Ozbow

I just finished watching episode 1 of the new show "Vikings" that screened on the History Channel in the US Sunday night. It's touted as an "historical drama", set during the early medieval period. It wasn't bad, they seem to be trying to be as authentic as possible, with a bit of explanation (history lesson) cleverly interwoven with the story and of course gratuitous (authentic ) violence. The story itself was compelling enough to make me want to watch the next one. Here's a sneak peek from youtube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlmSiRJZEco

Morning

discord wrote:... It's touted as an "historical drama", set during the early medieval period. It wasn't bad, they seem to be trying to be as authentic as possible, with a bit of explanation (history lesson) cleverly interwoven ...

Considering the pedigree of the production I would suggest that not expecting it to be Historically accurate would be a good move. "authentic as possible" may be a bit of over-statement. Authenticity and film do not seem to marry well. Irrespective it will probably be a good production that will enjoyable to watch. Given that "The Tudors" has done well, as far as sales etc go, my expectations are this will do the same - you will just have to wait a few years for it to turn up on "free-to-air" television.

On the other side it is filmed in Ireland so it will look good and it is historically a region that "Vikings" lived.

I am looking forward to seeing it once it comes out on DVD, I don't have pay TV and I just can't stand commercials.

It would have been nice if they titled it Northmen/ Norsemen or something more accurate rather than using a bastardisation of a verb - viking which basically means rape, pillage and plunder.

*cough* piratebay *cough*