FTA-TV Vikings

Munga

Brownlow Medallist
Jul 2, 2003
12,630
20,259
AFL Club
St Kilda
I enjoyed that season, the best since season three I think. It seemed to have quite a different/better vibe and direction from the first half of the season. And a pretty great finish too.
 
Mar 14, 2002
61,750
83,123
Gasometer Wing
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Kangaroos
I enjoyed that season, the best since season three I think. It seemed to have quite a different/better vibe and direction from the first half of the season. And a pretty great finish too.

The Rus episodes seemed to drag the most.
Finale was excellent and the final scene gave respect to the legacy of the series.
 
Anyone able to find Vikings on Amazon Prime?
Actually I think it was released on US Amazon Prime only and guys on here must have watched with US VPN. I’m going to tell my Uncle Jeff.
 
Feb 28, 2009
37,075
34,239
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Baltimore Ravens, Atletico
If I knew how to do the spoiler thing I would be more specific
On desktop, you press the button with 3 dots and it brings up a drop down menu from which you can select spoilers
1611056710023.png
 
May 13, 2012
15,809
5,960
AFL Club
GWS
Other Teams
Brumbies, Socceroos
I'm still enjoying it...but...it was always going to be the case that each new episode would fail to live up to the very best of the earlier episodes.
Once they start settling down, becoming Christian, introducing stable government, etc, it's less interesting to be honest.
The age of Vikings is coming to an end.
 

moto748

Premiership Player
Apr 19, 2010
3,558
798
Wigan
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Wigan Warriors
Actually I think it was released on US Amazon Prime only and guys on here must have watched with US VPN. I’m going to tell my Uncle Jeff.

Not just the US cos I watched it all on Amazon Prime in the UK. But I did think the other day that it seemed to have disappeared, but I can't say I did a thorough search. I thought they finished it well.
 
Sep 6, 2005
144,453
94,357
AFL Club
Fremantle
Downloaded all six seasons the other day, was a little struggle finding all the extra episodes of the latter seasons. Am almost finished season 3 after binging during the long weekend. Not as amazing as Black Sails, but still riveting, especially season 3, has gotten better each season. Looking forward to the remainder, and also the spinoff series eventually.
 
Mar 14, 2002
61,750
83,123
Gasometer Wing
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Kangaroos
Downloaded all six seasons the other day, was a little struggle finding all the extra episodes of the latter seasons. Am almost finished season 3 after binging during the long weekend. Not as amazing as Black Sails, but still riveting, especially season 3, has gotten better each season. Looking forward to the remainder, and also the spinoff series eventually.
Season 3 Paris?
 
Sep 6, 2005
144,453
94,357
AFL Club
Fremantle
On to season 5 tonight.




Meanwhile....


---------------

How historically accurate is the TV show Vikings?

It is as historically accurate as it can be with very creative artistic license.

Michael Hirst has done quite a lot of his research right and most of the things that seems to have been portrayed incorrectly is basically done under the ambit of “creative license”. Before I start listing the accuracies and the inaccuracies, I must inform you about some important facts that had an ultimate bearing on the show

1. Viking society was an oral one. As hardly any written records exist, most of the information comes from sagas that were orally handed down from generation to generation.

Hence, information is sketchy and unreliable.

2. Most writings use different names for the same person and place; language and dialect differed from reagon to region. Most of what we know of Ragnar lothbrok is legend and sagas that tended to romanticise actual events. So, it is difficult to separate fact from fiction.

Despite such severe limitations, Michael Hirst did an admirable job; he created a plausible and comprehensive storyline that was otherwise broken at several places and sketchy at best.

He had the following things in mind when he decided to create the show:-

Make it a “family saga” to create better connection and understanding among the viewers.
Wanted to dispel several myths while creating hero figures that became legend.

As a result of all the above factors, while taking into consideration the financial limitations, Michael Hirst tried to find a compromise by making the story as tight-knit while being as comprehensive as it could be, as historically accurate as they could make it. Rest of the gaps were filled by the free hand of artistic license.

Now to the specifics.

1.While Rollo and Ragnar's sons are actual historical figures, Ragnar is a legend which may or may not have been several persons.

2.Charlemagne's grandson-Charles the Bald was the ruler of western Frankia when Ragnar raided the place in 845( historical record).They paid off ransom of 7000 silver livres to Vikings. So that portion is true. What is not accurate is Ragnar's coffin heist. It apparantly never took place. Instead, it was Bjorn Ironside who carried off that deception successfully in Italian city of Luna ( which he thought to be Rome. Michael Hirst adapted that to enhance the ‘great legend' quotient of Ragnar.

3.Bjorn was the son of Ragnar and Aslaug not Of ragnar and Lagertha.

4.Ragnar had one son and two daughters from lagertha. Son dies early. Status of the two daughters is unknown. So gyda represent those daughters apparently while bjorn is to compensate for the first son of Ragnar, Friedlief.

5.The story that Ragnar tells little Bjorn in season one as to how he and Lagertha met is accurate according to sagas: Lagertha let loose a bear and a hound in front of her house and Ragnar killed the bear, choked the hound before he could impress Lagertha and ask her hand in marriage. However this is only half the story.

In “Gesta Danorum”, it is told that Ragnar met Lagertha when he was taking back Norway from Frø, the King of Sweden who killed Ragnar’s grandfather, King Siward of Norway during the invasion.

Along with the women in King Siward’s family and others living in his court, Lagertha was taken prisoner and put in a brothel to be humiliated. Many of the women Frø had ordered abused dressed themselves in men's clothing and fought on Ragnar's side. Chief among them, and key to Ragnar's victory, was Lagertha. These women fought bravely when Ragnar Lodbrok came to rescue them and take back his grandfather’s lands. That is where Ragnar met Lagertha. Lagertha is mentioned in Gesta Danorum as “a woman with the courage of a man who fought fearlessly”.

According to the story, Ragnar was so impressed by Lagertha’s bravery and he wanted to marry her. But it was not that easy. Ragnar killed a bear and the hound guarding Lagertha’s house to be convinced for marriage.

6.Another important fact that is confused throughout the series. Viking names are unique only in their first names their are no bloodlines for surnames, rather it is ‘name of the father+son', Ragnar's father- Hring Sigurd, King. Hence, direct descendant of Odin, Ragnar's name was Ragnar Sigurdsson. He acquired the title-lothbrok (hairy breeches) after one of his legendary escapades with his second wife. So in the show lagertha calling him lothbrok is inaccurate.

7.Lagertha and Ragnar fought over something and later on divorced.

8.Ragnar married Thora Borgarhjört (Þóra Borgarhjǫrtr), daughter of King Herraud (Herrauðr) of Sweden. Her father was the one that put her in a pit with poisonous snake. He challenged men to save his daughter and whosoever was successful would earn her hand in marriage. Ragnar being the clever one, fashioned out “hairy breeches covered in blood and sand which made him immune to poisonous fangs of the snake. He saved her and gained the title lodbrok(meaning hairy breeches) Hence, by those standards rollo is not lothbrok.

8.Interesting it is that Rollo's origin is unclear. But rest of the paris storyline of the show is mostly accurate.

9.I found an interesting piece of information on the Wikipedia page for the entry”sigurd Hring”. Yes that is Ragnar's father.

Successor
Ragnar Lodbrok in Sweden
Gudfred in Denmark
Rollo in Normandy

It simply means one thing: the argument that rollo and ragnar were not related because they lived in different time periods may not exactly be that simple. Their time periods do coincide narrowly, whatever that means.

10.The show has got the names of most of his sons correctly. but ‘most’ is the keyword here. His son's were- Ivar the Boneless, Björn Ironside, Halfdan Ragnarsson, Hvitserk, Sigurd Snake-in-the-Eye and Ubba. So you saw- Halfdan was a famous historical figure in his own right and he is totally obliterated.

11.Most of Aslaug's storyline is accurate. She was a sorceress or something similar. She saw the sinking of bjorn and Ragnar's ship. However, ‘Harbert’ storyline seems imagined. Only Inaccurate things regarding Aslaug are-

a. she was the third wife of Ragnar.
b. Apparently, no Harbert storyline in reality, who knows?
c. Bjorn was her son not Lagertha's. Ivar is the Eldest, elder than Bjorn, then Hvitserk and then Sigurd. Doubtful cases include Ubba and Halfdan.

12.The character of Floki is apparently based on Hrafna-Flóki Vilgerðarson. They lived in different time periods. very different.( don't compare it to Rollo-Ragnar discrepancy because their time periods overlap to some extent; floki was born ten years after Ragnar's death)

He won the hand of his new love after numerous adventures, but upon returning to Denmark was again faced with a civil war. Ragnar sent to Norway for support, and Lagertha, who still loved him, came to his aid with 120 ships, according to Saxo.[2] When at the height of the battle, Ragnar's son Siward was wounded, Lagertha saved the day for Ragnar with a counter-attack.

Upon returning to Norway, she quarrelled with her husband, and slew him with a spearhead she concealed in her gown. Saxo concludes that she then "usurped the whole of his name and sovereignty; for this most presumptuous dame thought it pleasanter to rule without her husband than to share the throne with him"

Sounds familiar? yes. That ‘Kalf’ storyline was apparently not as exaggerated as it looks. Quite authentic based on the legends.

13. Katherine Holman, the author of The Northern Conquest, concludes that while Ragnar’s sons are historical figures, there is no evidence that Ragnar ever lived and is likely to have risen from the combination of several different historical individuals and the love for romanticism. Two individuals that may have inspired the amalgamation of Ragnar was King Horik I, King Reginfrid, Rognvald or Ragnall the leader of the Norsemen, who conquered Northumbria and the Isle of Man during the tenth century and Reginherus, a Viking warrior under King Horik, who laid siege to Paris in the ninth century.

So Ragnar on television may be a manifestation of several people. We don't care anyways. They got the basics right. And even Linus Roache fanboyed over the Ragnar Lothbrok before he joined the show. The world that watches the show now knows about the legendary Viking figures, especially THE RAGNAR LOTHBROK, enough to spark interest. What better publicity can a culture gain, especially when it is favourable.[/QUOTE]
On another note,

Did I just read- “King Horik”? If what I'm thinking is correct ( ie. they borrowed the show's king Horik from the above Horik), then that is a major mashup! Either Hirst is very clever and a story-telling genius.. or I don't know what to make of it.

14.They even got the “ no viking horn helmets in reality” accurate! The Vikings did wear helmets, but without horns but in very later stages, not in time of earliest raids, ie. during Ragnar's time.

Rest assured, they do have many discrepancies both in the portrayal of the story and additional plots; some object to tatoos, horses, shaved heads or even leather. The makers have admitted that those all are imagination and creativity to make the show attractive to the audience.

Come on guys, It's a tv show, not a research documentary. It is as real as it can get while being amazing television at the same time. They wanted to portray family values, friendship and loyalty in viking society, at the same time had to portray famous viking warriors and personalities spanning three centuries, and show various historical battles.

How to sew it together in a wholesome whole and yet maintain the delicate balance? Michael Hirst seems expert on walking on eggshells with the amount of criticism regarding historical accuracy. Neither should we complain on minutest historical accuracy nor on the beauty and quality of the television entertainment he has given us. He has fused both aspects seamlessly. Additional kudos to the hardworking Irish crew, History for giving them necessary artistic independence and to the cast for pulling off such unforgettable performances. This is how great stories live and thrive. Bring more stories like these!!

{no plagiarism intended. Many lines regarding legends picked up verbatim from several websites. I attach all the links below-

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigurd_Hring
http://thedockyards.com/the-historical-truth-behind-bjorn-ironside/
https://englishhistory.net/vikings/ragnar-lodbrok/
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ragnar_Lodbrok
http://mythologian.net/ragnar-lothbrok-lodbrok-vikings-real-story-life-death-wives-children/
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagertha}
 
Sep 10, 2004
36,966
63,392
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Minnesota Vikings
Yep that final scene was right on perfect with one of the two characters that made this show in its early seasons and arguably the only endearing character in the entire series

I just love how it finishes with such a basic foundational question. It just ties it all up.
 
Last edited:
Sep 6, 2005
144,453
94,357
AFL Club
Fremantle
Finished the whole six seasons this morning.

Seasons 5 and 6 were pretty dull compared to seasons 1-4. Lost their way a bit with the over-arching, too many filler stories, too many overly long scenes of people dying, mourning, or contemplating, slow motion stuff far too much, etc, with dramatic swelling music.

The very last episode was great, the final scene, beautiful and all. But i remember something someone said in the Black Sails thread....Sails was perfect, not too short, not too long, story always vital and urgent, character arcs, just utterly riveting with no dull moments, never over-stayed itself.....well Vikings was not like Black Sails, not as good, the first four seasons were top notch largely, but seasons 5 and 6 seemed a bit aimless, writers out of ideas, started to overstay itself.

They rushed the conversion to christianity, didnt even really do it well, just a little over the last two of the final episodes. Felt they couldve cut out most of the dull aimless stuff in seasons 5 and 6 and told the story of the christian conversion across the final two seasons.

Still highly enjoyable, many epic battle scenes, etc, definitely started to get boring, on my nerves, and lacking urgency, riveting material, over the last two seasons.

I guess I'll finally give Game of Thrones a go now. Have all eight seasons and will eke away at it every night.
 
Mar 14, 2002
61,750
83,123
Gasometer Wing
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Kangaroos
Finished the whole six seasons this morning.

Seasons 5 and 6 were pretty dull compared to seasons 1-4. Lost their way a bit with the over-arching, too many filler stories, too many overly long scenes of people dying, mourning, or contemplating, slow motion stuff far too much, etc, with dramatic swelling music.

The very last episode was great, the final scene, beautiful and all. But i remember something someone said in the Black Sails thread....Sails was perfect, not too short, not too long, story always vital and urgent, character arcs, just utterly riveting with no dull moments, never over-stayed itself.....well Vikings was not like Black Sails, not as good, the first four seasons were top notch largely, but seasons 5 and 6 seemed a bit aimless, writers out of ideas, started to overstay itself.

They rushed the conversion to christianity, didnt even really do it well, just a little over the last two of the final episodes. Felt they couldve cut out most of the dull aimless stuff in seasons 5 and 6 and told the story of the christian conversion across the final two seasons.

Still highly enjoyable, many epic battle scenes, etc, definitely started to get boring, on my nerves, and lacking urgency, riveting material, over the last two seasons.

I guess I'll finally give Game of Thrones a go now. Have all eight seasons and will eke away at it every night.
Omg

I wish I was watching GoT from the start in a Binge

* I miss that show

It was epic watching all of these seasons year after year, one week at a time.

Start your own thread on it so we can read your reactions
 
Back