Grimm Forum
Would Juliette really have killed Nick? - Printable Version

+- Grimm Forum (https://grimmforum.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Grimm Universe (https://grimmforum.com/forum/Forum-Grimm-Universe)
+--- Forum: Spoilers (https://grimmforum.com/forum/Forum-Spoilers)
+---- Forum: Season 4 Spoilers (https://grimmforum.com/forum/Forum-Season-4-Spoilers)
+---- Thread: Would Juliette really have killed Nick? (/Thread-Would-Juliette-really-have-killed-Nick)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7


RE: Would Juliette really have killed Nick? - Adriano Neres Rodrigues - 06-14-2015

(06-14-2015, 07:26 PM)jsgrimm45 Wrote:
(06-14-2015, 06:52 PM)Adriano Neres Rodrigues Wrote:
(06-13-2015, 09:34 PM)irukandji Wrote: A question here, Adriano, Why would Monroe or Rosalee believe Juliette is no longer human?

I used the word human but I don’t think this is the correct question/perspective here. My point would be based more in trust and friendship. When I made the question it was more to provoke the debate. As I said before, I was basing my answer on last season more them in the show as a whole.
After I read your question, I thought about it and that why I took some time to answer.
Going by topics....

-> The dynamic
I will base my arguments in a dynamic that I can see developing in the relation between the Nick/Rosale/Monroe and Juliette in the least season. They were acting over chain of actions, expectations, perspectives and reactions and the reaction being the action of the following cycle. Sometimes I will not write about the character expectation for any reasons. But while reading my post, always remember that I am trying to guess characters’ expectations/interpretations in it situation.
As an example, I will use the spice shop scene (that one that should have not happened). That scene started with the group asking Juliette to drink a potion made by Adelaind. This was the Nick/Rosale/Monroe action. Their expectation was that Juliette dunk the potion and come back to normal (this was stupid from them… blame the writers…). By Juliette side, her expectation was to have friends saying: I am by your side what ever you choose to came back normal or not. If they did this first, maybe she would say I want to go normal… They could have said: Adelaind has a way to help. And Juliette could have accept or not… But the way they did, Juliette felt betrayed by them (this was Juliette reaction. They were stupid, I agree. But she could have trusted them a little bit more… I am not defending/atacking the group or Juliette here… I am just pointing out how a different action from both sides would have done things diferent).
Feeling threatened, Juliette’s reaction was to attack (not blaming her…) destroying the potion. The group reaction was aggressive too taking the guns… Juliette reaction was even more aggressive pointing Nick’s gun to Monroe, showing that if she wanted, they all would be dead. One possible reaction of the group could have be: she still likes us because she didn’t kill any of us. But their reaction, manly from Rosale, was: I am done of trying to help her.
Just because of this quote I think Rosale didn’t believe “Juliette’s humanity” any more… Actually, looking in another direction, as I don’t think this is the real question here… If Juliette was still alive in season 5, she would have not support from Rosale simply because in that moment Rosale had already give up on Juliette. I know that this argument is not strong enouth if we consider your explanation about all the show. But at this point, I am trying to see what direction things are going from this point. If we see all the show as you did, we should’nt have got here…


-> Why did they use different strategy for similar situations?
Believing they were trying to help Juliette, they simply asked her to dink a potion made by Adelaind. Even after Juliette burned the trailer.
Trying to help Sean to drink the “death” potion so they could send Jack away, they cheated Sean so he would drink the potion.
Aparently similar situations. They needed a frined to drink a magical potion to help this friend with a subject (Talking about expectations, Juliette wanted to be helped by acceptance… her friends believe she needed restoration and that she wanted restoration).
One possible answer for this question that came to my mind is that they believed that Sean was not in full control of his actions. So, they were not cheating Sean, but the spirit (Jack) that was the threat to be eliminated. Thinking this way, the group would not put in Sean account any threat he made to them.
In Juliette’s case, they believed she was in full control of her actions and that by this she was able to think, to understand her friends intentions and to drink the potion in free will. If they believe she was out of her mind, like being controled by the hexanbiest spirit, they would have find a way to cheat Juliette to drink the potion just like they did with Sean. This way, they believed every Juliette’s action was intentional and that she was full responsible for them. This can explain why Rosalee gave up on Juliette after the Spice Shop incident.

-> The ball is rolling
We have already discussed here how those actions affected Juliette’s decisions. Juliette’s actions affected the group decisions too. None of them tried to understand the other side expectations and, by doing this, adapt their actions to the other side expectation and ending up stopping the aggressively action / reaction they were having to each other. This put them in an enemy game… I mean, they ended up seeing each other as enemies more them friends with broken relationship that need to be restored.
Actually, we can say that Juliette was not acting as enemy, if she was Monroe would be dead. She was trying to show that she can be a threat but she isn’t. But the reactions of the other characters indicates that they were interpreting (or starting to) this in a different way… She is an enemy to be avoided.

-> The call for the death
Irukandji, by your posts I believe you are really upset because Nick called Juliette’s death. In this analyses I will consider this as the last stage of the ball is rolling example I gave above. I mean that, if not until now, Nick declared that for him Juliette is enemy and as this she must die. I am not discussing if he is wrong or right in this, I am just point out what Nick’s actions indicates.
But I have a question for you here, not to provoke you, but to bring a new element here. Why blame or be upset only with Nick? He was not alone there. Trubel listened the order (and she obeyed killing her in the end)… So Hank listened too… I don’t remember Rosalee was in the room too, but for sure Monroe was. No one of them, neither Monroe defended Juliette, or argued with Nick… or Answered that he/she would not be able to kill Juliette. All of them accepted Nicks decision and went to HUNT her and the royals.
This indicates that the group agreed with Nick in that call… So, they agreed with Nick that Juliette should be treated as enemy. And if they find them, they all agreed that she must die.
After the Spice shop, Rosale gave up on Juliette… After Nick’s call for Juliette’s death, Monroe agreed with him… ate least by omission.
Just to point out, all of this indicates that the ball is rolling against Juliette.

-> In the house, she was still the enemy in Nick’s eyes
Juliette went back to Nick’s / Juliette’s house. I confess that I don’t remember anymore the details, so forgive if there is some mistake bellow, but…
As far as I remember, Juliette started the talk trying to raise the white flag (originaly my impression was that she was playing him… but now after our talk, I am not so sure…). She asked for some kind of help asking him to kill her.
Nick’s reactions indicate he still saw her as enemy: I am done of fighting, he said. In other words Nick was saying that as Juliette was enemy, there just two options for them: fight or let each other go.
Juliette’s reaction was samething like: as you see me as enemy, let’s act like enemies…. So she started to attack him… Here we have got to the original question of the thread: would Juliette have killed Nick?
Trubel believed that yes, Juliette would have killed Nick… So she killed Juliette first.

-> Season 5 – how all of this affect the future?
After all of that, let’s imagine that Juliette survive Trubel’s arrows. Doesn’t matter Juliette’s real intentions. Trubel’s description of what she saw will say to Monroe and Rosale that Juliette would have killed Nick if Trubel didn’t shoot her.

-> Conclussion
So everything, until now, are getting Juliette apart from Monroe and Rosale.
I know that many of those argues can be criticized if we consider all four seassons, and not just the last one. I also know that things can be different if some of them stop the negative rolling ball and the other accept the, last call, “good will act”.
But based in what I have wrote above, there are some obstacles that must be by passed:
1. Apparently Juliette wants to be accepted in her new form while Rosalee and Monroe wants to change her back in what she was. One of them will have to change the expectation.
2. Even if Rosale and Monroe accept Juliette as hexabiest, as I have wrote above, they consider Juliette responsible for their actions (differently of Sean). A point here is that all of them are helping Adelaind, but none of them trust her… so, they would help Juliette, but trust and being friend again would take time.
3. If Juliette became normal again, as I said above, Rosale and Monroe still consider Juliette for their actions. As I argued above, their actions indicate that they didn’t consider Juliette anything like being controlled by a hexanbiest spirit.
Certainly there are other ways to see those episodes described above. At this time, those are the points I am taking from season 4 that indicates to me that Monroe and Rosalee would not accept Juliette easily, at least not after some time of re-adaptation.
Adriao I have not been following this thread for a while, but seen this was your post thought I check what was being said. I like you cause and effects points.

jsgrimm45, thank you.

I just tried to link the dots.

(06-14-2015, 08:08 PM)irukandji Wrote: Adriano, I think we just see things differently.

I hope this is not a bad thing... .

Big Grin


RE: Would Juliette really have killed Nick? - irukandji - 06-15-2015

It's not a bad thing, Adriano. We just see it differently that's all.

Okay, here are my conclusions on the fourth season. Juliette did not leave with the royals as expected. She came back home. Focusing specifically Rosalee and Monroe, and knowing what I know of them from the fourth season, I think they would want to know why. I could see them going to the hospital to talk to her. They might even pursue the reasons why she acted the way she did at the spice shop.

Then, based on what Juliette tells them, I see Rosalee, specifically, taking 20 steps back and looking at what she could have done differently that day in the spice shop. Rosalee is a herbalist, but in her own way, she is also a scientist. She would no doubt question why she put her faith in a belief system rather than scientifically weighing the situation and coming up with facts based on her knowledge. She would question why she handled the situation so sloppily and if she was acting in Juliette’s best interests or her own.

As for Juliette, her outcome depends upon what she tells Monroe and Rosalee. She may very well wish to remain a hexenbiest, but might ask for help in dealing with her symptoms. She might want to be a human again in which case a search begins for a cure. If she decides she wants to remain a hexenbiest and wants to remain in their company, then they all (not just Juliette) will have to work together to resolve their conflicts.


RE: Would Juliette really have killed Nick? - Adriano Neres Rodrigues - 06-15-2015

Well... actually I don't know if we are seeing things so diferently... Let me explain...

(06-14-2015, 06:52 PM)Adriano Neres Rodrigues Wrote: I also know that things can be different if some of them stop the negative rolling ball and the other accept the, last call, “good will act”.

(06-15-2015, 08:41 AM)irukandji Wrote: Okay, here are my conclusions on the fourth season. Juliette did not leave with the royals as expected. She came back home. Focusing specifically Rosalee and Monroe, and knowing what I know of them from the fourth season, I think they would want to know why. I could see them going to the hospital to talk to her. They might even pursue the reasons why she acted the way she did at the spice shop.

This would be the “good will act” I talked about. Juliette's reaction to that action would be able to stop the negative rolling ball.

(06-15-2015, 08:41 AM)irukandji Wrote: Then, based on what Juliette tells them,

You quote that the sequense depends on Juliete's reaction. That is exactly my point point. The things the will happend after dependes on how they are reacting now to what happend before.

(06-15-2015, 08:41 AM)irukandji Wrote: I see Rosalee, specifically, taking 20 steps back and looking at what she could have done differently that day in the spice shop. Rosalee is a herbalist, but in her own way, she is also a scientist. She would no doubt question why she put her faith in a belief system rather than scientifically weighing the situation and coming up with facts based on her knowledge. She would question why she handled the situation so sloppily and if she was acting in Juliette’s best interests or her own.
Just to point out. I based my argues in a cause efect chain reaction. So, I can perfectly see Rosalee doing this. But as you said, she should take "... 20 steps back". So, we have a dinamic that must be reverse.


(06-15-2015, 08:41 AM)irukandji Wrote: As for Juliette, her outcome depends upon what she tells Monroe and Rosalee. She may very well wish to remain a hexenbiest, but might ask for help in dealing with her symptoms. She might want to be a human again in which case a search begins for a cure. If she decides she wants to remain a hexenbiest and wants to remain in their company, then they all (not just Juliette) will have to work together to resolve their conflicts.

You have just explained how the characteres can react in a way that Rosalee and Juliette get close friends again.

The diference I see between our point of view is that you are framing a positive perspective where characteres would act in a positive way so they get close again. In your previwed future they would reverse the tendence of past actions and build a new light future (I am using those terms just to mark a difference with what I will wrote bellow).

In my term, I am framing a negative perspective where characteres would act in negative way so would get even more apart from each other. In my previewed future they would reinforce the dark tendence the 4th season ended. (I am using dark just to mark as diferent from the term light I used above).

Let me explain that I am not using a negative perspective because I believe this is the right one, or becuase your preview would not happend. I am using the negative perspective becuase I believe that to get to your preview (the light future) they will have to deal and by pass obstacles that, if they didn't, they would end up in my preview (the dark future).

Back to the subject to give an exemple. Rosalee can imagine that Juliette went back to the house to kill Nick and them go out to Europe to live with the royals. If Rosalee believes that, she would never go to the hospital. This is an obstacle to your light future perfectly possible based on how things happend in the end of seasson 4. But, Rosalee can also "want to know why", as you said, by passing the dark obstacle I have put above. That is also perfectly possible based in Rosalee's actions in all 4 seassons.

If we get only mine preview, we will lost the perspective that "... the show is about acceptance" as you comment in another post. But if we get only your preview, we will lost the perspective that the last season put a mine field between Rosalee/Monroe and Juliette. And this mine field must be by passed.

Actually, I think it would be very interesting to see how the show writers would build season 5 story to get them close again... How would they write characters actions to by pass the close past events in season 4.


RE: Would Juliette really have killed Nick? - irukandji - 06-15-2015

Adriano, you are incorrect. I was not looking at it from a positive or negative aspect, but trying to look at it according to our previous discussion and apply the logical outcome. You set the parameters for the scenario. Juliette lives and wants to be part of the group again. You asked the question if Rosalie and Monroe take her back. In addition, you're specific about the fourth season. That's the way I looked at it, according to what you said.

I don't think whether Rosalie or Monroe take her back is even an issue any more because Juliette changed the dynamics. It isn't an instance of her leaving for a long while and then coming home and trying to win them back. She didn't leave but came back home. Now the question I think Rosalee and Monroe would be asking is why. Does that make sense?


RE: Would Juliette really have killed Nick? - Adriano Neres Rodrigues - 06-15-2015

(06-15-2015, 11:03 AM)irukandji Wrote: Adriano, you are incorrect. I was not looking at it from a positive or negative aspect, but trying to look at it according to our previous discussion and apply the logical outcome. You set the parameters for the scenario. Juliette lives and wants to be part of the group again. You asked the question if Rosalie and Monroe take her back. In addition, you're specific about the fourth season. That's the way I looked at it, according to what you said.

I don't think whether Rosalie or Monroe take her back is even an issue any more because Juliette changed the dynamics. It isn't an instance of her leaving for a long while and then coming home and trying to win them back. She didn't leave but came back home. Now the question I think Rosalee and Monroe would be asking is why. Does that make sense?

It does make sense... for sure... But in my opinion, you are seeing only one side of the coin.

You are saying that Juliette changed the dynamic... And because of that Rosalee will automaticaly get close to her again. That is only half correctly, in my opinion.
Juliette made 50% of the job to change the dynamic. The other 50% depends on Rosalee's and Monroe's interpretation of this action.

You are taking for sure that Rosalee will interpret Juliette's actions in a perspective of goog will. I understand that you only see logic in this scenario.
That is why, in my opinion, you are seeing this by a positive perspective.

I can see other events happening, that I have alredy wrote before, interfering in their interpretation of Juliette's actions. I can see logic in a negative scenario.


RE: Would Juliette really have killed Nick? - irukandji - 06-15-2015

(06-15-2015, 12:12 PM)Adriano Neres Rodrigues Wrote: It does make sense... for sure... But in my opinion, you are seeing only one side of the coin.

You are saying that Juliette changed the dynamic... And because of that Rosalee will automaticaly get close to her again.

No, that's not what I'm saying at all. I'm not even addressing the issue of whether or not Rosalee will get close to Juliette or not. It's a non-existent issue at this point, in my opinion.


RE: Would Juliette really have killed Nick? - New Guy - 06-16-2015

Hi Grimm Fans,

This discussion topic is “Would Juliette really have killed Nick?”

Yes.

From the NBC recaps you will find:

1. Juliette used her hexenbiest power to kill Jonah by causing his head to explode. See 4.10. Yes she is deadly.
2. Juliette expressed her desire to kill Adelind. She attempted to kill Adelind in the big fight scene, 4.13. Then she tried to murder Adelind using using Telekinesis to smash her with a gargoyle, 4.17. Both attempts failed.
3. In 4.20 Juliette tries to Murder Monroe using Telekinesis to force Nick to fire his gun for what she hoped to be fatal. Hank shoved Monroe away and the bullet misses.
4. She plotted the murder of several innocent neighbors and had a significant role in the murder of Nick’s mother, 4.20. All were brutally murdered, 4.21. Juliette never shows ant remorse.
5. So when Nick yields to Juliette in the battle to death in 4.22 the hexenbiest (Juliett) stands over him, claws out and arm held high ready to rip out his throat. She says “goodbye Nick.” --- Now remove Trubel from the remainder…

With nothing to stop her, Juliette strikes Nick until she is certain he is dead, mutilates him for good measure, decapitates him and puts Nick’s head in the box with Kelly’s. No more Nick and no more Grimm shows on Friday night.

Fortunately, Trubel does intervene. As Nick directed, Trubel kills Juliette with two well-placed crossbow bolts to her chest. There will be a Season 5, Hooray!

New Guy


RE: Would Juliette really have killed Nick? - irukandji - 06-16-2015

I'll just say this. Juliette would not have killed Nick.


Nick is dead and Juliette did kill him - izzy - 06-16-2015

When you are twenty your see the world one way, when you are thirty another, by the time you have hit your 5th decade time has forced a sort of wisdom upon you simply because you have seen so much.

If Grimm in any way models real life, Juliette has in fact killed Nick. the Nick that was, will never be again. This event is one of those life altering events, the Nick that was is no more. He will be transformed by this experience, and likely the transformation will not be for the good. He will be bitter, angry, even more cynical, he will care less for the opinion of others and be more callous and jaundice, his compassion will take a fatal blow. The softer side of Nick will have died, the compassionate side that was Nick will no longer be. And that was the old Nick, a compassionate man,now he will be a shell of that man, as he morphs into a new Nick, a more cynical bastard, one still capable of great good, but one less willing to a stick his neck out for stranger. He will wall up his compassion and it will now only exist fro his child. He will never again let a woman in as deep as Juliette.

That is reality...I have seen it time and again.


RE: Would Juliette really have killed Nick? - Hexenadler - 06-17-2015

(06-16-2015, 10:04 PM)izzy Wrote: When you are twenty your see the world one way, when you are thirty another, by the time you have hit your 5th decade time has forced a sort of wisdom upon you simply because you have seen so much.

A lot of that can also depend on who you are, don't you think?