FTA-TV Vikings

Remove this Banner Ad

akkaps said:
I didn't realise Spain was a Muslim country at that time.

So this would have most probably been when Hannibal was in charge of the military set Carthage, and when they tried to defend the Roman Empire.
Click to expand...

Lol no mate

Hannibal was way before Moorish Spain.

Hannibal predates Islam by like nearly a thousand years.

Hell he predates Vikings by about that same amount of time. He was Ancient era.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

There was a very interesting documentary series on SBS over summer, called "The Real Vikings", which discussed a lot of the stuff in the show. Most interesting was what they told us about the characters in the show.

Ragnar, Bjorn, Ivar, and Rollo are all based on historic characters.

Ragnar is possibly more myth than reality. They really don't know, as the earliest references to him were written several hundred years later, and the various accounts are not exactly consistent. Bjorn and Ivar are said to be his sons, as are many other Viking heroes, but whether it's true or not is anyone's guess.

Rollo was definitely real, and they even showed his grave - in a cathedral in France. He did end up as a French Duke, assigned to the area now known as Normandy, charged with preventing further Viking incursions up the Seine. He was not Ragnar's brother, with Rollo's era being about 60 years after Ragnar's. The producers used a bit of creative license there, for purposes of story telling.

Bjorn and Ivar are definitely real. Bjorn did indeed lead expeditions into the Mediterranean.

Ivar was apparently the best known of all the Viking leaders. He was apparently very charismatic, and led all of the Vikings - a far cry from the cruel sadistic creep we saw growing up as a child in the show. There's considerable speculation as to what his "boneless" nickname refers to. It may actually have been "despicable", which (in Norse) is a very similar sounding word. It's not hard to understand why his enemies might call him "Ivar the Despicable", given his success in raiding and pillaging their lands. On the other hand, he may have had some kind of disfigurement (as suggested by the show's producers) - the historians just don't know.
 
Catfish Alley said:
His nickname may have also come from being impotent. They've gone with that one in the show.
Click to expand...
I assume that's a new development with the latest episodes? I haven't seen them yet - I'm waiting for SBS to show them (series 4B starts on Wednesday night).

Previously they said he was born with a deformity, with Ragnar prepared to abandon him as a baby. That's why he was hauled around on a billy cart as a kid. I guess they had to change that when they took the decision to continue the story, jumping to the years when his sons were leading the Viking raids. Can't very well portray the mightiest of all Viking lords as a cripple.
 
Last edited:
Vader said:
I assume that's a new development with the latest episodes? I haven't seen them yet - 'm waiting for SBS to show them (series 4B starts on Wednesday night).

Previously they said he was born with a deformity, with Ragnar prepared to abandon him as a baby. That's why he was hauled around on a billy cart as a kid. I guess they had to change that when they took the decision to continue the story, jumping to the years when his sons were leading the Viking raids. Can't very well portray the mightiest of all Viking lords as a cripple.
Click to expand...
He's still a cripple in all grown up. He just crawls around.

Though I do question how he has travelled so far as a cripple.
 
There are a couple of theories on the Boneless nickname.

One is that it's intended as an ironic name for someone who was actually long limbed (also "been" in Old Norse might mean both bone and leg).

Another theory is that he suffered from brittle bone disease, so that he was crippled from the waist down, but could have still been strong in the chest and arms - and that appears the to be the theory this show is running with. I'm guessing the show will end up showing him as a military genius who could command troops from atop a horse, perhaps with a special wooden saddle, like we saw in Game of Thrones, and he'll also use a bow quite accurately.
 
phantom13 said:
Wait, new season started when!? And what ep are we currently up to?
Click to expand...

There are 6 episodes that are available online and have aired elsewhere, but new series will be screened in Australia tomorrow on SBS I believe.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

VineyIsLORD said:
Ivar was a berserker irl as well wasnt he?
Click to expand...
Yeah apparently he was.

In the last ep we see him angrily smashing something together in the blacksmith. He's probably just making a sword to kill Lagatha but I'm wondering if he's banging up some proper braces that let him walk and fight on 2 legs.
 
DapperDon said:
Yeah apparently he was.

In the last ep we see him angrily smashing something together in the blacksmith. He's probably just making a sword to kill Lagatha but I'm wondering if he's banging up some proper braces that let him walk and fight on 2 legs.
Click to expand...

I think I read somewhere that a possible explanation has him being carried by other berserkers into battle aboard a sort of wooden throne.

I could see that looking really cool on film, maybe have two of his brothers do it.

Earlier in the season they showed how even sitting down without his legs he is more than a match even for his brothers in single combat.
 
phantom13 said:
Wait, new season started when!? And what ep are we currently up to?
Click to expand...
The show's producers split Season 4 into two parts. SBS showed Part A last year, and Part B is due to start tomorrow night. Several episodes from Part B are already available through "other means", having already appeared on other networks around the world.
 
Caught up while on holidays, still great. Ragnar's death was really well done, some big feels as he was reminiscing with those quick flashbacks to early episodes. Pretty ballsy to kill your main character 4 seasons in, show really needs to be carried by Bjorn and Ivar now. Ragnar's other sons don't have the screen presence for mine.

Not really a fan of the way they've gone with Ivar though, just can't buy it at all. Also last ep Floki is all of a sudden 'empty inside' or whatever, where did that come from? Pretty convenient, obviously they just needed him to step up story-wise to help fill the void left by Ragnar but you'd think they might have set it up a little bit.
 
bourbons said:
Caught up while on holidays, still great. Ragnar's death was really well done, some big feels as he was reminiscing with those quick flashbacks to early episodes. Pretty ballsy to kill your main character 4 seasons in, show really needs to be carried by Bjorn and Ivar now. Ragnar's other sons don't have the screen presence for mine.

Not really a fan of the way they've gone with Ivar though, just can't buy it at all. Also last ep Floki is all of a sudden 'empty inside' or whatever, where did that come from? Pretty convenient, obviously they just needed him to step up story-wise to help fill the void left by Ragnar but you'd think they might have set it up a little bit.
Click to expand...

Floki is empty inside and now fascinated by the Muslims. I hope they don't make his conversion too cheesy.
 
I dont think he is going to convert to Islam.

He just feels regret over killing Athelstan over his religion. And the muslims praying during the raid made him feel guilty.
 
bourbons said:
Caught up while on holidays, still great. Ragnar's death was really well done, some big feels as he was reminiscing with those quick flashbacks to early episodes. Pretty ballsy to kill your main character 4 seasons in, show really needs to be carried by Bjorn and Ivar now. Ragnar's other sons don't have the screen presence for mine.

Not really a fan of the way they've gone with Ivar though, just can't buy it at all. Also last ep Floki is all of a sudden 'empty inside' or whatever, where did that come from? Pretty convenient, obviously they just needed him to step up story-wise to help fill the void left by Ragnar but you'd think they might have set it up a little bit.
Click to expand...
Damn I am one that is watching on SBS so Iwished a spoiler tag was used for that. oh well teach me for coming in here.
 
Well from memory Ivar the Boneless is best Known for his exploits in Britain, I guess him going with Ragnar as a beginning for him on that path makes sense.

I can handle the show moving on, Ragnars story is done now time for other famous Vikings regardless if they were Ragnars sons or not, but tieing them in makes sense for the show.
 
sorted said:
Floki is empty inside and now fascinated by the Muslims. I hope they don't make his conversion too cheesy.
Click to expand...

akkaps said:
That's what I don't get. He was so against Christianity, that I would have expected him to react the same way.
Click to expand...

I don't mind it if that's the way they want to go with him. The Christianity/Athelstan stuff happened, what, 10 years ago? People can change. Just needed to be set up a bit better, not have him fine one day then 'empty' the next for no reason whatsoever - other than some new plot points are needed.

U2tigers said:
Damn I am one that is watching on SBS so Iwished a spoiler tag was used for that. oh well teach me for coming in here.
Click to expand...

Sh1t sorry about that mate, I thought SBS was only a day or so behind like they were last year
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top