I'm less worried about historical accuracy with a show like this (I sorta assume they're taking all sorts of artistic licence; I like to watch the shows and then seek out books/documentaries for the knowledge and facts), but when it isn't justified by a top-grade show, that's more of an issue.
Now, I am enjoying the programme for the most part, but there are a few things about the writing that bug me. The biggest (thusfar - I'm only part way through season one) is the Earl (Haraldson) keeps doing things that seem like they'd incite a full-blown insurrection/civil war amongst his people. It's compounded by Ragnar's disinterest in getting the least bit political. With a spoiler warning, I'll get some detail here:
When Ragnar first leads a raid into England and then returns with plunder, he and his raiders are stripped of almost all treasure they return with by Haraldson. Why didn't they immediately head to the tavern, feigning good spirits, but saying things like, "I'm not sure I'm looking forward to the next raid if the earl is just going to take all the plunder. Why not just farm?" and getting everybody talking. It seems like it wouldn't be a hard sell to a lot of people in that community that, if the earl takes your stuff you don't want to serve him. Later on, Haraldson butchers Ragnar's farm and burns his property to the ground. Ragnar doesn't bother bringing this in front of the council, he goes right to challenging Haraldson to personal combat. Why not bring this up as a crime? It's not even discussed as an option. It's like every character is operating with half a brain or less.
The other problem I have is that the show wants me to root for these guys (and gals - shield maidens - whatever) but the first two real battles in the story are against a bunch of monks and then an ambush raid on a Sunday so they face no opposition. They're a bunch of bullies.
reply
share