Last night I was perusing many of the threads that have caused such heated (and in my opinion, GREAT) debates. I found a consistency among them. Keep in mind I didn't cruise all of the threads nor did I take a poll of opinions. Here are some of the more consistent and I am paraphrasing:
Grimm is a fantasy, not a police procedural
Juliette's hexenbiest did not control her
Sean was the mastermind, not Adalind
Nick's legacy is to become a Grimm, he cannot escape it
There was one other comment:
What you see is what you get. There isn't more to the story because there is no indication there was more to the story. In other words, there is no proof.
Also, I found a couple of comments stating that the characters are not complex.
I believe for the purposes of this topic, Grimm can be called a dark fantasy. In other words, unlike Bewitched, it doesn't end happily or as in the case of the final episode, ending happily is more of an ironic twist.
A few weeks back, my husband and I were watching the extended version of LOTR. He was watching the vast combined army of Orcs, Men, and Giants. He looked over at me and said, "Why is it so easy to be evil?" The only thing I could come up with is that LOTR is a good versus evil story. As we talked, we found that the good characters in LOTR seem to be complex in that they grapple with their inner demons. I would say in the majority of the grappling, they come out the winners. The evil ones do very little, if any, grappling. They believe they're right, or convince themselves they're right, so there is no necessity for a conscience. I don't by any means think that's the complete answer to the question, but I began thinking of this as it applies to Grimm.
I was always under the impression that Grimm is essentially a good versus evil story. Nick is the hero, and thus "good". His inner circle fights wesen and thus is "good". But how can that be if being good requires complexity and the characters are not complex?
My focus here is primarily on Juliette. She fell very easily into evil, especially if you believe that the hexenbiest did not influence her to do so. In my opinion, she did not become more complex, because aside from a twang, she didn't have a conscience to speak of. She was simply instinctual, killing if being attacked, having sex because she wanted to, and if you believe she did, lying to Nick about not knowing of Kelly was going to be murdered.
What I have been wondering is, since Grimm is a dark fantasy, is it really about good versus evil, or the lesser evil battling a greater evil? The reason I say this is because even after Juliette became evil, she fit in quite well with the scoobies. In a series that is complex, there would be some major issues with the "good" falling in league with the "evil".
It seems it's very easy to be evil and easy to accept an evil person into the fold, if the group itself is evil. I'm not talking about the group or Juliette being 100% evil. What I am saying is that they have a propensity for evil which outweighs any natural tendency for good.
Grimm is a fantasy, not a police procedural
Juliette's hexenbiest did not control her
Sean was the mastermind, not Adalind
Nick's legacy is to become a Grimm, he cannot escape it
There was one other comment:
What you see is what you get. There isn't more to the story because there is no indication there was more to the story. In other words, there is no proof.
Also, I found a couple of comments stating that the characters are not complex.
I believe for the purposes of this topic, Grimm can be called a dark fantasy. In other words, unlike Bewitched, it doesn't end happily or as in the case of the final episode, ending happily is more of an ironic twist.
A few weeks back, my husband and I were watching the extended version of LOTR. He was watching the vast combined army of Orcs, Men, and Giants. He looked over at me and said, "Why is it so easy to be evil?" The only thing I could come up with is that LOTR is a good versus evil story. As we talked, we found that the good characters in LOTR seem to be complex in that they grapple with their inner demons. I would say in the majority of the grappling, they come out the winners. The evil ones do very little, if any, grappling. They believe they're right, or convince themselves they're right, so there is no necessity for a conscience. I don't by any means think that's the complete answer to the question, but I began thinking of this as it applies to Grimm.
I was always under the impression that Grimm is essentially a good versus evil story. Nick is the hero, and thus "good". His inner circle fights wesen and thus is "good". But how can that be if being good requires complexity and the characters are not complex?
My focus here is primarily on Juliette. She fell very easily into evil, especially if you believe that the hexenbiest did not influence her to do so. In my opinion, she did not become more complex, because aside from a twang, she didn't have a conscience to speak of. She was simply instinctual, killing if being attacked, having sex because she wanted to, and if you believe she did, lying to Nick about not knowing of Kelly was going to be murdered.
What I have been wondering is, since Grimm is a dark fantasy, is it really about good versus evil, or the lesser evil battling a greater evil? The reason I say this is because even after Juliette became evil, she fit in quite well with the scoobies. In a series that is complex, there would be some major issues with the "good" falling in league with the "evil".
It seems it's very easy to be evil and easy to accept an evil person into the fold, if the group itself is evil. I'm not talking about the group or Juliette being 100% evil. What I am saying is that they have a propensity for evil which outweighs any natural tendency for good.
The best way to frustrate a cyberbully is to ignore him.