Ledger and Chris Hemsworth.

[Ophir147]

Elhanan wrote...

No redeeming characters, but lots of action. Tis OK.

It works for Game of Thrones after Ned dies, doesn't it?

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

Ophir147 wrote...

Elhanan wrote...

No redeeming characters, but lots of action. Tis OK.

It works for Game of Thrones after Ned dies, doesn't it?

Well there is still Jonn.

[Elhanan]

Ophir147 wrote...

Elhanan wrote...

No redeeming characters, but lots of action. Tis OK.

It works for Game of Thrones after Ned dies, doesn't it?

 

Wouldn't know; never have seen an episode.

[Addai]

So what did you think? I was really worried about this episode, both that they might ruin the interesting character dynamics and that it would be boring without any fighting. Ha! They pulled it together really well. I'm impressed that, finally, there is a media depiction of the Norse that both has the guts not to sugarcoat, and the sensitivity and skill to give even the harsh stuff its dignity and beauty.

And OMG, the relationship between Ragnar and Athelstan. How complicated is that.

Next episode looks like Lagertha is going to get some central screen time. Speaking of complicated relationships, I hope that resolves well.

[happy_daiz]

^ I was on the edge of my seat for most of the episode, and had to pick my jaw up from the floor near the end. It was raw, yet beautiful. Very well done.

I'm curious to see how Athelstan acts towards Ragnar, now that he knows what the true intent of his tagging along was.

[Joy Divison]

"Oh, there once was a hero named Ragnar the Red..."

[happy_daiz]

^ You know, I think that every time I hear his name.

[slimgrin]

Addai67 wrote...

So what did you think? I was really worried about this episode, both that they might ruin the interesting character dynamics and that it would be boring without any fighting. Ha! They pulled it together really well. I'm impressed that, finally, there is a media depiction of the Norse that both has the guts not to sugarcoat, and the sensitivity and skill to give even the harsh stuff its dignity and beauty.

And OMG, the relationship between Ragnar and Athelstan. How complicated is that.

Next episode looks like Lagertha is going to get some central screen time. Speaking of complicated relationships, I hope that resolves well.

I take issue with who they sacrificed, especially Leif. Really pissed me off and it seems unlikley Ragnar wouldn't object. I'm not sure Siggy poisoned Lagertha now, but I do admire her ambition. She'll have Rollo pitting his blade against Ragnar in no time. As for poor Athelstan, would Ragnar really throw him away like that? Or was this a way to scare Athelstan for some reason? I suspect he knew Althestan would not be picked. 

[Addai]

They don't see death as a horrible thing. They even showed Leif's face at the end with the smile still on it, I think to emphasize this, that he did it gladly. It's what I mean that they don't sugarcoat the Germanic/ Norse mindset. Actually it's a staple of many cultures, the idea of a propitiatory death. If you turn the idea on its head, the idea that people are only good for what they can do for you in life is a rather utilitarian one. Also in a world where death is constant, not having a terrible fear of it is an advantage.

Modifié par Addai67, 23 avril 2013 - 01:04 .

[Elhanan]

Still, many of the loved one's were not so pleased at those volunteering for the sword and altar. And all of it makes me appreciate other Nordic lore a bit more, as well as my own modern comforts.

[Addai]

Floki's wife, yeah. But I'm with her, Floki can't die. 

I'm sure there are mixed feelings but they were all volunteers. Not sure on how historical all the details are. 9 people every 9 years is a lot of human sacrifice. The bog studies I've read about only had the occasional human sacrifice victim, so I'd always pictured it as something done in extraordinary circumstances.

Modifié par Addai67, 23 avril 2013 - 08:15 .

[HoonDing]

Show is still too much soap opera drama and not enough Northlanders for my liking. What is needed is more glorious shieldmaiden action.

Modifié par HoonDing, 23 avril 2013 - 09:22 .

[billy the squid]

Addai67 wrote...

Floki's wife, yeah. But I'm with her, Floki can't die. 

I'm sure there are mixed feelings but they were all volunteers. Not sure on how historical all the details are. 9 people every 9 years is a lot of human sacrifice. The bog studies I've read about only had the occasional human sacrifice victim, so I'd always pictured it as something done in extraordinary circumstances.

Considering the higher mortality rate of the period, 9 adults every 9 years would be a stunning rate of attrition.

Would they all have been volunteers though? I know it was in this case, but I'm speaking historically. ie: slave sacrifices.

[Addai]

I thought it was more often slaves/ condemned prisoners, too. I'm not sure anyone really knows. Maybe they are guessing that the chronicles we have are affected by Christian bias, which tends to paint the pagans in the worst light possible.

[Giggles_Manically]

Man.

I got out voted at home.
It is on the same time as some show about a trailer park is on.

My sisters want to watch it.
I cant watch Vikings.

Oh well have to wait for the DVDs I guess. Stupid freaking red neck shows.....

[billy the squid]

Giggles_Manically wrote...

Man.

I got out voted at home.
It is on the same time as some show about a trailer park is on.

My sisters want to watch it.
I cant watch Vikings.

Oh well have to wait for the DVDs I guess. Stupid freaking red neck shows.....

Movie 2k or watch series online. You can get the stream there. That's the only way I can watch it, and Game of Thrones from the UK.

[Brockololly]

Giggles_Manically wrote...

Man.

I got out voted at home.
It is on the same time as some show about a trailer park is on.

My sisters want to watch it.
I cant watch Vikings.

Oh well have to wait for the DVDs I guess. Stupid freaking red neck shows.....

History Channel has the 4 most recent episodes online on their website so you can watch them there.

[Joy Divison]

Addai67 wrote...

I thought it was more often slaves/ condemned prisoners, too. I'm not sure anyone really knows. Maybe they are guessing that the chronicles we have are affected by Christian bias, which tends to paint the pagans in the worst light possible.

Slaves and war capitves would be my guess...they were the traditional volunteers for many such sacrifical rituals across human cultures.  Typically the condemned would be a position of honor which, of course, was one of those religious inventions to make the experience more palatable for the "volunteer," but there is a certain logic.

Also however barbaric such practices may seem to our eyes, death was an everyday reality all pre-industrial cultures had to deal with.  And there were real Mathlusian limits.  For us, it would be unthinkable tragedy that would dominate the news if a mother left a newborn baby to simply die, but infanticide has a long, long history - it even persisited after the Neolithic Revolution grealty expanded the number of people the land could support.

[Das Tentakel]

I haven’t seen anything more except clips and stills yet, but I’m not exactly impressed by the clothing, armour etc. There’s a semi-accurate piece here, some LARP stuff there. Not great.
I do think you can make an argument for the HISTORY Channel doing a better job about clothing, weapons, armour etc – particularly because you can get decent stuff quickly, easily and rather cheaply when it comes to ‘Viking’ gear – but then again, they aren’t exactly known for being a quality outfit…

Other than that, I’m curious enough to give it a try. It seems decent enough as a TV series, and anything promoting interest in history is a good thing.

Here two ‘reviews’, one by a Germanicist and another by a reenactor, with different opinions on the matter:

wordhord.org/tulip/

 Note that Dutch-born Germanicist Michel van der Hoek, the author, gave up on the series in a later comment)

 spectator.org/archives/2013/03/12/history-channel-gets-vikings-p

Regarding sacrifice, from a synopsis I get the impression it's based on Adam of Bremen's description of the Temple at Uppsala (scandinavian.wisc.edu/mellor/myth/pdf_files/AdamBremen.pdf ).
That is, frankly, a somewhat suspect source. Archaeological evidence for sacrifice among Germanic peoples is somewhat more substantial, but here too are problems of interpretation. How common was it, and how large-scale could it be? Roman sources and some recent archaeological finds suggest it could be rather large-scale in the case of war and war captives, but there also appear to be several distinct but related practices: Sacrificing captives on or near the battlefield, sacrificing them later at a sacred place, or 'dedicating' the remains of slain enemies.
And then there's the smaller-scale, 'individual' forms of sacrifice of, say, a slave, a criminal or a maybe even a volunteer. Even a King might be sacrificed, if we can believe the sagas.



('Midvinterblot' by Carl Larsson, 1915, depicting the sacrifice of the Swedish King Domaldr 'to bring good seasons to the land').

[Addai]

I don't think they were watching the same show. That American Spectator piece is especially full of crap. I am conservative, I should say by the wayside, so it's not that I'm not de-sensitized to political themes being stuffed down our throats. Do people not get that the entire basis of season 1 is that Haraldson was overturned? And they cannot say that such a conflict is ahistorical. Some believe that the Viking migrations were started in part due to revolts against heavy-handed chieftains trying to consolidate power. The story in the series is simplified, but so what? They were no doubt under a limited budget and not sure they would get more than one season.

As for costumes, etc., sure I can believe they used some stock stuff. The hairdresser comments that she found the hairstyles in a reference book, and who knows what sort of book she might have picked up. The same attention was probably given to clothing. It's not outrageous, however. You don't see Ragnar running around naked in woad like you would on 98% of such depictions.

So, I think the good professor is picking nits. Fine for him, no sense in watching if he's not enjoying it, but for a general audience and even a general educated audience the show is far and above what has usually been offered as depictions of the Norse.

[Joy Divison]

They were watching the same show. Your sig pretty much sums up why it is fantasy to think other than that just about every academic that specializes in anything remotely close to "Vikings" will cry "Blaspheme!"

[Addai]

I suppose the bottom line is that other than the cinematography, he didn't like the story, so that makes the other things more egregious.

[slimgrin]

I think the author is right about the more complex social structure the Vikings had not being represented, especially in regard to the Althing and the relationship between Jarls and freemen. Everything else he says is malarkey. The show is a step in the right direction for a subject that has had rampant misrepresentation for ages.

Modifié par slimgrin, 26 avril 2013 - 04:59 .

[Addai]

However they do show patronage relationships in the series, and from episode one you see the jarl undermining them and people resenting him for it and going against him. That's the problem with that criticism. It assumes there was never a jarl in history who ever tried to overstep his bounds and got slapped for it. Really? In what sort of world don't powerful men want more power?

Modifié par Addai67, 26 avril 2013 - 02:04 .