Anyone watching "Vikings"?

[YJ02]

I believe they are dramatizing the Ragnar of the old Viking stories. It's not intended to be a documentary. Sometimes, in order to catch the attention of people who wouldn't otherwise have an interest in something, you must do something to grab that attention.

Ragnar Lothbrok may or may not have existed, and it's interesting to see what his life may have been like during that time. I certainly don't see any "modern mores" being put into the show. I'm not seeing anachronistic bits and pieces in it at all.

I see no modern mores either--maybe something approaching what helped formed current morality? She must of not watched an ep with the raids and battle included

Ragnar was probably an actual person--his sons are documented, and you know how that goes; anyone who is deemed of achieving great things (like ragnar's sons) HAVE to have a legendarium built about them==this Ragnar is obviously a type of aggregate character-this often happens in actual historical annals. Thew writers of source material often lumped together the achievements of many men into one person (like the Clint Eastwood character in HEARTBREAK RIDGE as an example )

RAC your are absolutely correct though (as you will see in my first post) about the HISTORY channel's use of "walmart-izing" history=quantity over quality.

Unfortunately like Illit said-many shows based on facts or history (like COSMOS) have to have a touch of drama or SFX to get the average joe bumpkin to keep their attn. Think back to the old HISTORY channel (or A&E for that matter!) of like 20 yrs ago--very dry and boring presentations-very few ppl watched.

I am totally for a "pure" history channel as I am for a pure sci-fi one-but we all know neither will ever happen if the money making issue is not removed from the picture.

 

[Illiterati]

How about these attempts at teaching history? <ducks and runs away...fast>

 

[YJ02]

How about these attempts at teaching history? <ducks and runs away...fast>

a part of me says "whatever it takes", the other part asks "why are there so many disinterested/stupid people to make "whatever it takes" necessary?

 

[Illiterati]

a part of me says "whatever it takes", the other part asks "why are there so many disinterested/stupid people to make "whatever it takes" necessary?

But like I said...you do what you have to do to catch the attention of people who might otherwise say "why the hell should I even care?"

The telling of the Hamilton/Burr duel, btw, was downright hilarious.

 

[Gate_Boarder]

This ought to make some people happy:

http://www.shawmedia.ca/Media/PressReleaseDetail.aspx?pressReleaseId=6442457166
​

After only four shows in it looks like the History Channel wants 10 more episodes.


OMG, I can't believe what I am reading. We are almost at the end of March in the year 2014. Talk about being old and having nothing in common with the younger punks.

 

[Illiterati]

I vividly remember when it seemed to take FOREVER for a year to go by. Now it's like "jeez! it's almost the end of March!"

 

[Overmind One]

I see no modern mores either--maybe something approaching what helped formed current morality? She must of not watched an ep with the raids and battle included

Ragnar was probably an actual person--his sons are documented, and you know how that goes; anyone who is deemed of achieving great things (like ragnar's sons) HAVE to have a legendarium built about them==this Ragnar is obviously a type of aggregate character-this often happens in actual historical annals. Thew writers of source material often lumped together the achievements of many men into one person (like the Clint Eastwood character in HEARTBREAK RIDGE as an example )

RAC your are absolutely correct though (as you will see in my first post) about the HISTORY channel's use of "walmart-izing" history=quantity over quality.

Unfortunately like Illit said-many shows based on facts or history (like COSMOS) have to have a touch of drama or SFX to get the average joe bumpkin to keep their attn. Think back to the old HISTORY channel (or A&E for that matter!) of like 20 yrs ago--very dry and boring presentations-very few ppl watched.

I am totally for a "pure" history channel as I am for a pure sci-fi one-but we all know neither will ever happen if the money making issue is not removed from the picture.

Spot on, both Illit and you. The thing is, we have to appeal to the "average bumpkin", because being a bumpkin is "average" now. The audience still left watching broadcast television is shrinking by the millions every year. The younger the age group, the less TV is watched. But they want entertainment and not "dry" knowledge.

No wonder Common Core is talking about "friendly numbers". Anybody remember the animated birds and the bees? Who wants to hear the "dry" version? In the future, maybe they will just show a variety of porn and leave the discussion for home.

 

[shavedape]

Meh, delved into Vikings again and it's reminding me too much of Game of Thrones sans the dragons. It does have some interesting stuff, like the use of old Roman infrastructure (baths, statues, etc.). But the intrigue and faux rough sex is a bit of an eye roll. It does get points for having some nice eye candy though.

 

[Overmind One]

Meh, delved into Vikings again and it's reminding me too much of Game of Thrones sans the dragons. It does have some interesting stuff, like the use of old Roman infrastructure (baths, statues, etc.). But the intrigue and faux rough sex is a bit of an eye roll. It does get points for having some nice eye candy though.

 

[Illiterati]

Why is that woman wearing jelly bellies around her neck?

 

[shavedape]

Why is that woman wearing jelly bellies around her neck?

Have you forgotten the joys of wearing a candy necklace as a kid? I mean, the candy is so close to your mouth at that point it's a no-brainer what happens next. As for the gif, clearly this gal has a sweet tooth and is looking stylish to boot. Two birds and all that, eh wot.

 

[Illiterati]

I remember candy necklaces. I just don't remember them dangling quite so much. LOL

 

[YJ02]

This ought to make some people happy:

http://www.shawmedia.ca/Media/PressReleaseDetail.aspx?pressReleaseId=6442457166
​

After only four shows in it looks like the History Channel wants 10 more episodes.


OMG, I can't believe what I am reading. We are almost at the end of March in the year 2014. Talk about being old and having nothing in common with the younger punks.

Well, there is the whole season one to consider as well. IMO, besides the "pedestrian (non history buff types)" viewers, that many viewers are indeed history geeks like me. They see as I did, that the show is so far keeping "in tune" with the history sources we do have. We "types" appreciate this kind of faith to the record just like you science types go apeshit if a show has a science element that is dumb or improbable/impossible (like glass windows on spacecraft)

Just like syfy needs more actual sci fi shows, history needs more actual history shows--little less PAWN STARS and SWAMPMEN

SPOILER? naw! Its History! Like I said all one needs do is look it up--but if you do not want to know then don't read any more

Spoiler

If they keep this track and the show goes far enough we will see something like Ragnar getting snuffed out and his sons leading the "great heathen army" into England after his death. If they do not do this or have Ragnar at the head of this army, then it will have gone off the rails

 

[YJ02]

So, Illit-did you catch last nights ep?

BTW season 1 is up on Amazon prime for those who didn't see it--and care to watch.

 

[YJ02]

Meh, delved into Vikings again and it's reminding me too much of Game of Thrones sans the dragons. It does have some interesting stuff, like the use of old Roman infrastructure (baths, statues, etc.). But the intrigue and faux rough sex is a bit of an eye roll. It does get points for having some nice eye candy though.

"like" for the infrastructure issues--nice to see that some of TPTB are thinking it out as to what would still be standing from a few hundred yrs prior--especially considering how the Britons maintained the Roman built places after the Roman departure

Like how they had the one character answer Ragnar's question of "who made this?" though it is more a lift from Greek history than the Roman Briton one = "some say that giants lived here" was a bit weak, they could of came up with something better and even the Norse would of had some scant knowledge of Roman civ without details as many raiders had made it to the Mediterranean and into Gaul by this time.

You do know that GOT is based on a fictional world of fantasy and that "VIKINGS" is based in our world, yes?

 

[shavedape]

"like" for the infrastructure issues--nice to see that some of TPTB are thinking it out as to what would still be standing from a few hundred yrs prior--especially considering how the Britons maintained the Roman built places after the Roman departure

Yeah, this is what I liked about the show.

Like how they had the one character answer Ragnar's question of "who made this?" though it is more a lift from Greek history than the Roman Briton one = "some say that giants lived here" was a bit weak, they could of came up with something better and even the Norse would of had some scant knowledge of Roman civ without details as many raiders had made it to the Mediterranean and into Gaul by this time.

I agree that the inhabitants, uneducated as they were, would still have known about the Romans to some extent. At the very least there would have been oral histories that depicted them. Granted, Ragnar and his people could have been out of the loop, but the "giants" response he was given was rather weak as you say.

You do know that GOT is based on a fictional world of fantasy and that "VIKINGS" is based in our world, yes?

Yes, I know GOT is over done fiction. That was the point I was making.

 

[Gate_Boarder]

Yeah, this is what I liked about the show.

I agree that the inhabitants, uneducated as they were, would still have known about the Romans to some extent. At the very least there would have been oral histories that depicted them. Granted, Ragnar and his people could have been out of the loop, but the "giants" response he was given was rather weak as you say.

I have to do some checking, but my ancestors from Sweden( Inland Vikings) must of traveled East through the Baltic Sea. Or how about Denmark? That must of been occupied by the Vikings, so Old Germany is a hop-skip-and-jump to some of the Roman outposts there.

Game of Thrones and The Walking Dead are just pornographic violence for the video generation, so I passed on both after a couple of episodes.

 

[Illiterati]

I haven't yet missed an episode of this show, and I'm hoping they have a panel for the show at WonderCon this next month. You can bet your ever-lovin' ass I'll be there.

 

[shavedape]

I haven't yet missed an episode of this show, and I'm hoping they have a panel for the show at WonderCon this next month. You can bet your ever-lovin' ass I'll be there.

Fingers crossed they don't check your bag for zip ties and duct tape. :encouragement:

 

[Illiterati]

Fingers crossed they don't check your bag for zip ties and duct tape. :encouragement:

I have a great new cane. I'm going to use the brass knob on the thing to knock them unconscious and then I'll play it by ear as to how to get them out of the building and into my dunge...ah...house.