Vikings - Season 4

[Jeivar]

NOTE: I'm only four episodes into the newest season, so I would appreciate an absences of spoilers. I just want to discuss one thing with fellow fans of the show.

Is it me, or has the writing gotten a bit weird? I find Rollo's sudden and complete 180° bizarre. His previous betrayal was against his brother, not against his brother AND his very people AND the Norse gods, and that one still left him a broken, self-loathing mess. But he turns so utterly at the promise of land and riches that he has his own warriors (and their women and children) killed. Rollo was never a beacon of virtue, but he was a true pagan and disliked Athelstan, and Ragnar's flirtation with Christianity.

Also... the French king wanted to use him as a buffer against other vikings, as various rulers actually did during the Viking Age. But without his warriors Rollo is just another French general. The French have no more manpower than before, and their soldiers aren't any tougher.

I can't really get this to make any sense to me.

[Liquor Box]

NOTE: I'm only four episodes into the newest season, so I would appreciate an absences of spoilers. I just want to discuss one thing with fellow fans of the show.

Is it me, or has the writing gotten a bit weird? I find Rollo's sudden and complete 180° bizarre. His previous betrayal was against his brother, not against his brother AND his very people AND the Norse gods, and that one still left him a broken, self-loathing mess. But he turns so utterly at the promise of land and riches that he has his own warriors (and their women and children) killed. Rollo was never a beacon of virtue, but he was a true pagan and disliked Athelstan, and Ragnar's flirtation with Christianity.

Also... the French king wanted to use him as a buffer against other vikings, as various rulers actually did during the Viking Age. But without his warriors Rollo is just another French general. The French have no more manpower than before, and their soldiers aren't any tougher.

I can't really get this to make any sense to me.

I haven't watched season 4 yet, so there will be no spoilers from me.

He was quick to volunteer to be baptised in season one, so I don't think his dislike of Christianity ran as deep as most of the Norse.

I think the idea is that Rollo's leadership will benefit the French - that the Norse are superior fighters to the French, and Rollo will teach the French superior techniques.

One thing to bear in mind, of course, is that something approximating this actually happened - there was a Rollo who defected to become a French Duke. You may not want to research that though, as real life may have some spoilers.

[Dienekes]

Rollo's conversion is weird. Admittedly I kind of accepted it, because since the first season the writers have said that Rollo is THE Rollo, first duke of Normandy. Doesn't matter that THE Rollo would have been born around the time Ragnar died. But whatever.

But yes. It would have made more sense to have his soldiers settle after staying there for a half season under promise of riches and land.

[Palanan]

I just started watching this show, and I’ve only watched Season 4, so I have virtually no idea of what happened in Seasons 1-3. All I know of Athelstan is what I’ve seen in flashbacks, although he seemed like a decent person.

Rollo, on the other hand, does not. His betrayal of his own warriors was vile and self-serving, and that’s pretty much the first thing I learned about him. If there was any depth to him before, it didn’t come through at the start of this season.

Perhaps because I haven’t watched the first three seasons, I’m having a difficult time finding anyone to actually like in this show. I’ll avoid commenting in more detail unless other folks want a spoilered discussion.



Originally Posted by Dienekes
Doesn't matter that THE Rollo would have been born around the time Ragnar died.

They’re taking some pretty broad liberties with the timeframe, that’s for sure.

But within that framework, they also seem to be doing their best to be as historically accurate as possible, given that Ragnar himself is half-mythical and his “sons” aren’t often much better.

And yet on aspects of life, culture, tradition, etc., they seem to be making every effort to include authentic details. There’s a companion book to the series, The World of Vikings, and their list of primary sources is impressive. Michael Hirst has clearly done some research.


Originally Posted by Liquor Box
You may not want to research that though, as real life may have some spoilers.

The same goes for other characters. Fair warning.


Originally Posted by Liquor Box
I think the idea is that Rollo's leadership will benefit the French - that the Norse are superior fighters to the French, and Rollo will teach the French superior techniques.

Oh yes. In spades.

“Fight fire with fire” is the general principle, and Rollo delivers.

[thorgrim29]

You have to remember that a huge part of the reason the Norsemen go viking is to get fame and reputation to be noticed by the gods. So Rollo is mostly concerned (at that point in his life) with getting out from under his brother's shadow and being respected as his own man, plus he was starting to be past his prime since he would have been what.... 35 or so at the end of season 3, and been living hard for probably 20 of those? It's hard to tell because Rollo is the only man who doesn't age in the series (maybe long flowing hair protects you from time because Lagertha, Auslaug, and a few other woman also age at 1/10 speed) and still hadn't made anything significant out of his life, didn't have sons, and he was facing being a footnote in the Saga of Ragnar Lodbrok. So, he made the move, got a wife, a title, respect, and a huge chunk of France. So far that makes sense to me.

What doesn't make sense is why he killed his warriors instead of sending a ship to Ragnar to tell him "Hey, don't raid France anymore, but if you're looking for targets here's a map of places not under my protection, and if you want to go back to England I have your back. Also I suddenly have all of this open land to farm, if you have extra farmers send them" and moving his guys to Rouen, no reason he can't protect Paris from there.

Finally about the conversion.... well apparently (according to more or less contemporary but hostile Aquitaine bishop) the historical Rollo (who was awesomely called Rollo the Walker because he was too tall and heavy for horses. His two next successors also had awesome names, William Longsword and Richard the Fearless) recanted his conversion when he was very old and started to get sick, and had a ton of people sacrificed to Odin, which apparently wasn't too much of a political problem since the people who mattered at the time in Normandy were, as the name suggests, scandinavian too and presumably not yet completely on board with the new god business (officially at that time people were always the same religion as their ruler, but I would assume private worship was a different matter and took a while longer to die out), so take of that what you may. Also a bit of historical irony, while the norsemen eventually failed to take over England completely (obviously, we wouldn't be calling it england if they had) Rollo's great-great-grandson did.

[Dienekes]

I just started watching this show, and I’ve only watched Season 4, so I have virtually no idea of what happened in Seasons 1-3. All I know of Athelstan is what I’ve seen in flashbacks, although he seemed like a decent person.

Rollo, on the other hand, does not. His betrayal of his own warriors was vile and self-serving, and that’s pretty much the first thing I learned about him. If there was any depth to him before, it didn’t come through at the start of this season.

Perhaps because I haven’t watched the first three seasons, I’m having a difficult time finding anyone to actually like in this show. I’ll avoid commenting in more detail unless other folks want a spoilered discussion.

Yeah, coming into the end of the story will make it seem pretty odd, and dark. Like a lot of the Sagas that the show is mirroring, a lot of it is about taking "good" characters and crushing them down. A good portion of the sagas end in the main characters death, or being betrayed, or betraying a loved one, or something else.

Early Seasons spoilers
In the beginning Ragnar was a somewhat noble raider, and Rollo was his envious but surprisingly loyal brother. Then it seems the writers didn't know exactly what to do with him, and he kind of flips back and forth from Ragnar's most loyal companion, to a backstabbing murderous thug.

[Thrudd]

I feel like the strange characterization is partly the result of wanting to compress 250 years of history into the adult lifetime of the characters (20 yrs or less). It's a clumsy way (imo) of trying to show how the Normans gradually acclimated and were absorbed into French Christian culture. Really, Rollo should be ruling Normandy as a basically autonomous entity, rewarding his Norse followers with land and castles, and we'd see them all taking Christian wives and gradually converting, one by one.
Maybe they thought this needed to happen (Rollo's slaughter of his own men), so that we understand why Rollo and the Normans aren't a part of the "great heathen army" that is being set up for the next season. Of course, there has also been a time jump of at least 10-15 years or so, so they could have easily had a scene in the next season where we see how Rollo and his men have become acclimated to French culture and all have Christian wives and children now, and avoided that stupid out-of-character slaughter.

[Jeivar]

Perhaps because I haven’t watched the first three seasons, I’m having a difficult time finding anyone to actually like in this show. I’ll avoid commenting in more detail unless other folks want a spoilered discussion.


I find that the show has developed a big problem in all the likeable characters either being dead by this point, or becoming brutal and horrible. I'm most of the way through the first half of season four, and I don't really know if I'll buy the other half. Lagertha and Bjorn are just about the only characters left I care about, which probably means they're going to eat a baby together or something.

[Dienekes]

I find that the show has developed a big problem in all the likeable characters either being dead by this point, or becoming brutal and horrible. I'm most of the way through the first half of season four, and I don't really know if I'll buy the other half. Lagertha and Bjorn are just about the only characters left I care about, which probably means they're going to eat a baby together or something.

I'll just say as of mid season 4 Lagertha is slightly more brutal but in a somewhat honest lawful way. She was still the one I had an ounce of respect for.

But t then I like Rollo I think, except for the last betrayal and slaughter of his own warriors which was just weird. He's the most accurate portrayal of a Viking they've done. Brutal, often horrible to our modern sensibilities, but with a logic to him. He isn't dumb just not our view of righteous.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Jeivar
I find that the show has developed a big problem in all the likeable characters either being dead by this point, or becoming brutal and horrible. I'm most of the way through the first half of season four, and I don't really know if I'll buy the other half.

Since I’ve only watched Season 4, I don’t have a sense of who (if anyone) was actually decent in previous seasons, apart from Aethelstan.

In particular, based on what I’ve seen this season, I loathe Lagertha and Auslag pretty much equally. I gather that Auslag is something of a homewrecker, but I haven’t seen anything to convince me that Lagertha is a single fleck better.

The one character who seems slightly sympathetic is…Judith? Not sure of her name, but the princess of Wessex who’s been having a long-term affair with the king, who is also her husband’s father.

It says something about everyone else in this show, that a woman who cheats on her husband with her father-in-law comes out looking morally superior.

.

[Thrudd]

Since I’ve only watched Season 4, I don’t have a sense of who (if anyone) was actually decent in previous seasons, apart from Aethelstan.

In particular, based on what I’ve seen this season, I loathe Lagertha and Auslag pretty much equally. I gather that Auslag is something of a homewrecker, but I haven’t seen anything to convince me that Lagertha is a single fleck better.

The one character who seems slightly sympathetic is…Judith? Not sure of her name, but the princess of Wessex who’s been having a long-term affair with the king, who is also her husband’s father.

It says something about everyone else in this show, that a woman who cheats on her husband with her father-in-law comes out looking morally superior.

.


yeah, the show has never really been about anyone adhering to any modern sense of morality. It is trying to depict that those cultures had different norms than those we are familiar with, in pretty much every aspect of life.

The fact that the show is about Vikings should tell the viewer, before even seeing it, that it would be following characters doing some pretty horrible things, at least by modern standards. They are raiders who spend their summers attacking and looting settlements and taking slaves, the softer the target the better. Those are the protagonists of the show.

[mikelala]

I'll just say as of mid-season 4 Lagertha is slightly more brutal but in a somewhat honest lawful way. She was still the one I had an ounce of respect for.

But t then I like Rollo I think, except for the last betrayal and slaughter of his own warriors Birthday Greetings (http://1birthdaygreetings.com/) which was just weird. He's the most accurate portrayal of a Viking they've done. Brutal, often horrible to our modern sensibilities Birthday Meme (http://1birthdaygreetings.com/best-happy-birthday-meme/), but with a logic to him. He isn't dumb just not our view of righteous.

[Dienekes]

I'll just say as of mid-season 4 Lagertha is slightly more brutal but in a somewhat honest lawful way. She was still the one I had an ounce of respect for.

But t then I like Rollo I think, except for the last betrayal and slaughter of his own warriors Birthday Greetings (http://1birthdaygreetings.com/) which was just weird. He's the most accurate portrayal of a Viking they've done. Brutal, often horrible to our modern sensibilities Birthday Meme (http://1birthdaygreetings.com/best-happy-birthday-meme/), but with a logic to him. He isn't dumb just not our view of righteous.

This is I think the fifth time a bot has just reposted one of my posts in 3 weeks.

Guys... am I a bot? Is that why they flock to me?

[Palanan]

…And so the season concludes.

Well, that was brutal and depressing. And resolved almost nothing.

The first few minutes of the episode were the best, with one of the most viscerally intense battle scenes I can remember. They really conveyed the desperate hammering chaos, the overwhelming crush and breathless pace of it all. That battle is one of the highlights of the season for me, and both the choreography and the editing were outstanding.

After that, things sort of slowly slid downhill. The last-minute advice which Ecbert gives to young Alfred was genuinely poignant, and if I’m reading things correctly Ecbert managed to lure the Vikings into a massive trap, by convincing them that he was still king with the authority to grant land for permanent settlement. I assume his plan—which like Ragnar’s will only come to fruition after his death—is for the Vikings to stake out homesteads, bring over their families, and throw themselves into farming, just as the resurgent English army sweeps across to slaughter them all.

And the Vikings fell for it, dimwits that they are. Never mind that Ecbert has no crown, no court, no army; for some reason they still assume that he’s king.

There was some pointless tragedy mixed in with the general looting, feasting and low-key rampaging. The entire arc of Floki’s wife Helga and their “adopted” daughter came to a melodramatic end, and I’m really not sure what the point of that was, other than to leave Floki a bleak and hopeless ruin at the end of this season. I personally don’t have much sympathy for him; I have a special loathing for ignorant thugs who burn books and destroy libraries, and I could just about cry at all of those beautifully illuminated scrolls going up in flames.

And then there was the kinslaying at the very end, which may or may not be part of the original sagas. That at least made its own sort of sense; they’ve laid the groundwork for it all season, from Ivar’s skill at throwing axes to his secret shame at being unable to take a woman.

But I’m not sure how Ivar can survive another thirty seconds, given that his other brothers should be obliged to avenge the murder. Bjorn warned Ubbe of that exact same thing a few episodes back, when Ubbe and Ivar were on the point of killing Lagertha for the murder of their mother; Bjorn told them he’d have to kill them in turn, which he didn’t want to do. So I’m not sure why they won’t apply the same logic to Ivar.

So, there we have it. A major cliffhanger for next season…but meh. I’m not feeling motivated to look forward to it.

[Gamer]

I agree is strange he go against it's own people ... But maybe they wanted to show about what people can do just to gain power.

[Bobby Baratheon]

The 4th season has been admittedly choppy, but there are some great moments that transcend it. Ragnar's vision of his old life, for example . . . that almost had me in tears. Just the poignancy of it all, and the longing on Fimmel's face as he realizes that what he really wanted all along is irrevocably gone. Gyda's died, Lagertha's long gone (romantically if not spatially), and he treats Bjorn like a potential rival more than a son. And Athelstan died long ago because Ragnar believed he could protect him. Everything he truly loved in life is gone, and without it his ambition has turned to ash. Four seasons in, it's still amazing to me how much Fimmel can convey with just body language.