Review: Runes Was…Something (Spoilers)

Last year, I did a review on one of the shows streaming on Bentkey, Dailywire’s children’s channel. At the time, I had only seen the first eleven episodes and said that I would redo my review on the show if anything changed in the coming episodes. Now, seven months after I gave that review, I can say that while I thought the story of Runes was okay, there are so many historical and mythological inaccuracies as well as what you could call blunders in common sense that my view of Runes has fallen from it being a fun kids show to being something that felt entirely unresearched.

(For those of you wanting to read my previous review of Runes, I’ll put the link to it in the comments section below. I would suggest reading it to get some more context to the show.)

#1: Osbern

In my previous review of Runes, I gave the show some credit for killing off Osbern, not because he deserved it, but rather because that was one of the few things in the show that was historically accurate. William of Normandy did have a guardian named Osbern who was killed. However, the show nukes that level of historical accuracy by bringing Osbern back to life in a plot twist episode where one of the villains, Dame Neel, uses him to try to capture William. While this works for the show, given that the events of the show center around real historical figures, I couldn’t help but feel annoyed that the producers would allow this. This leads me to my next point….

#2: So Many Historical Inaccuracies

There’s a lot of historical inaccuracies in Runes and I’ve touched on some of this already when it comes to Osbern, and I talked about it somewhat in the original review, where I mentioned that William of Normandy (a.k.a. William the Bastard) isn’t the greatest character for a kids’ show, but in this show, the inaccuracies get worse as time goes on. I’m going to focus on the two biggest problems, one of which is the fact that this show takes place around the early 1040’s A.D., a time when Normandy had already been Christianized. So, where the hell are the churches? Where are the priests? Why does everyone still act like they – to some extent – still worship the Norse gods? These are questions that are never answered in the show, even though I think they could’ve been used to create more drama and intrigue as well as being historically accurate.

Then there’s the whole deal about Rollo, William’s great-great-great-grandfather being a Viking sorcerer who trapped Loki for 300 years. Though this works to set up the story, it does not line up with history that well. While I don’t think Rollo introduced Christianity to Normandy (you can fact check me on this), he did play a crucial role in bringing it into the mainstream in 911 A.D. when he signed the treaty of Saint Clair-sur-Epte, where he swore that he and his people would stop raiding the people, fight the Vikings, and convert to Christianity, accepting baptism (912), which led him to talk the name Robert at his conversion in Rouen Cathedral. Because of this, Christian writers would later hold him up as an example of saving grace, showing how he had gone from being a Viking warlord to becoming a paragon of Christian virtue. With that in mind, the only thing that would make this plot line make sense is if the script writers had made it clear that he was perhaps a sorcerer in his early days but later repented. That would make a lot more sense.

There’s also the entire scene where Hugo’s friend, Turstin, is forging the Sword of Destiny in the cringiest way possible, but I’ll talk about that in a sec.

#3: Mythological Inaccuracies

I talked about this some more in my last review of Runes, but I’ll say it again: While it works for the show, Loki had already been imprisoned by the gods long before Rollo was born. It would be the onset of Ragnarok, the Norse version of Armageddon, that would free him, which would give Hugo and friends a lot more to worry about than just Normandy being destroyed.

There’s also the fact that Loki takes a dragon’s form in this show, which is interesting given he looks suspiciously like his son Jormungandr, the brother of Hel and Fenrir, who’s better known as the Midgard Serpent or the World Serpent. Once again, none of this ever happens in the myths; while Loki does fight a dragon named Fafnir, he never became one himself, so that entire plot point is stupid. If they had just stuck with Fenrir being on the loose, it would’ve been much better.

However, I can give the show credit for acknowledging that Sleipnir is Loki’s son, something that was implied, but never explicitly mentioned in the first 11 episodes.

#4: Overacting

This was something I forgot to mention in my original post, but just like with other shows produced by Dailywire, Runes has a problem with the voice actors overacting. While most of the time, the characters will sound fine, others will sound like they’re trying too hard to come off as evil, haughty, or excited to the point where they almost don’t sound like real people. I realize that this is a show for 7–12-year-olds, but so was Avatar: The Last Airbender, another animated show where the characters sounded incredibly real and the plot covered often dark topics about growing up, healing from trauma, finding hope in bad times, etc. I don’t get why Dailywire has such a hard time finding actors that don’t overact.

#5: What is With Dailywire and Casting Swords?

This was the worst part of the show and the part where my soul left my body from cringe. In the finale, Turstin must make the Sword of Destiny for Hugo so he can kill Loki. Already, from that sentence alone, we have encountered our first problem: time management. This seems to be something that people forget when writing scenes where characters – especially those in the Middle Ages – are forging things. If you have ever seen Forged in Fire, on average, it takes a bladesmith about 12 hours to forge your basic kukri or bowie knife, plus another hour or two to put together the handle and grind out the edge and imperfections, and that’s with modern day power tools, not to mention the fact that they have access to already refined steel. People in the 11th century did not have that luxury. They had to find their materials, bring them back, then spend days separating the iron from the rock, refining it, adding carbon, then pounding out the shape, all of this done by hand. This was a process that would take weeks, not a few hours as seen in the show.

There’s also the problem of where the characters are getting their metal and how they’re using it. The metal being used for the Sword of Destiny originates from a meteorite, and while you can find iron from meteorites to make really good weapons (such as the knife they found in King Tut’s tomb that was made with one), you’ll usually have to work through a lot of slag and nickel in order to find any iron and will still have to add your own iron to it to get enough metal for a sword. This means going through the process of heating, hammering, separating, and repeating in order to get even a little bit of iron to turn into steel, but do the characters do this?

Nope.

Because why would they?

Instead, Turstin throws the meteorites into the fire, it melts, and he immediately pours it into a cast where it cools in…like…five seconds (in real life it would take 1-2 hours). Ignoring all the other problems with that (like how there’s going to be a ton of nickel and slag in the melted metal), what is with Dailywire and casting swords? Not only was that method of making (crappy) swords never used in the 11th century, but it would also make for a very brittle sword that would not be good for a battle. The only person who had figured out how to melt iron into a liquid and turn it into high-quality steel was a dude named Ulfberht, and even then, he still let it cool into a lump that had to be forged, not cast.

Then there’s the fact that Turstin carves some runes into the sword after breaking it out of its cast, then heats it, holding the tang with his bare hands (because it’s not like metal is a good conductor or anything like that), then quenches it in water. Not only is this completely unnecessary and is only there for aesthetic reasons, but I would be scared that it would warp beyond repair or crack, which would render Hugo without a sword.

It honestly would’ve made more sense for the writers to make an episode entirely dedicated to Hugo and company having to find Skofnung (the actual sword of destiny in Norse traditon) or even Hofund, Heimdallr’s sword that’s so sharp that it can cut through anything. In fact, Hofund would’ve been a better choice for the show since Heimdallr is the one who kills Loki during Ragnarok, so it would’ve been more accurate to the myth.

#6: The Final Fight Scene

No. Just…no.

The series ends with Hugo loading his new sword into his bow and launching it at Loki’s chest. Not only does this sound like something for Shadiversity to try out, but it’s just so obviously stupid that I was screaming into the couch. If you shoot a sword horizontally from your bow, it will manage to travel maybe a foot before the hilt hits the bow and your sword goes flying to the side. If you shoot it with the hilt pointing up, you might manage to send the sword flying a bit farther (if the hilt or the pommel doesn’t hit the bow), but it may also take a finger or two with it. What makes it worse is that we’ve already established that Sleipnir can fly, which raises the question of why can’t Hugo ride on Sleipnir and lop of Loki’s head? It would make for a more epic battle that looks less stupid.

Overall, Runes succeeded at being a good kids’ show, but it would’ve been much better if more research had been done. Hopefully Season 2 will be better now that the Loki plot line has ended.

Until next time,

M.J.