Outlander: The Reckoning

Lots of premieres happening on cable right now, and I plan to get to Mad Men and Wolf Hall in the next couple days, but let's start with the show with the most sex, kilts, and brogues.

Outlander, of course! This post has some spoilers for the most recent episode, but I won't discuss any book-related future plot spoilers. Pinkie swear.

I'm not sure how I feel about the latest trend of networks splitting up a show's season into 6 or 7 episode long stints and then making the audience wait more than half a year for the rest. It's annoying as a fan and audience-member, but it also seems kind of disingenuous. But I can't get too worked up about it now that we actually have our new Outlander episodes. It's been a long wait though, so Starz better make it worth it.

I'm happy to report the mid-season premiere episode, not only delivered the goods, but then some. There were some big changes, most notably, that the point of view of our story switched from Claire to Jamie. I'm pleased that Claire still remains the clear focus and hero of our story, but the change in perspective, while a bit jarring, was also necessary from a storytelling perspective. There were plot events, including how Jamie ended up on the window ledge of Jack Randall right in time to save his wife from rape and torture, that simply cannot be told without changing the voice of the show.

I can't say that I found Jamie's voice-overs or character insights as interesting as Claire's, but the plot development during this episode was certainly solid. Jamie and the other highlanders whisk Clare away from Captain Randall and Fort William just in the nick of time, they have an epic fight ending in a spanking (hello spousal abuse!), Jamie returns to Castle Leoch and deftly negotiates a truce between the brothers MacKenzie, and Claire and Jamie figure out pretty quickly they need to keep an eye on Jamie's ex who has a first class ticket on the express train to Crazy Town.

Oh, and there was a pretty epic sex scene at the end that included Claire riding Jamie while holding a dirk to his throat and threatening to cut out his heart and eat it if he ever raises a hand against her again.

Daenery's is all, "you go, girl." 

So let's talk about that scene. You know the one I mean--the spanking heard round the internet. When Jamie left Claire in a grove outside Craigh nu Dun, he explicitly told her to stay put. She, of course, made a break for it in an attempt to reach the stone circle and get back to the 20th century and her husband, Frank. 

Her "disobeying" her husband resulted in her capture, assault by Captain Randall, and Jamie and the other Scotsman storming Fort William and springing her. At great risk to themselves and the MacKenzie clan as a whole, of course. As such, they felt she needed to be punished. Hence, the spanking. With a belt. On the bum. 

To the show's credit, they made Jamie seem as progressive as they could. You know, so far as someone can "progressively" beat their wife. He made it clear he was doing it because he had to, at least according to the expectations of the other Scotsmen. And it was for Clarire's "own good," so she would truly understand the potential ramifications of her actions. Is it still gross? Uh, hell yes. 

But here's the thing--this happened. Well, not in the sense that a time-traveler from the 1940s who was stuck in 1700s Scotland would make an attempt to touch magic stones and act against the wishes of her husband, but if a wife acted contrary to something her husband told her in 1743 Scotland he would likely hit her. Women were property. And their husbands would beat them. Does that make it excusable? Absolutely not. Does it make sense within the story we are being told? Absolutely yes. Especially since it opens the door for a lot of drama between the characters. I'll wager the effect of this on Claire will be far-reaching. 

And it made for some really crazy angry sex. Though I confess I found it disturbing that Jamie still ended up on top. This is, however, a good example of non-gratuitous sex that is used to actually further a story and show something about the characters. Also, it was really hot. 

All in all, The Reckoning was an excellent episode that set a lot of new plots in motion, had some great character moments, and left the audience slathering for more. And of course yelling at one another on the internet, which let's face it, is one of the criteria by which we measure the popularity television programs these days. I am declaring it a win!

The White Queen

Starz has been making quite a name for itself with original programming lately. The channel first caught my eye with Spartacus, which I love, though it didn't impress me with it's take on Camelot (but I am thinking about revisiting that one on DVD).

I heard some good things about the limited run series, The White Queen, and decided to give it a try on Netflix. It initially aired in the BBC and on Starz last year. And it was....alright? I guess? I'm a big Tudor history fan, but was honestly a bit disappointed.

Before we get into the nitty gritty of the series, how about some background and a brief history lesson, mmkay? The White Queen is set during The War of the Roses, circa 1460s, when the great English houses York and Lancaster vied for the throne. When the series opens, Edward IV of House York is King...and he falls for Elizabeth Woodville, a widow of House Lancaster. Whoops! Not a good idea to marry a member of your enemy's house. Edward is kind of a bastard, but Elizabeth (and more so her mother) ain't no fools, and they see that banging the King is a pretty good way to get some serious power and property. So they're down with going to bat for the Yorks. A girl's gotta do and all that rot.

So, Elizabeth is the White Queen in this scenario--because the symbol of House York is a white rose. Got it? The problem with all this history is also a problem with the show. It's SUPER complicated. Everyone is related to everyone else (thanks, inbreeding!), but people constantly change sides in the war and everyone is a pasty white person so it's kind of hard to keep things straight in your head. I spent a good 4 episodes trying to figure out who certain characters were and where they stood in the game of thrones (see what I did there?).

Comparisons to the other medieval dramas on premium cable are inevitable. So let's just get right into it. Unlike Game of Thrones, The White Queen doesn't handle the complicated plots and shifting loyalties of its characters particularly well. Starz tried to make things a bit more mysterious by implying that Elizabeth, her Mom, and her daughters have some witchy abilities, but it never really committed to that idea one or the other. Basically, The White Queen doesn't go far enough with the politics, fantasy, or battle scenes to be as awesome as Game of Thrones, nor does it have the sexiness to pull off being a guilty pleasure like The Tudors. It's kind of stuck in the middle, mired in mediocrity.

Ok, that last point might have been a bit harsh, but at the end of the day, I can tell you The White Queen didn't do a great job holding my attention, and the narrative was split between too many potential queens to tell a cohesive story. I wasn't really rooting for any of the characters to succeed (even though I knew how things eventually turned out), though ostensibly Elizabeth should be the center of the story and the "heroine."

Still, I stuck with it until the end which means I must have found some of it intriguing. It's also a welcome change to see several women featured at the center of story and to drive the action through their choices and machinations. I think what was really lacking was a character who was smart enough to effectively manipulate the situations and people. There was a lot of reaction and not a lot of actual action.

In sum, if medieval dramas are your thing, stick with the shows that have done it better and give The White Queen a pass. Now we just need to see how DaVinci's Demons and Black Sails shake out...

Bram Stoker is rolling over in his grave.

After months and months of anticipation here on the blog, NBC's Dracula has finally aired! As fans of all things vampire and ridiculous, Arsenic Pie and I were not about to let this occasion pass without a conversation discussing the show. So sit back and relax while we let you know whether Dracula is worth your time. 

Oh, and the pilot episode featured a plot twist at the end; I have marked our conversation of said twist with spoiler tags. 

Maggie: So: what did you think of Dracula?

Arsenic: Well I appreciate the Downton Abbeyness of it all. They've got great costumes, and Sir Anthony is on the show, being his usual douchey self. I literally laughed out loud when I saw him. All they need is Maggie Smith making snarky comments about the action.

Maggie: I think this is going to fall in the "hate-watch" category for me.

Arsenic: Oh, totes. It is ridonkulous.

Maggie: It's kind of terrible, but I can't look away.

Arsenic: I think all Dracula stuff I've ever seen has been a total train wreck, but this is unapologeticaly bad. 

Maggie: Here is my main complaint: there are too many unnecessary plot additions. Because you know what the Dracula story is really missing? A subplot about reliance on petroleum as an energy source versus geo-magnetic power.

Ew, get that science away from me!

Arsenic: The novel is a little light on taking down Big Oil. (SPOILER) I don't get why Dracula is suddenly a good guy who is working with Van Helsing. (END SPOILER).

Maggie: I don't think you could call Dracula a "good guy" though.

Arsenic: Well, he's the lesser of two evils because according to the show, he's working against a big corporation. He's like a 99 percenter who sucks blood and kills people

Maggie: Yeah, the killing people thing is kind of a sticking point. I usually love me some secret societies, but this whole Order of Dragon is so unexplained it is kind of laughable. What do they stand for? Why did they kill Drac's wife 200 years ago? What are they doing now other than being rich jackasses? Instead of "setting up mysteries" it's more like "we forgot to mention it in the pilot."

Arsenic: And I'm all for strong female characters and all,but my historical accuracy meter went off when I saw that Mina is somehow in med school.

Maggie: OMG YES what the hell?

Arsenic: In Victorian England? How??

Maggie: And nobody even bats an eye of course. Because her Dad is a famous doctor or something. PLEASE.

Arsenic: How did that happen?

Maggie: This is clearly some network suit being like, we need to make Mina a "strong" woman or the vaginas will bitch at us on twitter.

Arsenic: Those vajays be naggin'. And Mina isn't a strong character. She's meant to be an ingenue.

Maggie: Excellent point. And there are other ways to make her have a strong presence rather than some ridiculousness about her being in medical school.

Arsenic: Yeah, I don't buy that. No one would have been okay with that.

Maggie: Let's talk about Drac himself. Usually I hate Jonathan Rhys Meyers, but darn if he wasn't actually pretty good. Except for the American accent. DEAR GOD. It is terrible. And why is he pretending to be American? It makes NO SENSE.

Arsenic: He's good in this because he's playing total douche. I can't stand him unless he's being a douche because I feel that's his natural state. And yes, WHY is he American? That makes no sense. If it became clear in production that he couldn't nail the accent then it should have been time for a rewrite.

Maggie: Agreed. Just make him British and have him coming from India or something so he needs to be introduced to society.

Arsenic: Oh, and I loved how Jack the Ripper was ACTUALLY a vampire. Actually a fact. "Oh the trouble it took to clean up that mess." It was a total non sequitor and it made no effing sense.

Maggie: It's all a cover-up! Perpetrated by the same shadowy secret society that....well, we don't really know what else they do. Because it has in no way been established.

Arsenic: I feel like, and one of the reviews I read touched on this, that they can't use the Knights Templar because that's overdone, so they used something else. But still it's really stupid.

Maggie: I just don't understand what the society DOES. They burned heretics or something 200 years ago? But that doesn't mean anything. Who HASN'T?

Arsenic: I mean really. I thought that was a normal weekend in 1600s Europe. My mistake.

Maggie: So one change that I do like: Renfield.

Arsenic: I like him. He's enjoyable. I feel like he's the only likable character.

Maggie: I'll take quietly snarky over bug-eating batshit crazy any day of the week. I hope he ends up the hero of the show.

Arsenic: I can't stand Lucy. She's usually just a dumb blonde and here she's slightly more interesting with that actress. Mina is just a fainting flower with a ludicrous plotline.

Maggie: We will see what happens with Lucy. I mean, we kind of know from the book she shacks up with Drac, but hopefully she will play some purpose other than blood bag.

Arsenic: And Harker is a milquetoast, let's face it.

Maggie: He's better than Keanu though.

Arsenic: And I'm the tallest person at a midget convention. He is better. That actor fits the part better than Keanu.

Maggie (SPOILER) I know we already dropped this spoiler bomb, but the Van Helsing working with Dracula took me by surprise. And it didn't piss me off which also surprised me. I am interested to see where this goes.

Arsenic: It doesn't bother me, either, but I'm not a huge fan of the book. Maybe if I fangirled Bram Stoker I'd be more pissed. (END SPOILER)

Maggie: I just thought it was interesting, since they are so linked as enemies in pop culture. But since Dracula needs a hunter, thank goodness we have the blonde Lady Jane ninja.

Arsenic: It was like suddenly it was a kung fu movie. Oh, and why was Drac's fight on the rooftop in slo-mo??

Maggie: I think they were trying to be all 300 with it. It didn't work.

Arsenic: You save the slo-mo for epic battle scenes. Fighting a chimney sweep on the roof is not an epic battle.

Maggie: That guy was kind of shitty vampire hunter, to be honest.

Arsenic: I almost expected Mary Poppins to pop in. THAT'S the movie we should make.

Maggie: Dracula and Mary Poppins: Thunderdome. 

Arsenic: Mary Poppins: Vampire Slayer. I would pay to see that.

Maggie: To Kickstarter!

Arsenic: Let's make this happen!

Maggie: We just need some celebrity endorsements. I bet Dick Van Dyke would be down. Ok, we have gone off the rails a bit.

Step in time, motherfuckers.

Maggie: Any final thoughts?

Arsenic: I think there's not much else to say. It's silly.

Maggie: I'll give it a few more episodes, but mostly because I feel that I HAVE to watch something called "Dracula" as a vampire genre fan.

Arsenic: And I can't tell yet if it knows it it's silly or if it doesn't and it's taking itself very seriously.

Maggie: I think the later, which is kind of the problem.

Arsenic: Like Sleepy Hollow knows it's kinda silly.

Maggie: Exactly!

Arsenic: It's there. It's in on the joke.

Maggie: Are you going to stick with Dracula?

Arsenic: I don't know. Honestly, that whole Victorian murder spree stuff doesn't appeal to me. OH, but DID YOU KNOW...that experiment Drac did at the beginning was actually something Nikola Tesla did? So Drac = Tesla

Maggie:  When he was dissing Edison and Tesla, I was like, "oh no he didn't!

Arsenic: Oh, he went there.

Maggie: We'll see what The Oatmeal has to say about this.

Arsenic: The show's just trying too hard.

Maggie: Agreed.

Arsenic: I might tune in again just because it's so fucking funny.

Maggie: I think the takeaway is: if you enjoy hate-watching or drunk-watching, this is the show for you. If not, avoid.

Arsenic: I agree.

Maggie: Hurray, we agree!

Arsenic: It's a good thing to watch among friends when you are all drunk or feeling particularly snarky.

Maggie: if you ever come visit we will get drunk and watch it.

Arsenic: TOTES.


Dracula airs Friday nights at 10:00pm on NBC.

Hey, Baby It's Reigning

OMG you guys. So, like, Reign? Which just aired on the CW? Is like so awesome and historically accurate! Mary, Queen of Scots, is like the coolest Queen ever. Right?

Clearly people who think the above are the target audience for the new drama Reign. It's basically The Tudors for teens. And it is both amazing and ridiculous. Let's just establish right off the bat that we don't care about historical accuracy. I am going to turn off my brain and assume that Reign takes place in some alternate universe and leave it at that. Because, really. If that kind of thing bothers you so much you can never watch any historical drama ever. Especially one that airs on The CW.

Hit it, CW promo people!

Hidden between the lines of the history books is the story of Mary Stuart, the young woman the world would come to know as Mary, Queen of Scots. The teenage Mary is already a headstrong monarch ─ beautiful, passionate and poised at the very beginning of her tumultuous rise to power. Arriving in France with four close friends as her ladies-in-waiting, Mary has been sent to secure Scotland’s strategic alliance by formalizing her arranged engagement to the French king’s dashing son, Prince Francis. 

You guys, this show has everything. Teen angst, teen romance, teen sex, love triangles, "fabulous" costumes, prophecies, magic, mysterious shrouded crazy ladies, dark and dangerous woods, and a surprising amount of politics thrown into the mix.

But seriously, the best thing about the show? The absolute best thing?

The Queen of France, Catherine de Medici, is played by Megan Follows, aka, ANNE OF GREEN FUCKING GABLES. 

You guys seriously have no idea how important this is. Anne of Green Gables (and even more so Anne of Avonlea) was absolutely pivotal to my development into a feisty, imaginative red-head. Anne was pretty much my hero. And whenever Megan Follows pops up in a show (she was in an episode of Longmire last year!) I get so fangirly you cannot even imagine.

Anne and Gilbert OTP 4EVA!!!11!

Alright, let's get back to Reign. Other than Megan Follows there aren't a lot of people I recognize in the cast. I think the chick who played Susan in the Narnia movies is one of Mary's interchangeable ladies in waiting, but for the most part we have your standard line-up of pretty CW people. And they are all pretty much competent. I kind of wish the actress playing Mary would act a little more feisty, since Mary is actually written with a brain (well, maybe half of one) in her head and a strong backbone, but that's more of a quibble than an actual criticism.

More interesting than the actors are the characters they play. Because here is where Reign actually surprised me. I made a lot of assumptions before seeing the show. First, that Prince Francis would be your typical asshole spoiled brat. And that his mother, the Queen of France, would somehow be plotting against Mary because she's prettier than her or some other bullshit reason. And the king's bastard son, Sebastian, would be a womanizing rogue who would get between Mary and Francis.

But here's the thing. The main characters in Reign are actually (gasp!) fully formed people with complex motivations that make sense! I know, it's like a fall television season miracle. As for Prince Francis, he has some good points (he believes a man should know a trade) and some bad ones (he sleeps around and is kinda a bitch about it), but is struggling with doing what is best for his country--which may not necessarily mean marrying Mary and allying France with Scotland. Sebastian, Francis' half brother, is all smolder but also seems like a nice guy. I just love a good love triangle. And Queen Catherine, while she does try to take down Mary, it's because she believes in a prophecy saying that Mary will cause Francis' death. So she's really trying to protect her son.

Oh, didn't I mention the magic elements in this? Because the Queen's bestie is NOSTRADAMUS. You know, the seer. According to wikipedia, Catherine de Medici was actually an admirer of his, but who cares. Because there is magic and prophecy in this show and it is amazing. Oh, and there is also some crazy woman running around the French castle with a veil over her face warning Mary not to drink wine with roofies in it and that part is kind of amazing too.

Basically, this show has a large touch of the ridiculous. But it's the Middle Ages and people believed really weird shit back then so it works.

Man, the French royal family looks like a barrel of laughs, don't they? Oh, and the chick in the bright blue? Is the King's mistress. Oh, you crazy French people.

Speaking of ridiculous, the costumes on this show. Seriously, the costumes. Mary and her ladies in waiting look like someone raided the prom section of Forever 21. The entire show is a hodge podge of eras--I am pretty sure I spied some extras wearing some dresses from Gone With the Wind and the Queen of France looks like she wandered off the set of Pride and Prejudice. There is no consistency, but rather than bugging it makes watching the show kind of fun. Like when you would watch Sex and the City just to see what cray cray outfit Carrie was going to turn up wearing. The guys for the most part have pretty standard 1500s wear, but I have high hopes for pantaloons to make an appearance. 

There's also a surprising amount of court politics going on here. It's pretty much all in the context of marriage alliance discussions, but still. I was impressed the show is spending any time at all on the current state of affairs in sixteenth century Europe. I am hoping that they will get more into the religious issues (Catholics vs. Protestants) as the show progresses.

In sum, Reign is amazing, ridiculous, and you should watch it. Oh, and if you are a straight dude, there was a controversial female masturbation scene, so there you go.

MORE LOVE TRIANGLES PLZ

Reign airs Thursdays at 9:00 EST on The CW.

Sleepy Hollow

Greetings, fellow tv-nerds! It's that time of year again....the start of the Fall tv season! It's like Christmas for those of us who love television, with lots of new new shiny packages just waiting to be unwrapped. You never know what might be inside; it could be good, it could be bad....but either way, here at the blog we try to make it fun.

Last night was the first big premiere of the season with Sleepy Hollow over on FOX. All day long I have been getting messages from people asking me what I think....so here goes.

Surprise! I liked it!

I'd characterize it as a fun retelling of Washington Irving's, The Legend of Sleepy Hollow. Was it perfect? No--in fact some parts were downright silly. But none of the faults were so glaring as to really distract from the elements I enjoyed.

Before we get into specifics, here's the premise (from Wikipedia since work won't let me access the FOX website from my computer, stupid government firewall):

After Ichabod Crane "dies" during a mission for General George Washington in 1781, he awakens in 2013 Sleepy Hollow, New York. But so does the Headless Horseman, whose head Ichabod lopped off before his perceived death. The horseman begins his nightly killing spree, and Ichabod must partner with newly appointed Sheriff Abbie Mills.

So far, there is a lot of stuff I like here. A tall, dark, handsome and British lead character, magic, ghosts, witches, spooky New England settings, and flashbacks to Revolutionary war times which I always find interesting. Waistcoats and corsets for everyone! FOX was wise to premiere the show early (since it hauled in some great ratings), but it really felt like a perfect companion piece for Halloween.

Of course, that doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement. One thing I think the pilot got wrong was giving the audience too much information regarding the mythology right off the bat. After the first hour, we know a lot about the specifics of why Ichabod and the Horseman are linked and even a lot of the how. Basic plot spoiler alert: turns out the Horseman is actually one of the Four Horseman of the Apocalypse (and maybe actual Death himself) and of course Ichabod and Sheriff Abbie now have to prevent the world from ending by deciphering portions of prophecy in the Bible's Book of Revelation and fighting against the Horseman and other demons.*

Oh, and there are warring covens of witches (one light, one dark) who are also fighting against each other to prevent or cause the apocalypse. This means, of course, that there will be lots more supernatural monsters making an appearance in future episodes. I understand that the creators want to set up the show as a series (with a reason for different bad guys and creatures to show up each week), but throwing so much information at us in the first hour 1) takes away a lot of the sense of mystery and 2) makes it all seem really silly. Especially when one character tells another, "The answers are in Washington's Bible!!!"

But despite it all, the show worked for me....mostly due to the performance of Ichabod, played by Tom Mison. I don't remember seeing this guy before (except in the British miniseries Lost in Austen where he looks completely different), but in Sleepy Hollow he is really great. He has the gravitas to pull off what could be a ridiculous character in ridiculous situations, but he manages to bring just enough humor to the role to make him feel like a real fish out of water. I believe that he has been asleep for 250 years and has been thrown into a strange and alien world full of witches and demons. I'm not so impressed with the acting of the
Nicole Beharie (who plays Sheriff Abbie), but I appreciate the multi-ethnic casting which also includes Orlando Jones--Make 7Up Yours!

So, in a nutshell, Sleepy Hollow at times goes a bit too far down the silly rabbit hole, but it also has some genuine chills and a sense of creepy fun. I'm interested to see what happens next, and really that's what you're looking for from a pilot. Give it a try! The pilot is available on the FOX website and on On Demand.

Sleepy Hollow airs Monday evenings at 9:00pm EST on FOX.

 * Am I the only who gets really ticked off when tv shows and movies refer to the Books of Revalations? It's singular people (Revelation), NOT PLURAL. Not that I am a biblical scholar or anything (hahahaha), but COME ON. You're being sloppy.

Game of Thrones Season 2 Rewatch

The premiere date for the new season of Game of Thrones approaches....so that means it was time for a new Maggie Cats tradition: the Game of Thrones rewatch!

I started this tradition last year; invite a bunch of people over to my house, indulge in some themed crafts and baking, and run an entire season of HBO's Game of Thrones all day long to catch up before the new episodes start. The rules are simple: the first episode starts at 11 in the morning and we run them straight through, no breaks. People are free to come and go as they like, so there is usually a crowd throughout the day.

One of the things I love most about the rewatch (other than having a chance to cook some awesome themed snacks) is the mix of people. Some of us are big fans of the books, have read them all, and also really love the show. Others only track the show and have no idea of what lies in store for their favorite characters (mwahahahaha). And finally, there are always some noobs....who have no idea how the world of Game of Thrones works....or how truly fucked up some of the characters are.

"Oh my God! He really is as big a douchebag as the internet says he is!" --Monkey Sri, new to the show.

Running all the episodes back to back also is the best way to catch up. The story flows, you catch things you missed with a week break between episodes, and the season seems to fit together like a puzzle. Of course, it also means that some of the flaws become more obvious. Did Dany really do anything except wander around the desert and ask rich person after rich person for money? And "where are my dragons??" totally became the new "Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaalt!"

But perhaps the slowest plotline was Jon Snow. There was a lot of tramping through the snow and snarking with Ygritte. Tramping. Snark. Tramping. Snark. Sure, we got some movement at the end of the season when he arrived at the camp of the King Beyond the Wall, but it was kind of a slog to get there.

"Sure, living in the wilderness is fun and all, but what I really want to do is take a typing correspondence course and become a secretary." That's a Downton Abbey joke in case you aren't in the know. 

So I am declaring this year's Game of Thrones rewatch a success! We ended up with probably about 20 people, 3 dogs, 50 chicken wings, and lots of other yummy treats. And I absolutely cannot WAIT until the season 3 premiere. There is so much great stuff coming up...and I don't just mean things from the third book, Storm of Swords. The changes that the writers have made to the story have been almost universally positive (remember all those awesome scenes with Arya and Tywin?). Which means I am super excited for the surprises that lie in store!

Oh, and here are the House Sandwiches that I "made." I used the heraldic banners from Inn at the Crossroads to indicate the types of sandwiches....and printed up a banquet menu. Example: House Targaryen was Spiced Italian. Because those Targaryens are certainly spicy.

The Vikings: Let's Employ ALL the Skarsgards!

On Sunday night, the History Channel debuted its first two scripted tv series with The Vikings and The Bible. I only got around to watching The Vikings and was pretty impressed with the pilot episode. I apparently wasn't the only one; the ratings for the two shows were kind of epic, and the History Channel ended up beating the broadcast networks in the all important 18-49 demo AND posting the biggest cable premiere of the year. Put that in your zombie pipe and smoke it, The Walking Dead.

According to Wiki, the series is "inspired by the epic saga of Viking King Ragnar Lodbrok. One of the most popular Norse heroes, Ragnar was a great Viking commander and the scourge of France and England." Sidenote: I REALLY wish I could be the scourge of something. Maybe the scourge of chocolate truffles or naps or even my Netflix queue.  

"RAWR! I will watch the shit out of your instant queue!"

What was I saying? Oh, right! Ragnor! Ok, so when we first meet Ragnor he and his brother, Rollo, are tearing it up on the battlefield. See, they are awesome warriors. But Ragnor also has a pretty sweet family life--he's married to the uber-hot Lagertha who has some awesome fighting skillz of her own, and has two adorable moppet children.  In the first episode, Ragnor takes his son (who has recently come of age) to the annual gathering of Scandinavian warrior dudes where the King hammers out issues such as property ownership, renders judgment on peeps who have broken the "law," and decides where the warriors are going to rape and pillage for the spring season.*

But there's trouble in this non-specified Scandinavian paradise. Turns out Ragnor is of the mind that the warriors should head West for this year's fightin. Apparently, there are rumors of all kinds of treasure and ladies ripe for the picking out that way. But the King, Jaral Haraldson, (played by Irishman Gabriel Byrne) is all, "Ragnor, you are an idiot and if you threaten my power I will rip your head off, mkay?" So Ragnor decides to build his own ships, gather his own forces, and make his own way to the West along with his brother and their crazy ship-builder friend, Floki.

"Maybe we should go discover Canada while we're at it."

There's some other interesting stuff going on here, what with Rangor seeing Odin everywhere he goes, seeking out advice of soothsayers, and having a fondness for the latest scientific gadgets. The acting is universally good (and it even looks like they tried to hire mostly Scandinavian-looking people) and I found the political angle very very eeenteresting. I can't really comment on the accuracy of the period stuff: everyone looked appropriately grubby to me, but other than that I will have to leave it to the scholars.

I have read some criticisms of the dialogue and how it comes off as stilted due to a "trying to sound authentic to the period" type of thing, but here's my take. You're telling a story for a modern audience here and some allowances are going to have to be made. I think Spartacus is a great example of how you can craft period appropriate dialogue while still maintaining modern story techniques. Sure, the characters in The Vikings are quite, shall we say, plain-spoken, but it didn't come off as distracting, just different.

In sum, I thought The Vikings looked great and got off to an excellent start. I'm liking the characters and am genuinely curious as to where Ragnor's journey will take him. There are some good ideas here, and I would think a fair comparison would be to The Tudors or The Borgias (though toned down for basic cable). And it turns out, it's the same producers on all three shows, so that should give you some idea as to the look and feel of The Vikings.

 The Vikings airs Sundays at 10:00pm on The History Channel.

And honestly? How can you NOT watch a show where the lead character's name is Ragnor? I mean, come ON, people

*Actually, I hadn't even heard of The Bible until I saw the commercials during The Vikings...oops!

* On my travels through Iceland and Scandinavia last year, I actually heard a lot about this yearly gathering and in Iceland toured the area where it took place. During these scenes of the show, I was all knowledgeable, pointing at the screen and going, "oh! oh! This is a totally a thing that I heard about and then promptly forgot!"

Sexy Revisionist History Coming Soon! “Over it,” Says Henry VIII

Prequels today are all the rage. Personally, I blame George Lucas for the modern rise of this trend, but you may see things differently. Regardless, in addition to the origin stories for our favorite scruffy nerf-herders, would-be Übermensches and socially-conscious arrow slingers, Starz is going historical and finally giving us the Leonardi Da Vinci coming of age story we didn’t know we wanted. I give you Da Vinci’s Demons!

Makes you wonder if the demons have a code or something...

You can check out the first trailer for the show here. From the official description:

Starring Tom Riley ("Monroe," I Want Candy), as the title character, "Da Vinci's Demons" is a historical fantasy, following the ‘untold' story of the world's greatest genius during his turbulent youth in Renaissance Florence. Brilliant and passionate, the twenty-five year old Leonardo Da Vinci is an artist, inventor, swordsman, lover, dreamer and idealist. As a free thinker, with intellect and talents that are almost superhuman, he struggles to live within the confines of his own reality and time. He begins to not only see the future, but invent it. 

I confess I’m a little ambivalent about this.

Pro: I love history, so anything that gets people more interested in a chapter of history, especially for someone like Da Vinci who, despite being well-known, isn’t really someone most people know anything about, is gravy in my book. Also, the series is by David S. Goyer, who recently wrote a couple of movies that you may have heard about and which I think are all uniformly incredible. Goyer is a master at understanding how to employ action and character in a way that supports multiple deeper themes. Given how lush Da Vinci’s life and work was, the potential here in the hands of such a capable writer could be amazing. Also, judging by the preview the thing looks bloody incredible. The production values are high, the visuals are stunning, the whole thing just looks beautiful.

Con: Really, Starz? I know it’s Hollywood, but was “Sexy Leo Da Vinci” really a thing that you had to resort to in order to get this thing greenlit? Da Vinci’s life is fascinating and there are plenty of opportunities to play with the political and social intrigues that he was really involved in without skirting toward the Twilight audience. As a cable network, you can count on a viewership that’s going to be more discriminating. Also, given that Da Vinci lived a somewhat notoriously celibate life, possibly because he may have been gay, this seems like a stretch.

The early Virtuvian Man sketch looked a little different, apparently.

Another potential concern, one that could outweigh the slick visual design, is the production team which is the same that produced Torchwood: Miracle Day, another show that looked great but had some unfortunate missteps that ended up hurting the final package. Hopefully, that team has picked up a few lessons since their inaugural outing.

Finally, why refer to this as a historical fantasy? History is pretty fantastic (and fantastical) when you actually look at the details. It doesn’t need magic realism in order to dress it up. Of course, I’m also the guy who liked Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter, so maybe I’m talking out of both sides of my mouth here. This also may be the least concern, since the show descriptions are being more than a little coy about how much fantasy this thing actually is.

Da Vinci’s Demons will air on Starz sometime in 2013.