Dramatic though? I think not.

The only problem with the 'just un-ailve the target as soon as possible' method is that the target is not properly tortured for what it had committed, from the point of view of the one that came to exact revenge, as the target needs to feel the same terror and pain it had caused to the one who claim its vengence (at least). For this reason, the target must be put through both mental and physical pain (threatening and beating) before it is un-alived. Since heavy physical beating/torture will result in distorted mind and senses, the threatening (through words) should be done first with some little physical torture; for instance, a cut on the leg. Additionally, the guy who prevented him from claiming vengence had made him a promise before, so there should not have been any problem taking time to do anything to the target. My thoughts on this scene is everything was done correctly, and the only actual problem is the mf that intercept that sword from cutting the head of the target.

@Monkey D Luffy Difference between assassins and egomaniac killers. One has efficiency as part of their job, the other just wants to feel important.

@@Eadwulf_Skald difference between and assassin and a man looking for vengeance for his family* fixed it for ya cuz ya made it sound like some random just stormed a castle and started killing the help

@@zer0games877 You can look for vengeance yet still be an egomaniac though so I don't understand the point you're trying to make. One example I can think of is Uthred in The Last Kingdom (moreso in the books than the show). He just kills instead of giving a damn speech.

I see you too are a man of culture

Tuco

he try to make that trashtalk before actually doing the deed xD

need more dakka !

so simple... see oberyn martell vs the mountain

You sly dog

Frozone 🤣

😂

@@r1506rSyndrome actually.

You sly dog!

That seen still makes me angry even after so many years

WHO GAVE YOU THE ORDER? SAY IT! 🤣

To be fair at least Oberyn was telling Tywin he was MEANT to be next

​@@chiragsaini4832 agreed

HAHAHAHAHA

Dude this show is fiction so loosely based on the true historical events thats its laughable, they also made an african woman queen of Kattegat, and even gave her the name haakon or in modern tongue Håkon which is a 100% pure male name, and they got Gorm, forkbeard, and Sven mixed up and turned around completely.

​@@Vakaria-plays dang, that's messed up.

@@Vakaria-plays how the hell did they mess up this bad lmao. the first show with ragnar was so good. wokism at its finest.

Not wokism. Just mfs trying to make a fantasy series but trying to brand themselves the same way Vikings did, as a fictional history. ​@@goldenretrieversarethebest8119

It's 100% accurate

bro you are talking of a franchise which changed almost everything Bjorn was never Lagertha's son Rollo and Ragnar never even existed on the same time period and were never related Ragnar never pulled the deadman prank on paris it was done by Bjorn on Italy at Luna thinking it was Rome Sigurd was done dirty Ivar never died in battle Ubbe never discovered America and Greenland

@@GRR1MN1R yeah I’m well aware. Ironic since the show was originally produced by the History Channel. I always found Floki/Ubbe discovering Vinland very amusing, because now they’re doing a show about Leif Ericsson and they already gave his greatest achievement to Ubbe!

Vikings hold grudges for long periods apparently 😂

@@GRR1MN1Rthere are evidence vikings in America. Better do some good research dude.. 😂😂

@@SP911 what are talking about I never said anything about the Norsemen reaching America, it was Leif Erickson not Floki or Ubbe who reached Vinland

Wrong movie master widu

@@wlfshadow4255 Take a SEAT Young Ivar the Boneless

@@mattybold6726 how can I be on the council and not be a master it’s insulting!

I HATE YOU!!!

​@@wlfshadow4255you have become far greater viking warrior than i will ever be, but be patient ivar

The show suuuucks, not even close to as good as vikings

Well, then the guy would've most likely died and tadaa, the other guy with him.

Watch the clip, he says "If that sword STRIKES, your head will lay beside his" pretty sure chopping off the arm would get him killed.

@@boskilingenfelter9515 damn I heard it wrong. Oh well I'd still take his arm

​@@landoncube769if you double down just go straight for the head and then demand a Valhalla worthy execution for yourself. You will meet a proud father on the other side. Win win 😂

Then youd be executed by canute

So every single one of them ahah

yeah i saw that too 😂😂😂

Every time 🤣😂

😂

Who won? Who won?

If I was Harald I would’ve had the army join with England 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 to overthrow Canute.

@@kodesh1674 Not very likely

Los Culos Hermanooooos.....Don Eladio can suuuuuck meee🤣

Exactly. I had the same problem with King Alfred. Historically, he gained the throne after his father and brothers died fighting the Vikings. Then he succeeds in driving them off. Show version: a bastard, gains the throne because of mommy, and only tactical genius is trusting the Vikings more.

@@gatorhawk7167 precisely! And also the Saxons in general, making them out as if they don't know which side of a sword is dangerous. Its just redicilous.

@@rishisaaptacha oh im well aware they aint accurate bud. I just don't like how all these viking enthusiasts are taking the shows for fact if you know what i mean.

@@joshuaperry7199 yeah the joke is in equal battle the Vikings lost more to the English than they won.

@@makeytgreatagain6256 although ive never actually tallied up the battles, wouldn't surprise me if your right.

That's a difficult wound to treat by today's standards, so death was very likely to occur then

You clearly don’t understand how primitive their medicine was in that time. U could die from stubbing your toe.

Your logic is nowhere to be seen... Apart from bleeding out, the risk of infection is just extreme. Chopping off one arm would've been basically a death sentence. Humans are not goddamn legos...

"What about his legs? _He doesn't need those"_

​@John Kingston yes European s were slow

It's netflix bro, the whole show was trash. They disrespected Edmund Ironside so much he was nothing like the character they had in the show

​@@southercalifas son of bjorn?

@@lieselotmauroo9808 No son of Aethelred, Edmunds enemies actually gave him the title ‘Ironside’ cause he was a badass and hardcore warrior and incredibly tall and built. He was actually close to defeating Canute till he got betrayed by his allies. This show is a joke and turned him into a Joffrey 2.0.

@@lieselotmauroo9808 No, King Edmund the one in this scene that was about to die. He was nothing like that character in real life. He was a great warrior and won many battles. He was admired so much by the vikings, so they gave him the name Edmund Ironside. In the real history King Edmund wouldve won the war but at the last battle he was betrayed and died. King Canute visited his grave every year and respected him a lot.

It’s tv show not a documentary

Anyone

Exactly he should've just killed him

I felt the same but I gave season 2 a chance and I’m so happy I did. It was far better than the first season.

Nah that's stupid

good pfp bro

😄

😊

​@@KONUNGofficialPlease name the movie. please

Thorfinn is a slave at this point.

There is plenty to criticise even without that comparison... The collection of random historical characters, situations that make no sense for those characters except in this bizarre created history, etc.

@@rishisaaptacha Not at all. Historical characters were pretty rare on the viking side in the original show. A little more evidence for the english characters and some vikings like Bjorn, Harald and such. But the show was built around Ragnar who is 100% legend as far as we know. Same goes for Ivar since the historical references are impossible to prove to be the same guy from legend. So the impact is vastly different. Building a fictional story around legends is a vastly different thing than making a fictional show about real historical people. Valhalla does a disservice to history, Vikings didn't.

King Canute wasn't "Pagan" he was a Christian. He believed in heaven & hell not Valhalla.

"If anyone knows mythology, they know" And then you proceed to spell Helheim as "Hellhaim", what even. The heck is "haim"?

​@@3EyedRav3nAhh, that makes sense then. After all, what's 1 more sin amongst the millions of others he has committed/will eventually commit prior to death? Much less than the tiniest of drops in the bucket from that perspective - ESP. when all you have to do is say you're sorry to God b4 you die & all the crappy sh*t you did to others during your life is just magically forgiven & you wind up in eternal paradise all the same. Basically the ultimate get out of jail free card & you can even re-use it over+over+over again! [I honestly think this is the exact reason why, out of all the people I've known & friends I've had across my lifetime, the absolute worst 1s by a gigantic margin were always, eithout fail, the self-proclaimed Christians! Most esp. those who loved to talk abt their relationship w God & would try to ask others abt theirs.]

In reality theyre usually speaking norse but its translated for convenience, kinda like how in star wars they wouldn't actually be speaking english but its translated for the viewer rather than relying on subtitles. But when its from the point of view of those who wouldnt know norse they usually use the native tongue to show the language barrier