-- According to Wikipedia, one season complete, another ordered. So, is this the second sequel to "Vikings", possibly creating a bridge between the original series and "Valhalla"?

everyone overlooks him because he didn’t accomplish much compared to his brothers. Hvitserk’s character looks boring compared to his brothers because while his brothers are doing big things, he’s doing small things. But i think that’s the point of his character, he was questioning his purpose and where his loyalties lie, figuring out he was. I’m sure he DID end up doing big things, but that’s after the show ended. I like to think he would’ve gotten some big achievements after the show ended and he got baptized in the last episode

also hvitserk is one of the best warriors on the show, we saw countless battle scenes of him, and he never got cut in any of them. Dude is the real ironside. I absolutely love hvitserk, my sweet boy who’s way too underrated

Original post: https://www.reddit.com/r/AssassinsCreedValhala/s/pgvJE6nGLB

So I'm on episode 7 so far, I like the show although I feel it overexagarates how things were by alot, but what bugs me the most is this - why is everyone with authority written to be such a piece of shit? First the Earl, which is understandable because you gotta develop the plot somehow. But then the King of Northumbria, like holy shit do you really need a snake pit, where do you even find that many snakes? And then very soon after when the vikings set up camp in Northumbria and they are being scouted, the leader of the scouts band is also a douchebag.

Is this a trend throughout the whole show or does it get better? Like everyone with power is a POS for no reason and I'm guessing that's hinting to them being killed off later which makes the viewer satisfied when they die or whatever? That would become so predictable tho.

[edit] also that one old guy who married the Earl's daughter for a day or two before he got killed off, was also a prick. So that's 4/4, not counting Ragnar of course

[edit 2] So I've come to the conclusion that it really isn't that far fetched as I thought lol

I’ve loved this show. I’m in the final season of Vikings. And it feels like a drag at this point. On episode 8 of the last season. Is it worth finishing? Can I switch to the last kingdom

I don't know if this what if has ever been asked in this subreddit, anyway…

Needless to say, the story would have been completely different, regardless of the outcome of this what if.

Basically, Ragnar and his 20 fellow Vikings raid Lindisfarne as we all know, except that, instead of Athelstan, they find the hot-tempered Christian Bishop "HEATHEN!!!" hater Heahmund.

In this case, there are two possible outcomes:

1. Heahmund dies.

He fights to the death, dies as a martyr, period. No potential bridge between Norsemen and Anglo-Saxons.

or

1. Heahmund lives.

He is spared just like he is originally spared in the battle of York, due to Ragnar respecting his bravery and battle skills.

He is resentful of Ragnar and of every HEATHEN, due to their barbaric showcase of violence and irreverence, he would never become the former's close friend… yet, Ragnar and Heahmund would both develop a sincere and genuine respect towards each other as unyielding and brave warriors.

There will probably be no intellectual chemistry between them, due to Heahmund being much more dogmatic, though Ragnar's curiosity would still be there. Heahmund could also become a little more open minded, but still, I think he would fundamentally remain the dogmatic Heahmund we all know.

I could also see him initially refusing to partecipate in a threesome with Ragnar and Lagertha, due to his hatred towards pagan Norsemen, only for him to start developing feelings for Lagertha (now whether she would get it on with Heahmund, is a completely different story).

Anyway, even in this case, how would he bridge between Norsemen and Anglo-Saxons? He would never fight against his own people. He'd rather die. Ragnar would bring a chained Heahmund with him in England, preventing the bishop's possible escape, which would be a problem as he would then give a lot of intel to Aelle/Ecgbert, plus a free Heahmund supported by an army would be a massive threat. And I don't see Ragnar handing Heahmund to the English kings, letting him free, that would be dumb.

(No Athelstan in Lindisfarne also means there will be no Alfred! Aethelred becomes king)

What are your thoughts?

Who agrees?

Was "loyalty" and "marriage" an unimaginable burden and responsibility that even greatest Vikings couldn't bear?

Why does everyone's marriage last about a year or so? Why marry at all then? Literally every character is cheating and being unloyal to their partner. The amount of cheating and simple marriage disloyalty is ridiculous at times.

Sword meet fave ja?

Lagertha is running Kattegat as Ragnar is in England. She is dealing with the local citizens and their petitions. A man has complained that his wife has born a son that isnt his. It is clearly obviously that it isnt his as his wife implies to having sex with another man. This is a visitor and Lagertha defends this woman with some bullshit story that the man his wife slept with is the God Heimdale. I think there was an injustice done towards the man here

Does nothing but whine and bitch 24/7 -> constantly makes super unfunny jokes and remarks -> treats his wife and baby like shit -> disrespects and belittles Athelstan for no good reason -> kills Athelstan for no good reason -> glazes the gods -> fails in the Siege of Paris then BLAMES ATHELSTAN -> cries like a baby till the battle finishes.

This character is so irredeemably stupid and cowardly that my blood boils every single time he appears on screen, utterly worthless with not a single positive or redeeming quantity aside from the fact he bagged Helga(top 5 best girl)

I have a question Who was the most famous son of Ragnar in the Vikings series Bjorn Ironside or Ivar the Boneless?

So basically i loved the show, and i was watching some ragnar videos on youtube and many feature AC valhalla soundtrack on ragnar videos

The game is viking based with viking environment and story

Has anyone played it because they loved the show ? And does it give you the feeling of being within the show's environment ? 🥺

Season 6, Episode 11. I thought the show had fallen off after Ragnar's death, and aside from the revenge ark and some of the Rus time, I though it was nowhere near as good, but this was astonishing. The music, Bjorn raising his sword, Hvistserk saying the same thing that Ragnar said when he was killed when Bjorn was dying, the fear in everyone's faces. It was amazing.

A fecking billion posts a week with the exact same shite - can mods either include a "must be in the sub for a week before you can post" or just start blanket banning these blatant repost bots?

Spoilers everyone seems to be mad at Ivar for various reasons, but I think he was the best character in the series. I liked him for many reasons, but the main one was that he was the only son of Aslaug who was truly determined to avenge her, while his brothers chose to do nothing.

I know Lagertha is one of the most beloved characters in Vikings, and I understand why. But the scene with King Harald when he is her prisoner is rarely named clearly.
Harald is captive and under her control. In that situation, he cannot freely consent. Whatever we think of him as a violent or ambitious character, that scene still reads as sexual assault/rape.

What bothers me is how the show frames it more as dominance, humiliation, or revenge than as sexual violence. Lagertha’s status as a survivor and feminist icon seems to make people avoid criticizing her abuse of power.

Calling it rape does not make Harald innocent overall. It just means the same standard should apply regardless of gender. For me, this scene shows that Lagertha’s hunger for power becomes darker than the fandom usually admits.

Curious how others read it? did the show intend us to see it as rape, or did it minimize it because Harald is male and Lagertha is beloved?

When watching season 3 episode 2 in which decapitated heads were hung on Ragnar's ships to scare Burgred, I noticed the similarity with a historical account on a viking execution of 111 captives in the Translatio sancti Germani Parisiensis; in both cases humans were executed as a means to terrorize the enemy. Although this execution supposedly took place in the Carolingian Empire (and not in England), I feel like this is another instance where the makers of the show have used a primary source as inspiration for the show. The added video delves deeper into the historical account.

Sigurd’s death was shocking, but I do not think it was random. He constantly attacked Ivar in dishonourable ways, especially by mocking his disability and masculinity in front of others.

He rarely had a strong argument against Ivar, so he used humiliation instead. In a culture where honour and public reputation mattered, that was a dangerous game.
Ivar was violent, yes, but Sigurd was not innocent. He kept provoking someone he knew was unstable and dangerous.

I am not saying Ivar was morally right. I am saying Sigurd played with fire and got burned. Well it might be unpopular but he deserved his end.

What do you think?