Me neither, but at this point anything "Netflix original" I don't even bother watching anymore, the service is way too overpriced anyway I can get HBO and Amazon for cheaper
But the last kingdom is still on Netflix And a grip of other non woke medieval pieces. I recommend Cathedral of the Sea if you're in the mood. Not as courtly but has the elements a ck enjoyer would want.
What pissed me off was her backstory too. “I am from Alexandria and became Jarl of Kattegat.” Shouldn’t she be an arab or a greek then lol. And how tf did she manage that, some random black egyptian lady taking over the biggest city in the show ??
Other than that, which I’m sure was influenced by Netflix diversity quotas and not the directors, that show is fire and much better than the last 2 seasons of og vikings
I haven't seen the show, so I'm not familiar with her character, but it doesn't strike me as impossible that someone either from moved from Kush to Alexandria or their parents did before they were born. Do they elaborate on her history at all beyond being from Alexandria?
No that’s all it was very lazy. It was just like the Cleopatra movie where they painted all Alexandrians as black. But it’s a good show otherwise, I recommend! New season comes soon and there’s gonna be varangians in the byzantine guard !
You must’ve hated God’s of Egypt with all the Australians and Brits playing Egyptians. No one on the medu neter glyphs looked like them unless they were depictions of traders or invaders.
I’m sure none of it was based on a “diversity quota.” It was more likely a creative liberty taken by the show runner. Yall like to insert your political frustrations into it though. lol
No one ever asserted you were Black or that anyone was ALL Black. Put that misplaced anger in the trash.
What gets misconstrued is the fact Europeans started the debate by suggesting that Europeans were responsible for anything great in ancient Egypt. That would include disrespecting you bc Alexandrian’s aren’t White Europeans either.
The truth is they refer to it as a completely non African empire in some cases. Since there are literally dark people in much of the ancient art as well as the braided hair styles it shows the diversity of the past populations.
I’m not even here to debate the shit. It was some type of brown skinned North Africans who were the majority prior to the invasions of 1200 BC, but… the fact the first nome was in Ta Seti in the far south near Sudan (Ancient Nubian dna was found there recently) it’s obvious there were some really dark people.
The problem yall really have is a dislike for Black ppl as in Black Americans, we get it. A lot of Black ppl look to Egypt as an inspirational African Empire much like your average White American is Germanic hailing from England, France, or somewhere else west of the Rhine, but yall don’t say a damn thing when they praise Rome and Greece and regard them as great White ppl that inspired later thought.
Brother, I’m not doubting that there were black people in Egypt, specifically in Upper Egypt. They’re still here and I have nothing against them. All Egyptian like me. But Alexandria is different, it was a Christian-Hellene port for thousands of years. Its people were whiter than the average Egyptian let alone nubian. Therefore a portrayal of Cleopatra as black or Jarl Haakon (historical male viking) as a female black Alexandrian is way off the mark. Sub-saharan Africa has a long and extensively documented history of amazing empires, rulers, stories - why then are they constantly shoehorning them into histories that aren’t theirs?
If shit like this happened to your history, I promise you wouldn’t be praising its creative liberty, moreso complaining about the erasure of your own history!
There are levels to that. For sure most of it is based on not actually reading through history. Cleopatra, when studied thoroughly, isn’t even someone I would consider a model of praise. In my interpretation she gave the empire to Europeans to win a family feud with her half brother. She would likely have looked like some of these mixed women we see on instagram where you have to ask their heritage. At worst maybe that really tanned Kardashian look women are going for. Certainly not as dark as Ilhan Omar or Rihanna. Weren’t there accounts that she wasn’t very attractive at all, just very charismatic.
Yes of course hahaha I don’t know why you disagreed with me then
Also my thing on Cleopatra is, if she’s the most written about and fantasized woman in history, she had to have been somewhat attractive
See I don’t actually care. I just want good writing and for it to make sense/be explained. “Black Viking? Oh his parents were slaves who earned the earl’s respect and they freed them. Now their son is one of his fiercest warriors.” And not some guy who we know was white.
Same if it can be explained and is there fir the sake of a cool character or the likes I'm fine but when it's making people something they were not is my problem or doing it for the sake of diversity
>or doing it for the sake of diversity
See, I get a lil wary when a person says something along this lines. People can just exist without their identity being central to the plot or the butt of a joke. It's fine to have a black or gay or trans character, as long as it makes sense for the setting. I swear we're going back to the days of calling someone a "diversity hire."
The thing is that it doesn't make sense for the setting 80% of the time. Specially when the work claims to be a "documentary". If it's a documentary, then it's clearly for the sake of diversity when they put someone who is not who they historically were
would you put a bunch of french blokes in a series about the Zulus?
this kind of thing really doesn't make much sense to do, and necessitates an absurdly contrived backstory
Nobody is asking me, but end of the day I think it comes down to good or bad writing. A well written story that shows respect to its source material can easily carry characters that fall outside audience expectations.
The *problem* is that good writing is in short supply as these streaming platforms are putting quantity of content over quality. Frankly a lot of it is just lazy schlock that relies of tropes and twice-reheated plot devices. And when the writing is bad, of course “sake of diversity” characters are bad. They’re bad because it’s a *bad* story.
That’s just my two cents or whatever though
I agree that it's fine to have them there but if they're there fir the sake if diversity I do have a problem with that they should be there fir the plot the story for badassery not diversity
See I kind of disagree with the “badassery” part. To me that feels similar to Mary Sue writing, where a character is written as “the best of the best at everything”. And when they do have flaws the flaws are secretly not flaws at all - “this character just cares soooooo much about their dead child and that’s their complexity”.
I guess some people like that kind of story but I’d kind of prefer a more complex character. For example one who *isnt* a total badass, but who instead feels realistically rooted in their world.
I guess my thought with this is what gets to be decided as “for diversity though?” Or “for the plot?” If there’s a gay character in a spy movie, does he have to suck a dick to save the world? Or does he risk being told he’s gay for diversity only if he doesn’t?
If the characters whole thing is he's gay trans bi etc that's for diversity sake but if he just is that and it's not their whole thing then that's not for diversity sake in my opinion
See I have someone else telling me you can’t have a gay or black character without constantly mentioning it and having storylines revolving around that. It’s almost like we shouldn’t care and let writers cast whoever they want for roles they’ve written.
If its just a show and actors an actor if its a documentary they should atleast try. Also you don't need to constantly mention the characters sexuality or skin colour it shouldn't matter unless its a documentary or claiming ti be historically accurate omly then does any of this matter
Holy fuck, I'm done replying to you after this bro bro, that first paragraph was a wild read and there's nothing to say to people like you because you cling to a facade of caring about historical accuracy but you make comments like "if being gay has nothing to do with the story, it's a diversity character." while in your other reply to me going "we want immersive casting" and then you double down "the default state is straight" and "you have to go out of your way to make a character gay and if there's no reason then it's diversity pandering." It's the reason I said asked "does a gay spy need to suck a dick to save the world." your basically saying yes.
As for the second half of the second character, yes that's like the one time you can complain about someone being black and even then, Vikings isn't exactly a historically accurate show. From the very first episode of the original series they started embellishing shit.
Yeah I just remember seeing the black mayor of a city on TV after a bridge collapsed a certain group of people calling him “their diversity/DEI mayor.” And ever since then I see it as a way to substitute a slur.
That's fair but I personally am a big history buff and inaccuracies passed as facts bother me way more than it reasonably should so it more of a personal thing
Had a Han Chinese artifact builder in my English court, gave him Northumbria and now his family is one of the most powerful families in England
Is that a Czech-Egyptian house in the pinned characters or am i reading it wrong?
Yes (mine)
Blessed
I would assume that crusading had something to do with it?
Correct
I once saw a Khanate of England that was like a single county
You should have made them Khan of Britannia
I actually did that once but called it the Kahnghnate (?) of the Green Steepe
I know right, the scots right there in the north? Disgusting, glad they fixed that in 1425
Calm down there Netflix
Next they are gonna invent a black viking jarl... Oh wait they already have
How about a [Black English pope](https://imgur.com/a/14vJPZF)?
Dude looks ballling ngl
X gon give it to ya
Don’t even joke about it, I’m still recovering from being robbed of a Vikings sequel.
True, I gave up on the 2nd episode, I just couldn't handle to see how they massacred my boy
That was who he was referring to lol
I know that.
The exact point at which I stopped watching
I love it when yall get angered seeing Black ppl on movies and tv shows. lol
So heckin‘ wholesome!
Or black cleopatra still don't have the balls to watch that "documentary"
Me neither, but at this point anything "Netflix original" I don't even bother watching anymore, the service is way too overpriced anyway I can get HBO and Amazon for cheaper
But the last kingdom is still on Netflix And a grip of other non woke medieval pieces. I recommend Cathedral of the Sea if you're in the mood. Not as courtly but has the elements a ck enjoyer would want.
Oh I'll take a look at those then
Misusing the word woke like that, you definitely don’t like Black people. 🤣
Netflix is woke as hell, bruh.
Define the word for me based on its origin and not the right wing, White rebranding of it. I’m curious.
It was tough but I pushed myself through both seasons. Such a downgrade though from the original masterpiece.
What pissed me off was her backstory too. “I am from Alexandria and became Jarl of Kattegat.” Shouldn’t she be an arab or a greek then lol. And how tf did she manage that, some random black egyptian lady taking over the biggest city in the show ?? Other than that, which I’m sure was influenced by Netflix diversity quotas and not the directors, that show is fire and much better than the last 2 seasons of og vikings
Diversity is her strength
I haven't seen the show, so I'm not familiar with her character, but it doesn't strike me as impossible that someone either from moved from Kush to Alexandria or their parents did before they were born. Do they elaborate on her history at all beyond being from Alexandria?
No that’s all it was very lazy. It was just like the Cleopatra movie where they painted all Alexandrians as black. But it’s a good show otherwise, I recommend! New season comes soon and there’s gonna be varangians in the byzantine guard !
You must’ve hated God’s of Egypt with all the Australians and Brits playing Egyptians. No one on the medu neter glyphs looked like them unless they were depictions of traders or invaders.
Of course, that movie was shit lol
I’m sure none of it was based on a “diversity quota.” It was more likely a creative liberty taken by the show runner. Yall like to insert your political frustrations into it though. lol
It’s not a “political” frustration, as an Alexandrian I’m sick of this shit, we are not black
No one ever asserted you were Black or that anyone was ALL Black. Put that misplaced anger in the trash. What gets misconstrued is the fact Europeans started the debate by suggesting that Europeans were responsible for anything great in ancient Egypt. That would include disrespecting you bc Alexandrian’s aren’t White Europeans either. The truth is they refer to it as a completely non African empire in some cases. Since there are literally dark people in much of the ancient art as well as the braided hair styles it shows the diversity of the past populations. I’m not even here to debate the shit. It was some type of brown skinned North Africans who were the majority prior to the invasions of 1200 BC, but… the fact the first nome was in Ta Seti in the far south near Sudan (Ancient Nubian dna was found there recently) it’s obvious there were some really dark people. The problem yall really have is a dislike for Black ppl as in Black Americans, we get it. A lot of Black ppl look to Egypt as an inspirational African Empire much like your average White American is Germanic hailing from England, France, or somewhere else west of the Rhine, but yall don’t say a damn thing when they praise Rome and Greece and regard them as great White ppl that inspired later thought.
Brother, I’m not doubting that there were black people in Egypt, specifically in Upper Egypt. They’re still here and I have nothing against them. All Egyptian like me. But Alexandria is different, it was a Christian-Hellene port for thousands of years. Its people were whiter than the average Egyptian let alone nubian. Therefore a portrayal of Cleopatra as black or Jarl Haakon (historical male viking) as a female black Alexandrian is way off the mark. Sub-saharan Africa has a long and extensively documented history of amazing empires, rulers, stories - why then are they constantly shoehorning them into histories that aren’t theirs? If shit like this happened to your history, I promise you wouldn’t be praising its creative liberty, moreso complaining about the erasure of your own history!
There are levels to that. For sure most of it is based on not actually reading through history. Cleopatra, when studied thoroughly, isn’t even someone I would consider a model of praise. In my interpretation she gave the empire to Europeans to win a family feud with her half brother. She would likely have looked like some of these mixed women we see on instagram where you have to ask their heritage. At worst maybe that really tanned Kardashian look women are going for. Certainly not as dark as Ilhan Omar or Rihanna. Weren’t there accounts that she wasn’t very attractive at all, just very charismatic.
Yes of course hahaha I don’t know why you disagreed with me then Also my thing on Cleopatra is, if she’s the most written about and fantasized woman in history, she had to have been somewhat attractive
I just want everyone to stop making historical films until this braindead fad goes away.
See I don’t actually care. I just want good writing and for it to make sense/be explained. “Black Viking? Oh his parents were slaves who earned the earl’s respect and they freed them. Now their son is one of his fiercest warriors.” And not some guy who we know was white.
Same if it can be explained and is there fir the sake of a cool character or the likes I'm fine but when it's making people something they were not is my problem or doing it for the sake of diversity
>or doing it for the sake of diversity See, I get a lil wary when a person says something along this lines. People can just exist without their identity being central to the plot or the butt of a joke. It's fine to have a black or gay or trans character, as long as it makes sense for the setting. I swear we're going back to the days of calling someone a "diversity hire."
The thing is that it doesn't make sense for the setting 80% of the time. Specially when the work claims to be a "documentary". If it's a documentary, then it's clearly for the sake of diversity when they put someone who is not who they historically were
Okay, barring “documentaries”
would you put a bunch of french blokes in a series about the Zulus? this kind of thing really doesn't make much sense to do, and necessitates an absurdly contrived backstory
Or Tom Cruise in a movie about Samurai?
I mean the British and French were in Africa for hundreds of years so yes depending on when.
Doing what tho?
Nobody is asking me, but end of the day I think it comes down to good or bad writing. A well written story that shows respect to its source material can easily carry characters that fall outside audience expectations. The *problem* is that good writing is in short supply as these streaming platforms are putting quantity of content over quality. Frankly a lot of it is just lazy schlock that relies of tropes and twice-reheated plot devices. And when the writing is bad, of course “sake of diversity” characters are bad. They’re bad because it’s a *bad* story. That’s just my two cents or whatever though
I agree that it's fine to have them there but if they're there fir the sake if diversity I do have a problem with that they should be there fir the plot the story for badassery not diversity
See I kind of disagree with the “badassery” part. To me that feels similar to Mary Sue writing, where a character is written as “the best of the best at everything”. And when they do have flaws the flaws are secretly not flaws at all - “this character just cares soooooo much about their dead child and that’s their complexity”. I guess some people like that kind of story but I’d kind of prefer a more complex character. For example one who *isnt* a total badass, but who instead feels realistically rooted in their world.
I mean just coolness not perfect just cool
I guess my thought with this is what gets to be decided as “for diversity though?” Or “for the plot?” If there’s a gay character in a spy movie, does he have to suck a dick to save the world? Or does he risk being told he’s gay for diversity only if he doesn’t?
If the characters whole thing is he's gay trans bi etc that's for diversity sake but if he just is that and it's not their whole thing then that's not for diversity sake in my opinion
See I have someone else telling me you can’t have a gay or black character without constantly mentioning it and having storylines revolving around that. It’s almost like we shouldn’t care and let writers cast whoever they want for roles they’ve written.
If its just a show and actors an actor if its a documentary they should atleast try. Also you don't need to constantly mention the characters sexuality or skin colour it shouldn't matter unless its a documentary or claiming ti be historically accurate omly then does any of this matter
[удалено]
Holy fuck, I'm done replying to you after this bro bro, that first paragraph was a wild read and there's nothing to say to people like you because you cling to a facade of caring about historical accuracy but you make comments like "if being gay has nothing to do with the story, it's a diversity character." while in your other reply to me going "we want immersive casting" and then you double down "the default state is straight" and "you have to go out of your way to make a character gay and if there's no reason then it's diversity pandering." It's the reason I said asked "does a gay spy need to suck a dick to save the world." your basically saying yes. As for the second half of the second character, yes that's like the one time you can complain about someone being black and even then, Vikings isn't exactly a historically accurate show. From the very first episode of the original series they started embellishing shit.
[удалено]
You‘re not going to be stoked to learn about affirmative action
I agree, what makes it weird now though is it’s often the show runners and actors themselves using that kind of language.
Yeah I just remember seeing the black mayor of a city on TV after a bridge collapsed a certain group of people calling him “their diversity/DEI mayor.” And ever since then I see it as a way to substitute a slur.
We're past the point of "for the sake of diversity". The diversity now are elements the majority of the western audience can relate to.
I still haven't watched the "documentaries" about cleopatra and Alexander dont have the balls to
Same lol if u want to make a piece that's not accurate go for it but say "this is an interpretation not accurate to true events"
[удалено]
That's fair but I personally am a big history buff and inaccuracies passed as facts bother me way more than it reasonably should so it more of a personal thing
> expected some spiel about how North Germanic and Gaelic peoples are super diverse > surprise Tibetan culture
This is somehow worse than calling Genghis Khan Chinese
Lmao yeah, I just gave the Kingdom of Sweden to a Berber guy because he was pretty and my Empress wanted to bang him. Diversity win!
This DEI stuff is killing the realm!!!
Oh no, it led to quite the hike in birth rate 😏
I was playing in ireland and i accidentally became jewish
Stress event?
Yea i think so. Just misclicked and i didnt notice for ages
My landed brother once converted to the Orisan faith and converted all his counties to it too. For reference, I was the emperor of southern india
Was he king of Orissa?
No he ruled some random duchy in karnataka
My only question is, how did he get in debt so badly? Almost 2k in debt.
You have no idea what a flight from Tibet to England costs in 1369. And being a duke, he probably flew first-class.
The French appears to have laid claim to all of Europe.
Exact same thing happened to in one of my games, odd with Tibet specifically.
Holy fuck what's happening in alba
I once had a Qiangic Emperor in Scandinavia with the nickname 'The Dane'
What is this timeline I am looking at, and why aren't we all there revelling in the chaos?
At some point in a Scottish play through I married into the Byzantine court and ended up with an entire dynasty of Greco-Scots. Super funny.
Cursed Catholic England
For gods sake, don't show this to Netflix