Season #: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
User Score
7.3

Generally favorable reviews- based on 315 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 61 out of 315

Where To Watch

Stream On
Stream On
Stream On

Review this tv show

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

User Reviews

  1. Apr 7, 2014
    10
    Vikings keeps getting better, every main character is compelling and likable for what their role is. My favorite shows have a majority of actors that fit in that category, in Vikings I really like them all. What separates Vikings from something like Game of Thrones; which I also enjoy is its rawness. When I watch Viking's I feel like I am there, in that harsh environment, it feels real,Vikings keeps getting better, every main character is compelling and likable for what their role is. My favorite shows have a majority of actors that fit in that category, in Vikings I really like them all. What separates Vikings from something like Game of Thrones; which I also enjoy is its rawness. When I watch Viking's I feel like I am there, in that harsh environment, it feels real, not like a fantasy; which of course it still is. Expand
  2. Mar 14, 2014
    10
    I don't know how this show hasn't developed the insane fan following of Game of Thrones. It's a historical story driven drama, full of blood, sex, deceit, betrayal, politics, and strangely, some history thrown in.

    Vikings drags you back in time to the narrative of the Lothbrok family, yeah, the ones who eventually fought Alfred the Great for domination of both faith and power in Britain
    I don't know how this show hasn't developed the insane fan following of Game of Thrones. It's a historical story driven drama, full of blood, sex, deceit, betrayal, politics, and strangely, some history thrown in.

    Vikings drags you back in time to the narrative of the Lothbrok family, yeah, the ones who eventually fought Alfred the Great for domination of both faith and power in Britain during the Dark Ages. Due to the limited knowledge we have of this period, it is perfect for a History channel show, as it may influence more people to research the period.

    After watching the first season, I was hooked by the inter-family politics in a Dark Ages town, although towards the end of the season things got a bit religious, and thus I personally was bored during parts of the show.

    Season 2 so far has been all action. There are very few parts of the show which follow "politically correct" history, but sometimes there are throwbacks to modern morality and ethics.

    This is a Must Watch. I eagerly anticipate season 2-10
    Expand
  3. Feb 27, 2014
    10
    The acting in this show is great, the story is great, action is great. I started watching this show from when the very first episode premiered, and I have yet to be disappointed.
  4. Mar 29, 2014
    10
    This season is better than first one because it offers more excitement, plot twists, and it all comes with added value to all going on, everything has higher stakes and more people are reliant on their outcome.
  5. Apr 18, 2014
    8
    Is it as ambitious as Game of Thrones? No. Does it posses the emotional depth of Breaking Bad? Absolutely not. Are the plots and story lines on par with the detail ridden script of House of Cards? Not even close. But who cares? This show is just cool man. In the age of masterful television, I like to think of Vikings as the simpler option to all of those aforementioned juggernauts. TravisIs it as ambitious as Game of Thrones? No. Does it posses the emotional depth of Breaking Bad? Absolutely not. Are the plots and story lines on par with the detail ridden script of House of Cards? Not even close. But who cares? This show is just cool man. In the age of masterful television, I like to think of Vikings as the simpler option to all of those aforementioned juggernauts. Travis Fimmel in the lead as Ragnar Lothbrok is great and the rest of the actors are more than competent. Deeply luscious scenery, clear dialog, a concise plot and some badass fight scenes...what's not to like? Expand
  6. May 3, 2014
    10
    The show is simply amazing. The writers managed to write a story that leaves the reader in suspense until the last second, and without clichés. The plot of the show is absolutely engaging, with great historical and religious themes. The Vikings are portrayed reliably. Vikings is an epic, a must have.
  7. Mar 10, 2014
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I love historical series, the story with beautiful cinematography and great accessories! I'm attracted.
    Historic space mentioned that less attention is being very happy
    Expand
  8. hub
    Mar 21, 2014
    10
    They have really stepped it up this series, scenery, characters, production everything. Definitely worth a watch. For those who complain about historical accuracy, go watch a documentary not a series that is trying to compete with the likes of game of thrones and spartacus.
  9. Mar 9, 2014
    10
    This really is the best show on TV - bar now. Better than The Walking Dead, better than Game of Thrones, better than Helix, better than all of them. It transports the viewer like no other show can into another world - with engaging characters and beautiful cinematography. Everything from the quality of the sets and music to the brilliant cast and the excellent writing... I cannot fault it.This really is the best show on TV - bar now. Better than The Walking Dead, better than Game of Thrones, better than Helix, better than all of them. It transports the viewer like no other show can into another world - with engaging characters and beautiful cinematography. Everything from the quality of the sets and music to the brilliant cast and the excellent writing... I cannot fault it. It's wonderful. Expand
  10. Mar 5, 2014
    10
    Really, what's not to love about this series? The actors are perfection.The breathtaking scenery to the period trappings just add to the whole series week to week. True to history it is one of the most magnificent additions to television today. Violence runs rampant, as violent as that time period and people were. I find I must hide my eyes at some of the hacking and stabbing, but truly,Really, what's not to love about this series? The actors are perfection.The breathtaking scenery to the period trappings just add to the whole series week to week. True to history it is one of the most magnificent additions to television today. Violence runs rampant, as violent as that time period and people were. I find I must hide my eyes at some of the hacking and stabbing, but truly, its a blast for me. It is not often we can learn history and say we were not once bored. The casting of this series needs a raise, a masterful job putting these actors together to create a visual and auditory masterpiece. Romance, adultery, death, birth, coniving, egotistical maniacs etc.This show has it all and is continually evolving and shocking us. Kudos to the director and producer. I wait impatiently each week dreading the end of the season, wanting to rail at the chance it might not come back. A glimmer of theatrical brilliance on tv all played by professionals. Thank you Vikings ! Expand
  11. May 5, 2014
    10
    Season 1 was good but Season 2 is on another other level. Prefer this to GOT and this is the best TV since Season 5 of Breaking Bad. Roll on Season 3.
  12. Apr 3, 2014
    8
    Is exciting how you can learn about history and enjoy a good series and good actors, i like how the drama is going deeper and deeper and all the scenarios are from my perspective, the scenario is better than the game of thrones scenarios.
  13. Dec 30, 2014
    1
    Stopped watching this patchetic garbage at the sixth episode of the second season. Travis Fimmel is a poor actor, not to mention most of the cast, but I forgave that, since it is a series that is set in an historical era I love. The writers don't have the foggiest idea about the norsemen of that age.
    It was particularly upsetting that they tried to portrait the vikings raiders some sort
    Stopped watching this patchetic garbage at the sixth episode of the second season. Travis Fimmel is a poor actor, not to mention most of the cast, but I forgave that, since it is a series that is set in an historical era I love. The writers don't have the foggiest idea about the norsemen of that age.
    It was particularly upsetting that they tried to portrait the vikings raiders some sort of "good bad guys" by letting Lagertha kill on of the warriors trying to rape some wench he grabbed back in season one. Cause murdering innocent priests with a battleaxe is ok, but rape is not. Vikings ethics you know. Oh and yes, there is no evidence that there were actually "shieldmaidens" or fighting women amongst viking raiders. It's entierly mithological and they portray it as a fact. Women might have picked up arms with poor efficiency when a village was raided, but thats all.
    Ragnar Lodbrok and the 10 wonder-extras he takes raiding defeats a well prepared english cavalry force with the only tactic they know: shieldwall. Totally believeable if you ask me.
    Everything in the story can be expected. Here's the pattern for every episode of the Vikings: Ragnar gets into trouble-->Ragnar wins. I totally never expect him always winning, may it be a Holmgang, slaughtering an army by himself, or convincing Rollo with his eyes to stop fighting.
    Another thing about Ragnar Fimmel, that he is a total **** to his women. Yes, norsemen treated their women better than in most countries in europe, but this show must be directed by an ultra-feminazi group. Lagertha slaps him around like a little **** quite a few times and he's unable to stand up for himself. Way to humiliate a legendary historical figure. In season two he kills Jarl Borg, like a f*ckin' slimy coward, who comes in good faith to reconcile their differences after raiding Kattegat, in return, because Ragnar broke his word. And what for? Because his b*tch wife said so. Sleeping two nights in a barn is enough reason to kill another chief in such a cowardly manner. It's like they are trying to rip off the unexpected plot twists of Game of Thrones, but they fail poorly every time. After this I was really beginning to think that monkeys with typewriters must be behind this show.
    I really started to like the King of Wessex storyline, and Björn and his girlfriend, but it is not nearly enough for me to continue watching this awful show. This series is neither historically accurate or entertaining. 1/10, because I had a good day.
    Expand
  14. Mar 8, 2014
    3
    How sad is it when the "History channel" has a severely limited interest in telling history. I guess in a "post-modern" approach, history doesn't matter near as much as ratings. I'm surprised that they didn't hire Oliver Stone as a historical consultant. Maybe the History channel could consider call itself the neo-history channel.
    Apart from it's stunning lack of history- the series is
    How sad is it when the "History channel" has a severely limited interest in telling history. I guess in a "post-modern" approach, history doesn't matter near as much as ratings. I'm surprised that they didn't hire Oliver Stone as a historical consultant. Maybe the History channel could consider call itself the neo-history channel.
    Apart from it's stunning lack of history- the series is well cast, costumed, and filmed. Too bad there isn't a character worth caring about.
    Expand
  15. Mar 29, 2014
    7
    While the story takes considerable creative license, it is doubtful the real hyper masculine vikings of the dark ages were champions of gender equality, it is none the less entertaining. The fight scenes are hit or miss; sometimes they look good, and sometimes they seem to suffer from some lazy editing. The performance from Travis Fimmel as Ragnar is mesmerizing, and he is well supportedWhile the story takes considerable creative license, it is doubtful the real hyper masculine vikings of the dark ages were champions of gender equality, it is none the less entertaining. The fight scenes are hit or miss; sometimes they look good, and sometimes they seem to suffer from some lazy editing. The performance from Travis Fimmel as Ragnar is mesmerizing, and he is well supported by the rest of the cast; Gustaf Skarsgård occasionally steals the show with his portrayal of Floki, Ragnars close confident and ship wright. As long as you are not too much of a stickler for historical accuracy you will probably find Vikings to be an enjoyable viewing experience. Expand
  16. Jun 8, 2014
    9
    This series competes on a level with all other series on all other networks. I really enjoy the intertwined stories of the characters while not straying far from Ragnar. The History channel is providing some very good entertainment that shouldn't go unnoticed by the real critics.
  17. Sep 29, 2014
    10
    Finally a series not centered on sex or political,also a great reconstruction of the history.
    wonderful the characters and great the actors,especially Travis Fimmel,Katheryn Winnick,Clive Standen and Gustaf Skarsgard.
    Simply spectacular!
    I love these series,and i wait for the third season!
  18. Mar 13, 2015
    6
    This season seemed to be somewhat caught up in the gravity of Game of Thrones epidemic which has affected it for the worst. The show almost forces itself to be full of edginess and supposedly clever plot twists, which in my opinion have nowhere near the same impact as GOT or for that matter any show with good plot twists. That being said very little seems to be happening throughout theThis season seemed to be somewhat caught up in the gravity of Game of Thrones epidemic which has affected it for the worst. The show almost forces itself to be full of edginess and supposedly clever plot twists, which in my opinion have nowhere near the same impact as GOT or for that matter any show with good plot twists. That being said very little seems to be happening throughout the series, I found the focus of some of the episodes a bit thoughtless and pithy.

    Certain character developments have made the show seem a bit like a low brow sitcom which is disappointing. I could write a whole separate review on the absurdity of Rollo still existing ( I have lost track of how many times he has betrayed Ragnar and co) but it will suffice to say I find his whole part very unbelievable.
    There are some redeeming elements to season 2, principally the portrayal of the brutality of Viking life, although heavy handed does keep the viewer watching. Furthermore the increase in characters in England and the development of Athelstan has been quite interesting.

    I am a sucker for films or series that depict historic figures especially violent ones at that. There are several historical inaccuracies and yet the show presents itself as having done its research by portraying certain viking rituals such as Jarl Borgs blood eagle. This is perhaps only an issue to the historical pedant and is to be expected from the History Channel, however it did at times stray into the frustratingly unbelievable.

    Ultimately, this season and indeed the whole show seems to awkwardly attempt to straddle historical drama and fantasy when it chooses. Perhaps an intention of the director to reproduce on screen the feel of a saga, nonetheless the way it manifests itself does not do such an ambition justice.
    Expand
  19. Dec 1, 2015
    10
    The best show on TV!

    Honestly, it's brilliant. LOVE the characters, the progression, the plots, the acting, the scenery. It's the best show out there.
  20. Mar 30, 2014
    7
    Vikings continues to be an odd mix of elements unlike anything else on TV. The production design is extravagant, but the dialogue is sparse. Intriguing historical elements are presented side by side with inaccuracies and outright fantasies.

    The new season has incorporated multiple odd and unannounced time jumps. Miraculously, Ragnar's son is a grown man while no one else has aged at
    Vikings continues to be an odd mix of elements unlike anything else on TV. The production design is extravagant, but the dialogue is sparse. Intriguing historical elements are presented side by side with inaccuracies and outright fantasies.

    The new season has incorporated multiple odd and unannounced time jumps. Miraculously, Ragnar's son is a grown man while no one else has aged at all. That said, if one possesses the generosity to forgive this sort of thing, the show definitely has something to offer, bringing an overt religious clash (including a crucifiction) to the forefront, along with ample infighting among the Norsemen.

    There continues to be a variety of interesting characters, and they've certainly made an effort to focus on women. However, Travis Fimmel continues to carry the show with a gripping performance that defies stereotypes about warlike leaders seen throughout film and TV. The character's internal struggles with religion and family clearly weigh on him, but his actions are nonetheless restrained and he doesn't have a heroic speech or daring act at every moment, just when it's needed.

    Overall, the high production values, nuanced characters, and several other upsides continue to make the show worth watching, if well short of greatness.
    Expand
  21. Apr 23, 2016
    8
    In season 2, episode 3 there's a scene from Hedeby, surrounded by hills and snow covered mountains.
    However, Hedeby was in Southern Jutland, Denmark - which is as flat as the Netherlands (!) I should know, since I'm a Dane myself.
    The series is made as if events are taking place in Norway; however, Ragnar Lodbrog was Danish - and Hedeby as well, as mentioned. I think they should
    In season 2, episode 3 there's a scene from Hedeby, surrounded by hills and snow covered mountains.
    However, Hedeby was in Southern Jutland, Denmark - which is as flat as the Netherlands (!) I should know, since I'm a Dane myself.
    The series is made as if events are taking place in Norway; however, Ragnar Lodbrog was Danish - and Hedeby as well, as mentioned.
    I think they should consider such important details before making such a series....

    Except for that, it's a very good series! c",)
    Expand
Metascore
77

Generally favorable reviews - based on 11 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 11 out of 11
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 11
  3. Negative: 0 out of 11
  1. Reviewed by: Karen Valby
    Mar 19, 2014
    67
    The best of what Vikings has to offer, besides artfully, horrifically staged sequences of warfare, is fierce Lagertha.
  2. Reviewed by: Curt Wagner
    Feb 28, 2014
    75
    While the storytelling is generally riveting, Hirst and his team occasionally drop a few stinkers in the dialogue. The exceptional cast—which also includes Katheryn Winnick as Ragner's wife, Lagertha—is able to rise above those bombs. It's their distinctive portrayals that, for me, bring this Dark Ages tale to life.
  3. Reviewed by: Ed Bark
    Feb 28, 2014
    91
    Whatever becomes of Ragnar, Vikings has emerged in its second season as a series of appreciably higher quality. Its characters and storytelling, all within a world quite unlike any other on the TV landscape, have gone far beyond the cardboard stage.