Vikings
Vikings
I don't like battles and if there aren't any comparable to "Braveheart" then I am rewinding or going to brew myself some herbs
E there. I watch this series without A. Hopkins' hump. I saw "The Silence of the Lambs" a long time ago and "Hannibal", its sequel was a trash squared, as was the then predictable and boring role of Hopkins.
Death is lighter than a feather. Duty, heavier than a mountain.
Vikings
And two more episodes of "Vikings".
The final clash with the jarl so-so. Although I suspected that everything could be decided on the principle of <whoever saw, he would understand> - to the hell expose the village to 'house quarrels' - I had my secret hope that it would be more explosive / contemporary. In fact, I thought that was the end of season one. A real surprise.
The next episodes are probably a confirmation of Ragnar's wisdom.
And the next season is the story of making a whip on Ragnar? Well, it looks to be interesting.
Mortals cannot perceive me with the physical eye whilst in my pure form unless it is of my choosing, for it would result in fatality, which begs the question of why you are an exception.
Vikings
I'm done Vikings. If we go over the ahistorical side, it leaves a nice fantasy series. It is a pity a bit of kicked-out military, it strikes a bit of absurdity. As Romulus wrote, the series does not break anything, but it can be nice. I will definitely watch the second series.
but something about her beauty is wrong, it looks so overdone and as if sewn together from incompatible pieces
Would you like me to put you out of your misery, before I put you out of your misery?
Vikings
Vikings - I have mixed feelings.
On the one hand - a really interesting period, quite an interesting character and hence potential. In addition, a mythology that everyone knows, but remains quite mysterious.
On the other hand, it turned out terribly predictable. In fact, nothing is surprising. On the plus side, in my opinion ... well, no bombasticity and no debauchery. Everything is "small", "simple". Actually, it fits with some idea that our view of history is based on "exaggeration" - that from a small clash of 10 people on the cross, a version in which it was an epic battle between great forces has gone down in history. Just like the Americans, by killing five people, made the Boston Massacre, which lies at the beginning of the American Revolution.
The problem for me is that the authors themselves probably can't decide which way they want to go - whether in the direction of fantasy (with various inserts like the eyes of the main character), or some adventure series about a robber, or some such series about plots and power struggles.
The characters are a plus for me - one of the Skarsgaard brothers as Floki suited me a lot, and the same with Ragnar's team - for example an actor who previously played Buliwyf, or a grandfather, who wants to die in battle at all costs.
I think love is stronger than habits or circumstances. I think it is possible to keep yourself for someone for a long time and still remember why you were waiting when she comes at last.
Vikings
"Vikings" watched. And I liked it very much. Cool characters, simple storyline, but the atmosphere is kept. I want more.
Before that, I did "Banshee". If you adopt the convention, it is very good. Light, fast and with a bang. There could be more. This series worked well as an after-work distractor.
One day, you will be old enough to start reading fairytales again.
