cRPG

Off Topic => General Off Topic => Topic started by: Banok on March 14, 2013, 02:36:00 am

Title: Vikings TV series
Post by: Banok on March 14, 2013, 02:36:00 am
found about this series today, watched the first 3 episodes off pirate bay. its very very good. something to watch until thrones series 3. here is the awesome intro

Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Banok on March 14, 2013, 02:39:19 am
http://forum.meleegaming.com/general-off-topic/new-tvserie-by-hbo-staring-ragnar-lothbrok/

fuck feel free to delete merge this. other thread title didn't contain the word vikings so I overlooked it when I scanned offtopic.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: no_rules_just_play on March 14, 2013, 03:35:50 am
i saw the trailer somewhere and i was scared it looked quite bad. but if you say so, i will certainly try it
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Anal Bleeding on March 14, 2013, 01:43:13 pm
its bad
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: okiN on March 14, 2013, 01:52:11 pm
I wouldn't call it good, but it's not complete ass either.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Abay on March 14, 2013, 02:03:27 pm
I wouldn't call it good, but it's not complete ass either.
agree
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Butan on March 14, 2013, 02:14:24 pm
Starting a medieval 2 campaign with kingdom of norway for the 23th time in hommage to this.

+ sacking settlement ofc  :P
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Torben on March 14, 2013, 02:24:44 pm
meh, the second ep was better than the first,  maybe it will turn well after all
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: okiN on March 14, 2013, 04:01:47 pm
Okay, so I just watched the third ep and
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Laufknoten on March 14, 2013, 04:24:22 pm
Okay, so I just watched the third ep and
(click to show/hide)
So it's basically like that spartacus soft porn series just with a viking theme?
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: okiN on March 14, 2013, 04:25:04 pm
Nah, it's nowhere near as bad as that, I just thought that part was odd. :lol:
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Banok on March 14, 2013, 10:38:59 pm
if it was anything like sparticus I wouldn't be watching it. but yeah we were just talking about it in vent and that scene was really stupid but only bad one so far.

I really liked the last scene of ep 3 and wish the whole thing was in ancient languages.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Havoco on March 15, 2013, 12:01:23 am
Meh, good drama and showed some differences in culture I guess.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: ThePoopy on March 15, 2013, 12:10:27 am
scandinavian hospitality
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Kirman on March 15, 2013, 12:33:01 am
Okay, so I just watched the third ep and
(click to show/hide)


As i remember on 2nd episode.
(click to show/hide)



Its not epic but good and theres nothing to watch while waiting for Game of Thrones. The opening music is awsome.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Anal Bleeding on March 15, 2013, 05:47:40 am
Spartacus is awesome.
remove cock from mouth.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Banok on March 16, 2013, 05:23:55 am
Its not epic but good and theres nothing to watch while waiting for Game of Thrones. The opening music is awsome.

very much this. turns out its the same artist who sang on another song I love

Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Kunio on May 15, 2013, 03:23:21 pm
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Havoco on February 28, 2014, 07:32:50 pm
THREAD RESURRECTED! So the new season has started, has anyone seen the first episode yet?
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: NejStark on February 28, 2014, 07:34:23 pm
Oh shit has it!?

Might wait til theyre all done for a bnge. I wonder what antics RAGKHNAH LOTHKHBROKH has been up to.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Havoco on February 28, 2014, 07:40:20 pm
Oh shit has it!?

Might wait til theyre all done for a bnge. I wonder what antics RAGKHNAH LOTHKHBROKH has been up to.

Yaya, im sure the history channel will put it on their website like they did last season.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Leesin on February 28, 2014, 09:50:09 pm
Yeh I watched the first episode earlier, pretty good I guess, standard "Vikings" episode, or at least what I'd expect. This isn't a fantastic series but it's still good enough for me to watch anyway. But yeah, some of the things that happen in episode 1 have really turned part of the story on its head so I'm waiting to see what happens next.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Ujin on March 01, 2014, 07:24:25 am
very much this. turns out its the same artist who sang on another song I love
(click to show/hide)
Karen  Dreijner Anderson from the Knife (probably misspelled her name). One of my favorite songs and music videos of all time. Sorry for the offtopic. Decent series btw. -)
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: kinngrimm on March 01, 2014, 09:33:03 am
in the latest episod
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: NejStark on March 01, 2014, 12:34:14 pm
Spoiler!
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: vipere on March 15, 2014, 02:24:52 am
Bump

i just watched the 3rd episode of the season 2

i think it's way better than the first season, more fights, some charismatic new characters, like the king of Wessec or the jarl borg

and They did a really nice job with the /decors/ ( don't know if it's the correct term in english ).

Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Osiris on March 15, 2014, 12:53:10 pm
This should get interesting. Egbert of Wessex is the grandfather of Alfred the great and has a pretty varied history

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egbert_of_Wessex

Not sure what direction they will go considering the show is 99% fiction :D (trying not to say any possible spoilers for his history click link ^^)
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Tor! on March 15, 2014, 01:27:00 pm
I love this show  8-)
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Leesin on March 15, 2014, 02:01:04 pm
Yep 3rd episode of Season 2 was pretty good, did really enjoy this one, looking forward to next episode. Only a few weeks til Game of Thrones aswell  :D.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: BASNAK on March 15, 2014, 02:11:31 pm
Good show. First time I watch a TV-series where I want the main characters side to lose. The Vikings are horrible and evil D:
The English were so nice to them and offered friendship but are in return being butchered.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: FleetFox on March 15, 2014, 03:33:01 pm
This is my favourite show of all time, I like it better than Game of Thrones even. Really enjoying the second season thus far on Amazon/Lovefilm.

Also yeah love the Fever Ray- If I had a heart. Epic song!

Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Osiris on March 15, 2014, 06:32:23 pm
yeah i bought their album :D

Game of thrones is a good show but it lacks a certain something when you already know who dies and how, While based very very loosly on history and legend we dont know really what will happen in Vikings so it holds more excitement
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Torost on March 15, 2014, 07:08:57 pm
seen all the vikingsepisodes so far.

I enjoy the vikingspirit and theme, but they come of as smalltime uncultured savages.
My historical view on vikings is probably abit biased, but I think the series sells them abit short.

Still enjoy it nonetheless :D
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Torben on March 18, 2014, 09:17:37 pm
im just glad this series turned out this great.  really thought it was above average at most,  but its becoming quite the shit : )
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Osiris on March 18, 2014, 11:44:15 pm
Yeah but inb4 people think this is true history and take it as fact (like braveheart)
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Beauchamp on March 19, 2014, 01:38:25 am
i like mindless straightforward action that is not completely retarded at the same time - i really enjoy vikings series, more than game of thrones tbh.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Banok on March 19, 2014, 09:29:06 pm
I still love the show but stuff is starting to irk me. the scale of it, land dispute between king and earl with armies of 20 men....  :rolleyes: budget be damned, I'd show up for free as an extra surely they can get more people its not like they doing anything special.

The battles are basically; 20 guys are shieldwall to shieldwall just staring at each other until a main character does an incredibily obvious and stupid solo flank. Then let main character slaughter them or let main character do 1v1s, still not turning around to assist just banging shields and growling.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Teeth on March 19, 2014, 09:40:46 pm
Battles are the worst part of this series. Apart from that I find it quite enjoyable, not fantastic by any measure, but still quite excited when there is a new episode. Having a lot of trouble sympathizing with the vikings though, they are just simple minded cunts. Secretly just waiting for that episode where a large host of knights smashes them to bits. At least Ragnar is sympathetic and a visionary though.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Tot. on March 20, 2014, 01:24:26 am
Still noone is using helmets.
While embarking from a boat an archer happily jumps in the water with his bow, because wet bowstring is awesome.
They somehow killed a large bunch of English wearing lamellar armor and helmets, didn't loot any of it.

10/10 historical series
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Butan on March 20, 2014, 01:31:42 am
Having a lot of trouble sympathizing with the vikings though, they are just simple minded cunts. Secretly just waiting for that episode where a large host of knights smashes them to bits. At least Ragnar is sympathetic and a visionary though.


Me too, but sometimes its cool to be "forced" to try to understand a mind foreign to yourself. Good & evil is far different in different times.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Xant on March 20, 2014, 08:33:59 am
Good & evil is far different in different times.
What? No it isn't. Morals may change, ethics don't.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Banok on March 20, 2014, 01:42:25 pm
not like other TV series are more realistic, I cringe every time daryl hits a zombie his xbow, not only managing to somehow kill it but also to not snap the xbow in half.

the no helmets thing is somehwat justified so that actors can act and be identified.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Vibe on May 05, 2014, 08:28:14 am
I liked season 2 to be honest. Ending was pretty good,
(click to show/hide)
.

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: NejStark on May 05, 2014, 12:42:44 pm
I liked season 2 to be honest. Ending was pretty good,
(click to show/hide)
.

(click to show/hide)


ACTUAL SPOILER
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Gravoth_iii on May 05, 2014, 02:18:41 pm
No spears, dual wielding, no helmets, shieldmaidens and just really weird battle scenes, apart from all this a enjoyable show, too bad there arent more scandinavian actors like floki who is doing an awesome job.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Boerenlater on May 05, 2014, 03:30:46 pm
No spears, dual wielding, no helmets, shieldmaidens and just really weird battle scenes, apart from all this a enjoyable show, too bad there arent more scandinavian actors like floki who is doing an awesome job.
I hate dual wielding also.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Havoco on May 06, 2014, 12:13:51 am
I wonder if the series will continue through the whole viking era, or if they stop it after Ragnar and his sons.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: NejStark on May 06, 2014, 01:01:56 am
If it keeps making money, I imagine they'll keep making it.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Turkhammer on May 06, 2014, 06:11:10 am
No spears, dual wielding, no helmets, shieldmaidens and just really weird battle scenes, apart from all this a enjoyable show, too bad there arent more scandinavian actors like floki who is doing an awesome job.

So you like Vikings in mascara and eye shadow?
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Boerenlater on May 06, 2014, 12:09:00 pm
I wonder if the series will continue through the whole viking era, or if they stop it after Ragnar and his sons.
It's confirmed 1066 is the end date of the series.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Gravoth_iii on May 06, 2014, 12:52:35 pm
So you like Vikings in mascara and eye shadow?

Well i like his acting and the fitting accent, i guess the makeup fits hit crazy role though...
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Xant on May 06, 2014, 03:59:50 pm
What's wrong with some dualwielding? It's not like the majority of the vikings are doing it.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Gravoth_iii on May 06, 2014, 05:09:20 pm
Just that its pretty retarded, and not historical, but i guess in movies and stuff its pretty fancy.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Xant on May 06, 2014, 05:22:28 pm
Whatever do you mean by "not historical"? Do you mean to imply you know for a fact no viking ever picked up another weapon and used it in combat?
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Gravoth_iii on May 06, 2014, 06:16:20 pm
Yes.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: FleetFox on May 06, 2014, 06:29:03 pm
Yes.

lol

and yeah what a second series, can't wait for season 3.

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Vibe on May 06, 2014, 06:35:21 pm
spoilerino
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Christo on May 06, 2014, 06:39:52 pm
Gravoth has a time machine.  :shock:
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: the real god emperor on May 06, 2014, 06:45:09 pm
So shieldmaidens are not historical either? Nuuuu
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Osiris on May 06, 2014, 08:54:36 pm
Yes.

maybe, maybe not :D The shields they used were prone to serious damage so if you have an axe and no shield why not pick up another one to try to parry with :P
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: the real god emperor on May 06, 2014, 09:12:35 pm
Well sometimes dual wielding scenes are looks really retarded
(click to show/hide)
But sometimes it looks really cool and logical :P But I do think that duel wielding was a choice of fighting.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Gravoth_iii on May 06, 2014, 10:03:01 pm
I mean maybe some people did dual wield, and they also probably died first. Why give up a shield for another weapon, you will get shot or poked by a spear before you even have the chance to swing it anyways.

Its good that the series has a lot of axes, instead of swords, but the lack of spears is still sad. Spears were pretty much the best weapon to have back then. Cheap to make, penetrates armour and can be used at a distance, just a allround effective weapon.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Osiris on May 06, 2014, 10:20:09 pm
yeah but spears make less bad ass battle scenes :P
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Leesin on May 07, 2014, 08:23:21 am
Well i like his acting and the fitting accent, i guess the makeup fits hit crazy role though...

Floki is the one that annoys me most, some balding crazy Emo that styles his hair with viking hair gel or some shit, wears make up and acts like a retarded teenager, I can't stand his bullshit anymore. Still like the show though.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Xant on May 07, 2014, 08:59:04 am
I mean maybe some people did dual wield, and they also probably died first. Why give up a shield for another weapon, you will get shot or poked by a spear before you even have the chance to swing it anyways.

Its good that the series has a lot of axes, instead of swords, but the lack of spears is still sad. Spears were pretty much the best weapon to have back then. Cheap to make, penetrates armour and can be used at a distance, just a allround effective weapon.
Some people certainly did dual wield. Two weapons are also easier to carry than one weapon and a shield, and also offer some advantages.

And as for your "spears were pretty much the best weapon back then"... spoken like a true modern nerd. Viking age was not a video game with stats and possible and impossible builds, yet you're treating it like that. Both with your spear and dual wielding "opinions."
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Boerenlater on May 07, 2014, 02:54:54 pm
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Gravoth_iii on May 07, 2014, 04:14:20 pm
Some people certainly did dual wield. Two weapons are also easier to carry than one weapon and a shield, and also offer some advantages.

And as for your "spears were pretty much the best weapon back then"... spoken like a true modern nerd. Viking age was not a video game with stats and possible and impossible builds, yet you're treating it like that. Both with your spear and dual wielding "opinions."

Viking lived rough lives farming, raiding etc. They are fit enough to carry a shield, im pretty sure. And making a wooden board shield isnt really difficult either, so theres really no reason not to carry the shield, sure its less weight to have a second weapon compared to shield, but it also doesnt give anything.

And spears are the best weapon, its a stick with a pointy tip, basically anyone can wield a spear. Its cheap to make, its long and it can penetrate mail. You are the one looking at this from a video game perspective, not me.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: BASNAK on May 07, 2014, 04:40:58 pm
King Egbert is boss. Been disliking the Vikings since start. My reaction to the English destroying the Viking raiders in the big battle some episode ago:

visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Christo on May 07, 2014, 05:14:10 pm
And spears are the best weapon, its a stick with a pointy tip, basically anyone can wield a spear. Its cheap to make, its long and it can penetrate mail. You are the one looking at this from a video game perspective, not me.

Best? Only when deployed in formations in my opinion.

You are too limited to a sword fighter face to face. Sure it must come down to who has the better technique and experience in the end.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Gravoth_iii on May 07, 2014, 06:29:38 pm
Best? Only when deployed in formations in my opinion.

You are too limited to a sword fighter face to face. Sure it must come down to who has the better technique and experience in the end.

Swords are pretty uncommon though afaik.

And ofc they are the best in formations, when else would you use them, its not like a raid consists of duels. And vikings had strong formations.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Christo on May 07, 2014, 07:11:29 pm
Spears are clearly the better all-around tools, and maybe weapons of war.

Sword has only one purpose though, and it does that very well.  :)
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Xant on May 09, 2014, 04:35:14 am
Viking lived rough lives farming, raiding etc. They are fit enough to carry a shield, im pretty sure. And making a wooden board shield isnt really difficult either, so theres really no reason not to carry the shield, sure its less weight to have a second weapon compared to shield, but it also doesnt give anything.

And spears are the best weapon, its a stick with a pointy tip, basically anyone can wield a spear. Its cheap to make, its long and it can penetrate mail. You are the one looking at this from a video game perspective, not me.
It is not about being fit. You've clearly never been in the military or had to do any forced hiking. And you show you are clueless about fighting when you say a second sword gives nothing.

You can start here for an understanding about dual wielding.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mc74Ppoom8&feature=youtu.be
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Nessaj on May 09, 2014, 11:20:51 am

"Þeir eru Norðmenn"


Old Norse is bad ass.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Sniger on May 09, 2014, 11:53:43 am
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Gravoth_iii on May 10, 2014, 02:18:25 pm
It is not about being fit. You've clearly never been in the military or had to do any forced hiking. And you show you are clueless about fighting when you say a second sword gives nothing.

You can start here for an understanding about dual wielding.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mc74Ppoom8&feature=youtu.be

That video only shows fights vs others who are dualwielding (and duels at that), probably because fighting someone with a shield would get you destroyed instantly.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Bittersteel on May 10, 2014, 03:06:05 pm
Cool to see that we got some weapon experts around here. When I say around here I mean the cRPG forums.


EDIT: Just went on youtube and there is several battle scenes where both the english and the scandinavians uses spears.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Xant on May 10, 2014, 04:58:53 pm
That video only shows fights vs others who are dualwielding (and duels at that), probably because fighting someone with a shield would get you destroyed instantly.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Gravoth_iii on May 10, 2014, 05:49:58 pm
visitors can't see pics , please register or login


So basicall anyone not brining a shield would get destroyed, and because of that pretty much everyone did bring shields. Tough hiking, maybe, but atleast it'll keep you alive.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Xant on May 10, 2014, 05:58:45 pm
Nope, basically anyone bringing a shield would get destroyed.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Gravoth_iii on May 10, 2014, 06:21:52 pm
Good point.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Kalam on May 10, 2014, 11:27:10 pm
As far as entertainment goes, I think it's done a far better job than Game of Thrones this season. Granted, that's 10 episodes vs. 5, but I really do like the way they've paired scenes with Wardruna- the end of the episode right before Blood Eagle was amazing in the build up to Borg's capture. The finale's conclusion was great because it made sense all along- they left the clues throughout the season, something that some shows stupidly avoid in order to be 'unpredictable'. My biggest annoyance concerns Bjorn's relationship arc. That shit doesn't make sense. Then again, I suppose it's teenaged characters and those people don't make sense.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Falka on March 22, 2015, 03:20:24 am
Finally watched more than first 2 episodes of season 1 :P it's... maybe not great, but decent show, though I keep watching it mostly for Lagertha 8-)
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: pogosan on March 23, 2015, 07:46:02 am
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Elmuri on March 23, 2015, 08:49:08 am
Yeah I stopped too after 3 or 4 episodes of the 3rd season. Mysticism goes too far and makes things highly illogical. Also characters are not developing nearly at all, they make the same mistakes every season. Just not interesting enough.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: GandalfJr on March 23, 2015, 09:12:40 am
too many people complaining, u make a show. 3rd season isn't the best one but it does still keep me watching for the amazing battles and spirit shit
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: FleetFox on March 23, 2015, 11:50:45 am
Yeah I stopped too after 3 or 4 episodes of the 3rd season. Mysticism goes too far and makes things highly illogical. Also characters are not developing nearly at all, they make the same mistakes every season. Just not interesting enough.

Elmuri does have it right, but I'll still continue watching ^^ nice little twist with the Wessex king and his son in the latest episode.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Vibe on March 23, 2015, 12:00:43 pm
Those mystical moments aside, the show is still pretty decent.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Xant on March 23, 2015, 02:26:32 pm
Those mystical moments aside, the show is still pretty decent.
Is it better in S3 than S1? I'm trying to get through S1 again but so many cringe-worthy moments in the first two episodes already.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Falka on March 23, 2015, 05:47:30 pm
Is it better in S3 than S1? I'm trying to get through S1 again but so many cringe-worthy moments in the first two episodes already.

Dunno about season 3, but season 1 definitely gets better after first 2 episodes.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Leesin on March 23, 2015, 07:27:01 pm
I am on the fence with Season 3, there are bits I really like and bits I really dislike. I'm mostly tired of Floki and his bitching, that's all it seems he has done for the entire 3 seasons so far, he seems like a sulking child the whole time and I am tired of seeing him on screen lol. Most of the women in the show are just annoying and/or badly acted, not that many of the male characters are well acted, but there are far more likeable male characters than female IMO. I think the only female character I can stand is Siggy SPOILER
(click to show/hide)

The show seems to be all over the place at times and I don't think they're handling so many "main" characters that well. It is entertaining still so I will continue watching.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Kalam on March 23, 2015, 08:13:25 pm
I am on the fence with Season 3, there are bits I really like and bits I really dislike. I'm mostly tired of Floki and his bitching, that's all it seems he has done for the entire 3 seasons so far, he seems like a sulking child the whole time and I am tired of seeing him on screen lol. Most of the women in the show are just annoying and/or badly acted, not that many of the male characters are well acted, but there are far more likeable male characters than female IMO. I think the only female character I can stand is Siggy SPOILER
(click to show/hide)

The show seems to be all over the place at times and I don't think they're handling so many "main" characters that well. It is entertaining still so I will continue watching.

It is all over the place, alright.

To me, Floki does represent some decent characterization, though. I don't like his behavior, but I think it's for a good reason rather than a bad (such as a character behaving in a way that does not make sense for that character) one. He's the religious guy, sent to a relatively alien place and living in a deprived (they don't really show it in the show, but fucking around in a foreign country while waging a war would be constantly stressful) state, so it makes sense to me.

I've liked Lagertha for the most part. At least, better than Bjorn and Floki. I'm not sure why they keep introducing male characters only to kill them, but hey. Ecbert and Ragnar are my current favorite characters, and I want to see more interactions between them akin to Episode 4. It's probably the actors selling the characters hard rather than the other way 'round with those two.

Aethelstan is without a doubt the show's Jon Snow.

I like where they're going with Ecbert's son. It looks like Moe Dunford is finally getting a feel for the character.

 In some ways, the acting (especially Clive Standen's) seems to have improved, I think. It's the writing and directing (was there always so much deliberate obstruction, presumably to make up for shitty choreography, in their action scenes?) that seems to be off. Some of the lines could have been straight out of a B action movie.

Like Leesin, I'll continue watching.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Gnjus on March 23, 2015, 08:15:33 pm
Eggbert is the man.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Vibe on March 23, 2015, 08:39:53 pm
Is it better in S3 than S1? I'm trying to get through S1 again but so many cringe-worthy moments in the first two episodes already.

I don't recall early episodes that much but I remember it picked off after a couple of episodes.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Gravoth_iii on March 23, 2015, 09:13:35 pm
Is it better in S3 than S1? I'm trying to get through S1 again but so many cringe-worthy moments in the first two episodes already.

I thought thats what makes the show good. Im watching it for the same reason im watching Xena tbh, just to laugh at. Xena is better though.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Xant on March 29, 2015, 01:25:56 pm
On season 2 and... the time jumps between single episodes and even within single episodes are fucking bizarre.

Also their apparent need to please the SJWs by adding all the mythical "shieldmaidens" is a bit annoying (I know who I'd like on either side of me in a shieldwall... 160cm 60kg women) - just like the other mystical things in the series.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Leesin on April 29, 2015, 08:57:06 am
This part did make me lol
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Xant on April 29, 2015, 09:02:44 am
I've found the Paris episodes really, really boring. That was one of the only good scenes.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: the real god emperor on April 29, 2015, 01:24:58 pm
It is still the best show around since 3 years.Season finale wasn't bad.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Turkhammer on April 29, 2015, 06:07:08 pm
On season 2 and... the time jumps between single episodes and even within single episodes are fucking bizarre.

Also their apparent need to please the SJWs by adding all the mythical "shieldmaidens" is a bit annoying (I know who I'd like on either side of me in a shieldwall... 160cm 60kg women) - just like the other mystical things in the series.

I don't know what SJW stands for but I imagine it's PC.  I agree completely with you that the shield maidens concept is annoying.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Xant on April 29, 2015, 06:52:56 pm
I don't know what SJW stands for but I imagine it's PC.  I agree completely with you that the shield maidens concept is annoying.
Social justice warrior.

A lot of people now seem to think that shieldmaidens were a thing because there's a crap ton of them in Vikings. It's pretty cringeworthy when they didn't even choose manly truck lesbians to play the parts, instead having these pretty petite women. Also, cringed in season 1 when Lagertha killed a viking warrior because he was RAPING a woman from a village they were raiding. Like... right.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Vibe on April 29, 2015, 08:33:34 pm
Shieldmadiens and misticism and all that kind of shit was getting annoying true, but I think Paris was okay. Showed how hard it can be to raid a city.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Leesin on April 29, 2015, 08:54:17 pm
Let's face it, we all knew this was going to be a cheese fest after seeing the first episode, but it's still decent enough to watch. The whole Shield maiden business is pretty lame but I just try to ignore the majority of it lol. I blame it on whiney feminists, when will women learn that on average men are physically superior when it comes down to a fight. It's not about equality, it's about evolution, we are just built that way and there really were not that many females built to be warriors, so get in the fucking kitchen, make your guy a sandwich and let him watch Vikings without you being triggered by the lack of strong females in a TV show.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Angantyr on April 29, 2015, 09:17:33 pm
A lot of people now seem to think that shieldmaidens were a thing because there's a crap ton of them in Vikings. It's pretty cringeworthy when they didn't even choose manly truck lesbians to play the parts, instead having these pretty petite women. Also, cringed in season 1 when Lagertha killed a viking warrior because he was RAPING a woman from a village they were raiding. Like... right.
God, that scene, almost forgot. Anyway, it's cartoon Vikings. Only managed to watch most of season 1, though, but I feel like I've had my fill for a good while.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Siiem on April 29, 2015, 09:43:10 pm
Let's face it, we all knew this was going to be a cheese fest after seeing the first episode, but it's still decent enough to watch. The whole Shield maiden business is pretty lame but I just try to ignore the majority of it lol. I blame it on whiney feminists, when will women learn that on average men are physically superior when it comes down to a fight. It's not about equality, it's about evolution, we are just built that way and there really were not that many females built to be warriors, so get in the fucking kitchen, make your guy a sandwich and let him watch Vikings without you being triggered by the lack of strong females in a TV show.

The main difference is upperbody strength... which is quite critical when it comes to a fight.

Game of thrones, though, actually makes me cringe more. "The sand sisters" fights with a whip... seriously...
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Vibe on April 29, 2015, 09:52:00 pm
GoT also has dragons, because it's fantasy. Then again so is Vikings I guess, if you're looking for too much historical accuracy or just plain sense, you're not gonna be able to enjoy the show.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Siiem on April 29, 2015, 10:12:00 pm
GoT also has dragons, because it's fantasy. Then again so is Vikings I guess, if you're looking for too much historical accuracy or just plain sense, you're not gonna be able to enjoy the show.

Game of thrones is actually more realistic than Vikings, imo.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Xant on April 30, 2015, 03:37:12 am
GoT also has dragons, because it's fantasy. Then again so is Vikings I guess, if you're looking for too much historical accuracy or just plain sense, you're not gonna be able to enjoy the show.
Yeah, but that's my problem with it. Vikings would have been much better if they just went with historical accuracy. Like, there's absolutely no reason to add the fantasy elements, I haven't heard anyone praise them yet, on the contrary.
The main difference is upperbody strength... which is quite critical when it comes to a fight.
Women aren't just weaker men, their brains are different as well. And testosterone is a somewhat important hormone when it comes to fighting wars. It's beyond the point though, I mainly just wanted the series to be as historically accurate as possible. You'd think there'd be no reason for it to add the weird parts they did, given how many interesting events there are in Viking history.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Gravoth_iii on May 02, 2015, 08:16:01 am
Just finished season 3, you'd think fighting scenes would be a big focus on historicalness and stuffs but holy fuck where are the shields? And why the fuck arent you using your shields when you have them? And what a long and boring siege episode, it basically repeats itself over and over. Almost as boring as the battle of the five armies battle part in the hobbit 3.

Also just send the main characters in first, they dont need shields when they have plotarmor and can do anything they want.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Xant on May 02, 2015, 08:33:14 am
Just finished season 3, you'd think fighting scenes would be a big focus on historicalness and stuffs but holy fuck where are the shields? And why the fuck arent you using your shields when you have them? And what a long and boring siege episode, it basically repeats itself over and over. Almost as boring as the battle of the five armies battle part in the hobbit 3.

Also just send the main characters in first, they dont need shields when they have plotarmor and can do anything they want.
Yes, and Rollo fighting with no shield and barechested, supposed to be a "berserker" but didn't come across like that at all. I have no idea what was going on half the time, like when Rollo fell 2 meters to the water he just sinks to the bottom for no reason? Then he's back walking around normally suddenly.

I liked that there seemed to be a bit bigger scale for the first time, but the episodes just seemed written very poorly.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Gravoth_iii on May 02, 2015, 08:38:19 am
Yes, and Rollo fighting with no shield and barechested, supposed to be a "berserker" but didn't come across like that at all. I have no idea what was going on half the time, like when Rollo fell 2 meters to the water he just sinks to the bottom for no reason? Then he's back walking around normally suddenly.

I liked that there seemed to be a bit bigger scale for the first time, but the episodes just seemed written very poorly.

Exactly, i thought Rollo would die there, but then again it would be weird that he doesnt die to wound, but then it was set up like a dramatic death. What an awful mess.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Siiem on May 04, 2015, 09:48:00 am
Exactly, i thought Rollo would die there, but then again it would be weird that he doesnt die to wound, but then it was set up like a dramatic death. What an awful mess.

Y'know. Rollo is the "mythical" first Norman king, he won't die.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: the real god emperor on May 04, 2015, 12:55:25 pm
Y'know. Rollo is the "mythical" first Norman king, he won't die.

Isn't his son the first Norman king, liar.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Siiem on May 04, 2015, 11:12:37 pm
Isn't his son the first Norman king

No.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Vibe on July 30, 2015, 01:34:30 pm
Read a history book about Vikings (albeit from 1971, but I doubt much more was discovered since then), so here's some history facts (that might not be entirely true because of lack of evidence) related to the show:

Warning, includes spoiler of the previous and potentionally future episodes. Mind that the book focused more on how the average viking lived rather than big historical events.

As a general note, it seems that the Vikings TV series is trying to clump a lot of Viking history under Ragnar, from the beginning at the end of 8th century to (probably, we've yet to see how long it'll take for him to die) it's end around the end of 12th century:

- Supposedly the first attack by Vikings, just like in the show, was on a monastery in the year 793 (Lindisfarne, Northumbria), no records of Ragnar being included
- Early on they had no ways to tell where they were going on open sea other than wind, stars and such surroundings
- Most of the times they spared no one on these looting raids, you were either killed or taken as a slave
- The attack on Paris happened several times, the first time was in year 845, and the book said Ragnar was present. They burned down Paris then. The way they took Paris in the show (using the coffin as a trojan horse) was taken from another attack on a city called Luna (made by his son Björn Ironside). King Horik (king of Denmark) was still present at that time, and Ragnar handed a hefty sum of loot to him, out of which a large part was returned to Franks as a compensation for burning down some other city iirc. Ragnar was mentioned as being a naval commander then, so I'm assuming he was (still) a Jarl then.
- Rollo doesn't seem to have any big connections to Ragnar, the proof of this being that he was born quite a few years later. Apparently Rollos attack on Paris years later (886) resembles more the one depicted in the show (without the trojan coffin), the first one done by Ragnar was easier. The characters of Count Odo and Gizele were also present there. Just like in the show Rollo marries Gizele after being christened and is offered to become the ruler of Normandy (northern part of France), if he accepts being vassal to the western Frank king. There was not much fighting with other vikings after that. Rollo lived long and has passed on his rule to his son, and grandson and so forth all the way to the point when 'vikings' of Normandy invaded England with William the Conqueror, so british royalty basically has viking/dane origins.
- Ragnars sons Ivar (the boneless) and Ubbe are mentioned in one of the attacks on England, having then also called themselves sons of Ragnar, whether it was for real or not
- No mentions of travels to Iceland, Greenland and Vinland (North America) in the shows yet, hope they touch this subject as it's also interesting
- No mention of Floki, and it was believed that there weren't really specialized ship builders then (at least in the early ages), mostly it was common farmers that became shipbuilders and after warriors when going on these cruises
- England was mostly attacked by danes, Ireland by norwegians, the two clashed occasionally
- At one point pretty much the entire british isles were under viking rule
- Franks were easy to attack because they were seriously unprepared for viking attacks at first and later when their king Charles the Great (Charlemange) died and the country was split in three between his sons
- Vikings were (surprisingly, to me) very tolerant to christianity unlike Floki, a lot of them accepted christian god as just one more god in their repertoire of gods, one more deity to pray to for their own greater fortune (most of them cared only for their own good). A lot of Viking traders had to be baptized/converted to christianity to be allowed to trade with rest of Europe. Rest were converted en masse by their leader accepting the faith and imposing it on his people, again surprisingly without much resistance. Thus, they were sooner or later all converted and this might also be one of the reasons why the attacks stopped.
- Swords as weapons and chainmail were for richer folk, hand axes for normal people
- There is some evidence that so called 'berserkers' existed, filling themselves with toxic mushrooms with LSD-like effects before going all mad and barely clothed into combat. Apparently a lot these died without an actual wound, as one of the monks then wrote
- Christian monks were a bit more realiable source of information of that time as they wrote more and nordic writings/sagas of what happened were often exaggerated and with a mystical flavour
- Ragnars banner was two crows
- Going by how the last season ended, we should be around year 910 in the show

EDIT: added more
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Asheram on August 04, 2017, 01:19:43 am
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Asheram on December 08, 2017, 01:19:16 am
Best battle of the whole series.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: njames89 on December 08, 2017, 12:56:57 pm
oooh I'm not there yet. Exciting. Definitely enjoyed the first couple seasons only started watching it this year.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Jona on December 08, 2017, 04:53:24 pm
I kinda lost interest somewhere near the middle of season 4 (or season 3? the paris-oriented one). Does it get good enough in the later seasons to make it worth picking up again? I feel like the last season I watched kinda drew out the same storyline for far too long, made it awfully boring.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: njames89 on December 08, 2017, 04:59:25 pm
uh oh thats not good I'm just starting season 3  :|
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Asheram on December 08, 2017, 05:40:24 pm
Seige of Paris was season 3. And yeah I would say it's worth it, I thought season 4 was better than 3. S4 leads up to Ragnar's death and that was a decent episode.
I'm not liking it as much now that Ragnar's gone, but Ivars making this season somewhat interesting, also Flokis story arc is pretty good too he is off on his own tripping balls and exploring.
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Jona on December 08, 2017, 05:45:04 pm
Seige of Paris was season 3. And yeah I would say it's worth it, I thought season 4 was better than 3. S4 leads up to Ragnar's death and that was a decent episode.
I'm not liking it as much now that Ragnar's gone, but Ivars making this season somewhat interesting, also Flokis story arc is pretty good too he is off on his own tripping balls and exploring.

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Vikings TV series
Post by: Asheram on December 23, 2017, 09:43:43 pm
Ivar brocoding with Heahmund