Speculation with Spoilers: We're all Seers Now

[PatsyandEddie]

Magnus probably wouldn't be willing to go anyway. Some scary looking,scarred,tattooed Viking shows up and says," Hey! I'm your Daddy! Come with me!" . Yeah, I don't think so.

I bet Björn has had to hold it together Advance. The people know his reputation and would look to him for leadership rather than drunken AssLog. Maybe even Lagertha has had a hand in ruling as well but through an advisory position.

[green]

In next generation don't forget Torvi's son left in Lagertha's care -- Guthrum.  According to posts here he is the one it seems that is caught between two worlds.  Probably because Lagertha raised him a better and mature young man than Aslaug raised her rugrats and he has no Aslaug DNA in his veins. 

 

So now I think Magnus will be needed so that Alfred isn't the only next gen Saxon guy and Alfred has someone to be talking to and confiding in during his scenes.  That and Ragnar's connection to Magnus this season will make for some good drama of course.

 

Thanks for the explanation about Magnus showing up in the Ragnar legends.  Where they came up with Magnus was driving me crazy.  Glad he is actually mentioned.  And a mystery mother to boot.  Perfect for someone like Hirst to use to his advantage.

[Haleth]

I know there was at least one Swedish Viking King Magnus in the 11th century but can't see how little Saxon Magnus would be connected. (It's such a Scandinavian name I don't know why the writers chose that name instead of something more A-S for the boy.). Also in The Last Kingdom books about Alfred's time, one of the big baddie Danes is named Guthrum. He may be the same one.

[Babalooie]

I just can't handle the wait!  This will be epic!

 

http://www.spoilertv.com/2016/04/vikings-season-4b-episode-411-promo.html

[BitterApple]

I just can't handle the wait! This will be epic!

http://www.spoilertv.com/2016/04/vikings-season-4b-episode-411-promo.html

Waaaahhhh!!! Why do we have to wait til Fall? I almost wish I hadn't watched the preview because now I'm impatient as hell. Dang it.

[magdalene]

http://variety.com/2016/tv/news/vikings-recap-midseason-finale-season-4-episode-10-ragnar-sons-ivar-time-jump-rollo-1201758192/

 

Posting this link because there seems to be the belief in the episode thread that show Rollo is not the historical Rollo. But according to the show's producer himself show Rollo is supposed to be the historical Rollo. I remember him hinting at it before but this current article spells it out quite clearly.

[green]

http://variety.com/2016/tv/news/vikings-recap-midseason-finale-season-4-episode-10-ragnar-sons-ivar-time-jump-rollo-1201758192/

 

Posting this link because there seems to be the belief in the episode thread that show Rollo is not the historical Rollo. But according to the show's producer himself show Rollo is supposed to be the historical Rollo. I remember him hinting at it before but this current article spells it out quite clearly.

 

Yep.  Hirst basically took too major Vikings and fictionalized them into brothers and messed with the timeline a bit because dramatically it works far better to have Rollo there from the beginning than suddenly introduce him later.  And historically it doesn't matter to anyone other than history geeks like me. 

 

And I'm not bothered by it one bit.  They get both stories told either way and dramatic elements are just as important in filmed historical fiction -- as opposed to a documentary -- as the history.  Stay true to the "bones of history" and fudge the details to serve the gods of drama.

Edited April 24, 2016 by green

[millennium]

http://variety.com/2016/tv/news/vikings-recap-midseason-finale-season-4-episode-10-ragnar-sons-ivar-time-jump-rollo-1201758192/

 

Posting this link because there seems to be the belief in the episode thread that show Rollo is not the historical Rollo. But according to the show's producer himself show Rollo is supposed to be the historical Rollo. I remember him hinting at it before but this current article spells it out quite clearly.

 

Hirst's Ragnar and Rollo are imaginative riffs on historical/legendary figures.    They follow storylines suggested by history, but which are not historically accurate. 

 

In other words, it's fiction.   You said Rollo made out better than Ragnar in the end and cited the fate of the historical Rollo and Ragnar as proof.   But since our Ragnar and Rollo are fictional characters, I think there may be some room for subjectivity and disagreement. 

[green]

Hirst's Ragnar and Rollo are imaginative riffs on historical/legendary figures.    They follow storylines suggested by history, but which are not historically accurate. 

 

In other words, it's fiction.   You said Rollo made out better than Ragnar in the end and cited the fate of the historical Rollo and Ragnar as proof.   But since our Ragnar and Rollo are fictional characters, I think there may be some room for subjectivity and disagreement. 

 

I don't understand what you are saying?  This is historical fiction.  It's is a legit genre.  And it is not a documentary obviously.  Therefore dramatic license is used with real historical characters and yes they treat Ragnar as historical rather than a meld of several people which Scandinavian historians tend to do.  And there is no debate that Rollo was real.  And that the Rollo on this show, despite the timeline tweaks, is suppose to be that Rollo.  That was why the "character" of Rollo was put in the series period.

 

And Ragnar was "tweaked" forward in time so he could go to Paris. 

 

You just don't put 40 "historical" characters into a historical fiction series when 7 will do and tell your story far better that way.  You don't bore people with half the show being about other "historical" characters of no or very little import (think of all the filler material Saxon rulers we were spared already) or confuse them with new characters and the endless exposition scenes that go with them every single episode.  Some people on the last episode's thread seemed confused enough over the appearance of the adult versions of Aslaug rugrats.

 

The beauty of historical fiction when done well is telling enough of the basic truth of history while not bound by the detailed minutia of same.  I love real history and am a bit of an addict about same.  Bring on the ibids and op cites.  But I also love historical fiction where drama has an equal say at the table and respect those series and films that can pull it off well.  Vikings is one such series to me.

Edited April 24, 2016 by green

[millennium]

No matter how you shake it or bake it, our Ragnar and Rollo do not equal their historical counterparts.   The differences between history and fiction are too numerous to list.   Just for starters, the real Ragnar and Rollo were not brothers.   In fact, Ragnar may be largely a product of legend.   And nobody's exactly sure when and where Ragnar died.   Was he thrown into a pit of snakes?  Or did he die of his injuries after a Paris siege?  

 

Historical fiction means all sorts of license can be taken, and, in the case of Vikings, has been, and will be.

 

I was merely saying to the OP that you can't judge which of our fictional brothers got the better outcome based on the fates of their historical counterparts.   The OP drew her conclusion on the basis of history; I drew mine strictly upon the basis of Hirst's story and characterizations.

 

I want to say it's apples and oranges, but it's more like apples and apple pie.   The latter is made using the former, and while they do share certain similarities, they are undeniably different. 

Edited April 24, 2016 by millennium

[magdalene]

Hirst's Ragnar and Rollo are imaginative riffs on historical/legendary figures.    They follow storylines suggested by history, but which are not historically accurate. 

 

In other words, it's fiction.   You said Rollo made out better than Ragnar in the end and cited the fate of the historical Rollo and Ragnar as proof.   But since our Ragnar and Rollo are fictional characters, I think there may be some room for subjectivity and disagreement. 

I don't understand your post.  I know I am watching a historical fiction and not a documentary.  I also know that Ragnar may have been a legend and/or based on several historical figures.  But you said in the episode thread that Rollo was not real.  I know he was a real person and his legacy is very well known because it is so important to European history.  There are several statues of Rollo in Normandy.  There is nothing ambiguous about Rollo's existence. 

 

I was playing a little game in my head where I was going - if Ragnar was real and if I compare him to Rollo who has the better historical end game? And to me that is clearly Rollo. That is my opinion and of course it is subjective - but not unsupported by facts.

[millennium]

 But you said in the episode thread that Rollo was not real.  I know he was a real person and his legacy is very well known because it is so important to European history.  There are several statues of Rollo in Normandy.  There is nothing ambiguous about Rollo's existence. 

 

I never disputed the existence of the historical Rollo.   I merely said that Hirst's Rollo, the character played by Clive Standen, is not the historical Rollo.   Hirst's character may have been inspired by the historical figure, but he is not a factual representation of the historical figure.   He is fiction.   The Vikings writers have taken substantial liberties with history to create this character.   In doing so, they have invalidated all claims to their Rollo being the historical Rollo.

 

It may seem like I'm splitting hairs, but you debated my interpretation of a fictional work using history as your basis.  That doesn't fly, not only because the Vikings characters only loosely conform to history, but also because the fiction that is Vikings isn't finished yet, and we have only a vague idea how it may end.

[green]

 

I never disputed the existence of the historical Rollo.   I merely said that Hirst's Rollo, the character played by Clive Standen, is not the historical Rollo.   Hirst's character may have been inspired by the historical figure, but he is not a factual representation of the historical figure.   He is fiction.   The Vikings writers have taken substantial liberties with history to create this character.   In doing so, they have invalidated all claims to their Rollo being the historical Rollo.

 

It may seem like I'm splitting hairs, but you debated my interpretation of a fictional work using history as your basis.  That doesn't fly, not only because the Vikings characters only loosely conform to history, but also because the fiction that is Vikings isn't finished yet, and we have only a vague idea how it may end.

 

I still don't get what you are saying.  Rollo is Rollo.  The founder of the Normans.  Timelines may have been tweaked to get all the more interesting historical characters "on stage" while skipping over lesser figures so viewers wouldn't be bored to tears with uninteresting characters.  And a relationship to Ragnar may be added for extra dramatic effect and insight into Viking culture and family norms but it doesn't change the fact that this Rollo IS indeed the historic Rollo and not some guy with a similar name. 

 

Same with Ecbert.  He is that Ecbert.  Not some stray Ecbert who wander in off the turnip farm.  Still Ecbert even if the show has him in the same timeline with Ragnar which they weren't.

 

Again it is historical fiction or historical drama and it uses, like all dramas of this genre, the real historical characters with enhanced and tweaked dramatic elements added.

 

So no they have not "invalidated" any claims to the historic Rollo.  Instead they set up a re-imagined storyline (which is why it is historic drama and not a documentary) to get the historic Rollo to his final destiny while rolling out an awesome series in the process.  Getting Rollo to Normandy to be THE Rollo was the whole end game point of having the character in the series to start with.

 

Maybe this is just semantics we are disagreeing about but I just don't get how Rollo can't be Rollo since Alfred's father wasn't Athelstan and I believe his mother was the other (first? second? someone mentioned it above) wife of Athelwulf and not Judith, Lagertha is still Lagertha, Bjorn is still Bjorn (even if he didn't get to jump out of the coffin in Paris on this show but Ragnar did instead), Aslaug is still Aslaug (though the sagas don't make her out to be a villain-like drunkard), Athelwolf is still Athelwulf (and see Ecbert above) but Rollo somehow isn't Rollo in this series.  The other characters get a pass on drama trumping historical details at times but Rollo alone doesn't?  Does not compute to me.

 

Now I do think that Rollo does not get the better deal in the end.  Betraying everyone you ever loved from your native land including your family for some fleeting fame and power to me is the choice of a loser in life; not a winner.  Or to put it  in the words of Rollo's new "Christ God" (tm Floki) what does it profit a man to gain the whole world and lose his own soul.

Edited April 25, 2016 by green

[millennium]

 

 

Now I do think that Rollo does not get the better deal in the end.  Betraying everyone you ever loved from your native land including your family for some fleeting fame and power to me is the choice of a loser in life; not a winner.  Or to put it  in the words of Rollo's new "Christ God" (tm Floki) what does it profit a man to gain the whole world and lose his own soul.

 

This I agree with.    As for the rest, we're just going around in circles now.    Perhaps it is a matter of semantics.  

[Haleth]

Never mind.  Letting it go.

 

But it was good.  :)

Edited April 25, 2016 by Haleth

[Nukester]

Since this show has been following a lose version of history, what role will that hag Aslaug (spelling) play in the foreseeable future?  I think she grinds on my nerves worse than any other character in the series.   Well, Hubbard is close.  

Edited April 29, 2016 by Nukester

[LittleIggy]

On April 29, 2016 at 11:37 PM, Nukester said:

Since this show has been following a lose version of history, what role will that hag Aslaug (spelling) play in the foreseeable future?  I think she grinds on my nerves worse than any other character in the series.   Well, Hubbard is close.  

I want Lagertha to kick her skinny ass!

[Nukester]

On May 1, 2016 at 5:43 PM, LittleIggy said:

I want Lagertha to kick her skinny ass!

Yeah.  That would be just fine. 

Im not having much luck finding much on bitchlaug.  Wish some trailers, spoilers would pop up to give us hope of her demise.

[StannisB]

Hi, i made a new Tribute to Vikings, i hope you will enjoy it again !

[BitterApple]

Amazing work!!! I love the contrast of the early episodes and the ones from this season. It's amazing how much Ragnar has changed in such a short time.

[Babalooie]

July?  If this is true, we will be going through withdrawal again by late Fall.

 

http://www.christiantoday.com/article/vikings.season.4.air.date.spoilers.show.to.return.with.a.very.different.unpredictable.lagertha.this.july/86268.htm

[SingleMaltBlonde]

6 hours ago, Babalooie said:

July?  If this is true, we will be going through withdrawal again by late Fall.

 

http://www.christiantoday.com/article/vikings.season.4.air.date.spoilers.show.to.return.with.a.very.different.unpredictable.lagertha.this.july/86268.htm

What did Aslaug do to Lagertha in the finale?  I missed something.

[NoeNoe]

49 minutes ago, SingleMaltBlonde said:

What did Aslaug do to Lagertha in the finale?  I missed something.

Right??? Sounds more like what's to come than what's already happened, if there's any truth in it at all.

[BitterApple]

On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 10:46 AM, Babalooie said:

July?  If this is true, we will be going through withdrawal again by late Fall.

 

http://www.christiantoday.com/article/vikings.season.4.air.date.spoilers.show.to.return.with.a.very.different.unpredictable.lagertha.this.july/86268.htm

Huh, wait, what? Did I miss something? What happened between Lagaertha and Aslaug during the mid-season finale? I know I'm in Game of Thrones mode right now, but I don't even recall those two being in the same scenes. 

[Babalooie]

Not sure about the Lagertha/Aslaug deal, but maybe something happened in the unedited version that was not shown in the US???  I was sharing it because of the potential July debut.

[green]

If the writer is right -- which is a big if -- then this stuff about Aslaugh trying to kill Lagertha is from the mid-season premiere that they had access to.  They wouldn't have edited out something that important from any version.

We did see them having a verbal showdown over "there can only be one ruler" in the previews for the second half of the season.  So whatever happens is because of that no doubt.

Well I saw Athelwulf in the previews and I think Harold the Supercuts' brother maybe so he either survived the Seine River battle or any number of Vikings look as whacky as he did.  One or the other.

And thanks for the link, Babalooie.  Again I don't have access to giving the old version of a thumbs up for it because 90% of the threads I never see that icon.  But consider it a verbal thumbs up.

PS:  Update.  Finally saw the icons this time through so went up and clicked on a heart thingie for the link.  Who knows if the icons will show up next time in.  They are as weird and as mysterious as reading runes right now.  Still hate the "go to thread" in generic general and not to quotes or posters lack of options though.

Edited May 31, 2016 by green

[Babalooie]

I'll just leave these here.

http://www.movienewsguide.com/vikings-season-4-update-ragnar-lothbroks-revenge-viking-raid/228837

http://www.movienewsguide.com/more-deaths-in-vikings-season-4-revealed/225706

[Babalooie]

New trailer.  As Hirst always said would happen, the sons have come into prominence.

http://www.showbizjunkies.com/news/vikings-comic-con-2016-plans/

Edited July 16, 2016 by Babalooie
Grammar is important.

[Captanne]

Seems to me they are setting up a huge new ensemble cast.

[Babalooie]

New longer trailer from Comic-Con.  Interesting (to me) scene with Bjorn and Rollo.

Edited July 23, 2016 by Babalooie

[Babalooie]

Awww, Floki.   http://www.ew.com/article/2016/08/14/vikings-photos-lagertha-female-lover-endgame

[green]

Wow thanks for the link.  A lot of info about the upcoming episodes in that interview.  Can't wait for the show to continue.

[LOA-maker]

i suspect Travis will leave soon. 

So his pits of snakes has to be primed.lol. we've seen it before though....

once he dies, then it's interesting to see how the England situation unfolds. in real history, Egbert becomes the Saxon high-king, and the Danes first land in East Anglia, and kill the King of East Anglia named Edmund for not renouncing Christianity. We haven't seen him yet in the series, though we may in this season or next (whenever the sons raid).

It won't just be Ivar who raids though, it would be the other sons, and Hvitserk will marry the daughter of King Aelle (not Judith, I presume he has more than one). 

Aethewulf suceeds his father as King of Wessex, so we should see him as King in the show, and then of course Alfred succeeds him, but it's possible Aethelwulf has natural kids and not an adopted one like Alfred.

i hope the Battle of Edington is well choreographed lol. Probably by season 6 or 7 we'll see this. I also want to know who Guthrum would be.

[Babalooie]

Hmmm....

http://www.ew.com/article/2016/11/15/vikings-clip-ragnar-ponders-his-fate

[Captanne]

I have missed this show.  It's so lush and beautiful (despite what this clip is actually portraying, which is an entirely different matter.)

[Mick Lady]

On ‎11‎/‎15‎/‎2016 at 8:59 AM, Captanne said:

I have missed this show.  It's so lush and beautiful (despite what this clip is actually portraying, which is an entirely different matter.)

Which leads me to ask...When does it start this year?

[Haleth]

On 11/30.  Pretty soon!

[Captanne]

Praise-eh-lujah.

[Babalooie]

Still speculating on Jonathan Rhys Meyers' role.  One article said that he will briefly appear in this season.

 

http://www.australianetworknews.com/vikings-season-5-spoilers-end-of-ragnar-lothbrok-era-jonathan-rhys-meyers-to-defeat-ragnars-sons/

[BitterApple]

I'm totally shipping JRM for this show, but wouldn't he be too old to play Alfred? IIRC, Alfred was around Ivar's age before the Paris raid which would make him early 20s at the most and JRM is 40 in real life. I wonder if there's going to be another big time jump?

[spinxella]

Teen Alfred is played by Ferdia Walsh-Peelo from "Sing Street".

Darren Cahill plays older brother Aethelred.

 

Alfred and Aethelwulf 

[BitterApple]

Spinxella, thanks for the pictures, that makes much better sense. Creepy how the actor portraying Alfred really looks like he could be Athelstan's son.

[green]

On 12/15/2016 at 4:03 PM, Babalooie said:

Still speculating on Jonathan Rhys Meyers' role.  One article said that he will briefly appear in this season.

 

http://www.australianetworknews.com/vikings-season-5-spoilers-end-of-ragnar-lothbrok-era-jonathan-rhys-meyers-to-defeat-ragnars-sons/

Given the link says this actor will defeat Ragnar's sons that means he is Alfred (past his teenage years I guess).  And Aethelred?  Wonder if he is THE Aethelred as in Aethelred the Unready.  (Yes officially Alfred was "Great" and this guy was "Unready").

[Haleth]

Aethelred the Unready came later.  He was Alfred's great great grandson.  He was married to Rollo's great granddaughter, Emma (who was also the great aunt of William).  Emma was later married to the Viking king of England, Cnut (Canute).  How is that for full circle?

I bet there is a big time jump in the final episode as they have done in past years and we'll see both young and middle aged Alfred.

Edited December 20, 2016 by Haleth

[spinxella]

 

 

 

 

Jonathan Rhys Meyers

Edited December 25, 2016 by spinxella

[magdalene]

These pictures are awesome, thank you!

Last week I had read a synopsis  of the episode "All his Angels" (which airs next week, I believe) and one part of it said " King Ecbert turns Ragnar over to King Aelle in a cage".  When I went back to the site to link that here it was gone, replaced by some generic and vague synopsis. Make of that what you will.

[Haleth]

Uh oh. Doesn't sound good for Ragnar. 

[BitterApple]

On Tuesday, December 20, 2016 at 1:22 PM, green said:

Given the link says this actor will defeat Ragnar's sons that means he is Alfred (past his teenage years I guess).  And Aethelred?  Wonder if he is THE Aethelred as in Aethelred the Unready.  (Yes officially Alfred was "Great" and this guy was "Unready").

Hmm, so it looks like we are in for a big time jump if young Alfred and grown Alfred are going to be featured this season or early next. 

[Babalooie]

Wow!  I don't know if you want to read these or not.  Neither do I know why this insists on typing in bold.  These came from Spoiler TV.

 

 

 

 

 

4B and 5A
season 4B: Helga dies, Astrid dies(?), the last scene of the season is the GHA landing

season 5A: another slight time jump, basically Alfred (who is not yet king at the beginning of the season) against Ubbe, Ivar and Hvitserk, they go after Northumbria
Guthrum is one of the prominent leaders in the GHA
Ecbert and Aethelred are dead,
Aethelwulf is barely seen,
No Magnus,
Rollo does not die, but he is not there next season

L: gets usurped at the start of season 5 (episode 5.1 or 5.2) by H brothers
gets exiled, independantly joins GHA, which causes problems with the sons of Ragnar.
dies in the assault on York while saving Ivar, who was the most outspoken for the need for revenge on her

Sigurd: Harbard gets found & brought to Kattegat where he's executed by him in single combat, Sigurd doesn't join GHA, goes off & creates his own kingdom

[magdalene]

I saw these posted there, but there is no source so they could be foilers. One thing is wrong for sure - according to Hirst and Clive Standen Rollo will be in parts of season 5.  Not happy about Helga dying.  Though hoping that the Astrid death is true.