Article first published as VIKINGS Review on Seat42F.
History
Channel enters the foray of original series with VIKINGS, premiering
this Sunday, March 3rd at 10 p.m. ET. Set in Scandinavia during medieval
times, around 800 A.D., the show follows real-life Viking, and subject
of myth and lore, Ragnar Lodbrok (Travis Fimmel, The Beast), as he
challenges what he considers an unfit ruler and expands the reach of his
people.
The show opens at the end of a great
battle, with Ragnar and his brother, Rollo (Clive Standen, Camelot),
surveying the bodies on the battlefield. I do think it’s a little
unrealistic when a thrown spear easily impales one would-be escapee.
However, this scenes does a good job setting a tone of the series, and
showcasing its hero in a great light.
In fact, this first episode is a lot of
setup. Ragnar sits in council with his fellow Vikings, argues with his
lord, consults a seer, visits a shipbuilder, and has sex with his wife,
all to demonstrate what type of person he is, presenting various facets
of his life. A good pilot introduces us to the protagonist, and over the
course of the hour, viewers will get a real measure of what kind of man
Ragnar is, a smart, ambitious, brave one, and what he has set his
sights on.
Which is not to say that the episode is
boring; quite the opposite. It may be a setup, but it’s also well made,
and extremely interesting. The world the Vikings inhabit, as well as
their morals and values, are quite a bit different than those of modern
society. We are given a crash course, seeing the power struggles and
their version of justice in action. Yet, there is movement enough in the
plot to stay interesting.
Lest anyone worry these strange people
will feel unrelatable to modern audiences, Ragnar’s family is given
central standing, too. His wife, Lagertha (Katheryn Winnick, Bones) is a
fierce shield maiden, unafraid to show her husband affection, fend off
two would-be rapists, and use a loom. But when she overrules Ragnar and
makes their son, Bjorn (Nathan O’Toole, The Borgias), go to bed, even
though Bjorn has just been made a man at the tender age of twelve by
their people, it demonstrates that as much as things change, they also
stay the same.
I am not familiar with Viking culture,
so I cannot say how historically accurate VIKINGS is, but it certainly
looks good. Filmed in Ireland, the sweeping scenery is impressive, and
the buildings, costumes, and tools used look like they are from an
earlier time period. It’s a little like Game of Thrones, and while maybe
not at the same level of quality, not to mention comprising a much
smaller cast, it’s similar enough that it’s likely to pick up some of
the same audience, as long as they can be made aware that it’s airing.
Ragnar himself is the stuff of
conflicting legend, and because of that, we can only guess at where the
story is going. Sure, he and Rollo will sail east on a ship built for
them by the odd and brilliant Floki (Gustaf Skarsgard, Evil), off to
raid England and other new lands. And the current lord, Earl Haraldson
(Gabriel Byrne, In Treatment), will clash with our hero, proving to be a
dangerous foe. But will see Ragnar eventually become king? Will we see
his sons grow up to be warriors in their own right? Will we see his
eventual death? Until more episodes air, it’ll be difficult to judge
what kind of pacing the series’ writers intend to go for in these first
nine episodes, let alone over the span of years, should the series prove
to be a success.
VIKINGS not only looks good, but it’s
also well written. As stated, the pilot really gives us a feel for the
time period, locale, and the primary characters, but I also feel that
even the supporting players give off a sense of completeness, rounding
out the world, making it seem authentic. Haraldson may be evil, but we
see his sweet wife, Siggy (Jessalyn Gilsig, Glee), and a flashback to
the death of his sons, and realize that there’s a story behind every
action and motivation. The acting excellently conveys this mission, and I
am already eager to watch the next installment.
My only real complaint is about the
accents affected by the various characters. The episode begins with
subtitles, with is cool, but I’m glad they fade away relatively quickly.
However, each performer has a different take on what a Viking’s English
should sound like, and even among each individual, looked at
separately, that take does not seem to be consistent throughout the
episode. Ah, well. Nothing can be perfect, and accents aren’t so
important, especially when the thing wouldn’t have unfolded in English
in the real world, anyway.
I have to be honest, I was skeptical to
hear History Channel was dipping its toe into historical fiction. But if
this is an example of what they have in store, teaching us about a
culture and lesser-known hero in such a high quality way, I hope VIKINGS
is only the first of many such tales.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.