Grimm Forum

(04-09-2017, 02:57 PM)Mrtrick Wrote: [ -> ]This assertion that the writers are liars is completely insane.

I can assure you that I am not insane.

Adalind may be the best woman for Nick now and vice versa.
Since one is born not only changes his body , also your mind. His way of thinking. Your life plans.
Juliette was good for the old "Nick". What did Eve say: Nick unknown part of himself.

Just funny is that Juliette needed to say it first to him and first after that he told her that he loves Adalind. Don't ya think it is strange?

(04-09-2017, 02:47 PM)Tara Wrote: [ -> ]Nobody have said Nick should left Adalind...but that's not the woman, we know. She try to please but Adalind is her own people but she want to please. She is her own person. With own wishes and own commitments. If she is so focused on another person, it's not right. Nobody should change for someone and I really mean no one. You can make compromise but change so much - it can not be love.

---

And I don't say it because I can't stand Adalind. I say it as woman. I wouldn't change myself if the people don't like me - then I don't need them. Everyone can make compromise but change doesn't be.

Adalind is doing her redemption by being a good mom and not rocking the boat with Nick. Eve/Juliette has always been a more independent person than Adalind so her redemption by choose is helping the wesen community.

(04-09-2017, 01:23 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ]I was just looking at a way in which she could be valuable to them. If this is the case, then what was the point of being with people who didn't like her and didn't want here there at all?

If you’re looking for rationale in Adalind’s thought process or actions - good luck. Who knows why she ran to the same caliber of people when Renard and her mother cast her aside for losing the fight with Nick. That’s the only kind of people she knew? Realistically, why would anyone with a lick of sense agree to be the front man, taking all the risk while Renard hid behind his trusted-captain façade, and without any leverage to take him down if he betrayed her?

(04-09-2017, 01:23 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ]For Adalind to ask about Lisbon and then further the question by asking if Trubel was paid indicates an interest that goes outside the bounds of small talk. Otherwise there's no reason to bring it up. I got the impression Adalind was affected by the talk of Lisbon as in, she wished she could go there.

Adalind didn’t ask about Lisbon. Trubel was telling her and Nick about HW and her missions, not carrying on a casual conversation. Adalind didn’t react with intrigue, but with surprise about what Trubel had been doing, and concern that HW knew about her, Nick, and Kelly.

(04-09-2017, 01:23 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ]Adalind never once expressed any kind of anxiety over going to Nick for help and protection. She went, she asked, he took her in. Why should she be surprised and relieved? If he took her in, the scoobies would no doubt follow his word. And beside that, she had something to offer in return, the suppression potion.

Adalind went to Nick as a last resort, and yes, she went with an offer that would hopefully buy his help and protection. In S5, she was relieved, and surprised, when Nick included her in finding a safer place for them to live. In S4, she assumed the suppressant had worked on Juliette and Nick had come to Bud’s to kill her.

(04-09-2017, 01:23 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ]Was she? I remember about 30 seconds of maybe some terror and after that, nothing. Perhaps the terror was more for Rosalee's benefit, maybe she was scared, I don't know. I only know we never saw any more evidence of terror after that.

Adalind was upset in the Spice shop and still upset when alone in the loft. There was no one at the loft to fake her worry to.

(04-09-2017, 01:23 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ]She could have. But then why not just tell Nick? According to your post, Adalind was surprised and relieved at the help they gave her. I assume that includes Nick since she went to him first. If she had no fear of reprisal and was really struggling to become an honest woman, why not just be honest with Nick?

Probably for the same reason Juliette put off telling Nick. Nick was in love with Juliette, so if she was afraid Nick would instinctively kill her, why would Adalind think Nick would be more lenient with her?

Adalind could have only killed Rosalee to cover up her Hexenbiest returning if she was the character you’re depicting her to be in S5 - conniving and manipulative, and will betray Nick at the first opportunity. So I asked why wouldn’t Adalind have simply killed Rosalee? So why do you think Adalind didn’t kill Rosalee so she could keep scamming Nick?

(04-09-2017, 01:23 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ]This was just speculation that if the series continued, I have no doubt Adalind would have betrayed Nick. I just don't see her resigning herself to a life of the fome tidying up after Nick. She's much too complex a character to be reduced to a domestic partner. I like the fact that she made a stand to be a better mother to her children, and it seemed at first that's what she wanted to do.

But the last episode indicated to me that Adalind really had no intention of doing the best she could for her children. I don't agree with encouraging them to become wesen killers or adopt the grimm lifestyle.

Any scenario or characterization not established on the show is speculation. I don’t agree with the creative team’s direction with Adalind - hopelessly in love and subservient to Nick, and accepting so little in return. But I don’t think the show even hinted at the characterization you’re suggesting. Bonaparte asked Adalind for Nick’s location repeatedly, and each time she refused. When he told her he’d eventually find Nick, Adalind responded that he might but she wouldn’t help him because Nick was good to her when he didn’t have to be. That’s not the response of someone scheming against Nick and looking to betray him at the first opportunity. If Adalind wanted to be rid of Nick, BC was her opportunity. She turned them down because she hoped to take her children and return to Nick - even if it meant living in a two room loft over a paint factory. The show having another season didn’t restrict them to keeping Adalind with Nick. She was with Nick because that’s the direction the creative team chose for the characters.

I have reservations about Adalind’s decisions, or lack of, for the children - such as taking them to some cabin in the woods instead of getting the heck out of Portland. But Renard was just as committed to taking a stand in Portland instead of fleeing for the sake of the children. That the children adopted the Grimm lifestyle is a choice the characters made based on their lifestyle and experiences. Ours will differ because we can’t relate to those lifestyles and experiences, but that doesn’t make their choices wrong for them.

(04-09-2017, 02:57 PM)Mrtrick Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-09-2017, 01:53 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-09-2017, 11:40 AM)Courtney23 Wrote: [ -> ]Even the writers stated it was adalind and nick . Do u think Monroe and roaslaie would trust there three kids around Sean after all he's done I don't think so.

The writers are liars, pure and simple. I know there are people who believe them and even some of those people don't believe everything the writers write. As for me, I take everything they say with a grain of salt, especially when they add phrases like "happily ever after".

Even in your own words, you're stating Rosalee and Monroe wouldn't trust their kids around Sean. That being the case, then how could everything end up "happily ever after"?

---

(04-09-2017, 01:53 PM)Mrtrick Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-09-2017, 11:00 AM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-09-2017, 10:45 AM)Courtney23 Wrote: [ -> ]Because saying, "Our Dad and Mom" is how people talk in casual conversation? Or maybe she should have said "Mom and Stepdad are waiting", cause that rolls off the tongue. Kelly would have heard Diana call Nick "Dad" before, so using it in a familiar parlance would have needed no qualification for him. Why is the idea that people would call both Nick and Sean "Dad", rubbing some people the wrong way? It's in no way dismissive of Diana's relationship with Sean. It just means she's also close to Nick. Which is a good and healthy thing.

Kelly is writing in a book. Now if this is a book for posterity, then he isn't going to refer to his Dad at all. He's going to simply describe the Z and how it was destroyed.

If this is a personal diary Kelly is writing in, then "our dad" would be much more appropriate.

So the fact that he states "my dad" makes sense when he's referring to Nick. The fact that Diana talks about Mom and Dad means she's referring to Adalind and Sean.

I made no reference to the Grimm journal Kelly is writing in. I'm speaking about the way in which Diana would talk to her brother in a casual discourse. She's addressing Kelly when she says "Mom and Dad", assuming a familiar understanding between the two, over whom she's referencing. And as I will reiterate from previous posts, it makes no sense thematically, for Diana to be referencing Sean. Nick is the main character. This is his legacy. Why then would they be talking about a guy who isn't even a Grimm? Especially if other, more beloved characters get no mention.

And you don't think Kelly would understand she's could be talking about her Dad when she says "Mom and Dad"? In reality it makes no sense that she would even mention the parents anyway. The kids have taken over the legacy.

This assertion that the writers are liars is completely insane. It's a common practice for those involved in a show's production to stoke and misdirect public perception in an effort to veil upcoming plot points. But once a show is done, there are no remaining reasons to obfuscate the truth. They get to speak openly about intent. And to say that the events happening on screen are somehow a lie, for no greater reason than disagreeing with them, seems delusional. If nothing happened in the way it was shown to happen, the entire presented reality is a house of cards. What actually exists then, other than one's own perception of how it should have been. If you accept that nothing the writers gave you was true, I suppose the only recourse is to go back and rewrite the whole story in your own image. That way the characters could actually be what you seem to think they are.

In a literal sense, yes, Diana could be talking about Renard. If you wanted, you could interpret it as Nick being dead and Adalind is Mrs. Renard. You could say both Nick and Renard were killed in their sleep by Adalind and she's talking about that imaginary Prince you conjured up earlier. Maybe Meisner came back from the dead and he's now Diana's stepdad. Or Adalind, Nick and Renard all died in a tragic boating accident, making Monroe and Rosalee adoptive parents to Kelly and Diana. Or better yet, Nick got a sex change, married Renard, and Diana calls him "Mom" now. But all of those notions fall apart under a logical interpretation. Diana is passing along information to Kelly. She's trying to get his butt in gear. "Mom and Dad" are waiting. It's curt and to the point, and assumes they have a similar understanding of what the heck she's saying. A more expositionsary version of this exchange could have gone: "Hey you, sitting at that desk, writing stuff. Our shared parents are waiting at an undisclosed location, so that we might all go and fight things. Because we're Grimms or close enough, and that's the sort of thing we do. And when I reference our parents, I assume you know that I'm referring to the guy we would both call Dad, and not the other guy that I call Dad...because you don't call that guy Dad..and I didn't want to confuse you. Now let me grab this big stick so we can get to killin'." I'm starting to wish she'd said it that way, so people wouldn't have such an excuse to prop up their fanciful reimaginings of reality.

Excellent scriptwriting! Though, there was an important detail left out. Remember that it's very likely that Nick is not Diana's father. There was nothing on screen to indicate this, just like Adalind conning Nick and being mentally ill, but it's true. We just didn't see it because the writers are that clever. And people think Westworld is complex?

I'm also pretty sure that Rudyard Kipling got a couple of good hits in during that final battle but we just couldn't see it. I think there's even more evidence for that than whatever was mention was mentioned above since they're all descended from the first Grimm. He had a mean left hook.

(04-09-2017, 03:09 PM)Robyn Wrote: [ -> ]Adalind didn’t ask about Lisbon. Trubel was telling her and Nick about HW and her missions, not carrying on a casual conversation. Adalind didn’t react with intrigue, but with surprise about what Trubel had been doing, and concern that HW knew about her, Nick, and Kelly.

Someone asked her because she replied that she'd been to Lisbon, twice. I assumed it was Adalind since Adalind asked her if she got paid.

(04-09-2017, 03:09 PM)Robyn Wrote: [ -> ]Adalind could have only killed Rosalee to cover up her Hexenbiest returning if she was the character you’re depicting her to be in S5 - conniving and manipulative, and will betray Nick at the first opportunity. So I asked why wouldn’t Adalind have simply killed Rosalee? So why do you think Adalind didn’t kill Rosalee so she could keep scamming Nick?

I'll just put it this way. I don't trust Adalind with regard to men. I never have. Nothing about her meshes with the scoobies or Nick at all. I think she was sincere about her children although I wonder now after seeing the last episode. But I don't get the impression she's sincere about Nick or the scoobies. Had a season 7 come into play, I think we'd have seen a betrayal from her.

(04-09-2017, 03:25 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-09-2017, 03:09 PM)Robyn Wrote: [ -> ]Adalind didn’t ask about Lisbon. Trubel was telling her and Nick about HW and her missions, not carrying on a casual conversation. Adalind didn’t react with intrigue, but with surprise about what Trubel had been doing, and concern that HW knew about her, Nick, and Kelly.

Someone asked her because she replied that she'd been to Lisbon, twice. I assumed it was Adalind since Adalind asked her if she got paid.

(04-09-2017, 03:09 PM)Robyn Wrote: [ -> ]Adalind could have only killed Rosalee to cover up her Hexenbiest returning if she was the character you’re depicting her to be in S5 - conniving and manipulative, and will betray Nick at the first opportunity. So I asked why wouldn’t Adalind have simply killed Rosalee? So why do you think Adalind didn’t kill Rosalee so she could keep scamming Nick?

I'll just put it this way. I don't trust Adalind with regard to men. I never have. Nothing about her meshes with the scoobies or Nick at all. I think she was sincere about her children although I wonder now after seeing the last episode. But I don't get the impression she's sincere about Nick or the scoobies.

I don't know how else to respond. While I don't like some of the directions they took with some of the character, I still consider the show presenting exactly what the creative team intended. I don't understand Adalind's overwhelming adoration of Nick, but my lack of understanding doesn't change that the show established it as fact.

It is what it is whether we agree with it or not.

(04-09-2017, 03:31 PM)Robyn Wrote: [ -> ]I don't know how else to respond. While I don't like some of the directions they took with some of the character, I still consider the show presenting exactly what the creative team intended. I don't understand Adalind's overwhelming adoration of Nick, but my lack of understanding doesn't change that the show established it as fact.

It is what it is whether we agree with it or not.

I would agree with her being a trustworthy person, but there are episodes where Nick himself showed that she wasn't worthy of his trust. We don't know when he finally got around to showing her the stick and actually telling her about it. We know that everyone else was made aware of it first.

The second thing is when Adalind told Nick she loved him and then stripped to prove it so she can have sex with him. How exactly is that proof that she loves Nick? I can imagine his mind wandering back to Hank as well as the night when she masqueraded as Juliette. I can imagine him asking himself, "is she kidding?"

Another instance is when her hexenbiest returned. Let's say that your argument was correct and Adalind feared for her life so she wasn't going to spill the beans to Nick. How is that establishing any sort of trust between them? Her hexenbiest returned after she told him she loved him.

I think there are probably many other instances as well, but I didn't believe Nick when he finally got around to telling Adalind he loved her. The whole scene just felt wrong. Who knows, maybe that's why he went back in time before the scene occurred, so he could do it right. We'll never know.

(04-09-2017, 03:52 PM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ]I would agree with her being a trustworthy person, but there are episodes where Nick himself showed that she wasn't worthy of his trust. We don't know when he finally got around to showing her the stick and actually telling her about it. We know that everyone else was made aware of it first.

The second thing is when Adalind told Nick she loved him and then stripped to prove it so she can have sex with him. How exactly is that proof that she loves Nick? I can imagine his mind wandering back to Hank as well as the night when she masqueraded as Juliette. I can imagine him asking himself, "is she kidding?"

Another instance is when her hexenbiest returned. Let's say that your argument was correct and Adalind feared for her life so she wasn't going to spill the beans to Nick. How is that establishing any sort of trust between them? Her hexenbiest returned after she told him she loved him.

I think there are probably many other instances as well, but I didn't believe Nick when he finally got around to telling Adalind he loved her. The whole scene just felt wrong. Who knows, maybe that's why he went back in time before the scene occurred, so he could do it right. We'll never know.

There were episodes after E7 that suddenly and inexplicably expressed Adalind was in love with Nick while simultaneously expressing that Nick didn’t trust Adalind. But G & K admitted that they wanted/needed to change Nick/Adalind, and suddenly love & distrust began without explanation around the time Nick was preparing to leave for Germany. Up to that point, Nick never indicated outright distrust of Adalind, and while she indicated appreciation for his kindness, her behavior never implied she was falling love.

Consider Nick and Adalind’s talk in ‘Eve of Destruction’ that ended with a kiss. Adalind wanted to convey her regrets for what she'd done over the years, Nick wanted to talk about him and Juliette choosing to not take advantage of him losing his Grimm and having a normal life - something he referred to as ‘Adalind giving him’. Adalind put the brakes on anything happening beyond the one kiss because they needed to know it was about them and not their situation.

One, it was the most level headed and mature behavior I’ve ever seen with Adalind. Two, when everyone came over for dinner, Nick told Monroe that he didn’t have any idea how Adalind felt about him because they never talked about it. In order for G & K to make the change they wanted of Adalind hopelessly in love and Nick distrustful & indifferent, they were content to make Nick look like a jerk during his conversation with Monroe.

This is bad writing at it’s worse, but any lack of love and trust Nick expressed in S5 was basically dismissed in S6. Nick and Adalind were suddenly operating as though the prior inconsistencies never existed. Again, bad writing at it’s worse.

That said, I still don’t think you’re insistence that Adalind will betray Nick or my confusion & disappointment with their yoyo relationship/character development negates the show establishing Nick & Adalind in a loving and committed relationship during S6. It might not make sense to us, but there it is.