How did Vikings: Valhalla turn out?

Vikings: Valhalla premieres February 25 on Netflix. Formally, this is a sequel or spin-off of the famous "Vikings" from the History channel. But in fact, everything is a little more complicated.

Netflix often picks up popular series. Sometimes the service just continues them after closing on the original platform, as was the case with the Cobra Kai project. Sometimes it allows authors to create sequels or prequels to their projects, as in the case of Hot American Summer. But the irony of Vikings: Valhalla is that this series is completely unrelated to its predecessor. Its plot takes place a hundred years after the events of the original, so the characters in the center of the story are completely different. Yes, and the authors are different: the creator of "Vikings" Michael Hirst is listed as only one of the producers, over he did not work with scripts, and the showrunner was Jeb Stewart, who did not participate in the production of the old project.

Based on this, we can say that "Valhalla" is a completely independent series associated with the "Vikings" only by the name and rare mentions of individual characters. However, comparisons cannot be avoided. And for the most part, the sequel keeps up with the original. But in some respects it is inferior to its predecessor.

Exciting main action

After many years of wars Vikings converted to Christianity and went to the service of King Ethelred of England (Bosco Hogan). But the ruler decided to cleanse the nation and massacred many people from Normandy and their families who lived in the country.

In response, King Canute the Great of Denmark (Bradley Frigard) gathers all the Vikings and prepares a campaign against England. That's just among his supporters there are many contradictions: some soldiers have already adopted Christianity, while others worship the old gods. But obsessed revenge for the death of his brother, Harald Sigurdsson (Leo Suter) unites his comrades-in-arms, and the Vikings set off to conquer England. The Greenlander Leif Eriksson (Sam Corlett) swims with them. He originally arrived with his sister, who wanted revenge on one of the men for raping him. Now the brother must fight so that she is not executed for murder.

Already from the outset, it is clear that the series, like the original project, immediately introduces the viewer to almost a dozen important characters, whose fates will surprisingly intertwine with each other. Moreover, the authors build the introduction very carefully: all the characters are easy to remember, and events develop quite quickly. After a couple of episodes, most of the main figures will be around and get involved in political intrigues more abruptly than in the Game of Thrones.

With each series, the main plot becomes more ambitious, and the actions of the characters become more ambiguous. Each of the important heroes goes on a campaign with his own goal: to achieve fame, revenge, get rich. Different motives make them regularly enter into unexpected alliances and betray each other. Moreover, even the rulers of England are shown here not just as stupid enemies. These are people who find themselves in a difficult situation: the wise woman, a dodgy advisor and inexperienced youngster has to deal with the problems caused by the previous king, who died before the start of the invasion.

Because of this approach, there are practically no uniquely positive or negative characters in Valhalla. With the possible exception of Leif - he is too smart, handsome and always acts with dignity (probably, without a share of heroism, a modern project is impossible). But the rest will regularly surprise with their actions. How close all this is to real historical events is for experts to judge. But from the point of view of the dramatic plot, the main action is built as exciting as possible. What, alas, can not be said about the secondary line.

But vague morality and actual agenda in a side story

Even before the series was released, many were outraged that the black Caroline Henderson would appear in the project as Jarl Hakon. But in fact, this is not even the main problem of the character and the entire storyline in which she appears.

Leif's sister Freydis Eriksdottir (Frida Gustavsson) arrives at the Viking meeting, dreaming of revenge. When her brother goes on a campaign for her crimes, the heroine remains as a hostage with Hakon. After that, the jarl, without any sensible reason, releases Freydis on a campaign to Uppsala, where she must discover her true destiny.

Further, almost the entire line of Leif's sister seems to be either an artificial stretching of the timing, or inserts from another unfinished series. For example, throughout the whole episode, her story is one long mystical trip. And the main drama is that a certain warrior attacks Freydis and her companions along the way, after three minutes the heroine kills him, and then some jarl pursues her for a long time to take revenge. Therefore, Hakon sends the heroine to be trained by warrior womento counter the enemies. This part, especially its mystical component, is filmed very beautifully. But it is completely unclear why it is needed.

Part of the answer lies in the character of Caroline Henderson. Its origin, by the way, is explained in the plot. Although here everyone will decide for himself how plausible the story is, but formally there is logic. But Hakon's remarks sound like the words of a typical motivational speaker. At a certain moment, she will say: “Anything is possible if you are open to the world,” very reminiscent of a random quote from the books of Paolo Coelho. At the same time, the jarl says that everything can be achieved on her own, but she herself received most of the power simply by birthright.

Unfortunately, you can't avoid thinking that this whole line is just playing off the theme of strong women in a world of violent men at war with each other. And the most offensive of all is that this is shown as part of the Vikings franchise, where equality there were no problems - just remember Lagertha in the original series. Yes, and in "Valhalla" there is also the Queen of Normandy, who is smarter and more cunning than other rulers, and one of Leif's companions, who is in no way inferior to her comrades-in-arms. But for some reason, the emphasis is on a separate and very clumsy female line, which with each series you want to squander more and more.

Cool staging and great costumes

When evaluating any historical project, especially one that tells about distant times, one has to make allowances for the need to adapt the characters to modern culture. Therefore, it is hardly worth seriously discussing the too beautiful and well-groomed faces of the Vikings and their white-toothed smiles. Although, when looking at the almost model appearance and sunny eyes of the Australian Sam Corlett, it is hard to believe that the viewer is facing a stern man from frosty Greenland.

Luckily, it makes up for it with good acting. Moreover, Leo Suter and Bradley Freegard, who often appear next to Corlett, are excellent in type for the role of the Vikings. And David Oakes, who played Earl Godwin, made a name for himself on historical projects - from "Borgia" to "White Queen".

But what definitely looks great is the scenery and staging. Here, again, it is up to historians to judge how plausible they are, but everything looks very realistic. Many individual costumes were designed for the Vikings, and many of the actors actually learned to fight with swords and axes themselves so as not to use understudies.

As a result, the action in the series looks very beautiful and dynamic. Like the original Vikings, the project is marked 16+, so the authors have room to turn around in in terms of cruelty: there will be severed heads and slit stomachs - but without manic obsession blood. Although in large-scale battles, perhaps, someone will not have enough scope: until the last seasons, some “The game of thronesThe series is definitely not up to par.

The fourth episode, dedicated to the capture of the bridge, will become literally the apotheosis of the atmospheric production. Here and non-linear narrative, and a complex plan of attack, and a lot of characters on which the outcome of the battle depends. For filming, several real ships and part of the bridge were rebuilt, and the night battle in cold water was staged on location.

All of this makes Vikings: Valhalla one of the most visually pleasing historical projects in recent memory. Although sometimes it seems that the authors did not have enough time to fully reveal their intention.

But confusion and haste in action

Perhaps this is the most controversial point in the review. But after praise for the dynamic introduction and accusations of Freydis's lengthy line, I would like to note that the main action turned out to be too crumpled. It’s good that the Vikings quickly set off on a campaign, but for the decisive battle in England - and this is almost the main event of the season - the authors take literally two episodes. And this is given that the narrative is interrupted by a secondary story, and they talk about opponents only in fits and starts.

Sometimes one gets the feeling that the script was not designed for eight shot episodes, but one and a half times more episodes. And this is very likely to be true, given that Valhalla is shorter than even the first seasons of Vikings. Not to mention that the last few years in the original series came out in 20 parts.

Here you can reassure yourself a bit that the creators are already working on a sequel. Perhaps in the future there will be less haste and the characters will be able to reveal even more interesting.

"Vikings: Valhalla" for the most part leaves a pleasant impression. Like the original, this is a well-researched historical project with a large-scale staging. Unnecessary lines and confusion somewhat spoil the story, but it is likely that the action will even out further, and the authors will find the right pace and mood.