07-15-2017, 06:41 AM
(07-15-2017, 05:42 AM)Robyn Wrote:(07-14-2017, 07:07 AM)dicappatore Wrote: Here is my question to you Robyn. When analyzing these fictional character, are we applying our analysis on what is in the plot or what we wish they did. For me, I do my analysis on what is in the script. The analysis on what ideas we had on other outcomes should be separate discussion from the facts of the plot.I don’t understand how the two can be isolated. What would a discussion of only a script be other than the characters did specific actions and said specific statements? Unless viewers interact by scrutinizing, questioning, reacting positively and negatively, characters would never be more than one dimensional representations of the creative team’s intent/vision.
For instance. The pro-Juliette crowd labels Nick is selfish and untrustworthy to Juliette about hid Grimm life. Yet when he tries to let her into his world, she rejects it all including from the rest of the gang. How come none of you pro-Juliette place no blame on her? It takes two to Tango.
To me, Nick was right for doing what he did, not because I hate Juliette. It’s because of her reaction to his honesty. Imagine how much worse her reaction would have been, if he was honest with her in the beginning, before there was a gang to support his enigmas and had all this crap happen to her.
Now, the analysis above I based on what is given on the screen as we were watching, not on my re-write. There is nothing wrong in the discussion of Ideas we have. How we would have changed the plot, characters, timeline, etc. How we could have saved the show for more seasons.
How can we analyze what they were thinking? They are not sitting on a couch in front of us to ask questions to either the characters nor the writers to explain what a line or scene was meant. We can only go by what’s IS said and reactions we witness.
Back to my question. Shouldn’t the two discussions be kept separate? Instead of intermixing the two?
Nick was deceptive and Juliette was suspicious, Nick was forthcoming and Juliette was reluctant only because the characters were written that way in the script. Unless those scenes prompt a smorgasbord of reactions they would remain as flat as the paper they were written on.
A discussion of a script would entail whether it was well written and the characters and events followed a cohesive path to the episode’s conclusion. Since neither character was written as having a change in feelings for the other, there isn’t a legitimate reason to introduce any personally emotional reaction into the discussion if we’re only discussing the script. Neither character would be right or wrong, neither character would warrant praise or disdain - unless we bring personally emotional reactions into the discussion.
IMO. The way I see it is, in one hand we should discuss us as being the Judge, Jury and Executioner since is what we do in our heads on these characters anyway. Share our thought on based on what is presented to us.
Then on the other hand we also discuss what you recommend. This gives us more of a contrast on what was and what it could have been. To me seeing the contrast between the written word and how we would have it re-written. It gives a more varied understanding on our various outlook.
You know you are OLD, when you see the Slide Ruler you used in college selling in an ANTIQUE SHOP!!