T O P

After reading the books, i'm disappointed about a few little annoying details

After reading the books, i'm disappointed about a few little annoying details

Tessarion2

You're not alone. Sadly you'll notice that very few medieval or fantasy 'heroes' in film and TV ever wear helmets because then we can't see the main characters face. Despite it making no sense. Authenticity wise TLK does it really well IMO in every way aside from the weird BDSM gear that all the men wear haha


SmilinMercenary

The funny thing is an actor can deliver a great performance in a helmet, one which covers even more of the face. Karl Urban in Dredd or Pedro Pascal in Mandalorian for instance. Even the Marvel films had Reynolds in the Deadpool suit, Downey Jnr as Iron man or Paul Rudd as Ant man. It's such antiqued reasoning they do this (we'll forget who the star is) and it makes that much less believable. We like an actor for their acting ability, not just their face.


johanozagal

To add to this, Karl Urban also wore a helmet in LOTR.


ForwardUntoFate

Also Chris Evans as Captain America. Dude is usually wearing his helmet every fight. I think the only time it’s weirdly absent is Age of Ultron’s final battle. Avengers he gets it ripped off towards the end, and Infinity War he’s obviously using his shabby damaged armour. I think it helps if the costume is iconic enough, or specifically tied to the character in some way. And also if the actor can convey his emotions despite the helmet/mask.


Masteryoda212

I think it’s different with Evans since captain America is a super hero, and most super heroes where some sort of mask while fighting.


Leo-Hadan

Exactly lol


Sidewinder7

Book Uhtred and show Uhted definitely feel different to me although I like the portrayal of both. In the book he's described as much larger than Dreymon is and more gruf and savage. That's reinforced by the fact that I did the audio books and the first voice narrator Jonathan keeble has that gruff kind of gravelly voice and is outstanding. Unfortunately he only voiced books one, two and four, they had four other guys finish out the series, the last being Matt Bates who I think sounds somewhat like Alexander Dreymond. If you're looking for books to read once you're done with this series I highly recommend The Warlord Chronicles, Cornwell's other series. Every bit as good and a little familiar yet different.


Yufle

The only book of the series I got as an audio book is the Lords of the North, which Richard Armitage narrated. I like it.


Leo-Hadan

I think it's the one book who made me feel the most emotions, the part where Uhtred is a slave for 3 years and ragnar liberating him is such a ride, love it


BlueRaining

I love Cornwell’s series, to the point I am about to read The Last Kingdom series again. Thank you for your book recommendation by same author; you’ve saved me from the 3rd (no, actually 4th) reading!


yodasarmpits

I feel your pain, his always donning his Wolf crested helmet before a big battle. The books so well written, love the details in it.


Panzermoosen

I specifically missed all the little hammers he hung from the bottom of his mail so that those he killed would recognize him in Odin's Hall...


maurovaz1

Actually the show is terrible inaccurate when it comes to historical events with season 4 being straight fantasy, the first two seasons were actually pretty accurate because they were following the books. Book Uhtred war gear would look amazing in TV


[deleted]

I love it how in the books uhtred puts his dads old leather type helmet that means his enemies can’t tell who he is. I love it


taker685

The show ruins a lot of the battle and fight scenes. I was so disappointed with the Uhtred vs. Cnut fight. In the books, it is a much better fight. The books are far better than the show imo.


dawson3678

Much easier to write a good fight scene than film one tbf. But yea just like GOT a lot of the fight scenes are tamed down by a large margin sadly…


taker685

It would be nice if the showrunners could at least get the 1v1s right. The Witcher did it well with the Striga fight. I'm sure it wouldn't have been difficult to make the Cnut fight more interesting. I would have rather seen the fight recovery/cursed Uhtred plot line from the books than the crappy plague storyline the showrunners came up with.


jonsnowier

You might enjoy watching this video where armor and weapons from movies/shows are rated. If you don't want to watch the whole thing the two relevant parts are at 4:00 (Vikings) and 17:10(The Last Kingdom). https://youtu.be/5uwWlamONqs


AnusCruiser

That's a fair complaint for almost every medieval show. Truth is that back scabbards just look cooler on screen so it's used more. However in book 2 (maybe 1, not 100% sure. I'm pretty sure it was at Ethandun) there's a long explanation about why, in the shield wall, Uhtred prefers the back scabbard. When you're elbow to elbow in the shield wall you have no room to draw a long sword forwards from your hip. When it's on your back you can pull it up, out, and ready for a slash downwards. Atleast in 1 case the back scabbard is book accurate.


___Daddy___

The reason they do it in the back is for ease of production and continuity. If a sword is flapping around on your hip when you’re doing a bunch of shots and takes it could look out of place when they cut from one take to another. It looks stupid af to me when you stop to think about it but I don’t think I noticed until I saw others complaining. Hard to unsee it though lol I don’t remember where in the books he talks about having his sword in his back. I know he uses a seaxe in the shield wall in the books because it is smaller and easier to maneuver, but I’m interested to see what you’re talking about in the books if you can find it


AnusCruiser

Haha I was a little off. It was not a long explanation but rather a short note while explaining what equipment he had on. My explanation was longer. Book 2, Part 13: I had hung Serpent-Breath on my back. In the crush of battle a sword is easier to draw over the shoulder than from the hip, and the first stroke can then be a vicious downward hack. I carried Wasp-Sting in my right hand. Wasp-Sting was a saxe, a short sword, a stout blade for stabbing, and in the press of men heaving against an enemy shield wall a short sword can do more damage than a long blade. My shield, iron-rimmed, was held on my left forearm by two leather loops. The shield had a metal boss the size of a man’s head, a weapon in itself.


___Daddy___

Well shit! Nice catch. Thanks for sharing, brother AnusCruiser!


Vonatar-74

Just wait for the black bishop in S5 if this stuff annoys you.


Leo-Hadan

Black people in TV shows don't annoy me a but it sounds like it annoys You. And it tells me a lot about yourself


Vonatar-74

Your assumption tells me a lot about you too. Tell me how many POC were bishops in the church in England in the 9th/10th century? Racism is one thing. History is another.


Leo-Hadan

No one learns history through a TV show And there were black and north african knights, so why not a Priest ?


Vonatar-74

There is no evidence of black knights in England in C9-10. But it’s the same as making a movie about the Zulu war against the British and throwing in a few white characters as prominent Zulus because “diversity”. If you’re trying to represent history (not teach, but represent) you’ve got to have some connection to historical reality. It doesn’t bother you and that’s fine. But it bothers me.


andthehousefelldown

I’d like to thank both of you for sending me down quite a rabbit hole into history today. The first and most important point to be made is that we are talking about historical fiction here, most of the books ends with the author explaining how he invented characters or events loosely based on real people and events. He often says that he creates them to drive the story and make it better. So there isn’t to much need to get seriously wrapped up in historical evidence in character developments. Also, almost all of the characters are either slightly off in appearance or in the case of Uhtred entirely off in appearance comparing to the books. Beocca was supposed to have a bad squint, a club foot, and a palsied left hand; however, in the show he is a warrior priest. So we are talking about multiple levels of creative liberties hear when we make the jump from history to novels to tv show. But as far as evidence for a black church leader there is an arch bishop that was incredibly influential to Anglo Saxon Christianity known as Archbishop Hadrian of Canterbury. He was in England around 650-750 AD. That’s enough for me to base a fictional character on. And while it isn’t hard historical fact, sir morien was a knight of the round table who was absolutely described as black or at least black Arab, so that is ancient cultural knowledge and impact of dark skin people dating to prehistoric England. And again, moving back to the books dark skin people are often mentioned. The most prominent being Murassa, father Cuthberts wife who is rescued from slavery by Finnan and Uthred. And they are often spoken of during descriptions of London in the trading markets. I’m going to agree with the OP here and say that the show ignoring proper armor is a far more egregious decision than having one black character on the show. Because every warrior character in the book essentially lived in heavy mail coats, wore helmets and carried shields when in battle or near battle.


moon-worshiper

No, just Alt-ALIF (Absolutist Literalist Inconsistency Fetishist). Uhtred's Grandfather, who also was named Uhtred, wearing representative Anglo-Saxon armor: https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/the-last-kingdom/images/9/9a/Season_one_Ealdorman_Uhtred.png/revision/latest?cb=20200710022427 Hardened leather helmet, chain mail coiffe. They do not have steel, they have dirty iron. A dirty iron skull cap weighs over 5 pounds, a dirty iron chain mail coiffe weighs almost 20 pounds. Cornwell's description is based on the Ornamental Helmet found at Sutton Hoo: https://smarthistory.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/suttonhoo-helmetreconstruction.jpg When Sutten Hoo was first found, in the 1930's, it was immediately assumed to be Anglo-Saxon. It is appearing to be Celt now.


Leo-Hadan

It's a britton helmet ??? But what about the garnets and the sword that was found in the tomb ? It's a germanic spatha type right ? Can you link me an article about that specific discovery That it's a britton helmet ? (I am actually a master's degree historian IRL so that stuff interests me a lot)


Tessarion2

Take no notice of Moon-Worshiper he frequents this sub regularly with utter nonsense. Take his first sentence for example. There isn't a single historian on earth who thinks the Sutton Hoo burial is Briton/Celtic he has just invented this theory in his head with zero evidence to back it up. If you want more evidence to why you shouldn't take notice of him he believes King Arthur was real and Anglo Saxon and also believes that alien reptiles are using our planet as a meat farm.


Leo-Hadan

Oh okay I get it lol I read a full book about sutton hoo and the types of objects found there, compared with other objects from various places of northern europe, proving the germanic origin of the burial It seemed weird (knowing the types of weaponry and apparel used by britons at that time... Yeah it seemed weird, which is why I asked for his source. If a thing like this was discovered it would have made the headlines of every archaeological papers) Oh and a website named "smarthistory", yeah I should have known better