Jump to content

Vikings #4, On to Season 3


Black Wolf Smith

Recommended Posts

But now we at least know where Pyat Pree and his friends ended up after the Qarth chapters.

It ended up being more "trusted councillor" towards the later Middle Ages, so somewhat similar to Hand of the King, yeah. But if we are puny, what does that say about our past vassal peoples? ;)

I was more referring to the situation a millennium ago, but as far as 'vassal people' goes, hey at least we were a democracy where the king had quite limited power, whereas someone else, to this day, still haven't got rid of their nobility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was more referring to the situation a millennium ago, but as far as 'vassal people' goes, hey at least we were a democracy where the king had quite limited power, whereas someone else, to this day, still haven't got rid of their nobility.

Pfff, the only power our king has nowadays is the power of cutting ribbons at openings or waving at crowds, and the nobles don't even get to do that. Sweden (and thus also Finland) also had a relatively democratic system back in the day, never instituting serfdom as well as having the farming class represented in government. I think Denmark was the only Nordic country that adopted a more "continental" model for those things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't call it a fantasy either. It belongs to that long-time established category we call historical fiction in publishing and I think television calls period drama, like the Poldark series was for BBC and PBS back in the day. Historical events, fictional characters, mixed with historical personages.

However, I'd still call Reign fantasy, even though there was a real Mary Queen of Scots. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the history of the time at all! :)

Whereas Boardwalk Empire is definitely historical fiction - period drama, most definitely not fantasy.

Loved Poldark and I Claudius, not a fan of "Reign," and I'm still bitter over Carnivale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

Question.... and forgive me if you guys went over this.....



My wife and I just watched season 2.... did someone kill Ragnar's kids?... When Bjorn walked into that room it looked like a few dead boys and Horiks daughters... It might have been the first time in 2 seasons where we were confused....



PS... Donal Louge has mastered the part of psychotic self indulgent murderous back stabber.... but IMO, his best work was on Copper


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question.... and forgive me if you guys went over this.....

My wife and I just watched season 2.... did someone kill Ragnar's kids?... When Bjorn walked into that room it looked like a few dead boys and Horiks daughters... It might have been the first time in 2 seasons where we were confused....

PS... Donal Louge has mastered the part of psychotic self indulgent murderous back stabber.... but IMO, his best work was on Copper

I'm pretty sure Horik didn't get to any of Ragnars children, but only Horiks heir was spared.

And love Donal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question.... and forgive me if you guys went over this.....

My wife and I just watched season 2.... did someone kill Ragnar's kids?... When Bjorn walked into that room it looked like a few dead boys and Horiks daughters... It might have been the first time in 2 seasons where we were confused....

PS... Donal Louge has mastered the part of psychotic self indulgent murderous back stabber.... but IMO, his best work was on Copper

Those were Horik's sons and daughters (only the heir was spared). Ragnar's sons are all still amongst the living.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Have to finish the season still, but I just watched Blood Eagle and the last few minutes of the episode was one of the most disturbing things I've ever seen on television.

It wasn't easy to watch, but I think there is some speculation on whether the Vikings actually did this or whether its a cultural myth. The Myans and Aztecs were able to extract the still-beating heart of sacrificial victims, but I don't know how successful a lung extraction would be without the victim dying from shock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wasn't easy to watch, but I think there is some speculation on whether the Vikings actually did this or whether its a cultural myth. The Myans and Aztecs were able to extract the still-beating heart of sacrificial victims, but I don't know how successful a lung extraction would be without the victim dying from shock.

I could imagine them doing it but I agree that the person in question was probably long dead before the decorative Blood Eagle was displayed. If they didn't bleed out, surely they'd asphyxiate pretty quickly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could imagine them doing it but I agree that the person in question was probably long dead before the decorative Blood Eagle was displayed. If they didn't bleed out, surely they'd asphyxiate pretty quickly?

And not only that, but I would think the person doing the job would also have to be pretty dexterous as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And not only that, but I would think the person doing the job would also have to be pretty dexterous as well.

It would suggest a level of surgery. Then again they may just have got the local butcher to perform the execution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would suggest a level of surgery. Then again they may just have got the local butcher to perform the execution.

Thats what I was thinking too, but Ragnar did it himself.

(What are you watching now? I've hit a dry patch, though I think "Defiance" is back on).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats what I was thinking too, but Ragnar did it himself.

(What are you watching now? I've hit a dry patch, though I think "Defiance" is back on).

He likes to tell us he's a farmer a lot - maybe butcher is one of his other many talents?

In terms of TV that's actually on it's pretty much "salem" which hasn't really lived up to its potential but may as well see the season out. I've been making my way through "turn" which is fairly decent (although they make the english seem human there's still a tendency that english = bad, pro-indepence = good). I'll be giving Defiance another go for sure and the same with falling skies.

Main plan is to catch up on some other things though that I've missed over the year. Supernatural, Hell on wheels, Borgias. I'm a sucker for period dramas that aren't "downton abbey" in style :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He likes to tell us he's a farmer a lot - maybe butcher is one of his other many talents?

In terms of TV that's actually on it's pretty much "salem" which hasn't really lived up to its potential but may as well see the season out. I've been making my way through "turn" which is fairly decent (although they make the english seem human there's still a tendency that english = bad, pro-indepence = good). I'll be giving Defiance another go for sure and the same with falling skies.

Main plan is to catch up on some other things though that I've missed over the year. Supernatural, Hell on wheels, Borgias. I'm a sucker for period dramas that aren't "downton abbey" in style :)

Or, Ragnar has very diverse "talents." :P

On "Turn," yes there is a bit of a slant, (and I'm personally going to miss Ensign Baker who really wanted to see Abe and his wife do the right thing). He really is a good representation of a regular dude probably from some far flung village fighting for what he believed in, and that was a reconciliation of the two factions rather than another Aristocrat fighting for the Aristocracy.

Most of us Americans get that it wasn't cut and dry, and there was ruthlessness on the American side as well ;) . While Graves is typically over-the-top along with "The Patriots" Tavington, based upon Benastre Tartleton, another "baddy," these guys were the ones that historically really took the rebels seriously as opposed to say, a John Andre though his gallantry was greatly admired, even by Washington.

But these guys wanted to win, and didn't take it for granted they could.

I have not seen Salem probably since the second episode, so I'll have to get caught up,. I like period dramas as well if nothing else, to make me appreciate the here and now. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Salem is one you don't really need to rush to. I've fallen behind by 2 weeks and there's been a lot less history which was one of the things I liked about episode 1. It seems to have highlighted that I'd like a show set in that period moreso than one about witches!



Turn has had opportunities to be a bit more "grey" but it always seems to come back with a "ha, the english are evil" last minute scene. eg the slavery episode - it's a very valid point but it was boiled down to "the english just want more troops" (probably true but it's ignoring the other reality as well). At least they do show most of the "loveable" rogues as having a slave or two in all their sheds. They sometimes show the rebels causing trouble for the regular people trying to get by but it tends to have a hint of Jack Bauer "it's ok because we are ultimately right about it".


It's maybe the actor but I do find John Andre to be pretty sympathetic. I don't want a show making the English out to be in the right (because at the end of the day we make excellent villains) but I do think the show is far too reverent to Tallmadge and Brewster - I'll accept that no-one wants to portray Washington as anything but godlike (although I loved his portrayal in "John Adams")



RE Vikings. I'll play it safe and assume history has to be spoiler tagged but how

do they get around the fact Ragnar is killed by the somewhat clumsy king with the snake pit?

. I guess they can just drag it out but the way the characters have been portrayed so far has me worried the ending will be a let down.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finished the season last night. It had some ups and downs, no doubt.



I had been looking something up about the show on something else, so I got the spoilers for the final episode and the final showdown with Horick (who, because I have the show on DVR and fast forward through the starting credits, I'd completely missed that it was Louge...his transformation was remarkable). So I knew that Floki's betrayal wasn't really a betrayal. But I watched the end expecting more exposition on the subject. Something from Ragnar to show he'd always had Floki's loyalty (it seemed that it was a bit of a set up when Ragnar and Floki were interacting around Horick, but then there were Floki's scenes with just his wife...) What about Siggy? She was working for Ragnar the whole time? It was a neat little trap, yet at the same time, Ragnar's people weren't as ready as they could have been, since some of them were ambushed by Horick's men pretty easily...


Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's a farmer, why wouldn't he slaughter his own animals? It's not like 'butcher' was a profession back then.

Of course - I was just highlighting how the guy can do pretty much anything. Like you said you have to be an all rounder unless you are a king or good at fighting. He does have slaves though so a lot of domestic skills may be for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Salem is one you don't really need to rush to. I've fallen behind by 2 weeks and there's been a lot less history which was one of the things I liked about episode 1. It seems to have highlighted that I'd like a show set in that period moreso than one about witches!

Turn has had opportunities to be a bit more "grey" but it always seems to come back with a "ha, the english are evil" last minute scene. eg the slavery episode - it's a very valid point but it was boiled down to "the english just want more troops" (probably true but it's ignoring the other reality as well). At least they do show most of the "loveable" rogues as having a slave or two in all their sheds. They sometimes show the rebels causing trouble for the regular people trying to get by but it tends to have a hint of Jack Bauer "it's ok because we are ultimately right about it".

It's maybe the actor but I do find John Andre to be pretty sympathetic. I don't want a show making the English out to be in the right (because at the end of the day we make excellent villains) but I do think the show is far too reverent to Tallmadge and Brewster - I'll accept that no-one wants to portray Washington as anything but godlike (although I loved his portrayal in "John Adams")

RE Vikings. I'll play it safe and assume history has to be spoiler tagged but how

do they get around the fact Ragnar is killed by the somewhat clumsy king with the snake pit?

. I guess they can just drag it out but the way the characters have been portrayed so far has me worried the ending will be a let down.

Exactly.

If he is capable of a pristine lung extraction, then he is more than a butcher. And while Ragnar was likely a well rounded individual he did have servants and slaves to do the menial things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...