05-06-2017, 01:03 PM
In this thread?
The best way to frustrate a cyberbully is to ignore him.
05-06-2017, 01:07 PM
(05-06-2017, 12:55 PM)rpmaluki Wrote: Basically Grimms are damned if they do and damned if they don't raise their own children themselves? A while back it was heavily debated that Nick and Adalind shouldn't be allowed to raise their children and I remember asking who should and I don't remember ever getting an answer. Imo, if allowed by outside elements to do so, Grimms should have children and raise them. If threats to the children's welfare are present, then it would probably be best to separate a threatened Grimm from their families. It's not a new idea; many members of royal families, warring cultures, etc., had their children raised away from the dangers plaguing their parents. Don't be looking for logic in matters involving most of the characters on Grimm from a certain element of this Forum.
"The only thing that will redeem mankind is cooperation." Bertrand Russell - printed on a beer mat in "Shaun of The Dead".
So far we've seen three different ways in which Grimm deal with their children, if there's a fourth and more appropriate way, I'd like to hear it.
1.There's Kelly's way, which is to disappear from your child's life and cause a lifetime of trauma. 2.There's Marie's way, which is to lie to your child their whole life and create distance between you two due to the lack of true bonding between the two of you. 3.There's Nick's way, stay in your child's life and bring them up with the knowledge of the truth about their heritage, whether the child becomes a Grimm or not. Josh's father waited until too late to clue Josh in that Josh actually thought his father was losing his mind. There doesn't seem to be a lot of good options available to Grimms, I prefer Nick's way over his elders.
05-06-2017, 01:17 PM
If Kelly had raised Nick the way you suggest, I believe he would have never lived to grow up.
Nick wasn't permanently traumatized by his upbringing, imo. In fact, I think he dealt with it in a very healthy psychological way.
"The only thing that will redeem mankind is cooperation." Bertrand Russell - printed on a beer mat in "Shaun of The Dead".
Trauma doesn't only mean being rendered mentally/emotionally incapacitated. Yes Nick dealt with his mother's abandonment but it still affected him as an adult especially when you see how season 5 played out. Would he have given Adalind a chance to mother his son if he didn't want Kelly to grow up motherless like him?
Nick is shaped by the choices of the people in his life, if his mother had raised him, he could have made completely different choices like moving to Portland, becoming a cop, meeting Monroe etc. He may have grown up to become a traditional Grimm, one of many instead of forging a new path. I like him as he is now, that's why I prefer his way of doing things because he had to learn from past experiences to look beyond what the eye can see rather than kill because someone was simply different and why I like that he values the bonds of family and that it's not about being a Grimm. If Kelly turned out to be a half Zauberbiest, I don't think Nick would love him less or put him away for anything. Kelly and Marie made choices that made sense to them at the time and Nick has done the same, only difference is that he's much more informed about the consequences of some actions, whereas Kelly has lived with regret most of her son's life and Marie sacrificed too much for the cause.
05-06-2017, 01:34 PM
(05-06-2017, 01:22 PM)rpmaluki Wrote: Trauma doesn't only mean being rendered mentally/emotionally incapacitated. Yes Nick dealt with his mother's abandonment but it still affected him as an adult especially when you see how season 5 played out. Would he have given Adalind a chance to mother his son if he didn't want Kelly to grow up motherless like him? Your post makes great good sense. Don't go along with every word, but I do support the spirit of it.
"The only thing that will redeem mankind is cooperation." Bertrand Russell - printed on a beer mat in "Shaun of The Dead".
05-07-2017, 04:16 AM
(05-06-2017, 07:51 AM)irukandji Wrote: Grimm tried to gloss this over by making Nick an adult, and therefore supposedly he wouldn't need to have any deep feelings on the subject, other than to happy that the egg donor was alive. In short, the last half of his life without a mother meant nothing. That was wrong.Exactly. The gamut of emotions one would naturally expect was dismissed for the sake of speed and ease, which was the go-to approach on Grimm. G & K consistently sacrificed character evolution to focus only on their stories and action scenes. And sadly, both were compromised as a result. As a viewer, I’m much more interested in how the characters grow and change throughout their experiences than how ‘cool’ those action scene experiences are. Speakeasy, rpmaluki, why Kelly faked her death or that Nick understood Kelly’s choice as a Grimm isn’t in question. It’s the flash-card pace that Nick moved from shock to acceptance. Nick instantly accepted a stranger was the mother he’d believed to be dead for almost twenty years, yet, this instantaneous acceptance disappeared when the woman he shared his life with and supposedly loved and wanted to marry became a Hexenbiest. The Grimm experiences and personal commitment that enabled him to readily accept his mother should have carried the same influence in his reaction to Juliette. So, were these two events even about the character evolution of the central character or the writers simply providing him the emotional reaction that best suited the story they were telling at the time?
"If my devils are to leave me, I am afraid my angels will take flight as well." Rainer Maria Rilke
05-07-2017, 05:00 AM
(This post was last modified: 05-07-2017, 05:01 AM by MarylikesGrimm.)
(05-07-2017, 04:16 AM)Robyn Wrote:(05-06-2017, 07:51 AM)irukandji Wrote: Grimm tried to gloss this over by making Nick an adult, and therefore supposedly he wouldn't need to have any deep feelings on the subject, other than to happy that the egg donor was alive. In short, the last half of his life without a mother meant nothing. That was wrong.Exactly. The gamut of emotions one would naturally expect was dismissed for the sake of speed and ease, which was the go-to approach on Grimm. G & K consistently sacrificed character evolution to focus only on their stories and action scenes. And sadly, both were compromised as a result. As a viewer, I’m much more interested in how the characters grow and change throughout their experiences than how ‘cool’ those action scene experiences are. Grimm avoided dealing with humans even when they were important part of the character evolution for the central character. Did Reed Burkhardt know mama Kelly was a Grimm? For the 12 or more years they were together how did they make a living and protect Nick with Kelly as a Grimm? Izzy and many others assume Nick had no humans friends IMO since the show deem them unimportant to show.
Women characters do not have to be having sex with the lead to be important to the story.
05-07-2017, 05:42 AM
(05-07-2017, 05:00 AM)MarylikesGrimm Wrote: Grimm avoided dealing with humans even when they were important part of the character evolution for the central character. Did Reed Burkhardt know mama Kelly was a Grimm? For the 12 or more years they were together how did they make a living and protect Nick with Kelly as a Grimm?Someone posted recently that Nick was originally planned to be an established Grimm when the show premiered, but the network wanted the main character to be a cop. It could be that G & K only bothered with the detective and precinct part while keeping their original characterization in tact. We didn’t consider Kelly strange as an old school Grimm drawing a hard line because she was introduced that way. But Nick was introduced as a regular guy who was a detective, in a relationship, and buying an engagement ring. Then bam Nick’s a Grimm, no fuss no muss and immediately began deceiving the woman he wanted to marry. Not because he was written as a jerk but because the intent was for him to be a Grimm immediately. I agree, G & K didn't bother with the human or emotion factor other than scripting emotional reactions to propel their planned story. Emotional reaction was either a required impetus or omitted because it wasn’t needed for the story.
"If my devils are to leave me, I am afraid my angels will take flight as well." Rainer Maria Rilke
05-07-2017, 05:56 AM
(05-07-2017, 04:16 AM)Robyn Wrote:(05-06-2017, 07:51 AM)irukandji Wrote: Grimm tried to gloss this over by making Nick an adult, and therefore supposedly he wouldn't need to have any deep feelings on the subject, other than to happy that the egg donor was alive. In short, the last half of his life without a mother meant nothing. That was wrong.Exactly. The gamut of emotions one would naturally expect was dismissed for the sake of speed and ease, which was the go-to approach on Grimm. G & K consistently sacrificed character evolution to focus only on their stories and action scenes. And sadly, both were compromised as a result. As a viewer, I’m much more interested in how the characters grow and change throughout their experiences than how ‘cool’ those action scene experiences are. No, it's not about the flash-card pace that Nick moved from shock to acceptance, that's what it's about for you. I don't agree with any part of your post. This thread is about Kelly, Nick's mother. It's not solely about character development, character development, character development - and why that all-important part of the show's biography is lacking for just about every character to some viewers. I am fine with the big hole left by the lack of character development by the creators and writers of the program. In spite of it, I somehow managed to get alot of enjoyment out of the programming of Grimm. Of course the writers were leaving out a big tearful, episodes-long saga about the cause of Nick's separation from his mother. We are supposed to accept it and get on with the subjects at hand. But some posters insist on crucifying just about every character we saw in the series with vituperous and outlandish critiques about far too many aspects of the entire show. A few posters around here seem bent on proving this particular program was aimed at corrupting society. It's weird, imo.
"The only thing that will redeem mankind is cooperation." Bertrand Russell - printed on a beer mat in "Shaun of The Dead".
|
|