S04.E01: A Good Treason

[Crackers]

I looked up the actor playing Gisla. She is Morgane Polanski. Daughter of Roman. I guess we know how she got the part.

[SingleMaltBlonde]

I looked up the actor playing Gisla. She is Morgane Polanski. Daughter of Roman. I guess we know how she got the part.

Pity?

[SharonH58]

Okay I was 'forced' to watch the episode again.  With close caption on, it showed Rollo was speaking in old Norse and Gisla in whatever French.  But that doesn't explain how Rollo told the Frank soliders that he wanted them to go kill all the Vikings at the camp.  I really want Ragnar to kick his ass.  The Valhalla gate send would have been cool if they show Athestan standing at the gate with his hand out in the Stop gesture.  Or have him say, it's not your time. 

[ihartcoffee]

Very good question about how he communicated his mission to them.  Sometimes shows just gloss over those little details and hope you don't notice.  One of the reasons I love coming here is you guys catch so much detail.  I learn a lot.  

 

Leave it to Rollo to have you loving him one minute and wanting to slap some sense into him in the next. He does look good without his shirt on though, so he can continue to do that.  I look forward to more scenes between him and his feisty princess. I was bummed we didn't get more of them together in this episode. 

 

Can Floki just go already?  I like the actor and all, but his character just grates.  I hate we don't have Althestan because of him.  But, I have to wonder if the point of him being killed is the loss of his presence affects so much. It has had a huge ripple affect so to speak.  They had to have someone hate him enough to carry out that plot.  Just a guess....

 

Lagertha continues to be a badass B.  I kinda like her and Calf together.  The way they looked at each other when he killed all those against her, was that sexual tension?  He is good looking and as hot as Ragnar is, he looks like he smells better.  

 

I'm trying to remember, is Ragnar not happy with Auslaug because of her being with the Wanderer when the boys fell in the river? 

[caprice]

Gisela and Rollo are hilariously both bewildered and intrigued by each other. Those two are going to make a hell of a power couple once they actually figure out how to talk to each other.

 

Welp, I don't think Lagertha and Kalf trust each other even a tiny bit, but clearly they know exactly how to turn each other on.

 

Ragnar loves Rollo, and Ragnar knows Rollo. He knows that Rollo will make a grab for power the first chance he gets.

Although she hardly qualifies as a shield-maiden, Gisla has shown that she knows how to motivate her armies and I am sure Rollo remembers seeing her above the ramparts. That strength is something that has always attracted him (Lagertha and Siggy, anyone?), so I can buy the idea that he's going to be invested here. Plus, we know that the Seer was telling him The Bear would marry The Princess.

 

As for Gisla, knowing the was she was verbally dismissing Rollo, the way that he left her alone on their wedding night may come back and intrigue her. Would an animal show that much restraint? I'm looking forward to these two learning how to communicate.

 

Yes, Ragnar knows his brother very well, as he reminded Bjorn.

 

Was it just me, or did anyone else notice Princess Gisela's new puffy face??;)

 

I thought it was supposed to be puffy from her crying about marrying Rollo, but I'll have to go back and look.  I was curious- after he went to sleep, did she just put down the knife and go to sleep next to him?

 

And Rollo...just when I thought he was going to be a decent human being, he went and killed off his own people.  Silly me for believing.  

I rewatched and decided that Gisla's puffy face was a result of bad lighting in the church scenes. When we saw them in the bedroom, she looked like a woman who'd been crying all day, but her face looked normal.

 

I'm curious about what she did after Rollo went to sleep too. The scene cut away with her drawing back a little, the knife still in her hand.

[LittleIggy]

I think Gisla was secretly disappointed that Rollo went to sleep. If he had ravished her, she could keep on hating him and being a martyr.

Maybe Rollo got the weird translator guy to tell the Franks his plan before the guy left. Or just drawing out a diagram in the sand and using hand gestures could convey a lot.

[Julio Ferreira]

I could watch an hour of Ragnar observing what everyone else is doing.

There was some awesome cinematography in this episode, from the first scene showing Ragnar riding his horse in his Valhalla dream, to the sweeping shot over the water and ships to the village.

Ragnar is the best. That body Language is Awsome

[green]

After everything that has happened, I guess I can't really blame Bjorn to just take a break from everything and go live in the wilderness for a bit.

 

Yeah I'm with Bjorn there.  Far more sanity amongst animals than humans and far less treachery.  Heck even the Seer was out and about in nature this time around and not cooped up back in his hut in Kattegat.  Didn't stop Aslaugh from annoying him but she pretty much annoys everyone.

 

Edit:  Just got around to proof reading this post and noticed I misspelled Aslaug above but kind of like the subconscious misspelling.

 

I'm trying to remember, is Ragnar not happy with Auslaug because of her being with the Wanderer when the boys fell in the river? 

 

History Channel had a Season 3 marathon right before Season 4 started and I caught that episode again.  Yep, Ragnar was upset she hadn't watched the boys but was off with the Wanderer because (1) the boys almost died and (2) Siggy did die because of Auslaug not being there.  He didn't seem too overly bent out of shape by the Wanderer in and of himself though.

 

The bad.  A Vikings episode goes by way to fast!

 

The good.  Almost everything else. 

 

Well except for the Frankish scenes I guess.  I liked the battle of Paris bits regards the Vikings' side and politics and the actual awesome battle scenes last season.  But none of the three main Franks -- Charles, Gisla or Odo -- do anything for me but make me sleepy.  And they still do.  No wonder Rollo fell asleep on Gisla.  Too bad they are so far down my interest ladder from ye goode olde Saxons who I do love seeing.

 

Speaking of Rollo he has been one treacherous thug down the seasons but this mini-holocaust of his own people, half of which were totally loyal to him too, is a new low even for this jackass.  So Rollo isn't going to make me like the Frankish scenes any better by his presence either.

 

But that leaves 3/4 of the show super great.  1.  Ragnar et al in Kattegat, the heart and soul of the show.  2. Lagertha and Kalf having fun back in hers, no, his, no, their earldom.  3. And finally though not in this episode but soon, Ecbert, Queen Crazypants, little Alfred before he became Great et al back in the Saxon lands where a real game of thrones of their own is going on.

 

As long as the Frankish scenes don't take up too much space this looks like a most excellent season.

 

Oh yeah.  Floki.  Oh Floki, it seems Bjorn doesn't have the same "fury of a very patient man" as his father.  Just you did it, you stink, go shiver chained like a dog for now.  Interesting how Ragnar immediately saw that arrest as limiting his options.  He thinks further ahead than a chess master.

 

Loved the first episode even with boorish Franks and the traitor, Rollo.  Ragnar and Lagertha more than make up for that.  But I did miss Athelstan.  I agree with the poster above that said Athelstan brought a totally different pov than anyone else on any side and a very important one and I think the series will be the lesser for him gone.

Edited February 22, 2016 by green

[millennium]

Although my heart belongs to Lagertha, Aslaug is one beautiful woman.   I like her.   Ever regal, she retains her nobility despite being treated like crap by Ragnar.   She loves her children unconditionally.    She and Lagertha have more in common than people give her credit for.

 

Loki's comeuppance doesn't feel real, so I can't derive much satisfaction from it.   As someone said upthread, he'll find a way out of this.   The show isn't going to sacrifice his character. 

 

I don't relish the Paris story line.   The prissy king, the stupid princess, Rollo letting her off the hook in the bedroom (which I feel like I've seen in other shows/movies).   Rollo betraying Ragnar.   Again.

 

And the killing of everyone in the Viking camp.   There seems to be a never-ending supply of Vikings.   Regardless of how many died in the battles of Wessex and Mercia, the battle of Paris, the revolts in and around Kattegat over the years, the war with King Horik, there always seems to be plenty more Vikings to come home to Kattegat, or be handily slaughtered by Rollo or Lagertha/Kalf, etc.  They're like Redshirts.

 

It's good to be back, though.  

Edited February 20, 2016 by millennium

[magdalene]

I think part of the reason the Frankish  king forced his daughter into marriage with Rollo was because she had showed him up in the bravery stakes during the siege of Paris.  While he was cowering and shitting himself she was actually doing the job of king.  He had to resent her for that on some level and it was time to show her her place as chattel and as a thing to be bargained. 

 

On the whole I don't believe the Saxons and the Franks were really less barbarous than the Vikings, just in a different way from the Vikings.  And from some stuff I have read about the hygiene habits of the Vikings I am guessing that the Vikings were cleaner. 

 

I had re-watched the pilot of Vikings recently and comparing young Ragnar to this older version - ouch!  Not that being walking wounded is keeping him from eyeing his next love interest.

 

I think Floki is going to weasel out of his current predicament.

[Haleth]

I am so glad the show is back, even if I didn't get to watch until tonight. I agree Travis Fimmel is a wonder. He brings incredible depth to his character. And Lagertha is my idol. Biggest BA woman on TV.

I am interested in the Paris storyline, interested in seeing how the relationship between Rollo and Gisla plays out because of their history.

Maybe the female ruler the seer saw was Bjorn's daughter. O_o

[Curious5]

Attica mentioned Ragnar watching the others in this episode.  That has been his strength throughout the series.  So many times we have watched him behind the screen or behind the throne, or watching the people from his door.  He knows and understands because he knows his people. He feels those who will betray him.  His sweet wife is on his list.  He feels her jealousy as he asked her if she "saw" something about Bjorn.

[Arynm]

Ragnars eyes are like ice. I just love him. Even laid low with his injury he is a bad ass. Fuck Floki, so sick of his shit, poor pitiful me. Ragnar tried to protect him, even chastising his son for making him deal with the Floki situation. Ragnar still  loves him, even now.

Oh Rollo! Shield wall for sure, I hope Valhalla has a special place for you(I still love you with your shirt off) Asshole

[Captanne]

My problem with Floki is not the performance (although...Gollum is the family name for him) or the storyline thus far.  It's the fundamental black/white binary he's been cast into.  It's so un-nuanced.  He's been out there on the fringe that by the time he delusionally stalked an unarmed, naked, kneeling, solitary, and praying man and felt some sort of "victory" by killing him -- I was SO over it.

 

It's a disservice to the viewers, the actor, and the entire plotline.

 

But, as I said, I'm over it and moving on.  The problem is, like a nagging wound, the show won't let it go.

 

For that reason, I'm interested to see this plotline play out.  They wrote themselves into this corner, now they need to get out of it.  

 

What is MUCH more fascinating is how every other character is dealing with it.  (Particularly this episode and Bjorn/Ragnar with the arrest.)

 

ETA:  As for Floki?  He has been reduced (by writing) to a fringe, insane menace to society.  Is that really how they wanted to portray the metaphor of the old ways resenting and wanting to destroy the new?  I doubt it.  Because that is a very, very important story and the way its been handled has turned it into something easily digestible (Loki = insane murderer) and it shouldn't be.  This point should be hard.

Edited February 21, 2016 by Captanne

[SharonH58]

 I hope Bjorn while away, will think on the few decisions he made as leader and realize why Ragnar was angry.  In his rah rah speech I think it was a bad idea to tell everyone yeah Ragnar is at death's door but who is our King for the moment?  But you would think Ragnar would have given Bjorn some guidelines before he was completely out of it.  As others have said Ragnar is the best at observing and planning ahead.  I think Bjorn can learn a lot from his father, but he's gotta be there to learn it!

[Ohwell]

I think part of the reason the Frankish  king forced his daughter into marriage with Rollo was because she had showed him up in the bravery stakes during the siege of Paris.  While he was cowering and shitting himself she was actually doing the job of king.  He had to resent her for that on some level and it was time to show her her place as chattel and as a thing to be bargained. 

Yes, I think that's exactly why he did it.  He wanted to show his daughter who was really in charge.

[Curious5]

When you watch the conflict with Ragnar suffering over Floki  killing Athelstan, you can consider the underlining conflict within Ragnar himself which carries through the series.  He has been drawn to Athelstan because of his goodness.  He is seeking that but it confused him.  He seeks the peace and faith Athelstan has but his violent nature in in conflict with that.  Floki cut short Ragnar's friendship with Athelstan and his conscience seeking the of valuing human life.

[magdalene]

I think that it does a disservice to simply reduce the conflict between Floki and Athelstan being about "good" or "bad". Or that Ragnar loved Athelstan mainly for his "goodness". Or that Ragnar has a violent nature as a Viking other than the violence needed to rise to power and keep it in his culture.   It's clear Ragnar was fascinated by Athelstan and his Christian faith but I am not convinced he would have eventually - or ever - become a Christian himself.  I also think that Floki has always had a screw loose and that combined with his jealousy of Athelstan led him to murder Athelstan.  Not because of his pagan beliefs. 

 

But then I also don't believe that the pagan beliefs of the Vikings are automatically "bad" or the Christian beliefs of the Saxons and the Franks automatically "good".  There are terrible things about both cultures and belief systems. Just as there are good things about both.

[TiffanyNichelle]

 

Speaking of when Aslaug went to see the blind seer who told her a woman would take the thrown, could that woman be Bjorn's daughter?

That would be awesome. I just really don't want it to be Aslaug because I have never liked her. Are you really shocked about Ragnar's constant cheating when that's the way you got him? He's never hidden who he was and you fought hard to get him. Now you have him, don't complain about it. And for someone who is all about her children, I haven't forgotten that Siggy died saying Aslaug's precious children that she ignored in order to have sex with the stranger.

 

Ragnar calling Bjorn stupid for leaving Rollo behind hurt but he's right. You have to keep on top of Rollo at all times or he will betray you.

[Curious5]

As they portray the Vikings, they really have not much over wolves.  Other than they have learned language and basic food gathering and growing. I just don't see anything that is good  as a Viking. They show no mercy, no morals, no order of law.  One level above the wolf.

[jnymph]

Ah! My show is back & the first episode did not disappoint!!!!

If I had to complain about something it would be; how did an Asian woman get to Paris? That took me out of the moment :(, but I'll try to reserve judgment till we learn more about her.

Wow. Hey Einar, you dumbass, did you really think Lagertha was going to let you off easy?

Lageretha continues her bad ass image & I love it.

Really hate Rollo not only for slaughtering his own people, but his never ending search for power. He's an asshole. But as others have said .... He DID take his shirt off. So there's that.

Can't wait to see Ragnar torture Floki.

I missed seeing Athelstan's face, even though his presence was felt.

I have a feeling this is going to be a wild ride this season - hang on !

"Nothing gets by you !" LOL !!!!!!

Edited February 21, 2016 by jnymph

[tennisgurl]

Damn Rollo. That was cold. But at least you took some gender studies classes over the hiatus, and learned how no means no. Progress, I guess. 

 

It has been way too long since I had Vikings on my TV, and it looks like its going to be another great season. 

 

There really is no one else on TV like Travis Fimmel. The guy just has such a presene, and his performance is so fascinating, even if he is just sitting there, reacting to people. This show has tons of great characters/performances, but it would be a huge loss to not have him around. 

 

Excited to see what happens with Bjorn. Guy can make a dang good speech, just like Dad. Although I will miss his interactions with Ragnar. 

 

Floki is basically out of his mind at this point, and I think Ragnar was right to call him out on his motives for killing Athalstan. He was jealous that Ragnar had a new BFF. But, and I really hope the show acknowledges this, Floki`s fears about Christianity taking over the Old Gods and the Old Ways of the Viking are totally correct. Eventually, Christianity will overtake Paganism, and their way of life will go away. His fears are founded, just he comes at it from such a messed up, fanatic sense, its hard to feel bad for him. 

 

Also loved the conversation between Ragnar and Aslaug when she said they would never see Bjorn. Mainly Ragnar`s "why the hell would you say something like that to me? What is your problem" reaction. 

[magdalene]

As they portray the Vikings, they really have not much over wolves.  Other than they have learned language and basic food gathering and growing. I just don't see anything that is good  as a Viking. They show no mercy, no morals, no order of law.  One level above the wolf.

I disagree with that completely.  First of all not everybody in the Scandinavian region actually was a Viking - to viking is a verb, and many of these people never went "viking" at all. Secondly, the people we call Vikings had a legal system and laws that were in some ways more fair and advanced than the European system at the time. Their women, as long they were not thralls, had more rights and freedom than Saxon and Frankish women. The Vikings were superb boat and ship builders and navigators on the seas. Their hygiene habits were better than those of the average European at the time.  They were highly skilled and brave fighters. Sure they were ruthless and brutal in battle and when they went a viking I certainly wouldn't want to be living in a village or town they were plundering. But to reduce these people and their culture to just brutal fighters without morals does not paint the whole picture.

 

And to be compared to wolves isn't a bad thing IMO - wolves are beautiful and amazing.

[SingleMaltBlonde]

I think people are applying modern expectations to Rollo and Floki and not Ragnar.

 

If you are/were a practioner of the Norse religion then Floki isn't/wasn't wrong for killing Althelstan.  Regardless of the circumstances of the death.  While I am not discounting the jealousy but Floki is also driven by religion.  Ragnar wants to expand his universe and move forward and away from the small binary world that makes Floki comfortable.

 

While Rollo was wrong to massacre all those vikings for hints of disloyaty (per modern morals) ...why wouldn't he take King Weenie up on his offer?  Land, title and a wife?  We all imagine they start a line that ends in the current Queen of England.  What was Ragnar really offering him?  A chance to be Ragnar's minion?

 

Ragnar wants to be more modern but his dreams of settlements seemed to have died in Wessex.  He just wants treasure...and given the cost of raiding Paris I highly doubt it was worth it.  Yes, the trojan casket was great but Rollo is on track to fathering an heir to the throne and no doubt defending it when his wife is sitting in it.

[magdalene]

Well, Ragnar is our hero, our protagonist,  so of course we tend to be on his side, that's the nature of watching fiction.  And here we are watching fiction based on actual history which colors very much how I see some of these characters. A character like Rollo has significance to me way beyond of what an arrogant shithead he can be and how good he looks without his shirt on.  Watching this whole saga from the beginning I admit to getting the shivers as we reach certain plot moments. How can I not having all my roots in Europe and being formed by European culture.

[Curious5]

Magdalene I stand corrected.

[green]

Actually, they do have an oder of law, and one Athelstan referes to at some point as more perfect in certain regards, than the one known to Saxons, particulary where women's position in society is concerned. Altough I'm not sure how historically correct is that, since I don't have a sufficient enough grasp on the history of  Dark Ages (but from what I've read "shield maidens" are rather the writers' invention, as Vikings tended to left women behind when they were gone for raids).

...

 

From what I read "shield maidens" was a real term.  Where the show may have amped up things is in making shield maidens more front line fighters than helping to hold up and maintain the shield wall in place (more defensive fighters) which is what I've read of their descriptions online.  And Lagertha was referred to as a shield maiden in that saga as I recall.  Been a couple of years since I was reading all of this online now though so my memory may be a little off.

 

Ah! My show is back & the first episode did not disappoint!!!!

If I had to complain about something it would be; how did an Asian woman get to Paris? That took me out of the moment :(, but I'll try to reserve judgment till we learn more about her.

...

 

Since she has officially now appeared in an episode I think we can safely mention here that the producer, in interviews, has said she is based on a real Asian woman (from some area now in modern day China I think, foggy here) of this general period though of course the actual story line he writes can be off from the original.  Or rather the original contains little details.  Just that she was in Paris and then with the Vikings. 

 

My guess (no spoilers) is she will be more like how he took stories of some of the actual monks that were taken in Viking raids to build up the character of Athelstan.  Use the facts as a jumping off point to explore cultures colliding and exploring social and personal and cultural parameters through that.

Edited February 22, 2016 by green

[jnymph]

 But I did miss Athelstan.  I agree with the poster above that said Athelstan brought a totally different pov than anyone else on any side and a very important one and I think the series will be the lesser for him gone.

 

I do appreciate the fact that he is still referenced by the characters, but I miss him terribly as well.    As poster SharonH58, (way upstream) mentioned,  why oh why, couldn't he be standing at the gates to Valhalla/heaven/*insert your spiritual destination here*  & be the one to tell Ragnar he needed to go back?  Oh well, I'm going to have faith that the spirit of Athelstan will make some visits to Ragnar.   He has to, since we saw glimpses of his face in the trailer for this season.   I want him to provide a moral compass for Ragnar.  

Edited February 22, 2016 by jnymph

[Rockstar99435]

And for someone who is all about her children, I haven't forgotten that Siggy died saying Aslaug's precious children that she ignored in order to have sex with the stranger.

 

Wasn't she going with the Wanderer because he was a God in human form and he could help Ivar? Ivar was in constant pain and was always screaming until the Wanderer touched him. Aslaug wasn't interested in the Wanderer, but more seemed compelled by him to go with him and everytime she went with him, Ivar's pain would stop. (I think Aslaug assumed that sex was the price for the cure, but like with most supernatural figures, the price was something the human didn't suspect. The actual price was death- the boys' deaths until Siggy sacrificed herself for them.)

 

The more I think about it, the more I'm bothered by the Rollo and the Princess storyline. I'm not sure what emotion the director was going for. We cut from the Princess being physically forced to kneel and bow her head while sobbing to Rollo's laughing at her knife and dismissing her fears. Are we supposed to think she's silly to be afraid of Rollo (even though we saw Rollo rape a woman back in Season 1)? Most of the reactions to the scene of her grabbing a weapon to defend herself is to talk about how hot Rollo is without his shirt and that the Princess should jump the guy her father sold her to. If we're supposed to feel bad for her, the director failed. If we're supposed to feel bad for Rollo, perhaps they shouldn't have had the scene where he slaughters his own people in this episode.

Edited February 22, 2016 by Rockstar99435

[green]

Wasn't she going with the Wanderer because he was a God in human form and he could help Ivar? Ivar was in constant pain and was always screaming until the Wanderer touched him. Aslaug wasn't interested in the Wanderer, but more seemed compelled by him to go with him and everytime she went with him, Ivar's pain would stop. (I think Aslaug assumed that sex was the price for the cure, but like with most supernatural figures, the price was something the human didn't suspect. The actual price was death- the boys' deaths until Siggy sacrificed herself for them.)

 

The more I think about it, the more I'm bothered by the Rollo and the Princess storyline. I'm not sure what emotion the director was going for. We cut from the Princess being physically forced to kneel and bow her head while sobbing to Rollo's laughing at her knife and dismissing her fears. Are we supposed to think she's silly to be afraid of Rollo (even though we saw Rollo rape a woman back in Season 1)? Most of the reactions to the scene of her grabbing a weapon to defend herself is to talk about how hot Rollo is without his shirt and that the Princess should jump the guy her father sold her to. If we're supposed to feel bad for her, the director failed. If we're supposed to feel bad for Rollo, perhaps they shouldn't have had the scene where he slaughters his own people in this episode.

 

The part of the season 3 marathon I caught was where Ivar was good to go and fine again.  Aslaug went into that empty shed was it with the Wanderer where he brags about a child he sired with another woman who ended up as the current prince of Kiev.  That he can produce super kids basically hint hint.  He takes off his shirt (what is it with shirtless Vikings) and she is definitely attracted to him and most willing strips down for him at that point.  There was no quid por quo regards Ivar in that scene anyway.

 

As for Gisla I don't get the tears.  It it wasn't Rollo it would have been Odo to cement the loyalty of his army (keep Odo in check) to wimpy Charles.  From a modern day perspective, yes sure.  But back then royally-born daughters knew they would be eventually married off to who their fathers decided on to advance their father's and their kingdom's power.  It was always an alliance thing so she would expect this.  Fume a lot in private, sure.  Carry an inner anger all her life about her plight, yeah that too.  But get hysterical in public like in the church?  Never.

 

I don't think we are suppose to feel bad for either of them in historical context.  From modern perspectives and modern viewers it certainly grates that all royal-born medieval women were indeed chattel in the endless game of thrones of that era. 

 

As for Rollo, he was a bloody treacherous thug half the time all along.  The fact that he is a good looking one just shows you how much a very superficial attribute like looks can allow you to get away with your actions for so long I guess.  But yeah people should definitely be pissed off at mass slaughtering his friends which, again, half would have remained loyal to him even over Ragnar.  This guy is a fame and power whoring jealous jerk of a man. 

 

He has his moments like when he can't bring himself to fight Ragnar but that was only after he original did betray him and killed One-Eye in the most horrible way.  Ragnar forgives him and he rewards that generosity by soon after plotting with Siggy to find a way to seize power.  He later defended Kattegat from Jarl Borg's original attack but that was because he would have been killed in the attack as well if he didn't.  Especially since switching sides (again) from Jarl Borg in that battle above cost Borg big time. 

 

Back in season one he held off against the original Earl's torture to protect Ragnar but if he had broken down and spilled the beans then the Earl would have killed him anyway since he could never trust him and his holding out and Ragnar surviving was his only hope of survival at that point.  At all points along Rollo's story line Rollo is pretty much just for Rollo.  If it means he has some warm and fuzzy moments with his kinsman, that's fine and an added bonus for him.  But if it means betraying them, that's fine with him too.  Ragnar indeed knows his brother well.

 

And that scene in the second episode of the first season where he raped the slave woman so casually told us as viewers all we needed to know about Rollo from the get go.  So we should all know Rollo as well as Ragnar knows him by now.

 

Rollo made it clear the first couple of episodes of the series that he buys totally into the Viking view that prowess of a warrior and name and fame and gaining power arising from same is the only goal worth pursuing.  He will betray his brother, kill his friends etc to obtain those ends.  Rollo has always been Rollo.  Never a sympathetic character for viewers from the very beginning.  What he did in this episode is just the next step for him.  So no we aren't suppose to feel bad for Rollo.  We never were suppose to.

Edited February 22, 2016 by green

[feverfew]

Regarding the Seer's vision of a female ruler, I think Aslaug's hoping it's her, but I bet it will end up being Laegertha. Those two are long overdue for an epic showdown.

 

There is a woman who will rule all of "Kattegat" (as in Scandinavia) but she's about two centuries later. Her name was Margrete I of Denmark. She was the Queen of Denmark, Noway and Sweden and the founder of the Kalmar Union (which united those three countries) and she was awesome. But I guess in the context of Vikings, the seer isn't looking quite so far ahead ;)

 

Well, Ragnar is our hero, our protagonist,  so of course we tend to be on his side, that's the nature of watching fiction.  And here we are watching fiction based on actual history which colors very much how I see some of these characters. A character like Rollo has significance to me way beyond of what an arrogant shithead he can be and how good he looks without his shirt on.  Watching this whole saga from the beginning I admit to getting the shivers as we reach certain plot moments. How can I not having all my roots in Europe and being formed by European culture.

Rollo made it clear the first couple of episodes of the series that he buys totally into the Viking view that prowess of a warrior and name and fame and gaining power arising from same is the only goal worth pursuing.  He will betray his brother, kill his friends etc to obtain those ends.  Rollo has always been Rollo.  Never a sympathetic character for viewers from the very beginning.  What he did in this episode is just the next step for him.  So no we aren't suppose to feel bad for Rollo.  We never were suppose to.

 

I don't feel bad for Viking's Rollo and I never have. But I find him to be at least as intriguing a character as Ragnar, and I hope the writers will let him come into his own, now he's out from under Ragnar's shadow. History spoiler

: Seeing as he and his sons are the founders of Normandy (who later invaded England again and founded the whole Norman vs Saxon conflict as pr Ivanhoe and Robin Hood) I hope the show won't kill him off in a stand-off with Ragnar

 

Like magdalene, I have a somewhat vested interest in these stories, as they are my history in a sense. Or at least my forefathers. Hirst's other historical show, The Tudors, never bothered me much when they drew outside the history lines, but here I get sort of frustrated with some of the things they don't get right. Shield Maidens were very real, but Kattegat as a country does not, and have never existed. It's a bloody sea!:) The historical Rollo was not Ragnar's brother, but a famous Viking and statesman in his own right. Ragnarr Loðbrók (or Regnar Lodbrog as he's called in my language) was, according to the historian Saxo, a Danish king and as such, most action should have taken place in Denmark. But Denmark doesn't have those beautiful mountains (that's Norway) - and Scandinavia was in a bit of a complicated mess when it came to borders at that time, so I understand why the show runners went for the more dramatic shots. I also get slightly offended on behalf of the mythical Aslaug who is one of our most beloved female characters, famous for her wisdom, strenght and deep, abiding love for her countrymen.

 

I understand that it's fiction and I do enjoy it oh so very much - I just have to close my eyes when it comes to the historical inaccuracies.

Edited February 23, 2016 by feverfew

[Ohwell]

I knew Rollo was a dick (albeit a good-looking one), but I never thought he would be that bad.  Historical narrative aside, I'm done with him.  I wish it was him in the pit of snakes instead of Ragnar.

 

As for Gisla I don't get the tears.  It it wasn't Rollo it would have been Odo to cement the loyalty of his army (keep Odo in check) to wimpy Charles.  From a modern day perspective, yes sure.  But back then royally-born daughters knew they would be eventually married off to who their fathers decided on to advance their father's and their kingdom's power.  It was always an alliance thing so she would expect this.  Fume a lot in private, sure.  Carry an inner anger all her life about her plight, yeah that too.  But get hysterical in public like in the church?  Never.

 

The only thing I could think of is that, good looks notwithstanding, she thought Rollo was a beast.  At least Odo is refined and a gentleman, as far as she knows, since she never saw his dungeon.  *shudder*

Edited February 23, 2016 by Ohwell

[whoknowswho]

Although my heart belongs to Lagertha, Aslaug is one beautiful woman.   I like her.   Ever regal, she retains her nobility despite being treated like crap by Ragnar.   She loves her children unconditionally.    She and Lagertha have more in common than people give her credit for.

 

Loki's comeuppance doesn't feel real, so I can't derive much satisfaction from it.   As someone said upthread, he'll find a way out of this.   The show isn't going to sacrifice his character. 

 

I don't relish the Paris story line.   The prissy king, the stupid princess, Rollo letting her off the hook in the bedroom (which I feel like I've seen in other shows/movies).   Rollo betraying Ragnar.   Again.

 

And the killing of everyone in the Viking camp.   There seems to be a never-ending supply of Vikings.   Regardless of how many died in the battles of Wessex and Mercia, the battle of Paris, the revolts in and around Kattegat over the years, the war with King Horik, there always seems to be plenty more Vikings to come home to Kattegat, or be handily slaughtered by Rollo or Lagertha/Kalf, etc.  They're like Redshirts.

 

It's good to be back, though.  

I cannot stand her--I see no beauty in that long, long angular face and giraffey neck--but you can't change your face's shape (mine is like a ball, no beauty there, either!)

Don't like her character, other than her love of her kids.

I didn't get it when Ragnar chose her over Lagertha, who I think is positively stunning.  Other than she has a functional womb where poor Lagertha doesn't, and it was foretold that Ragnar would have lots of sons.

 

This is one show that I get more out of it each episode--I watch it on History at 10:00 then on History West a few hours later. Then--the next day--we watch it AGAIN. Yes--love it that much.  If there's a run on seasons coming up to the new episode/season--hubby who hates all TV except for Vikings and I haul out the popcorn and watch the entire marathon. 

 

I did wonder to Mr.Whoknowswho, how Rollo managed to tell the Franks he wanted them to kill all his clansmen--and then--why would they not just kill him, too? So he's married to the Princess now--I'm sure she'd happily go drive that knife in, with some help from Count Odo...

 

I'm waiting for them to get back to England and kick some Mercia Queen Crazypants ass.  And maybe the delicious feast that is Eckbert, but...damn, he's fine.  Sometimes I love him, and sometimes I REALLY  love him, depending on how wonderfully evil he's being.  He is such a great character. 

 

And I miss Athelstan forever--he was one of my absolute favorite characters, and while he's still there in the narrative--I still miss his story, and really wish Floki would just go to Iceland or Valhalla, soon--whichever's closer. 

[TV Anonymous]

KW has two black belts in different styles. She is one tough woman.

 

Just to top it off, Winnick is also a licensed body guard. And she does not have to build like Ronda Rousey to be a bad ass (not that anything wrong with Rousey's body).

[millennium]

I cannot stand her--I see no beauty in that long, long angular face and giraffey neck--but you can't change your face's shape (mine is like a ball, no beauty there, either!)

Don't like her character, other than her love of her kids.

I didn't get it when Ragnar chose her over Lagertha, who I think is positively stunning.  Other than she has a functional womb where poor Lagertha doesn't, and it was foretold that Ragnar would have lots of sons.

 

 

What kind of TV series would it be if it didn't have at least one woman to hate on?

 

I find Aslaug's beauty compelling -- and so did Ragnar.

[feverfew]

I forgot to mention something I found very interesting: The Crossbow! We saw it both with king Horik's son bringing one home from Paris and when Rollo attacked the viking settlement at Paris. That attack especially was interesting, because we saw how powerful the weapon was - powerful enough to pierce the shield wall. I'm guessing that's going to make all the difference when Ragnar attacks Paris again...

[jnymph]

What kind of TV series would it be if it didn't have at least one woman to hate on?

 

Agreed. My personal preference to hate on was Siggy.   I don't think it was a "love to hate" thing either.... because I don't miss her one iota.

Useless character.

[Tara Ariano]

In case you missed it: here's the Previously.TV post on the episode!

 

Ask Vikings's Super-Creepy Seer With No Apparent Eyeballs
Like you wouldn't run all your issues by a free psychic, too.

[Stratego]

I forgot to mention something I found very interesting: The Crossbow! We saw it both with king Horik's son bringing one home from Paris and when Rollo attacked the viking settlement at Paris. That attack especially was interesting, because we saw how powerful the weapon was - powerful enough to pierce the shield wall. I'm guessing that's going to make all the difference when Ragnar attacks Paris again...

The problem with the crossbow attacks was the too rapid fire rat e depicted.  There should have been a hand-operated lever shown which draws the string back.  That's how the crossbow developed its superior force.  This was a slow operation compared to the simple arm movement of a standard bow (at that time) and shown in the ambushes.

[Bizabra]

*cough* I don't know how Floki managed to remain chained to a post for so many days withouth sitting in his own excrements, but I suppose it's one of the wonders of television.

 

 

I thought that some of that "shite" being thrown on him might be his own!

Edited February 24, 2016 by Bizabra

[feverfew]

The problem with the crossbow attacks was the too rapid fire rat e depicted.  There should have been a hand-operated lever shown which draws the string back.  That's how the crossbow developed its superior force.  This was a slow operation compared to the simple arm movement of a standard bow (at that time) and shown in the ambushes.

 

I don't know much about firearms (old or otherwise), so I'm sure you're right. But what is a little historical/mechanical accuracy between friends? :) What I meant was just that compared to regular bows the crossbow is a mighty weapon, because it can pierce the shields. And as we saw with Horik's son, it's a weapon not known by the vikings. My guess was just that it'll be the determining factor in the coming war between the vikings and the French forces, and one that might save the French this time.

[Ravenya003]

Just caught up with it, and enjoyed it - though wasn't quite as captivated as in previous seasons. I really feel the loss of Athelstan, and the French characters don't interest me all that much.

 

I think the major problem though is that the cast is so scattered, when most of the show's strength is in the dynamics between them. That, and I fear the writers may have a few too many balls up in the air. I have no idea how many more seasons this show is expected to run, but plot-lines like the Wanderer, Thorunn, Rollo's new marriage, Lagertha/Calf, Bjorn heading off into the wilderness, Floki's trial, Eckbert and Judith - they're all going to need closure at some point. Remember when the first two seasons ended cleanly on the deaths of Earl Haraldson and King Horik? I miss that.

 

Not sure what to make of Rollo/Gisla, or of people's reaction to it. Sure Gisla would have expected a political marriage, but to a man who helped invade her city, slaughter her soldiers and who isn't even a Christian? It's impossible to underestimate how central a person's faith was to a person back in those days, or what it would mean to be joined in wedlock to someone so fundamentally removed from it.

 

Yet the tone seems to be off: in the church we're asked to feel sorry for Gisla, yet in the bedroom her distress was played more for laughs. Thankfully Rollo demonstrated more compassion for her than he did the slave back in season one, but his final decision to ambush his fellow Vikings means this isn't in any way a "beauty and the beast" narrative with Gisla eventually coming around to his inner nobility (there isn't any!) I guess I'll just have to wait and see how it unfolds.

 

I'll also stand up for Aslaug: I like her in the same way I like Britta from Community: she's prissy and self-absorbed, but I find those traits oddly endearing. I've never doubted her love for her children, and she carries herself beautifully: every inch a queen. 

[WatchrTina]

I don't like Aslaug.  I don't like her because I assume she is a liar.  She keeps talking about how her father killed a dragon.  Do you think she really believes that?  She reminds me of of a con artist who has been lying for so long she can't remember what is fact and what is a fiction her father made up to impress the neighbors.  Maybe, just maybe she believes the story herself.  But I doubt it.  I think she just tells it to let people know she's better than them -- that her father was some kind of demi-god.  Also she stole the husband of my home-girl, Lagertha, so I've never liked her.

 

BTW -- I don't like Ragnar asking his eldest son by Aslaug if he want's to be king -- even if it was just a ploy to send him for ale.  I hope those boys understand that Bjorn is Ragnar's heir.  He is, isn't he?  (I mean in the context of the show -- please don't quote history in your response.)

[BitterApple]

I think the major problem though is that the cast is so scattered, when most of the show's strength is in the dynamics between them. That, and I fear the writers may have a few too many balls up in the air. I have no idea how many more seasons this show is expected to run, but plot-lines like the Wanderer, Thorunn, Rollo's new marriage, Lagertha/Calf, Bjorn heading off into the wilderness, Floki's trial, Eckbert and Judith - they're all going to need closure at some point.

I'm not sure if you watched Lost, but a similar dynamic happened with that show. Too many characters, too many ancillary plotlines and by the end it got so out of control there was no way for the writers to wrap it all up in a satisfactory manner. The result was an underwhelming series finale.

I'm hoping Vikings doesn't go down that road, but it's starting to toe the line just a tad.

[whoknowswho]

I don't like Aslaug.  I don't like her because I assume she is a liar.  She keeps talking about how her father killed a dragon.  Do you think she really believes that?  She reminds me of of a con artist who has been lying for so long she can't remember what is fact and what is a fiction her father made up to impress the neighbors.  Maybe, just maybe she believes the story herself.  But I doubt it.  I think she just tells it to let people know she's better than them -- that her father was some kind of demi-god.  Also she stole the husband of my home-girl, Lagertha, so I've never liked her.

 

BTW -- I don't like Ragnar asking his eldest son by Aslaug if he want's to be king -- even if it was just a ploy to send him for ale.  I hope those boys understand that Bjorn is Ragnar's heir.  He is, isn't he?  (I mean in the context of the show -- please don't quote history in your response.)

Nailed it on the head! 

That's my problem with her--she is either a liar or a con artist, (or carny barker.)

 They don't have dragons in Vikings (the series)--her father was Segurd, or so she says--and he is part of Norse mythology--which was still mythology in the supposed time they lived in. So--yeah--I don't trust her.  Maybe she believes this--maybe she just likes to say "My Dad was a hero" like many of us believe--except in her case, he slew the dragon Fafnir.  

She's odd and exotic, but she's duplicitous, and I sense she may get her comeuppance in the coming episodes.

 

Someone upthread mentioned Siggy, and I found Siggy's character strange. She was a sneaky, greedy bitch in the first series until Earl Harralson was killed (I know I am murdering their correct names, the spelling eludes me right now)--and then she flipped, at times appearing good, at times appearing bad--but she stayed true to Ragnar's household for the rest of her life. I grew to really like her, and was sad to see her killed off, because I was always wondering--sort of like I have with Rollo, when she was going to turn to the dark side again. 

 

So many people have mentioned Rollo's rape of the slave girl, which I can't remember--but he has always been slippery, murderous and is as traitorous as they come. (But sexy without a shirt) while I want him to be a good guy, he just isn't. 

Edited February 24, 2016 by whoknowswho

[green]

I'm not sure if you watched Lost, but a similar dynamic happened with that show. Too many characters, too many ancillary plotlines and by the end it got so out of control there was no way for the writers to wrap it all up in a satisfactory manner. The result was an underwhelming series finale.

I'm hoping Vikings doesn't go down that road, but it's starting to toe the line just a tad.

 

The difference here is that Vikings is based on real history so there will be a real endings and new beginnings because history never stops.  Whether the audience finds them underwhelming or not is another matter but the people here are following history's storyline, not going out in 12 different directions making up stuff for the sake of making up stuff, which to me is a very big difference.

 

Yeah I always like earlier parts of series when everyone is hanging out together like Season 1 of Vikings but the whole series was started with the premise of telling the history of the era from the pov of the Vikings.  And as their population and power grows (despite the loss of endless red shirt Vikings as noted above) and as they expand, you can't help but have several threads going at once.

 

whoknowswho, Rollo's rape of the slave girl occurred in the second episode of the show right before Ragnar, Floki, Rollo and a handful of others set sail on their first voyage to hopefully find this place called England and wreck havoc there.  Rollo wandered into Floki's open boat shed minutes before they leave, find's Floki's slave girl (not Helga, we don't see the girl in the show again after this scene) and pushed her down over the work table and did the deed as casual as if nothing is happening.  Not just the rape alone but that coupled with this off the hand attitude to the victim like nothing happened that mattered was chilling.  It also demonstrated a difference between how free Viking women were treated vs how a female slave of theirs could be treated right off the bat.

Edited February 25, 2016 by green

[Ravenya003]

I'm not sure if you watched Lost, but a similar dynamic happened with that show. Too many characters, too many ancillary plotlines and by the end it got so out of control there was no way for the writers to wrap it all up in a satisfactory manner. The result was an underwhelming series finale.

I'm hoping Vikings doesn't go down that road, but it's starting to toe the line just a tad.

 

Oh yes, I was a Lost viewer! Thing is, however crazy the plots on that show got, I felt that the writers managed to at least keep a handle on their characters. Here... I don't know, but it just felt like things are unravelling a bit. Granted, there is a basic historical template that the writers have to follow, but I'm not hugely interested in Floki's punishment or Lagertha's weird relationship with Calf or Rollo's second betrayal. The characters just seem a bit diminished somehow. Of course, it's just the first episode, so I'm willing to trust that things will get ironed out later. 

[rozen]

I know it's not popular, but...I kind of don't blame Rollo in this instance?

 

I mean, I hate his guts regardless. But the minute Earik (sp) made his report, I immediately thought "he's lying" and that most, if not all, of the camp was pro-Ragnar. And the rest would never really see their fellow Vikings as "traitors" and would turn on Rollo for executing them. At that point, clean sweep was the best option. 

 

I mean, Rollo's still dumb because he should have been separating them from each other with fiefs so they'd get drunk on the idea of being able to eat without pounding the food out of the earth with their bloody fists. And be less able to sit and brood with each other. Looks like he went gallivanting off to his fancy castle and left them holed up in the dirt with some loot, for all the good that was going to do them. How were they even eating? Poaching? Who was going engage in trade with them so they could get basic supplies? 

[basil]

I looked up the actor playing Gisla. She is Morgane Polanski. Daughter of Roman. I guess we know how she got the part.

 

 

Interesting. I had no idea. Maybe her name got her the part, but I think she's done a great job with it. She definitely brings the crazy.

 

My problem with Floki is not the performance (although...Gollum is the family name for him) or the storyline thus far.  It's the fundamental black/white binary he's been cast into.  It's so un-nuanced.  He's been out there on the fringe that by the time he delusionally stalked an unarmed, naked, kneeling, solitary, and praying man and felt some sort of "victory" by killing him -- I was SO over it.

 

 

ETA:  As for Floki?  He has been reduced (by writing) to a fringe, insane menace to society.  Is that really how they wanted to portray the metaphor of the old ways resenting and wanting to destroy the new?  I doubt it.  Because that is a very, very important story and the way its been handled has turned it into something easily digestible (Loki = insane murderer) and it shouldn't be

 

 

I can understand that you don't like it, but I think the writers did intend to write it the way that they did. Floki was and is a religious fanatic. Such people did (and do) exist. He's a whole bunch of tropes: the holy fool, the insane (evil?) genius. 

 

Athelstan, too, is written a little one note. As "evil" as Floki is, Athelstan is "good". He turns the other cheek, making no attempt to save himself from Floki's attack, raising his arms up in a Christ-like pose.

 

He wasn't naked, by the way, he was wearing a loincloth (again with the Christ-like imagery), just as

Floki will be in the next episode.

Edited March 4, 2016 by basil

[green]

How was Eric lying?  The show did not show us he was in the least.  Instead we see him not fighting back even when attacked until he saw his wife and small child brutally murdered before his eyes.  Only then did he rise up and fight.  Eric was totally loyal to Rollo until it was too late.