[Vikings] Season 3. More raiding, more looting, more... farming?

Siska

Vikings - A history channel drama (Thursdays at 10/9c). The show is about the beginning of the viking raids in England. While it has some characters and events that resemble things from legends and some that actually happened, it is not a documentary. It has ambition, plotting, scheming, jealousy and vikings going berserk with their axes.

Season 1
The shows protagonist is Ragnar, played by Travis Fimmel. A totally super hot underwear model who can also act.

He is a farmer/viking happily married to an ass kicking woman, the shield maiden Lagertha (Katheryn Winnick). He has a brother named Rollo (Clive Standen) who honestly seems to be a bit of an asshole of a thug, even for a viking. The most famous star of the show is Gabriel Byrne, as the greedy, paranoid and backwards striving Earl Haraldson. He is also happily married. To an equally greedy and power hungry woman named Siggy (Jessalyn Gilsig). Then there is Floki (Gustaf Skarsgård), town weirdo and ship building genius.

Season 2
Things are changing

Rangar's fame is spreading far and wide. He is now a jarl (earl) forging alliances with other jarls and kings. Meanwhile his personal life is falling apart.

Behind the scenes/trailer. --->
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbkX710w4uA&feature=endscreen&NR=1

I like the show. It's weird rooting for a guy who is objectively a murdering bandit. But if his family and allies can manage to see him as a good guy, then so can I! Sometimes the peoples motives don't quite make sense to me. But I have yet to see anything that truly annoys me or make me hate how a character is portrayed.

Season three is here. Discuss season 1-2 freely. Keep season 3 spoiler tagged, especially the last aired episode.

If you missed any episodes you can catch up on them here ---> http://www.history.com/shows/vikings

RocketSauce

I was skeptical when I first watched it, but it is better than it has any right to be. I was expecting cheapness all around, but it looks gorgeous, the costumes and sets don't look flimsy, and the leads are watchable.

Siska

It's definitely not cheaply made. No idea how authentic the costumes are, but they look genuine enough (love their hair cuts). Wonder how much of the boat is real and how much is CGI. Either way, gotta be expensive. I hope they get the ratings they need to keep this show going. Wonder where they are shooting at. The mountains are gorgeous, although maybe slightly misplaced since I believe the legendary Ragnar lived in Denmark. But I suppose there could be somewhere, even in Denmark, where it's that hilly.

The 3rd episode airs this Sunday. Oddly enough it's already up for viewing on the History Channel website. I hope they'll keep putting them all up there.

Magell

I really like this show so far. Nobody should let the fact that it's a drama on History channel dissuading them from watching it. It's great.

SammyF

This show is worthy of being on HBO. All that's missing that would distinguish it from a premium cable tv show is a lack of nudity.

Hacksaw

I feel there could be more nudity, blood, and cursing, but otherwise this is basically my favorite show on television right now and I want it to go on forever.

SammyF

This show is basically Downton Abbey for people with hair on their chests.

Hacksaw

Yup.

Hacksaw

(I don't actually have hair on my chest, but am of strong Scandinavian descent. Thus, my love.)

spacekungfuman

Hacksaw wrote: »

(I don't actually have hair on my chest, but am of strong Scandinavian descent. Thus, my love.)

Drink more whiskey?

Magell

I really liked the episode tonight. This show is just so fucking good it's hard to believe it's on the History Channel.

I loved Ragnar and Lagertha trying to tempt the priest into a 3-way.

Fuck Rollo, he's fucking up Ragnar's genius plans.

I really want to see some of the God's show up for real and have a tangible effect on the world in this show.

knitdan

Really liking this show, here's hoping its successful so History Channel doesn't go back to running Chariots of the Gods-type horseshit.

Hacksaw

spacekungfuman wrote: »

Hacksaw wrote: »

(I don't actually have hair on my chest, but am of strong Scandinavian descent. Thus, my love.)

Drink more whiskey?

I drink more whiskey than several adult people combined. Still nothing.

Siska

Magell wrote: »

I really liked the episode tonight. This show is just so fucking good it's hard to believe it's on the History Channel.

I loved Ragnar and Lagertha trying to tempt the priest into a 3-way.

Fuck Rollo, he's fucking up Ragnar's genius plans.

I really want to see some of the God's show up for real and have a tangible effect on the world in this show.

I could not tell if they were serious, or if they decided to just mess with him when they heard him mumbling. :P

Either way I'm sure he thought those two were awful

and that he was living the worst kind of torment, until they went back to the village and saw that the other monks had ended up as human sacrifices.

I wonder how much worse the Jarls

paranoia and fear is going to get. If he starts cracking visibly in public, there may be a civil war. He also seems to have either a premature ejaculation or impotence problem. That might drive a wedge between him and his wife. Where he is not just paranoid about his underlings are lusting after her. But that she is ogling back.

[Tycho?]

I just saw this last night (after seeing the thread about it). Seemed decent, I'll give it another shot. The dialog didn't do a whole lot for me, but the setting was pretty cool.

Why the hell did Ragnar leave the Priest with his kid? When the last time he went out on an expedition that dude came and tried to take his son? I know its a sanctioned voyage this time, but the point is that if the strong and threatening wife hadn'e been there, there would have been problems. I suspect the priest will prove himself for the sake of the show, but it seems like a really bad call to make, especially when its decently likely neither Ragnar nor his wife will return alive.

Siska

And now the 4th episode is available online on the official website, a week early. Very strange.

Magell

Siska wrote: »

I could not tell if they were serious, or if they decided to just mess with him when they heard him mumbling. :P

Either way I'm sure he thought those two were awful

and that he was living the worst kind of torment, until they went back to the village and saw that the other monks had ended up as human sacrifices.

I wonder how much worse the Jarls

paranoia and fear is going to get. If he starts cracking visibly in public, there may be a civil war. He also seems to have either a premature ejaculation or impotence problem. That might drive a wedge between him and his wife. Where he is not just paranoid about his underlings are lusting after her. But that she is ogling back.

Regarding the Jarl

He mentions how old is sun would have been when they kill that kid on his treasure, which makes me believe his wife may have had a stillborn birth or their kid died really young and so they aren't intimate anymore, because everything's awkward.

SammyF

[Tycho?] wrote: »

I just saw this last night (after seeing the thread about it). Seemed decent, I'll give it another shot. The dialog didn't do a whole lot for me, but the setting was pretty cool.

Why the hell did Ragnar leave the Priest with his kid? When the last time he went out on an expedition that dude came and tried to take his son? I know its a sanctioned voyage this time, but the point is that if the strong and threatening wife hadn'e been there, there would have been problems. I suspect the priest will prove himself for the sake of the show, but it seems like a really bad call to make, especially when its decently likely neither Ragnar nor his wife will return alive.

It certainly ain't going to match Justified for witty, testosterone-laced banter, but considering it's the dark ages, most of these folks are illiterate, and the absolute smartest of them all is using a floating sundial as a poor man's sextant, I don't know that I'd be able to accept them as believable characters who inhabit this world if they were rhetorically gifted. But that kind of brings us to your question, I think:

I think it's simply that they're trying to cast Ragnar as something of a philosopher king among Norsemen who values a literate and well-traveled prisoner more than his intrinsic value as property. Ragnar was a holy fucking nightmare for most of England and France, but they're making him a lot more contemplative than the rest of the Vikings.

For instance, while he wants to meet with Ælla, the rest of his warband are untrusting, violent marauders who provoke their first battle with the Angles. Sometime during the ninth century, Ragnar Lodbrok was executed by Ælla when he was supposedly thrown into a pit of poisonous vipers, and I presume the final scene of this episode was meant to give Ælla justification for eventually doing so. So it may be that they're trying to frame Ragnar as a tragic hero of some sort.

Rhan9

I am going to see if this show's any good. Since they're going for drama, there's a lot more leeway for artistic license. I do like me some viking movies/shows.

Siska

Aha! I just realized who Travis Fimmel (Ragnar) reminds me of. That where have I seen him before feeling was driving me nuts. He looks a bit like Roy Dupuis - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Dupuis from that La femme Nikita show 10 years ago. He is just a stockier built version who smiles a lot.

TheOrange

UP ONTO THE OVERTURNED KEEL
CLAMBER, WITH A HEART OF STEEL
COLD IS THE OCEAN’S SPRAY
AND YOUR DEATH IS ON ITS WAY
WITH MAIDENS YOU HAVE HAD YOUR WAY
EACH MUST DIE SOME DAY!

Gave me nerd shivers...

And I agree, their lack of wit is very believable.

Decomposey

All I'm going to say is that with that body and those eyes, Ragnar can plunder my coastline anyday.

Mego Thor

Recorded the first couple of episodes, but haven't had a chance to watch them yet.

Rollo is in this?



"That's cool, pops."

RocketSauce

Siska wrote: »

Aha! I just realized who Travis Fimmel (Ragnar) reminds me of. That where have I seen him before feeling was driving me nuts. He looks a bit like Roy Dupuis - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Dupuis from that La femme Nikita show 10 years ago. He is just a stockier built version who smiles a lot.

For about the first couple of minutes I was sure that it was Charlie Hunnam from Sons of Anarchy.

SammyF

RocketSauce wrote: »

Siska wrote: »

Aha! I just realized who Travis Fimmel (Ragnar) reminds me of. That where have I seen him before feeling was driving me nuts. He looks a bit like Roy Dupuis - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Dupuis from that La femme Nikita show 10 years ago. He is just a stockier built version who smiles a lot.

For about the first couple of minutes I was sure that it was Charlie Hunnam from Sons of Anarchy.

It's even basically the same character, only one guy has a motorcycle, and the other guy is on a motherfuckin' boat. Boat > motorcycle.

Decomposey wrote: »

All I'm going to say is that with that body and those eyes, Ragnar can plunder my coastline anyday.

As a totally straight male who thinks penises are disgusting, I still feel compelled to hit "agree."

Rhan9

SammyF wrote: »

Decomposey wrote: »

All I'm going to say is that with that body and those eyes, Ragnar can plunder my coastline anyday.

As a totally straight male who thinks penises are disgusting, I still feel compelled to hit "agree."

How do you live, day to day? You've got one attached if you haven't noticed :P

SammyF

Constant grooming.

Turkson

Just finished the 2nd episode. Loving it so far.

Only real complaint is that the Jarl seems cartoonish evil.

Siska

I don't find him cartoonish at all. Pretty much acts like I would expect a paranoid and fearful person in charge to.

In Episode 3

it is shown (or at least strongly hinted) that the Jarl and his wife are having problems in the sex department. Which puts the very odd "wanna bone my wife?" game he was playing with one of his underlings in a new light. Siggy seems to be constantly reassuring him of how all powerful he is and that was just another example of it.

knitdan

I'm starting to wonder just what is stopping Ragnar or one of his crew from killing the Jarl and taking over.

Maguano

like the show but what irks me is that i keep wondering if vikings really had a modified scottish accent.

goldwatchkilla

a lovefest for Vikings? here i was hoping someone would be saying how they are disappointed that that History channel has abandoned documentaries. Well i guess that someone is me. I understand that this world is more about money than knowledge, but quite frankly I would prefer more WW II in HD than Vikings. What would happen if that budget went to straight documentaries?

Magell

Listen, Vikings is the least of Histories problems when it comes to fucked up tv shows. I would prefer they did more educational stuff, but I'd kill Pawn Stars, American Pickers, Restoration, Top Gear, Searching for Bigfoot, and so many other shows before I blame the History channel for making a historical drama. At least this one covers actual history.

knitdan

When's the last time they showed honest-to-God historical documentaries on a regular basis? I don't think the History Channel proper does those anymore, they've got one or two spinoff networks that you can go to for all your Nazi-killin'.

RiemannLives

goldwatchkilla wrote: »

a lovefest for Vikings? here i was hoping someone would be saying how they are disappointed that that History channel has abandoned documentaries. Well i guess that someone is me. I understand that this world is more about money than knowledge, but quite frankly I would prefer more WW II in HD than Vikings. What would happen if that budget went to straight documentaries?

the history channel hasn't made any documentaries worth watching in like 10+ years

this Vikings show, being complete fiction, sounds like it is a bit more historicially accurate than their documentaries

Wassermelone

goldwatchkilla wrote: »

a lovefest for Vikings? here i was hoping someone would be saying how they are disappointed that that History channel has abandoned documentaries. Well i guess that someone is me. I understand that this world is more about money than knowledge, but quite frankly I would prefer more WW II in HD than Vikings. What would happen if that budget went to straight documentaries?

Well considering that previously the History channel was making ANCIENT ALIENS

I am pretty pro them making dramas. Especially really really likable, well made ones like this.

Decomposey

knitdan wrote: »

When's the last time they showed honest-to-God historical documentaries on a regular basis? I don't think the History Channel proper does those anymore, they've got one or two spinoff networks that you can go to for all your Nazi-killin'.

The spin off networks areactually really good for Nazi killing, biblical exploration, and of course, bad hair. Other than Vikings, there's really nothing to watch on H anymore unless you like reality shows.

SammyF

RiemannLives wrote: »

goldwatchkilla wrote: »

a lovefest for Vikings? here i was hoping someone would be saying how they are disappointed that that History channel has abandoned documentaries. Well i guess that someone is me. I understand that this world is more about money than knowledge, but quite frankly I would prefer more WW II in HD than Vikings. What would happen if that budget went to straight documentaries?

the history channel hasn't made any documentaries worth watching in like 10+ years

this Vikings show, being complete fiction, sounds like it is a bit more historicially accurate than their documentaries

And it's actually not even complete fiction in that at least some of these characters are based on historical figures.

Rhan9

Magell wrote: »

Listen, Vikings is the least of Histories problems when it comes to fucked up tv shows. I would prefer they did more educational stuff, but I'd kill Pawn Stars, American Pickers, Restoration, Top Gear, Searching for Bigfoot, and so many other shows before I blame the History channel for making a historical drama. At least this one covers actual history.

What the hell is Top Gear doing in that list? Unless it's the american version, that is.

If it's shown on History, that's bizarre, but it's a good show.

Magell

Rhan9 wrote: »

Magell wrote: »

Listen, Vikings is the least of Histories problems when it comes to fucked up tv shows. I would prefer they did more educational stuff, but I'd kill Pawn Stars, American Pickers, Restoration, Top Gear, Searching for Bigfoot, and so many other shows before I blame the History channel for making a historical drama. At least this one covers actual history.

What the hell is Top Gear doing in that list? Unless it's the american version, that is.

If it's shown on History, that's bizarre, but it's a good show.

The American version is on the History Channel, and while it is good, it's definitely not about history.

[Tycho?]

As has been stated already, its not like much on that channel is about history anymore. I learned an awful lot about WW2 when I was a kid and watching History. And now it is almost completely filled with mindless trash. A shame.