Lead Adventure Forum

Miniatures Adventure => Medieval Adventures => Topic started by: gamer Mac on 20 February 2014, 10:58:33 PM

Title: Vikings series 2
Post by: gamer Mac on 20 February 2014, 10:58:33 PM
Does anybody know when we get the second series here in the UK. Just watched the first series on DVD and it was great. I can see some Vikings in my future :D
Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: Captain Blood on 20 February 2014, 11:25:21 PM
I just watched it on DVD too Colin. Great, wasn't it? (Mostly - there were a couple bits where I felt like I was watching a schools programme designed to educate me, but I thought the leading bloke was excellent. An Australian former male model, would you believe?  :o)

Anyway, apparently season 2 is about to start this week - on Sky presumably, since I believe the show is made by the History Channel, and I don't think they're on terrestrial TV in the UK?

Which means another year to wait for those of us who like boxed sets...  ::)
Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: Mason on 20 February 2014, 11:30:02 PM
I was looking at season one of Vikings today in Sainsbury's, as GoT season three was out of stock already (!), but could not quite decide whether to get it or not.

As you both seem to recommend it, I shall grab it on the way to work tomorrow.

Thanks, chaps!
 :D

 
Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: gamer Mac on 20 February 2014, 11:40:39 PM
On the web it says season 2 starts on the 27th Feb on the history channel but it doesn't appears on my sky planner.
Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: Mason on 20 February 2014, 11:44:27 PM
On the web it says season 2 starts on the 27th Feb on the history channel but it doesn't appears on my sky planner.

Season one was shown in Canada and the US first, so maybe that is the release date for season two there.....?
 ???

Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: Skyven on 21 February 2014, 12:30:28 AM
Amazon UK grabbed the rights for it in the UK, it should be available on LoveFilm, as was the first series.
Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: von Lucky on 21 February 2014, 07:51:35 AM
Hah - I checked Wikipedia on Monday to see when season 2 starts. SBS was prety good with showing it last year, I hope they pick it up again this year.

Scurv - I also agree it's better than Walking Dead.
Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: von Lucky on 21 February 2014, 08:39:29 AM
Apparently SBS has picked it up and is due to air it in March.
Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: Marauderman on 21 February 2014, 09:06:05 AM
Thanks for the heads up about SBS for March von Lucky. I enjoyed the first season.
Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: Atheling on 21 February 2014, 09:46:22 AM
"Fly straight with perfection,
Find me a new direction....."  ;) :)

Darrell.
Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: gringo on 21 February 2014, 12:15:56 PM
seen the first series in good old Sainsburys hummed and hard will get
mine now.........
just wonder how they did with achieving the viking look.... :D

thanks for the thimbs up men
regards
Ged
www.gringo40s.com
www.gringo40s.blogspot.com
Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: Captain Blood on 21 February 2014, 12:21:53 PM
just wonder how they did with achieving the viking look.... :D

Pretty good for my money, Ged... Feels quite authentic - not that anyone can really know for sure.

I think they've got the Anglo-Saxons a bit wrong though... Very strange look to them, costume and armour-wise. And all portrayed as feeble, effete, pusillanimous idiots - which I'm fairly sure wasn't the case... But apart from that, good stuff...
Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: OSHIROmodels on 21 February 2014, 12:31:42 PM
I think they've got the Anglo-Saxons a bit wrong though... Very strange look to them, costume and armour-wise. And all portrayed as feeble, effete, pusillanimous idiots - which I'm fairly sure wasn't the case... But apart from that, good stuff...

I would imagine that's so people can recognise the difference between the two with the target audience not having as much a historical bent as we learned types  :)

A shame but there we go  :D

cheers

James
Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: Captain Blood on 21 February 2014, 02:12:29 PM
Yes, I think they've shown the Anglo-Saxons as a bunch of useless pansies in funny outfits in order to make the vkings look more butch. But it is a shame, because they've clearly gone to extraordinary lengths to get the vikings looking as authentic as possible - and then treated the Ango-Saxons as kind of pantomime opponents, without any attempt to get their look right...  ::)

Overall though, it's a very good series, so...  :)
Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: von Lucky on 21 February 2014, 02:19:35 PM
Maybe it's portrayed as a story from the point of view of the vikings, ie how they saw the world?
Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: Captain Blood on 21 February 2014, 02:21:21 PM
Fair point.
Maybe they indeed saw the Anglo-Saxons in great big wobbly leather helmets...  ;)
Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: Mason on 21 February 2014, 02:35:41 PM
I would imagine that's so people can recognise the difference between the two with the target audience not having as much a historical bent as we learned types  :)

A shame but there we go  :D

I am very impressed, Bibbles!
That showed some serious restraint, with no reference to the Vikings being hard Northern Barbarians and Saxons being Southern ....you know the rest... :D

Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: Malamute on 21 February 2014, 03:21:45 PM
Does it have boobies and nudie bits like wot Spartacus had?

 ;D
Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: gamer Mac on 21 February 2014, 03:59:34 PM
Not so much I am afraid Nick
I am surprised it is an 18 Cert
There are some extras showing the " making of" which are quite good.
The shield wall battle was good apart from I thought the Anglo-Saxon fought in a similar shield wall style or did they learn that from the northmen?
Are the axes the Vikings use not a bit small as well?
Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: OSHIROmodels on 21 February 2014, 04:15:40 PM
I am very impressed, Bibbles!
That showed some serious restraint, with no reference to the Vikings being hard Northern Barbarians and Saxons being Southern ....you know the rest... :D



I've got the flu and would feel a bit wrong saying that sort of thing at the moment  lol

cheers

James
Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: axabrax on 21 February 2014, 05:58:00 PM
Wow, really? I thought the Vikings costumes looked more like Game of a Thrones than anything I've ever seen on a reenactment site or in any Osprey, and Ive looked pretty closely. The complete and total lack of armor for the nobles was also baffling to me. I didn't see proper chainmail at any point in the entire first season. I find the "we can never really know, so it doesn't matter" argument to be a slippery slope in that it seems to ratify artistic license and creative speculation rather than focusing on what little we do know. We certainly know enough about the armor from Scandinavian burials to say that what they are doing in the series is off-base in that regard for the Vikings.

I thought the cultural aspects of the show were spot on however. I think it would be cool at some point if they brought in a berserker character.   ;D


Pretty good for my money, Ged... Feels quite authentic - not that anyone can really know for sure.

I think they've got the Anglo-Saxons a bit wrong though... Very strange look to them, costume and armour-wise. And all portrayed as feeble, effete, pusillanimous idiots - which I'm fairly sure wasn't the case... But apart from that, good stuff...
Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: Argonor on 21 February 2014, 11:08:00 PM
Besides the very strange grungy look of the vikings, I think the plot of the first series is very weak.

What is this columbus-nonsense of the vikings not knowing if Britain actually exists ('there's nothing to the west'? And the best seafarers of their age have never navigated down the coast to the Channel, and traversed it? There's lot's of evidence of extensive trade all over Europe up through the Bronze Age, also by ship, if I recall correctly.

And this feudal system that seems to be the order of society... what's the deal with that? The vikings were above all free men, with the right to chose whom to follow. A Hersir, Jarl or King could take oaths, but had to lead from the front and give large gifts to earn the respect of, and gain, followers.

I'm sorry, I really don't like this take on my forebears. It smells too much of 'Vikings are 'in'; we'd better make an epic series about them. Let's mix Lord of the Rings with medieval Europe and add some names from the sagas and make up this typical american maverick as the main protagonist... and let's also make him discover the west, which the vikings have only heard vague rumours about and don't really believe in, to thicken the plot. Then let's add tits and ass, and we have a winner.'
Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: Slayer on 22 February 2014, 02:35:58 AM
well if you want a 100% accurate series then this wont be for anyone looking for that :(. Its a drama/action series and should be treated as just that. I do, and think you'll also find it more enjoyable it viewed like that. But hey each to there own and I know some cant get past inaccurate things like uniforms etc ;D (not having a dig at anyone)
Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: Furt on 22 February 2014, 05:46:17 AM
Yes, I think they've shown the Anglo-Saxons as a bunch of useless pansies in funny outfits in order to make the vkings look more butch. But it is a shame, because they've clearly gone to extraordinary lengths to get the vikings looking as authentic as possible - and then treated the Ango-Saxons as kind of pantomime opponents, without any attempt to get their look right...  ::)

Overall though, it's a very good series, so...  :)

Totally agree about the Anglo-Saxon thing. This actually turned me off the series and I stopped watching after they started appearing in it - really off putting for me.
Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: Blackwolf on 22 February 2014, 05:56:23 AM
Totally agree about the Anglo-Saxon thing. This actually turned me off the series and I stopped watching after they started appearing in it - really off putting for me.

Me too mate.
Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: Argonor on 22 February 2014, 11:09:17 AM
I forgot to mention the ridiculous '3 shields wide shieldwall' in the fight on the beach. The saxons, outnumbering the vikings, just ran into it from the front and died, instead of some of them going 2 steps to the side and attacking the foes in the side/rear. Even my 7 year old daughter could have figured that out.

well if you want a 100% accurate series then this wont be for anyone looking for that :(. Its a drama/action series and should be treated as just that. I do, and think you'll also find it more enjoyable it viewed like that. But hey each to there own and I know some cant get past inaccurate things like uniforms etc ;D (not having a dig at anyone)

This tastes a lot like the dicussion I just had over one of Sarissas supposedly 'viking' buildings. Who's to say what would be 100% correct? But at least doing a LITTLE actual research and basing the output somewhat on archaeological findings and many years of research and experiments by dedicated scholars wouldn't hurt THAT much, now, would it?
Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: Atheling on 22 February 2014, 11:50:03 AM
I forgot to mention the ridiculous '3 shields wide shieldwall' in the fight on the beach. The saxons, outnumbering the vikings, just ran into it from the front and died, instead of some of them going 2 steps to the side and attacking the foes in the side/rear. Even my 7 year old daughter could have figured that out.

This tastes a lot like the dicussion I just had over one of Sarissas supposedly 'viking' buildings. Who's to say what would be 100% correct? But at least doing a LITTLE actual research and basing the output somewhat on archaeological findings and many years of research and experiments by dedicated scholars wouldn't hurt THAT much, now, would it?

Well, we do know quite a lot from one particularly well known source,  The Bayeux Tapestry(!!). OK, it's Late Eleventh Century but warfare and equipment didn't change very much in the so called 'Dark Ages' (no such thing IMHO).

There are other sources too such as the Anglo Saxon Chronicle, various Viking Saga's (that must have contained a grain of truth despite being written in the 13th C) just to mention a few of the better known.

Darrell.
Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: Gibby on 22 February 2014, 12:48:49 PM
Besides the very strange grungy look of the vikings, I think the plot of the first series is very weak.

What is this columbus-nonsense of the vikings not knowing if Britain actually exists ('there's nothing to the west'? And the best seafarers of their age have never navigated down the coast to the Channel, and traversed it? There's lot's of evidence of extensive trade all over Europe up through the Bronze Age, also by ship, if I recall correctly.

And this feudal system that seems to be the order of society... what's the deal with that? The vikings were above all free men, with the right to chose whom to follow. A Hersir, Jarl or King could take oaths, but had to lead from the front and give large gifts to earn the respect of, and gain, followers.

I'm sorry, I really don't like this take on my forebears. It smells too much of 'Vikings are 'in'; we'd better make an epic series about them. Let's mix Lord of the Rings with medieval Europe and add some names from the sagas and make up this typical american maverick as the main protagonist... and let's also make him discover the west, which the vikings have only heard vague rumours about and don't really believe in, to thicken the plot. Then let's add tits and ass, and we have a winner.'


I agree with all of this, totally, at which point I began to look at this series like I did the film 300. It's just pure comic book nonsense, and if you sit back and switch off then it can be enjoyable enough. It is a shame that the entertainment industry think that realism and entertainment are mutually exclusive, but it is what it is I suppose.

The portrayal of the Saxons did my fecking head in, too. It's a decent series but you have to push through all the nonsense.
Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: LeadAsbestos on 22 February 2014, 02:48:58 PM
Button counting like this belongs on TMP. I thought this forum is where the fun people came to hang out...

Vikings, the show, makes me want to play SAGA, the game, to have fun. Tiny metals toys on a tabletop aren't real either, boys.

Not that I didn't raise my fists in anger at that Clive Owen travesty, King Arthur! ;) ::)
Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: Argonor on 22 February 2014, 03:33:54 PM
Button counting like this belongs on TMP. I thought this forum is where the fun people came to hang out...

Vikings, the show, makes me want to play SAGA, the game, to have fun. Tiny metals toys on a tabletop aren't real either, boys.

Not that I didn't raise my fists in anger at that Clive Owen travesty, King Arthur! ;) ::)

Easy for you to say, it's not your cultural heritage they are messing with.
Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: Captain Blood on 22 February 2014, 04:59:37 PM
Okay chaps, calm down. Please keep it civil and constructive :)

Like I said at the top of the thread, I very much enjoyed the series. But like most TV historical dramas, there will be lots of things experts like us can find fault with.

The interesting thing about this programme is that it's made by the History Channel, not a drama producer like HBO, and - for me anyway - even though it's done through the medium of drama, it does feel very 'educational'.
You can almost spot the bit in each episode where the producers are saying 'and this is how the vikings did justice; this is how they did religion; this is how they did shipbuilding; this is how they did warfare' and so on. Each episode covers off some aspect of culture and life in Viking society... Given this thinly-veiled educational thrust, it would be surprising if the producers hadn't done their homework pretty thoroughly - although of course, that doesn't mean they've got everything right.

As far as chainmail goes, I'm not sure what the historical evidence is for so many vikings wearing chainmail in this early period. To my (semi-educated) eye, the mix of leatherwork, furs, and occasional bits of metal looks pretty convincing. I know we wargamers have been taught by wargames miniatures companies to like our vikings of all denominations almost uniformly clad in nasal helms and mail shirts, but I don't imagine that's really how it was at all. Armour, even mail armour, almost certainly was the preserve of the wealthy few - same as in most medieval cultures from 500 - 1500.

Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: LeadAsbestos on 22 February 2014, 05:14:12 PM
Easy for you to say, it's not your cultural heritage they are messing with.
Maybe I'm just an American maverick. ;)
Title: Re: Vikings series 2
Post by: Captain Blood on 22 February 2014, 05:30:45 PM
Thank you for your thoughtful contribution.

Since people seem determined for some reason to turn this innocuous topic about a TV programme into an argument, I think we'll leave it there.