Which is better: Vikings or Vikings: Valhalla?
As a fanatical Viking genre enthusiast, this question hits close to home for me. With acclaimed historical drama Vikings recently wrapping up a successful 6-season run and gritty successor show Valhalla just premiering on Netflix, fans face a choice. Well, I‘m here to settle the debate once and for all – keep reading to discover which show best captures the iconic Viking spirit.
Vikings: A Character-Driven Drama That Burned Brightly
Debuting in 2013, Vikings depicted the legendary sagas of Ragnar Lothbrok (Travis Fimmel) and his extended family, grounding the action in rich character development. Over 89 acclaimed episodes, we witnessed Ragnar‘s rise from farmer to fearsome warrior king. Charismatic performances and complex relationships between Ragnar, wives Lagertha and Aslaug, loyal friends Floki and Bjorn, and cunning offspring like Ivar and Ubbe fueled the drama.
Per History channel, the series premiered to an impressive 5.8 million viewers, above average for the network. Strong ratings endured over 4 seasons before declining in later years. Still, critical consensus agrees the first 4 seasons marked the show‘s golden era.
The Verdict
At its peak, Vikings blended action, adventure, political thrills and family melodrama into a potent brew. A mostly sure-handed balance between battles, betrayals, and human relationships rewarded loyal fans.
Vikings: Valhalla – Ambitious But Uneven Sequel
This spiritual successor sports a new cast and story set 100 years after Vikings. The series follows Leif Eriksson (Sam Corlett), his sister Freydis Eiriksdotter (Frida Gustavsson), and Nordic prince Harald Sigurdsson (Leo Suter) as they confront upheaval in the Viking world.
Valhalla emerged with high expectations as a Vikings spin-off. Viewership indicates strong initial interest, with Netflix reporting 90 million hours viewed in its first week – the biggest premier for a Netflix original series at the time.
However, critical appraisals prove more mixed, earning just a 55% on Rotten Tomatoes. Many praise lush production values while lamenting uneven pacing and a crowded story canvas. Character development also feels lacking compared to the original show. Variety sums up consensus stating Valhalla "delivers action and bloodshed galore but no heart or soul.”
The Verdict
Valhalla shows flashes of thrilling potential but lacks focus, unlike its predecessor. With untapped room for growth on characters and themes, I have hope it can channel more of the original Vikings magic in future seasons.
Historical Authenticity: Vikings Does it Better
For history buffs, Vikings conveys a more immersive Viking world centered around documented figures like Ragnar Lothbrok and his progeny. Valhalla indulges in more fabrication and fantasy. Though neither should be viewed as historically accurate documentaries per se.
Vikings earns points for commitment to Viking language, customs, warfare tactics and Scandinavian filming locations. Valhalla leans harder into legendary sagas over fact with increased fictionalization.
So Which Show Wins? Vikings…For Now
Weighing all factors, Vikings currently stands as the superior show that left an indelible mark on television. The depth of vision, soulful performances and masterful storytelling at its best remains unmatched.
That said, Valhalla shows seeds of promise to carry the torch. As characters develop and creative kinks get smoothed out over future seasons, it may prove a worthy successor to Vikings’ profound legacy. But the original still reigns supreme.
So there you have it – consider me the people’s expert advocate. As a devoted Viking genre commentator, I call it like I see it. Right now, Vikings captures quintessential Viking adventure with more substance. But stay tuned as Valhalla continues its quest to eventually ascend to Valhalla itself in television Valhalla!
