(((Read through or scroll to the end for the update.)))
Billed as a spinoff sequel to History Channel's "knocked it out of the park" smash hit "Vikings," I naturally looked forward to this new series. So before we get into it, I love writing rave reviews, and I had expected to on this one, but it's not going to happen.
As others have mentioned, there are many historical inaccuracies, one of which is a black female jarl. You can't make this stuff up... but THEY DID. I lost count of how many times I've read reviews that used the words "politically correct" and "woke," and, if I'm being honest, I can't disagree with them. This isn't the only instance of forcing today's social and diversity issues into this time period within this series, but I don't want to spend any more time on this.
After watching Valhalla, I truly believe that it should be described as fantasy fiction based on some actual historical events. To do anything other is false advertising. The biggest mystery is this: how can a series, with so many people from its epic predecessor being involved in it, be such a raging dumpster fire?
The cast were okay, but they didn't click for me at all. In more scenes than I care to remember there was zero chemistry. There are some really good people, but these roles didn't stand out or shine at all. Not a single one.
The series as a whole made me claustrophobic. Gone are the vast vistas of breathtaking beauty from the original series. In their place are boring small pieces of mountainsides and marsh. Throw in a bridge and some other cheesy sets, and, well, there's really nothing more to say with a subtle nod to the bad CGI as well.
I'm guessing Frida Gustavsson was supposed to be the obligatory "strong female lead" in this series? The writing for Freydis Eriksdotter, along with Gustavsson's interpretation of the role, are both abysmal. I know, I know, she's not Katheryn Winnick/Lagertha, but I can say with a straight face that I didn't expect her to be! I expected her to be different, but on PAR, and that's all based on what I said in the first paragraph. Bottom line... not even close.
The writing is abysmal. I was the opposite of captivated. I watched until the end of the season hoping for some of the magic of the original Vikings to be recaptured, but it didn't happen. For me, the series flatlined, and no one bothered to call for a crash cart.
As others have mentioned, if you value your time, watch the original Vikings (shout out to Gustaf Skarsgard as my favorite character "Floki"), and The Last Kingdom. These two shows captured and held me from the opening moments.
----------------------------------
Update:
I watched all of Season Two. Though some parts dragged out far too long, it was much improved, and I brought my rating up. I'm looking forward to (hopefully) more improvements in the next season, if there is one.
Billed as a spinoff sequel to History Channel's "knocked it out of the park" smash hit "Vikings," I naturally looked forward to this new series. So before we get into it, I love writing rave reviews, and I had expected to on this one, but it's not going to happen.
As others have mentioned, there are many historical inaccuracies, one of which is a black female jarl. You can't make this stuff up... but THEY DID. I lost count of how many times I've read reviews that used the words "politically correct" and "woke," and, if I'm being honest, I can't disagree with them. This isn't the only instance of forcing today's social and diversity issues into this time period within this series, but I don't want to spend any more time on this.
After watching Valhalla, I truly believe that it should be described as fantasy fiction based on some actual historical events. To do anything other is false advertising. The biggest mystery is this: how can a series, with so many people from its epic predecessor being involved in it, be such a raging dumpster fire?
The cast were okay, but they didn't click for me at all. In more scenes than I care to remember there was zero chemistry. There are some really good people, but these roles didn't stand out or shine at all. Not a single one.
The series as a whole made me claustrophobic. Gone are the vast vistas of breathtaking beauty from the original series. In their place are boring small pieces of mountainsides and marsh. Throw in a bridge and some other cheesy sets, and, well, there's really nothing more to say with a subtle nod to the bad CGI as well.
I'm guessing Frida Gustavsson was supposed to be the obligatory "strong female lead" in this series? The writing for Freydis Eriksdotter, along with Gustavsson's interpretation of the role, are both abysmal. I know, I know, she's not Katheryn Winnick/Lagertha, but I can say with a straight face that I didn't expect her to be! I expected her to be different, but on PAR, and that's all based on what I said in the first paragraph. Bottom line... not even close.
The writing is abysmal. I was the opposite of captivated. I watched until the end of the season hoping for some of the magic of the original Vikings to be recaptured, but it didn't happen. For me, the series flatlined, and no one bothered to call for a crash cart.
As others have mentioned, if you value your time, watch the original Vikings (shout out to Gustaf Skarsgard as my favorite character "Floki"), and The Last Kingdom. These two shows captured and held me from the opening moments.
----------------------------------
Update:
I watched all of Season Two. Though some parts dragged out far too long, it was much improved, and I brought my rating up. I'm looking forward to (hopefully) more improvements in the next season, if there is one.