05-09-2017, 09:36 PM
Contacts would work if their whole eye turns black.
05-09-2017, 09:36 PM
Contacts would work if their whole eye turns black.
05-09-2017, 10:20 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-09-2017, 11:25 PM by MarylikesGrimm.)
(05-09-2017, 09:36 PM)irukandji Wrote: It could be the grimm's iris that makes the entire eye appear black to the wesen. It's possible that by camouflaging the iris with a contact lens, the grimm's eye might appear normal to a wesen.Ok, your idea is possible. (05-09-2017, 09:36 PM)irukandji Wrote: Grimms can't wear sunglasses all of the time. Grimms do not need to wear sunglasses at home, with friends and sleeping. All wesen cops seem to know Nick is a grimm already too. You could have the sunglasses like tinted like car windows.
Women characters do not have to be having sex with the lead to be important to the story.
(05-09-2017, 04:09 PM)irukandji Wrote:(05-09-2017, 08:22 AM)Mrtrick Wrote: She certainly took possession of the coins after returning to Nick's life, and at that point she sought their destruction. Which means this had always been her intent. Making this contrary to your notion that she's all about the Benjamins. It's certainly possible that she did some work for hire while in hiding, but what someone does, just to get by, is vastly different than a coldly calculated cash grab. Is Trubel's work purely mercenary? It doesn't preclude a moral code. A pursuit of the right. Why would that be any different for Kelly? Watching over Diana wasn't something she did because the pay was so great. I guarantee the Royals could have offered more. No doubt, the resistance covered her expensives, but how would any of what she did, profit a purely mercenary attitude. I'm not saying she never did mercenary work. I'm saying there's a difference between what you do to get by and what you do as a profiteer. You are making a correlation between such a job and Kelly's choice to leave Nick. Unless she is more interested in money, than being a Mom, one has no bearing on the other. If that had been her nature, there are a multitude of more lucrative ways to cash in. She could have simply sold the coins to the highest bidder. She could have sold Diana to the Royals. Why choose the Resistance over the Royals if there is no moral element to her decision? You use the term "mercenary" as a blanket statement. As if there aren't gradations to what that means. It doesn't automatically indicate wanton destruction, without moral considerations. (05-09-2017, 04:09 PM)irukandji Wrote:(05-07-2017, 01:28 PM)Mrtrick Wrote: They do have a bearing, because your comparing the two. The specific threat to Kelly, brought on by her attempts to keep the coins out of nefarious hands, remained for as long as those coins existed. If Nick disappears after Kelly's supposed death, then it's not going to go unnoticed. Her enemies could easily have put two and two together. And anyone pursuing her is also pursuing Nick, simply by association. By removing herself from his life, attention turns away from Nick. Staying with her, he basically becomes a John Connor type character. Endlessly on the run. So the toss-up is between a normal life, coupled with the grief of loss or a life with your mother, pursued by a never ending threat to life and limb. It's not a black and white choice. There is no good option. You can say she chose the wrong one, but there's no merit to the idea that this wasn't painful for her. It's based on nothing other than your own jaundiced view of all Grimm. And Diana's situation is vastly different because in this case, she is "The Coins". She is the object of pursuit by the forces of evil. Like the coins, she must be kept out of those hands. Why does everything always have to be so antithetical with you? Like the only choice is between wonderful mother and terrible mother. I hate to tell you this, but it's just not that black and white. Disagreeing with her decisions, doesn't negate the reasons behind them. You say that a desire to protect him is a "lame excuse", as if the there wasn't a legitimate threat. And Nick wasn't "on the run" with Marie. They moved from New York to Oregon. When I say he had a normal life, I'm speaking in relative terms. Compared to the chaotic and dangerous existence he would have had with Kelly, his life with Marie was run of the mill. Nick may have preferred to tag along with Mom, but sometimes what a kid wants, isn't what's best for him. (05-09-2017, 04:09 PM)irukandji Wrote:(05-07-2017, 01:28 PM)Mrtrick Wrote: Also, they are not serial killers! There is no goal to maliciously slaughter Wesen. Do you view all of the enemies Nick has faced, as righteous in some way? Or as his victims? I would love for you to go on an episode by episode basis and explain to me how each case should have been handled differently. How do you rectify these divides between what is and isn't know by society? How can he possibly deal with these situations but never get his hands bloody? Again and again, the same rhetoric. You toss around the word "kill", as if it's so incredibly arbitrary. As if Nick wakes up in the morning and says, "Let's go kill some Wesen!". And if the kids have Carte Blanche to act as they see fit, it merely means Nick trusts their judgement. This is a team effort. Nick isn't forcing anyone into this life. They're involved because they believe in the mission. But you would say that makes them all serial killers. No matter how many times I play devil's advocate and ask you to justify that characterization, you just come back with the same old song and dance. Explain to me the things Nick should have done differently. Take each of his cases, and lay out an argument as to why they show him to be some sort of monster. Tell me the ways in which the judicial system, as it stands, was equipped to deal with the problems Nick faced. I can't recall a single instance of Nick killing, just to kill. But maybe I'm forgetting something. Where's the smoking gun that verifies your opinion? All Grimm are not created equal. As each is an individual, all have different views on killing. Just because the Grimms of old, were more merciless in their approach, doesn't mean this applies to Nick. He differs even from the way his Aunt and Mother approached the calling. But maybe for you it comes down to the idea of killing at all. That you can see no justification under any circumstance. Even in a matter of life or death. If absolute pacifism is the only option, then even being a cop would cause issues. But if you believe there can be due cause for extreme measures, what are the lines that Nick crossed? From episode one until now, there had to be a first instance that colored your view of Nick. What was the egregious sin that he first committed? Or is all of this based on Grimm history? If that's the case, I would say that people get to rise above the past. If we didn't, we would still be stuck in the Dark Ages.
05-10-2017, 07:30 AM
I think Nick showed them-Diana and Kelly- not be carried away by fear or hatred. They would not kill "Wesen" because. Its function would be to protect, be a barrier between both worlds. Know how to react according to the circumstance.
05-10-2017, 07:42 AM
(This post was last modified: 05-10-2017, 07:47 AM by MarylikesGrimm.)
(05-10-2017, 07:14 AM)Mrtrick Wrote: And Nick wasn't "on the run" with Marie. They moved once. From New York to Oregon. That is what I thought but they are right Juliette mentioned that Nick and Marie moved all the time in a Christmas show. Marie was in Minnesota for cancer treatment and lived in Montana at the time of the pilot.
Women characters do not have to be having sex with the lead to be important to the story.
05-10-2017, 08:22 AM
Season 3 chapter 8.
I would hate to come before a certain poster if she presided over a court in our legal system. She would be a 'hanging judge' for certain.
Seriously, some people have a sense of justice that seems to be driven by Old Testament retribution and authoritarianism, and even then, that doesn't fully explain what passes for logic in the their minds, imo. Kelly Burkhardt loved her son and that was made perfectly clear to the viewers and what was also clear was that her decision to leave Nick behind had nothing to do with what some people try so hard to convey as a heartless abandonment of her child. But no one is so blind as a person who will not see. I believe it is possible to demonstrate factually that people in the developed world are generally more civilized and therefore more understanding of all diversity than was the case historically. I'm saying that Nick as a Grimm is more accepting of wesen as legitimately deserving of their civil rights when they are living by the rules of both kehrseite and wesen societies. That may not have been the case up to his mother's generation, but along with all tolerant people, his age views things differently and in a way that places an extreme value on acceptance and equality of all living creatures. In my opinion. Nick is certainly a hero of his time. Nick is a good man. Nick is a good Grimm and a good officer of the law within the constraints of his special duties to both the kehrseite and wesen worlds. To work so hard at trying to create a construct that places him in the position of serial killer, degenerate, corrupt policeman, etc. is folly. In my opinion.
"The only thing that will redeem mankind is cooperation." Bertrand Russell - printed on a beer mat in "Shaun of The Dead".
05-10-2017, 09:14 AM
(05-10-2017, 07:42 AM)MarylikesGrimm Wrote:(05-10-2017, 07:14 AM)Mrtrick Wrote: And Nick wasn't "on the run" with Marie. They moved once. From New York to Oregon. It's hard to say how long that lasted. Their path across the country may have been somewhat circuitous. But at some point they settled in Portland. Once Nick was grown, Marie probably hit the road right away. And there's no telling how many places she's hung her hat since. Wherever they stopped, it would have had to be long enough for Nick to finish school. Could be a year in one place, then another year in the next. I guess they finally picked Portland because it was on the opposite end of the country.
05-10-2017, 09:35 AM
(This post was last modified: 05-10-2017, 10:19 AM by MarylikesGrimm.)
(05-10-2017, 08:22 AM)speakeasy Wrote: Nick is certainly a hero of his time. Nick is a good man. Nick is a good Grimm and a good officer of the law within the constraints of his special duties to both the kehrseite and wesen worlds. To work so hard at trying to create a construct that places him in the position of serial killer, degenerate, corrupt policeman, etc. is folly. In my opinion. I agree that is the show's narrative of Nick. There have been times where wesen died in a show where it seemed they could have prevent it with more forethought yet we never hear them talk about how to prevent something like that from happening again. As mother, I allowed my children to watch more challenging tv shows if I was with them. I watch Charmed with my daughter when she was very young. Every time they did something that was wrong IRL, I pointed it out and explained why to my child no matter how much she complained. I think some posters are trying to remind us that the behavior IRL is not acceptable and the show is not moving towards a world more like our own. As example, why no wesen newsletters? You are right there needs to a balance between the narrative and IRL.
Women characters do not have to be having sex with the lead to be important to the story.
05-10-2017, 10:23 AM
(05-10-2017, 09:35 AM)MarylikesGrimm Wrote:(05-10-2017, 08:22 AM)speakeasy Wrote: Nick is certainly a hero of his time. Nick is a good man. Nick is a good Grimm and a good officer of the law within the constraints of his special duties to both the kehrseite and wesen worlds. To work so hard at trying to create a construct that places him in the position of serial killer, degenerate, corrupt policeman, etc. is folly. In my opinion. MLG, this site is very supportive of the wesen to me. Most of the main characters are wesen and most are treated as friends by Nick. Up until fairly recently Wu was one of the only two human characters on the show and he and Hank were entirely in sympathy for the other main characters and of the wesen victims they assisted from week to week. This site is where we come to discuss everything Grimm, very much including wesen, imo. Your vigilance as a mother in explaining what your children see as programming is commendable and is a very important part of their upbringing. I would be curious to know if you had to spend a lot of time explaining some deviations away from the right way of behavior by the Grimm show or if generally speaking, it followed a path of the punishment fitting the crimes. Or whether perhaps you gave a little latitude to the fantasy element of the stories in guiding your children to learn the right thing from what they take as entertainment - there are mighty lessons that we absorb from the forms of entertainment we choose, I realize. I thought it was not only democratic that Nick had more wesen friends and family than not, but that it was an exercise in getting along with those who aren't just like us. I purposely avoid criticizing areas and activities we see on Grimm because of the extreme positions of those who do around here. However, I'm aware that there is plenty of room for improvement. But....to me, there is a large difference in pointing out comparatives to real life lessons when a youngster is at risk of taking in the wrong message and deliberately trashing anything and everything about a production - from a position of self-righteous fault-finding in the motivations and actions of others. That, to me, is the arrogant confidence in having the answers to life's moral challenges of the wrong-headed.
"The only thing that will redeem mankind is cooperation." Bertrand Russell - printed on a beer mat in "Shaun of The Dead".
|
|