+- Grimm Forum (https://grimmforum.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Grimm Universe (https://grimmforum.com/forum/Forum-Grimm-Universe)
+--- Forum: Grimm Discussions (https://grimmforum.com/forum/Forum-Grimm-Discussions)
+--- Thread: Adalind's apology (/Thread-Adalind-s-apology)
RE: Adalind's apology - Robyn - 02-11-2017
Being drawn to a particular type of character is a personal choice based on what a viewer is looking for with the characters and the show. I wasn’t initially drawn to Renard and Adalind because they were bad guys doing bad things, but the bad guy element allows the multi layers that makes the characters more interesting and alluring. But the moniker isn’t enough by itself. Catherine appeared to be completely self serving, but the character and actor didn’t deliver the multifaceted range of Renard/Roiz and Adalind/Coffee.
You may have a point that the perception of Nick is tied to how closely or distantly he’s scrutinized. But shouldn’t a character in the lead role hold up to scrutiny no matter how much the lens is magnified? And I’m not talking about morality, but the character earning the leadership role rather than being systematically encircled by a few select characters who only view him through rose colored lenses.
Other than being more confident and assured of himself as a Grimm, Nick is the same character introduced in the pilot. He hasn’t gained wisdom or introspect from his experiences and mistakes. Instead of Nick navigating a different type of relationship with Adalind who was once as distinguishable from Juliette as night from day, the show provided for Adalind to become a mousy clone of who Nick is accustomed to. Instead of Nick upping his game, the show provided for Renard to become an emotionally weaker opponent overwhelmed by his inescapable circumstances.
The second string characters shouldn’t have been made weak and dumb, the leading character should have become bolder and wiser from his experiences. The leading character should have instinctively taken the leadership position in standing against a faction whose objective threatened family, friends, and city, and not only become involved because it affected him personally.
RE: Adalind's apology - speakeasy - 02-11-2017
You must be analytical by training, Robyn, because you see things with a depth that I do not. I've said it here before, I lack the imagination to write a script or a story, let alone flesh out a character. But I continue to love Renard, Adalind, my guy Hank and Eve/Juliette. With the exception of Hank, perhaps, they've all undergone extreme transformations, but I still hold on.
Don't feel that way about Nick. I'm fond of him, I regard him as the central figure of the series, but I can't form a bond to him. Nevertheless, he just comes over as a very decent man caught like a fly in a web in this monster-filled world that has consumed his life. Even though I feel he's the most heroic character on the show, he's not the reason I tune in every week.
RE: Adalind's apology - FaceInTheCrowd - 02-11-2017
I don't see Nick as the strong leader type. He's tough, he's brave and he can be counted on to come to the aid of his friends and people he sees as needing help. The scoobies tend to defer to him when it comes time to act, because he's usually the one who has to act. But the person who comes across as the scoobies' leader when it comes to wisdom and introspection is really Monroe. Or rather, Monroe and Rosalee.
As in many TV series, it usually takes multiple characters to make up a complete "hero" package. The usual formula is one character for action and anger, another for intellect and knowledge, and a third for conscience/compassion. The reason for this is that if one character possessed all of these qualities, he or she would spend every story delivering lectures to the rest of the cast and the audience. Split up the components of "heroism," and instead of those lectures, you have dialog. Throw in some initial disagreement between the characters before the eventual decision is made, and you have dramatic tension and a depiction of a decision process that would otherwise all be taking place inside someone's head.
RE: Adalind's apology - speakeasy - 02-11-2017
(02-11-2017, 11:23 AM)FaceInTheCrowd Wrote: I don't see Nick as the strong leader type. He's tough, he's brave and he can be counted on to come to the aid of his friends and people he sees as needing help. The scoobies tend to defer to him when it comes time to act, because he's usually the one who has to act. But the person who comes across as the scoobies' leader when it comes to wisdom and introspection is really Monroe. Or rather, Monroe and Rosalee.
As in many TV series, it usually takes multiple characters to make up a complete "hero" package. The usual formula is one character for action and anger, another for intellect and knowledge, and a third for conscience/compassion. The reason for this is that if one character possessed all of these qualities, he or she would spend every story delivering lectures to the rest of the cast and the audience. Split up the components of "heroism," and instead of those lectures, you have dialog. Throw in some initial disagreement between the characters before the eventual decision is made, and you have dramatic tension and a depiction of a decision process that would otherwise all be taking place inside someone's head.
If the characters on Grimm were a football team, which one would play which position?
RE: Adalind's apology - Robyn - 02-11-2017
Quote:As in many TV series, it usually takes multiple characters to make up a complete "hero" package. The usual formula is one character for action and anger, another for intellect and knowledge, and a third for conscience/compassion. The reason for this is that if one character possessed all of these qualities, he or she would spend every story delivering lectures to the rest of the cast and the audience. Split up the components of "heroism," and instead of those lectures, you have dialog. Throw in some initial disagreement between the characters before the eventual decision is made, and you have dramatic tension and a depiction of a decision process that would otherwise all be taking place inside someone's head.
This is pretty spot-on in cohesively blending the characters for a show or movie, but where have I missed this occurring in the show:
Quote:Throw in some initial disagreement between the characters before the eventual decision is made, and you have dramatic tension and a depiction of a decision process that would otherwise all be taking place inside someone's head.
One of my biggest complaints is that the group behaves like a cult driven by a singular purpose instead of the diverse group they should be considering their personal & professional differences. Monroe & Rosalee researching and directing Nick on the best way to kill the WoW is simply part of the established procedure. And while I somewhat agree Monroe & Rosalee are the typical voice of reason, I don’t recall any instances of differing opinions of Nick’s actions/decisions causing disagreement or tension.
If anything, the show seems to be very careful not to introduce storylines that would presumably cause conflict and tension in the group. In S1 or S2, Monroe challenged Nick about killing his former girlfriend/hunting buddy, but I don’t recall anything similar since. I don’t recall any situation where a member of the team had an opposing view during an episode/storyline that caused tension or conflict between him/her and the group. Even Hank and Wu’s introductions to the Wesen/Grimm world were carefully orchestrated so each man would fear insanity before being relieved to discover Nick hadn’t yet told them what was really happening.
RE: Adalind's apology - FaceInTheCrowd - 02-11-2017
Yeah, Grimm is pretty light on the second part of what I described. In the early episodes they had Monroe pressing the argument that Nick couldn't handle everything that was happening to him just by being a cop, but that didn't last very long.
I think the underlying theme of Grimm has been less about Nick having to make dramatic decisions and more about him being inexorably guided by fate to some unknown destiny. Right up until the point where Meisner threw King Freddie out of the helicopter I thought that destiny was going to be to go to Europe to have it out with Hexenbiest Juliette and Viktor and finish his ancestors' war with the royals, and compared to BC I probably would have preferred that.
OTOH, it probably would've meant fewer extra calls for me, because there wouldn't have been many 60+ yr old Asian guys hanging out in the Black Forest.
RE: Adalind's apology - syscrash - 02-11-2017
A commented was made about Nick vs Sean who is the heroic character. The perception is NIck comes to the rescue. But we forget Sean has also come to the rescue. He put his life on the line to save Juliette. He has stepped in and saved Nick several times.
As for leaders. Sean may be the captain. But he does not show a lot of leadership. But then neither does Nick.
Lets not forget Nick has been shown to be as crafty as Sean. Sean has run a number of scams to get what he wants. Nick has done the same. Planting the head in the room to trap Kenneth. The trust me knot. And his ultimate becoming Sean.
At first it was only Nick mom and Trubel that had a cavalier view at killing people. This last episode has shown Nick is changing to be more in line with how his mom and Trubel think. He is becoming a true Grimm. I think this is to explain his final end game of being a full on Grimm like his mom.
RE: Adalind's apology - rpmaluki - 02-11-2017
No one is saying Renard hasn't had heroic moments. I feel that Nick's heroics are called into question all the time and used to paint him in bad light whereas Renard's villainous actions aren't even a blip on people's radars. There's no way these two man are even similar but that's my view based on everything I have seen.
RE: Adalind's apology - Kwu9888 - 02-11-2017
(02-11-2017, 01:09 PM)syscrash Wrote: A commented was made about Nick vs Sean who is the heroic character. The perception is NIck comes to the rescue. But we forget Sean has also come to the rescue. He put his life on the line to save Juliette. He has stepped in and saved Nick several times.
As for leaders. Sean may be the captain. But he does not show a lot of leadership. But then neither does Nick.
Lets not forget Nick has been shown to be as crafty as Sean. Sean has run a number of scams to get what he wants. Nick has done the same. Planting the head in the room to trap Kenneth. The trust me knot. And his ultimate becoming Sean.
At first it was only Nick mom and Trubel that had a cavalier view at killing people. This last episode has shown Nick is changing to be more in line with how his mom and Trubel think. He is becoming a true Grimm. I think this is to explain his final end game of being a full on Grimm like his mom.
As usual syscrash I agree with almost everything you said I thought the exact same thing last night when he gave his badge and gun to Hank, I'm OK with that. The one big difference I see in Nick and Renard is that Nick is a natural leader people listen to him and follow him pretty much without question because he has earned the trust and the love of his friends. It may be cultish because they do for the most part follow him without question but part of that again is because they trust him he has risked his life for them and they have for him. Misguided or not that's how I think they feel
RE: Adalind's apology - Robyn - 02-11-2017
Nick hailed as the hero requires a distinction to Renard. As the villain, Renard isn’t expected to be heroic or self sacrificing. With Nick, it’s up to viewers to decide what they’re willing to have the hero/Grimm do to accomplish his objectives.
I don’t suggest that Nick is a bad man compared to Renard or any other character, but I do consider them to be more alike than different. My argument has always been about double standards that excuse behavior of some characters while condemning other characters.
A character’s intent might hold a lot of weight in evaluating his/her actions, but it’s not the only form of measure. Renard was willing to sacrifice many to achieve his power grab. Nick was willing to sacrifice Juliette to regain his Grimm power. Was Nick’s intent the greater good, and if so, was Juliette acceptable collateral damage? Or is the greater good an excuse for Nick wanting to be a Grimm? It’s all up to viewers to decide. In fiction, I doubt there’s a completely right or completely wrong conclusion.
Quote:Right up until the point where Meisner threw King Freddie out of the helicopter I thought that destiny was going to be to go to Europe to have it out with Hexenbiest Juliette and Viktor and finish his ancestors' war with the royals, and compared to BC I probably would have preferred that.
I would have preferred that too. Let it end with the bang introduced in the pilot.
Quote:OTOH, it probably would've meant fewer extra calls for me, because there wouldn't have been many 60+ yr old Asian guys hanging out in the Black Forest.
We wouldn’t want that happening. Although, you could have been the Asian version of Yoda enlightening the Grimm about the true meaning of his quest.