History Channel's 'Vikings'

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well it's not as if Rollo's track record with women is stellar. And lets not pretend that it is.

Yeah, didn't he rape a slave girl in season 1? At least Odo made sure the girl was consenting before he went to town on her. I'm sticking with my theory that she is going to be important in future seasons.
 
As with SOA, there are no good guys in Vikings.
 
Odo has odd sexual tastes, but he isn't a bad guy yet. When he starts dragging fair-maidens to his whip dungeon without their consent then we can call him a bad guy.

As far as the finale is concerned, it was pretty ho hum. It felt like just another regular episode. The only difference being that instead of having to wait one week now we have to wait almost a whole year. The writers should have gotten the show to Paris by about episode 3 or 4 and not wasted time on that damn Wonderer BS.

And could they make the Emperor anymore of a ****heel? He has got to be one of the most...IDK of a word to adequately encompass the negative attributes of this character. If I was Odo I'd drag him to my dungeon and whip some sense and a spine into him.
 
The Wanderer was Odin, right? I know that's what Floki said, and when I later Googled Odin the picture on his Wikipedia page is called 'Odin the Wanderer'.

I hope they go back to him at some point, because it felt a little unfinished. Otherwise the guy just shows up, causes some mischief and wanders off again.

Odo has odd sexual tastes, but he isn't a bad guy yet. When he starts dragging fair-maidens to his whip dungeon without their consent then we can call him a bad guy.

Thank you!
 
The Wanderer was Odin, right? I know that's what Floki said, and when I later Googled Odin the picture on his Wikipedia page is called 'Odin the Wanderer'.

Odin:
odin-beard.jpg


The Wanderer:
xkevin-durand-the-wanderer-vikings-s3e2.jpg.pagespeed.ic.siIVExcIdlAhKg8lw5cF.jpg


Its a definite possibility. The show will likely never outright say it, but that is what the show is implying. The only evidence against it is that The Wanderer had both his eyes and Odin only has one good eye.
 
Good point yes but the "*****ebag" part was already covered by the King characterization, not need to add kinky stuff. We already saw that the Franks are as brutal as the Vikings, only with a nicer dressing ( hot oil, spiked barrel and crossbow ).
It only annoys me because I'm French, my point of view is biased but I saw the same thing in The Musketeers, lame King, able Queen/Princess, you Americans really like our noble women :p
Note : I don't break a nerve on the matter, no Twitter outrage or Facebook indignation here :)

The Musketeers and Cardinal Richelieu were also French, and were hardcore badasses.
 
The Wanderer was Odin, right? I know that's what Floki said, and when I later Googled Odin the picture on his Wikipedia page is called 'Odin the Wanderer'.

I hope they go back to him at some point, because it felt a little unfinished. Otherwise the guy just shows up, causes some mischief and wanders off again.

At the very least, Aslaug ought to be pregnant with his child.
 
Ohh true, I forgot he fooled around with Mrs. Ragnar.
 
Yeah they definitely should have reduced the Wanderer subplot and given more time for Paris invasion. I also felt they tried to make the whole Paris invasion too epic with those tower boats, yes i am bringing that nagging again, but i liked the stuff Paris had.

Marvolo is correct that this didn't feel like a "proper" season ending, the Paris stuff felt rushed.
 
I don't think any European kingdoms we have encountered are more morally pure than one another. All of them are ruthless. The Vikings come out in a slightly more favourable light because they are the protagonists of the show but they do enslave, rape, invade, pillage, ransom and murder people throughout the show.

King Ragnar is as corrupt as King Ecbert. Both are ambitious and cunning. I think the only real difference is Ecbert would sell out his own family to get what he wants while Ragnar is loyal to his loved ones providing they don't cross him. Ragnar would forgave Rollo while Ecbert wound not have.
 
Also the Vikings have been played up as "mindless bloodthirsty savages" in fiction for so long that it's nice to see a more nuanced take on them for once. More like they actually were, with their fair share of negative qualities but also positive ones as well. And the "civilized" Christian kingdoms were not as squeaky clean as they're often played up as being.
 
I was talking about the King in the Musketeers who is portrayed as a buffoon.

Is he really. He seems more like he's simply young and unsure of himself to me. I don't see him as an idiot on that show. Now the Paul W.S. Anderson movie, on the other hand, oh boy.
 
We saw Louis crying in public, falling apart at each troubles, incompetent, played like a puppet by Rochefort, distrusting his Queen in public. That is just not kings-like, I don't mind some weakness but not to that extent for a King.
In Vikings, Egbert is cool, even the old Viking king was cool, the crazy Queen is cool but French King is an incompetent wuss ...excuse me while I comfort me French pride:)
 
Ahh, but the French princess is smart and capable! And Odo is no sissy either, for what it's worth.
 
We saw Louis crying in public, falling apart at each troubles, incompetent, played like a puppet by Rochefort, distrusting his Queen in public. That is just not kings-like, I don't mind some weakness but not to that extent for a King.
In Vikings, Egbert is cool, even the old Viking king was cool, the crazy Queen is cool but French King is an incompetent wuss ...excuse me while I comfort me French pride:)

Kings can be wussies too. There have been a number of monarchs not just in France that were foolish and/or weak to the detriment of their people and country.
 
Ahh, but the French princess is smart and capable! And Odo is no sissy either, for what it's worth.

Yes they are, that was my point, in both shows the King is incompetent or a *****e and the Princess/Queen is badass/smart ( which is all good, I am not misogynous )

Kings can be wussies too. There have been a number of monarchs not just in France that were foolish and/or weak to the detriment of their people and country.

In real life yes but this is a show and I'm French :) and Louis XIII was not known to be weak, that was Louis XVI.

My comment about the Kings/Princesses was more anecdotal than anything, I just find it somehow funny that in the 2 "historical" shows I watch both Kings are portrayed in not flattering manners ( can be cunning/evil and still cool like King Egbert ).
I will be honest, I don't like how Louis XIII is portrayed ( edit : the "wussiness" level is too hight ) in The Musketeers but I know the reasons in the show and I know why I am "annoyed" ( pride ), it still doesn't prevent me to envoy the show.

At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter, I'm an easy audience.
 
Travis and Katheryn at A&E Networks UpFront event on April 30th.

I believe they've just started Season 4 filming.

nRFcALv.png
 
Nice ! I'm intrigued by this Chinese character, I didn't expect the Vikings to have relationships with a country so far away, then again, I am no Historian.
 
This is the only show I can think of where I enjoy the time-jumps. They make a lot of sense, and it's always fun to see where characters are and what they've been up to over time.
 
Agreed, once you are used to it, it's not as weird as it was at the beginning of the show. That being said, the editing can be confusing ( Athlestan death by example ).
 
This is the only show I can think of where I enjoy the time-jumps. They make a lot of sense, and it's always fun to see where characters are and what they've been up to over time.

Yeah we will see some stability in France alongside more of Ragnar's children as young adults.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"