Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #20 - bionicpanda (07/15/2013) [-]
The new show "Vikings" on the history channel is the **** . You guys should watch it
#98 to #20 - sotalokki (07/15/2013) [-]
4 first episodes were fine, after that ***** just started go full retard.
User avatar #27 to #20 - hudis ONLINE (07/15/2013) [-]
It's overall very historically inaccurate and biased in favour of Christianity which is weird considering it's a show about vikings.
#133 to #27 - CoolStoryBrosky (07/15/2013) [-]
>"Biased in favor of Christianity"   
>Christians consistently get destroyed in battle and die, and their holy men are massacred   
>wat
>"Biased in favor of Christianity"
>Christians consistently get destroyed in battle and die, and their holy men are massacred
>wat
User avatar #134 to #133 - hudis ONLINE (07/15/2013) [-]
Okay, you're not getting the point at all. It's the portrayal of viking/pagan society and customs contra those of the Christians in Northumberland.
User avatar #103 to #27 - finni (07/15/2013) [-]
In what way is it historically inaccurate and biased in favour of Christianity?

I've watched it so far and yes, there are some things that are inaccurate, but I don't see how it is very inaccurate or in favour of Christianity, except for the Uppsala episode.

And it seems very pro Viking sometimes espescially when Ragnar's wife killed Knut for trying to rape her and another woman and that they didn't kill the people in the Church unless they attacked.
User avatar #136 to #103 - hudis ONLINE (07/15/2013) [-]
I'm not going to name all the reasons, but it's more in the portrayal of viking society versus "Christian" society. The people of Northumberland are portrayed as sophisticated, well-mannered and with good morals - oftend credited to Christianity in the series - whereas vikings are frequently made excessively violent, simple, filthy and generally barbaric.

Another thing is how it's suggested (or so it seemed to me) on several occasions that some vikings, very important ones, lean somewhat towards Christianity as soon as the priest starts talking about it. It's not blatantly said, but it annoyed me that the implication is there, as if every one of them were basically Christians from the start just waiting for someone to say the magic word.

"Pro viking" should not be about watching them being badasses chopping people's heads off and painting their faces with blood. That's not historically accurate, that's just the impression they left on places they raided. This is a show about vikings, on History Channel even; you'd expect a little more than the standard image of bloodthirsty warmongers (except when they talk about Christianity) so popular in fiction.
User avatar #140 to #136 - finni (07/15/2013) [-]
Well I don't think I exactly think of it that way. The Viking society is not despicted that bad, they have their own morals and that they care for their children just like we do today. I just get some sort of mixed feelings about them, but I don't think they're despicted that unfairly. We don't really get to see the common folk of England either and that king didn't seem like a good guy exactly. I mean, killing his own general like that? Is that a good way to portrait Christian rulers? Or how he surprised attacked the Vikings and let his brother die?

And also, I find that the show is actually much against Christianity, with Athelstan being very like, unsure of his beliefs and how the one Bible book (not the hole bible, it was John something) was ruined when they went to Uppsala and generally how they despict that women has more athourity than they have in bad unequal Christian Britain and again how Knut was killed for rape.

I dunno, I just did not feel at ALL that it was leaning towards being pro Christian. I can grant you that they haven't shown all there is to the Viking society, but going out on raids and everything isn't really innacurate.
User avatar #150 to #140 - hudis ONLINE (07/15/2013) [-]
No, obviously the latter isn't inaccurate. Either way, I guess it really comes down to different perspectives on the show. Perhaps we are both right in different ways.
User avatar #151 to #150 - finni (07/15/2013) [-]
Yeah maybe.
User avatar #56 to #27 - zuflux ONLINE (07/15/2013) [-]
Well you know. When you risk getting a ******** of hate from Christians regarding that time period.... Egh.
User avatar #59 to #56 - hudis ONLINE (07/15/2013) [-]
While I see what you mean, it really shouldn't matter.
User avatar #63 to #59 - zuflux ONLINE (07/15/2013) [-]
Point is. You don't see 'tea' teeth for reasons:

-They stopped drinking that much tea, and instead drank coffee.
-They're not 'decended' from brits, merely founded by.
User avatar #66 to #63 - hudis ONLINE (07/15/2013) [-]
I get the feeling you replied to the wrong comment, friend.
#67 to #66 - zuflux ONLINE (07/15/2013) [-]
More like "Wrong thread." Haha, this will stand as a monument to my forgetfulness.
User avatar #43 to #27 - bionicpanda (07/15/2013) [-]
they bash christianity every 5 seconds i don't see how it's biased in christianity's favor at all
#31 to #27 - godlycuntdestroyer (07/15/2013) [-]
Many Vikings and other Germanics happily accepted Christianity? In fact many Germanic converts in Europe were exceedingly pious and non ****** up cf their Mediterranean friends.
User avatar #33 to #31 - hudis ONLINE (07/15/2013) [-]
Not necessarily in 793 AD. That's considered the starting date of the 'Viking Age', and the year in which the first part of the show takes place. I'm aware that many northmen embraced Christianity, but it's nonetheless a bit inappropriate to glorify Christianity and the people and villages of Britain to such an extent when it's nowhere near the truth of how it was.

That's the impression I got from the show, anyway; despite King Aella pretty much being the antagonist, it's suggested several times that he and his followers are morally superior to the encroaching vikings. Yes, vikings were often merciless raiders with no respect for other cultures or beliefs, but they were not the filthy, bloodthirsty barbarians and brutes that fiction would have people believe - and the people of King Aella were not saints and masters of sophistication.
#35 to #33 - godlycuntdestroyer (07/15/2013) [-]
Maybe? I haven't actually seen the show tbh, I'm talking more generally about the misconceptions of Christianity vs "Paganism" as interpreted through popular culture, or 'net culture really.

Maybe I should watch it but most people keep saying its bad, so...
User avatar #36 to #35 - hudis ONLINE (07/15/2013) [-]
Problem is there are a lot of contradicting sources (like most things historical) and the pagan peoples were rarely united. While some certainly converted to Christianity quickly (especially those who travelled to Constantinople), there is evidence to suggest that some others raided frequently for the simple reason that Christians would not trade with them.

But yeah, if you're into vikings etc, go ahead and watch it. It's not that bad, it's just... awkward.
#25 to #20 - anonymous (07/15/2013) [-]
It's a good show. The problem is that they have so many factual mistakes in it.
 Friends (0)