Plot
A small Norwegian town experiencing warm winters and violent downpours seems to be headed for Ragnarok -- unless someone intervenes in time.
Cast
Nobody I knew prior to Ragnarok but a host of people who consistently knocked it out of the park, Stakston's transformation alone was very impressive.
Verdict
My other half's choice, this perhaps would have been a lot further down the watchlist for me, I was hesitant. A modern telling of sorts of Thor? It didn't sit right with me and felt it was going to be over convoluted and fall flat, to my surprise from the very first episode it's actually really quite engaging and I found myself engrossed.
Not only this but it unconditionally kept my attention throughout the three seasons, it never wavered, it didn't have peaks and troughs, it was consistent in its quality.
So why? Decent enough writing, very solid cast and it went in directions I simply didn't expect, it's a lot of things but predictable isn't one of them.
It's not flawless, there's plenty of elements I didn't like and sadly the shows very core namely the Norse mythology was never something I was entirely on board with however I appreciated the subtlety and it's lack of attempt at being Marvel. Sure it's hokey and you have to suspend disbelief to an extent, but you do with all fantasy shows.
This show isn't a big cgi-fest, it's subtle, it's well crafted and it plays it vastly more serious.
What I don't understand however is the fans perception of season 3. The episodes are considerably lower rated and the finale seems to be universally despised. I get it, and yet I don't. Allow me to explain.
I don't like ambiguous endings, I don't need everything spelling out for me but generally I like to be in the ball park. Ragnarok's finale is very ambiguous and when it was drawing to a close I was very frustrated by this as I could see where it was going. However by the time the credits had rolled and the two distinct interpretations had reared their heads I found myself perfectly content with them. Maybe people aren't getting that, maybe people are simply assuming one over the other, maybe people like me just don't like ambiguous but were more stringent on that.
Me, I liked it. It doesn't matter which was the correct interpretation, both were deep, meaningful and neither took anything away from the show. At first I feared they'd pulled a Dallas on us, in reality it's far more multi-tiered and engaging than that. I simply don't understand the hate.
Rants
Oh dear, I thought that the criticism of the show was at least constructive even if I didn't agree with it. Filtering through the 1/10 reviews I as I should have expected found myself drowning in accusations of the show being propaganda and having an agenda due to the environmental parts of the story and the gay characters. Seriously, grow up. The existence of gay people in movies/tv is not an agenda, stop dressing your bigotry up as something its not. And the environment? You live on the same planet as me, you might want to start taking it a bit more seriously.
Breakdown
Great cast
Solid performances
Consistency
Concept still isn't my thing
Too short.
