Jump to content

Vikings VII: We'll always have Paris [SPOILERS]


Veltigar

Recommended Posts

See, i don't think he did, this plus Aethelwulf seeing his dad wanted to kill him for no damn reason seems to show a bit of tricky on Aethelwulf's part. This is why I think Ecbert was taking stupid pills this season: When you shit on the most powerful guy other then you constantly and you really need him for your plots, your going to end up fucked. Bonus being it is his son and up till now loyal heir.

I hope this is dealt with in some way that doesn't involve stupid pills (Aethelwulf killing Ecbert) but I doubt it. He just seems like a dope

Even if he isn't, nothing is happening this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We both saw the same show, just our interpretations differ.

I enjoy reading YOUR take on it, even though I might not agree. just makes it a richer experience.

That's appreciated. But, alas, being who I am, what appears preposterous cannot be hand-waved away by other people's imaginations. It's like students insisting, "I meant to say . . . " and the teacher saying, "Yes, but you did not say / write what you meant." Intentions don't get credit, the actual content does.

However, as you say, that means we have very different approaches to reading and writing and watching, and as you say as well, there is NO reason to argue about them. :) :agree: :cheers:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What exactly is preposterous?

Harbard healed Ivar's pain. His coming to do specifically that is not preposterous.

Auslag sitting on her throne had no hesitation in responding to the missionary and preposing a trial. And as she watches the test, the show carefully frames her son standing right beside her. the visual story telling in this production is very strong,lots of show me rather than tell me. The logical time for her to order the missionary killed is right after he fails the red hot iron test. but the show waits for a new scene, where she is right in front of Ivar, for her to order the kill. I see those two different scenes of the boys watching ruthless mom making judgements as put there for a reason. is that a preposterous thought? i don't think so. Her sons become ruthless conquerors. i think the show is showing us how they are being trained. I am giving the showrunners credit for setting up for the future. You may choose not to do so, but my doing somis not ridiculous. Call it hopeful.

As to Odin coming also for the sake of Auslag, it helps if you don't hate her and I don't.

In the showverse, Odin is seen in the distance, walking through a battlefield, appearing to Ragnar, and sitting on the ice watching Siggy decide to drown her way to Valhalla. would he come to Kattegat just to give Auslag a good time in the fish huts? probably not. But if he is already there to ease the pain of his descendant, Ivar, why not. I think it is preposterous to think a wandering nobody can permanently ease the pain of some deformed kid and have happy times with his mom while he is at it. But for Odin it would be all in a day's work. Which is the more preposterous proposition in the world of the show?

So, yeah, we see different things, but calling my interpretation preposterous just shows a certain reluctance to consider other points of view. Or maybe I just did not flesh out my reasoning. Happy to agree to disagree

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing much to add to what's been said but this : Rollo Rocks !!!!!



Looking forward to the finale ! I loved how 9 was clearly a transition episode, but damn, those are always excellent in Vikings !



I wonder if Ragnar will bite it... historically, that's not how he dies, but who knows what the show will do.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

What exactly is preposterous?

Harbard healed Ivar's pain. His coming to do specifically that is not preposterous.

Auslag sitting on her throne had no hesitation in responding to the missionary and preposing a trial. And as she watches the test, the show carefully frames her son standing right beside her. the visual story telling in this production is very strong,lots of show me rather than tell me. The logical time for her to order the missionary killed is right after he fails the red hot iron test. but the show waits for a new scene, where she is right in front of Ivar, for her to order the kill. I see those two different scenes of the boys watching ruthless mom making judgements as put there for a reason. is that a preposterous thought? i don't think so. Her sons become ruthless conquerors. i think the show is showing us how they are being trained. I am giving the showrunners credit for setting up for the future. You may choose not to do so, but my doing somis not ridiculous. Call it hopeful.

As to Odin coming also for the sake of Auslag, it helps if you don't hate her and I don't.

In the showverse, Odin is seen in the distance, walking through a battlefield, appearing to Ragnar, and sitting on the ice watching Siggy decide to drown her way to Valhalla. would he come to Kattegat just to give Auslag a good time in the fish huts? probably not. But if he is already there to ease the pain of his descendant, Ivar, why not. I think it is preposterous to think a wandering nobody can permanently ease the pain of some deformed kid and have happy times with his mom while he is at it. But for Odin it would be all in a day's work. Which is the more preposterous proposition in the world of the show?

So, yeah, we see different things, but calling my interpretation preposterous just shows a certain reluctance to consider other points of view. Or maybe I just did not flesh out my reasoning. Happy to agree to disagree

I'm sorry to not be responding in a timely manner, but for some reason since Monday the site won't load!

Yes, indeed, happy to agree to disagree. Mostly my disagreement is because this is television fiction and long ago Vikings stopped following even the fiction of the sagas, much less history. Yah, Harbard took away Ivar's pain - -but what about those two dead kids? what about Siggy's death? what? because these are the things that mattered in Kattegat when the others of the core group were away, and there's nothing to indicate why those kids died. We can make up all the stories we want about that, but the job of Show is to finally provide us, at least, a path to understand. If the point of those kids drowned is that they were the sacrifice for Ivar, there should have been a bean tossed about that our way. But there wasn't.

And after all we get is Porunn running away and Aslaug telling the retainers to kill the Christian priest -- and that, we probably know is going to be Very Big when our baptized Ragnar returns. But that's pure spec since this isn't the sagas, and via the sagas we know how Ragnar ends. it's a messy amount of writing to do within a season via my viewpoint.

But we don't need the same viewpoint. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Hirst takes this all the way as per history all the way up to the Norman conquest of England, (which I hope he does), then all the old characters will die off.

They just have get compelling actors to carry the story through.

Yes, I agree with this and hope to see it. I had assumed that Ragnar and Aethelstan would be our protagonists throughout the series, but with one gone and the other looking worse for wear, I could enjoy the show focusing on the sagas of some others.

The Norman Conquest would make a great final season, a culmination of Ragnar's initial dreams in Season 1. In between, there's still the founding of Normandy, the exploration of the Mediterranean and North Africa, Ireland, Russia, the Middle East, plus the North Atlantic and the discovery of North America, that could potentially be used to fill the seasons.

These last few episodes have been great. I've loved seeing a new culture and political situation, with the Vikings having to deal with and try to manipulate a whole new style of laws, values, and adversaries. It drives home for me how truly impressive the feats of the Vikings were, how much political savvy and fluidity it took, in addition to the military prowess, for them to have such a lasting impact on so many regions of Europe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bjorn.



And Rollo.



I agree, maybe he wont die this season, but I can see him iced half-way through season 4, just before another time-jump to find his sons grown up like 10 years later.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bjorn.

And Rollo.

I agree, maybe he wont die this season, but I can see him iced half-way through season 4, just before another time-jump to find his sons grown up like 10 years later.

Nah, I think he first needs a better relationship with his other sons. Particularly Ivar. I think I'll become worried for Ragnar when he seems to be loved by all his remaining sons. That's when the axe will drop imo :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bjorn.

And Rollo.

I agree, maybe he wont die this season, but I can see him iced half-way through season 4, just before another time-jump to find his sons grown up like 10 years later.

At this point that wouldn't be an option. Rollo and Bjorn are still obvious side characters, just like Floki, Lagertha and Athlestan (well he was).

To keep the show rolling, they need more background and a goal for them. At this point, they are still all followers. So at this point, Ragnar can't be killed off IMO. But of course you never know.

Nah, I think he first needs a better relationship with his other sons. Particularly Ivar. I think I'll become worried for Ragnar when he seems to be loved by all his remaining sons. That's when the axe will drop imo :)

The main thing they need is at least 1 person that has a goal or something like that to work on. Ragnars family life hasn't been a really big point in the story imo. As long as he has sons it's good.

Happy Finale Day!

For me, once again, it will be tomorrow :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Happy Finale Day!

For some reason, I thought last night was Thursday, so I was very disappointed when I turned on the tv at 10 to find some other show on.... :bawl:

BUT today is the day, Ride on, Ragnar. Ride on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...