+- Grimm Forum (https://grimmforum.com/forum)
+-- Forum: Grimm Universe (https://grimmforum.com/forum/Forum-Grimm-Universe)
+--- Forum: Episode Discussions (https://grimmforum.com/forum/Forum-Episode-Discussions)
+---- Forum: Season 5 (https://grimmforum.com/forum/Forum-Season-5)
+---- Thread: S5E20 - Bad Night (/Thread-S5E20-Bad-Night)
RE: S5E20 - Bad Night - speakeasy - 05-16-2016
(05-16-2016, 07:09 PM)FaceInTheCrowd Wrote: My guess is that the upper echelons of BC are really nothing more than a wesen would-be royal family, and their lower level followers the new pan-wesen verrat.
It does resemble the Royals in that way, except that as in most hierarchical structures of power, there is probably a middle tier of enforcers filling the role of verrat, with a vast bottom layer of regular wesen who become both the victims and the lifeline of those at the top. Would work out fine if they were ants or bees, but it's unacceptable to thinking beings.
RE: S5E20 - Bad Night - FaceInTheCrowd - 05-16-2016
The hidden existence of wesen among humans is a more complicated than just being afraid to publicly woge. While predator wesen like Blutbaden and Lausenschlange may feel constrained and repressed, Eisbibers, Maushertz and Indole Gentile probably feel a lot better living somewhere that predators can't be themselves whenever and wherever they want. Offhand, I'd guess there aren't many, if any, members of the gentler wesen in BC because they're aching to be able to woge at will.
RE: S5E20 - Bad Night - syscrash - 05-16-2016
Quote:But when wesen use their strength for dominance, they lose IQ points. The more they use that strength, the more IQ points are lost. Eventually, they go insane and cannot resort back to being human. Sean says he wants a primitive and violent world. If that's the case, why is he retreating to luxury and comfort in a mansion? He should be camping out in his backyard and living off the land. He's a hypocrite if he tells Nick a violent and primitive world is the answer, yet he has no intention of living primitively.
Why would you think they would lose IQ points. Is that a reference to the dumb jock stereotype. We have seen, powerful wesen doing well monetarily. Money does not indicate IQ but a million dollar house is not owned by an idiot. You have a very narrow definition of primitive and violent. Sean saying "you took may Grimm, I take your life even if you are my brother" is as primitive and as violent as you can get. Showing that concept has nothing to do with a standard of living.
RE: S5E20 - Bad Night - FaceInTheCrowd - 05-16-2016
I think it's a reference to the umkippen, where wesen who woge too often start to lose their unwoged side as their wesen side takes over and they start to act on instinct rather than conscious thought. But from the description Monroe and Rosalie gave, it doesn't seem to matter why the wesen woged; it's simply a matter of frequency.
RE: S5E20 - Bad Night - syscrash - 05-16-2016
Quote:I think it's a reference to the umkippen,The problem is we have seen a number of wesen that woge often. The fortuneteller for one. Even Monroe mentioned he would often hunt which means he woges. Even the other members in the show where not effected. I took this to mean it is something that can happen not something that will happen. I would think the condition of the woge could also have something to do with it.. Woging under stress like he was in the show exasperates the condition.
RE: S5E20 - Bad Night - FaceInTheCrowd - 05-16-2016
Way back in the beginning, Monroe told Nick that a blutbad is good for a week to 10 days between feedings. How often would you guess that carnival had a show? I'm thinking it could have been as many as 12 a day.
RE: S5E20 - Bad Night - izzy - 05-17-2016
(05-16-2016, 06:14 PM)irukandji Wrote: Nick's reaction in this particular instance also continues to astonish me because he showed such complete and utter stupidity. He entrusts a special baby to his mother, a person he hardly knows and who he hadn't seen in 20 years because he was told she was dead. As a policeman, his primary concern should be for both mother and baby. Diana would have been better off with her mother. Nick, as an experienced detective, would have seen hundreds of domestic cases. His sixth sense should have been flagging a thousand red flags at him when Kelly was talking him into giving her Diana.
and...
Quote:I for one would like to see Nick become a stronger more dominant character. Monroe and Rosalee are great resources, but they are beginning to wear thin in my opinion. They just can't possibly know everything about everything, yet that's what we're led to believe from week to week.
So...Oh go ahead and click, you know you want to!!! given your first quote - how? They would have to retool the character. Nick is not a leader, he may be a charismatic figure that gets people to follow him, but that is actually different than being a leader. For one, as you pointed out he makes extremely poor decisions, in many ways it goes back to my comments about his seeming arrested adolescent development. rememebr the court holders form hihg school, with their little troupe f hanger-ons, msot of the folks I know like that washed out in the adult world. tha ti swhat NIck sor tof remineds me of.
When you look at it, Rosalee may view him a bit maternally, or at least as a big sister-little brother relationship. Monroe, may be his friend, but in many ways Monroe plays a wise elder to an impertinent youth. I guess what I am saying is after 5 seasons, Nick character does not seem to have matured much and I don't see how he grows in leadership, given the fact he is, well, Nick. Everyone's favorite brother.
Quote:I would also like to see Nick leave the force.
Ditto.
But as you know, I would like to see some attempt made to bring him to justice for his many crimes. I also think he should be afforded a path to redemption, in the form of the classic way men use to restore honor to their family name, ala warden Norton in the ShawShank Redemption: Warden Norton
But frankly the writers seem to lack the moral courage to make a more profound statement as other series have attempted to do(aka Seinfeld, The Sopranos).
But perhaps justice can be served by a group of unconnected maraudering wesen in the aftermath of whatever conclusion they draw this BC/HW nonsense with. Well, I can dream can't I?
RE: S5E20 - Bad Night - irukandji - 05-17-2016
(05-16-2016, 08:48 PM)syscrash Wrote: You have a very narrow definition of primitive and violent. Sean saying "you took may Grimm, I take your life even if you are my brother" is as primitive and as violent as you can get.
That's it? That's your impression of a more primitive and violent world that Sean was talking about? That's a pretty narrow vision too, syscrash.
RE: S5E20 - Bad Night - Robyn - 05-17-2016
Quote:irukandji
Sean says he wants a primitive and violent world. If that's the case, why is he retreating to luxury and comfort in a mansion? He should be camping out in his backyard and living off the land. He's a hypocrite if he tells Nick a violent and primitive world is the answer, yet he has no intention of living primitively.
This doesn’t just represent Renard, but any top level leader/dictator. It’s the followers and the suppressed that suffer the impoverished & violent consequences while rulers/usurpers maintain a lifestyle of protected luxury.
Quote:irukandjiRather than bothering with valid causation that will move plots & characters in the necessary direction for the storyline they use the go-to method of contrived causation. It’s usually the characters that suffer the consequences because they’re the ones that look foolish, coldhearted, etc.
Thank you for the nice compliment, Vance. There are many here who believe Nick is a good cop, but one of the earmarks of a good cop are the resources they have at their disposal. Because they know so many people, they can think their way out of the box.
That's why it was rather surprising to me that Renard caved when Kelly wanted to get her hands on baby Diana. Renard, as a police captain, would have many, many resources at his disposal to safely hide both Diana and Adalind. And him being the smooze talker of the group, I have no doubt he could have talked Adalind into hiding.
The show established in prior episodes that Adalind had already agreed to the Resistance taking her and the baby underground. Nothing indicated that Adalind ever planned to return to Portland or the lives of Team Grimm. But Kelly sharing that tidbit of information might upset the desired storyline - Adalind loses her child, and we don’t know what to do with this baby so let’s send her somewhere off screen.
Quote:IzzyNick gave me a mama’s boy vibe from the beginning, so him relenting to his mother’s commands didn’t surprise me even though he was reluctant to approach Renard. With Adalind, I think Nick’s quick decision to go along with Kelly was colored by his history with Adalind. In his mind Adalind couldn’t possibly be a good mother, and I imagine Nick enjoyed the payback to some degree.
Nick's reaction in this particular instance also continues to astonish me because he showed such complete and utter stupidity. He entrusts a special baby to his mother, a person he hardly knows and who he hadn't seen in 20 years because he was told she was dead. As a policeman, his primary concern should be for both mother and baby. Diana would have been better off with her mother. Nick, as an experienced detective, would have seen hundreds of domestic cases. His sixth sense should have been flagging a thousand red flags at him when Kelly was talking him into giving her Diana.
We’ve touched on this in earlier posts - learning from experience and utilizing that knowledge to prevent repeating mistakes.
The decision to take Diana from Adalind didn’t accomplish anything, it only made matters worse in the long run. Pain and suffering, death and destruction have followed. Diana was taken in S3 to protect the child and Portland. It’s S5 and Diana and Portland are in peril, and not one participant in the scheme has ever reflected on their choices and questioned if they made a mistake with the child’s safety and their opinion of Adalind as a mother. And history is repeating itself. In S5 everyone except Adalind is determining what’s best for Diana and Portland just as they did in S3.
Quote:I for one would like to see Nick become a stronger more dominant character. Monroe and Rosalee are great resources, but they are beginning to wear thin in my opinion. They just can't possibly know everything about everything, yet that's what we're led to believe from week to week.Case of the week solved in 42 minutes or less and actors on the payroll needing something to do. And it’s sad because the actors have a lot to offer to their characters and the storylines.
RE: S5E20 - Bad Night - irukandji - 05-17-2016
(05-17-2016, 12:59 AM)izzy Wrote: So...Oh go ahead and click, you know you want to!!!
I did. I couldn't resist!
(05-17-2016, 12:59 AM)izzy Wrote: given your first quote - how? They would have to retool the character. Nick is not a leader, he may be a charismatic figure that gets people to follow him, but that is actually different than being a leader. For one, as you pointed out he makes extremely poor decisions, in many ways it goes back to my comments about his seeming arrested adolescent development. rememebr the court holders form hihg school, with their little troupe f hanger-ons, msot of the folks I know like that washed out in the adult world. tha ti swhat NIck sor tof remineds me of.
When you look at it, Rosalee may view him a bit maternally, or at least as a big sister-little brother relationship. Monroe, may be his friend, but in many ways Monroe plays a wise elder to an impertinent youth. I guess what I am saying is after 5 seasons, Nick character does not seem to have matured much and I don't see how he grows in leadership, given the fact he is, well, Nick. Everyone's favorite brother.
I'm probably one of the few that doesn't find David Giuntoli charismatic. Not trying to be mean here, but I have a really hard time believing Juliette or Adalind could ever fall in love with him. He looks like a very nice guy in real life, but on the screen there's just not a lot there, even after five years.
The only way I could see Nick being retooled is through a major storyline, like a revolution. After that, I'm with you. Punishment is a must for Nick. In my opinion, he needs to atone more than any other character on Grimm. I laughed when I read your example of Warden Norton from the Shawshank Redemption. I actually never considered that kind of redemption for his character.
Right now I am assuming Grimm will only have 13 episodes left at this point, so I don't see a major retooling of Nick.
Quote:Robyn wrote:
Nick gave me a mama’s boy vibe from the beginning, so him relenting to his mother’s commands didn’t surprise me even though he was reluctant to approach Renard. With Adalind, I think Nick’s quick decision to go along with Kelly was colored by his history with Adalind. In his mind Adalind couldn’t possibly be a good mother, and I imagine Nick enjoyed the payback to some degree.
If he had a mama's boy vibe, that at least would have been something. I didn't even get impression from him.