The Last Kingdom

Jun 2010
3,306
Colorado Springs (PA at heart)
#21
I understand where you are coming from and find it frustrating that so much historical fiction takes a negative view of the early Christian church which really reflects as much our modern day dissatisfaction as historical reality.

However to be fair to Cornwall while he does reproduce the cliché money hungry power grabbing, corrupt church (not totally myth to say the least) he does give several main characters as 'honest and good Christians' and also does show a Danish war leader as equally under the power of his Gods.

Iwpuld have to say loved the series and have read all the books-- and would recommend them both.
Which is precisely why it's not as simple as the story being one sided (on either side) - my point is rather that it's more complex than that, because that is what makes a good story with compelling characters.
 
Jun 2010
3,306
Colorado Springs (PA at heart)
#22
The biggest issue about this series is, as far as I'm concerned, is that the BBC has walked away from this production and the third season will be exclusive to Netflix. This stinks.
Netflix has done some excellent stuff so far, I'm actually hoping they'll make it better. I do enjoy the show but as we discussed in another topic, I originally felt like it could have been better.
 

Corvidius

Ad Honorem
Jul 2017
2,145
Crows nest
#23
The issue is that The BBC extracts money by force of law via a license fee. They have decided to no longer have anything to do with this show, which was left on a cliff hanger at the end of season two. Therefore, to see season three, or any subsequent seasons, requires viewers to give money to Netflix, in addition to the money they have to give to the BBC by law, or face prosecution. I wonder just how many subscriptions we have to have over the obligatory license fee, how much money we have to part with. It's not an issue with, say, Game of Thrones on Sky Atlantic or HBO as that is where it's always been, but with a series that starts on the public broadcaster, and paid for by the public, by law, and then moves to a subscriber channel, this really does stink.
 
Jun 2010
3,306
Colorado Springs (PA at heart)
#24
The issue is that The BBC extracts money by force of law via a license fee. They have decided to no longer have anything to do with this show, which was left on a cliff hanger at the end of season two. Therefore, to see season three, or any subsequent seasons, requires viewers to give money to Netflix, in addition to the money they have to give to the BBC by law, or face prosecution. I wonder just how many subscriptions we have to have over the obligatory license fee, how much money we have to part with. It's not an issue with, say, Game of Thrones on Sky Atlantic or HBO as that is where it's always been, but with a series that starts on the public broadcaster, and paid for by the public, by law, and then moves to a subscriber channel, this really does stink.
Well, I already have Netflix and I live in the US.

You always have to pay for TV - whether it's on Sky Atlantic or HBO, those are still channels you pay for. You pay for Sky, don't you? I don't think Sky has changed that drastically since I left England, lol. I can understand you're saying it bothers you that not everything is available from one source/one payment... but if it were, it'd be a bit of a monopoly.
 

Corvidius

Ad Honorem
Jul 2017
2,145
Crows nest
#25
Ah, well I do have subscriptions of course, but not Netflix. It's not a monopoly issue for me, it's that a commercial broadcaster will make money from an audience, at least in the UK, that has paid for the first two seasons, and so gained an audience for the show, which will then have to get a subscription to see the continuation. Of course it's a financial burden to subscribe to multiple broadcasters if you want to see their shows, but nobody forces you to, but you are, in the UK, forced to pay the license fee, and to see a show move from a "forced system" which you cannot get out of, to a "market system", seems almost corrupt, or at least very arrogant and cavalier with taxpayers money by the BBC, but then that's what they do, IMO.
 
Oct 2014
149
California, USA
#27
Ever see the Kirk Douglas, Tony Curtis movie called The Vikings. It's an oldie. Made in 1958. Have no idea how historically accurate it is. Probably not much. Just remember seeing it when I was a kid and was majorly impressed.

Other than the violence in the fighting scenes, it's probably fine for your son. Can't imagine the language being a problem.

https://www.amazon.com/Vikings-Kirk-Douglas/dp/B000062XF2

BTW, have you read the Bernard Cornwell book, The Last Kingdom, that the show is based on? It is a thousand times better than the TV series.

Thanks for the suggestion. That would have been fun if we had had time to find it. We could have talked about what was realistic and what wasn't.



And no, I haven't read the book...but I want to!
 
Oct 2014
149
California, USA
#28
I think it's probably not worth it - anything of historical importance is probably either too violent or too political or too profane. Not that a 10 year old can't understand some politics, but watching one or two scenes would be too random, you'd likely have to explain what's going on or what lead up to that scene, etc. I'm just not sure it'd be worth all the trouble. Maybe a documentary would be better.

Yeah, that's what I finally decided. Too much trouble for too little that we could use. We watched some things on people who reinacted crossing from Greenland to "Vinland" in a recreated Viking ship, got a hold of a "sunstone" (Icelandic spar) and did science experiments with it, and watched all the stuff by Extra Credits did on Lindisfarne and the Danelaw and that was plenty to supplement the text.





It's entertainment , not history.
So while you might get him interested in the period due to it, any learning would have to take place elsewhere.
Of course, this was supplementary to our main text.


The show is not for kids and for this reason has many aspects that children won't like nor frankly are suitable for them. this includes scenes or themes/concepts.
OH, I get that it's not a show for kids. But we've found kid friendly scenes from other from other shows that are otherwise "not-for-kids" before that were useful in illustrating things related to what we were learning...so I don't think it was totally crazy to think there might be a scene or two we could use, though I didn't end up doing that.
 
Oct 2014
149
California, USA
#29
I understand where you are coming from and find it frustrating that so much historical fiction takes a negative view of the early Christian church which really reflects as much our modern day dissatisfaction as historical reality.

However to be fair to Cornwall while he does reproduce the cliché money hungry power grabbing, corrupt church (not totally myth to say the least) he does give several main characters as 'honest and good Christians' and also does show a Danish war leader as equally under the power of his Gods.

Iwpuld have to say loved the series and have read all the books-- and would recommend them both.

As a Christian myself, I appreciated that this show at least had some Christians that seems like positive, authentic portrayals, even though I wish it had more like that. But it least it didn't go the way of World Without End where every single positive character leans athiest or agnostic, and the only people who actually believe what most people believed in that time and place, were portrayed as blatantly evil (that shows annoyed me so much). I don't mind when a show shows both the good and bad that has happened in the Christian church...and I felt like The Last Kingdom leaned more towards that, though somewhat stronger on the bad.



And the portrayal of Christianity through the eyes of someone who was raised Christian to a certain age (but obviously from the beginning scenes had not embraced it or even really understood it yet) and then raised by a Viking who treated him better than his own father...well, I thought his skepticism of both Christian and even somewhat of Viking belief made a lot of sense in that context. I thought they did a good job of showing how the clash of religions might have effected characters.
 
Mar 2007
251
Philadelphia
#30
This bit by any chance?


That's the one.

This scene showing Kirk Douglas 'running the oars' is one of my favorites. Does anyone know if this was an actual Viking activity? It has a ring of realism to it.

In Bernard Cornwell's book The Last Kingdom, in the first chapter when Uhtred first sees the Vikings sailing off Northumbria's coast, he witnesses Ragnar running the oars. I don't think the scene made it into the TV version.
 

Similar History Discussions