+- 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: Too much moral grayness in GRIMM? (/Thread-Too-much-moral-grayness-in-GRIMM)
Too much moral grayness in GRIMM? - Hexenadler - 11-02-2015
Is anyone else getting a little tired of characters who are always morally compromised in some fashion? I'm guessing it's a "big thing" right now in TV and film, especially after the success of BREAKING BAD and GAME OF THRONES, but it really makes me miss the glory days of the 1980's, when popular entertainment knew who the good guys and bad guys were.
Now, of course, things are different. Now we have a Superman willing to snap a villain's neck, when there was once a time when even the idea of Superman killing anyone was considered creatively reckless and stupid. SUICIDE SQUAD is an upcoming comic book movie starring a gang of villains as the "heroes." GRIMM is no better, featuring a protagonist ready to bend the law to his own ends, and a cast who can become bloodthirsty monsters if all the right buttons are pushed. Juliette's fate hasn't helped matters, either. When the only person we feel we can completely trust is Bud, you KNOW you're watching a bleak show.
Is all the idolization surrounding "badasses" and anti-heroes having a negative cumulative effect? Should the age of "lawful good" characters make some kind of comeback?
RE: Too much moral grayness in GRIMM? - eric - 11-02-2015
There is very little pure white or pure black in the real world. Remember, the original comics were for children, who see things in a simple yes or no fashion. We should all be working to remove as much of the dark spots in our lives as we can, but not be too surprised when we find a dark spot or two in our character. Like the old westerns, most of the white guys were good, and the red skins(they were not yet called Native Americans} were either bad or in league with the whites. In the Catholic church, they usually wait 5 years before declaring anyone a saint--things have a way of surfacing after a while. A pure white or pure black character would be dull and less complex. A true hero is one who strives to be good, who will fall on occasion, but continues to strives to become better.
RE: Too much moral grayness in GRIMM? - Lin S. - 11-03-2015
(11-02-2015, 04:26 PM)Hexenadler Wrote: Is anyone else getting a little tired of characters who are always morally compromised in some fashion? I'm guessing it's a "big thing" right now in TV and film, especially after the success of BREAKING BAD and GAME OF THRONES, but it really makes me miss the glory days of the 1980's, when popular entertainment knew who the good guys and bad guys were.
Now, of course, things are different. Now we have a Superman willing to snap a villain's neck, when there was once a time when even the idea of Superman killing anyone was considered creatively reckless and stupid. SUICIDE SQUAD is an upcoming comic book movie starring a gang of villains as the "heroes." GRIMM is no better, featuring a protagonist ready to bend the law to his own ends, and a cast who can become bloodthirsty monsters if all the right buttons are pushed. Juliette's fate hasn't helped matters, either. When the only person we feel we can completely trust is Bud, you KNOW you're watching a bleak show.
Is all the idolization surrounding "badasses" and anti-heroes having a negative cumulative effect? Should the age of "lawful good" characters make some kind of comeback?
I feel similiar. Complex and many layered is one thing. A series should "reveal" character already there. But Grimm has stepped over the line into chaos. If Nick isn't a better kind of Grimm then what's the point of watching him?
I don't have a problem with Nick and Adalind getting together "IF" and this the important part they make the transition have a reason or purpose to it. So far they have failed to do that. All they have shown is Rosalee taking Nick by the hand and saying "here, now feel this way about her."
Unfortunately I am not following Rosalee yet.
RE: Too much moral grayness in GRIMM? - Elkhound - 11-03-2015
(11-02-2015, 10:41 PM)eric Wrote: A pure white or pure black character would be dull and less complex. A true hero is one who strives to be good, who will fall on occasion, but continues to strives to become better.
Exactly.
RE: Too much moral grayness in GRIMM? - izzy - 11-03-2015
(11-03-2015, 05:06 AM)Lin S. Wrote: I don't have a problem with Nick and Adalind getting together "IF" and this the important part they make the transition have a reason or purpose to it. So far they have failed to do that. All they have shown is Rosalee taking Nick by the hand and saying "here, now feel this way about her."
Unfortunately I am not following Rosalee yet.
Getting together is an interesting term.
Here is a perspective. There is a child involved. A child deserves both an involved mother and father in their life, who cohabit and raise the child in a warm and nurturing environment. The child is innocent in all of this. The child now needs to be the focus of their life fro the next 20 some years. That means they give up on their individual identity for the sake of the child and are a mommy and a daddy first an foremost. They may or may not want to be a husband and wife or snuggle buddies, but the they better get use to self gratification because they sure as heck should not bring third parties into their mutual child's life.
So Nick needs to man up and be father to his son. He can become a friend with benefits to Adalind, actually develop feelings for her, or resign himself to marrying his right hand. Sometime life just deals you a hand that sucks.
RE: Too much moral grayness in GRIMM? - wfmyers1207 - 11-03-2015
(11-02-2015, 10:41 PM)eric Wrote: There is very little pure white or pure black in the real world. Remember, the original comics were for children, who see things in a simple yes or no fashion. We should all be working to remove as much of the dark spots in our lives as we can, but not be too surprised when we find a dark spot or two in our character. Like the old westerns, most of the white guys were good, and the red skins(they were not yet called Native Americans} were either bad or in league with the whites. In the Catholic church, they usually wait 5 years before declaring anyone a saint--things have a way of surfacing after a while. A pure white or pure black character would be dull and less complex. A true hero is one who strives to be good, who will fall on occasion, but continues to strives to become better.
OK, that first sentence I have to disagree with. Yes, there is a lot of gray in the world, but there are some things that are black and white!
If someone risks his/her life to save another life, is that gray?
If someone molests a child, is that gray?
I think that nowadays far to many people want to see "gray" where it does not exist. And not because they are trying to be all "nonjudgemental" but rather because of moral cowardice. Don't have to make a judgement, don't have to take a stand!!
RE: Too much moral grayness in GRIMM? - irukandji - 11-03-2015
(11-03-2015, 05:06 AM)Lin S. Wrote: I don't have a problem with Nick and Adalind getting together "IF" and this the important part they make the transition have a reason or purpose to it. So far they have failed to do that. All they have shown is Rosalee taking Nick by the hand and saying "here, now feel this way about her."
Unfortunately I am not following Rosalee yet.
It's hard enough being a parent when two people are married and have been committed for sometime, and also have everything going for them. These two? What have they got to give a baby? Immense immaturity and a history of not only hating one another, but some serious criminal activities to boot.
I don't have an issue with Nick taking the baby on his terms. But living with Adalind and pretended to be one big happy family? I just don't see it.
I think you have an excellent point about Rosalee, Lin. If she has to handhold Nick into believing being a father is a good thing, that's a serious redflag to me.
RE: Too much moral grayness in GRIMM? - Lin S. - 11-03-2015
(11-03-2015, 05:24 PM)irukandji Wrote:(11-03-2015, 05:06 AM)Lin S. Wrote: I don't have a problem with Nick and Adalind getting together "IF" and this the important part they make the transition have a reason or purpose to it. So far they have failed to do that. All they have shown is Rosalee taking Nick by the hand and saying "here, now feel this way about her."
Unfortunately I am not following Rosalee yet.
It's hard enough being a parent when two people are married and have been committed for sometime, and also have everything going for them. These two? What have they got to give a baby? Immense immaturity and a history of not only hating one another, but some serious criminal activities to boot.
I don't have an issue with Nick taking the baby on his terms. But living with Adalind and pretended to be one big happy family? I just don't see it.
I think you have an excellent point about Rosalee, Lin. If she has to handhold Nick into believing being a father is a good thing, that's a serious redflag to me.
I had this problem with Buffy and Angel and now it seems to be appearing in Grimm. I feel as if the producers try so hard to "surprise" the audience, come up with something new every time, that they come up with the illogical.
After all if logic is what would naturally follow, then to be unpredictable you have to be unlogical. At least I see that in Joss Whedon and now I see it in Dave Greenwalt.
If surprise is the primary element you are going for in a show then eventually you aren't revealing hidden personality of your characters you go all over the map with characters who no longer have a core.
I fear this may be happening with Grimm. But then I will give it a few more episodes.
RE: Too much moral grayness in GRIMM? - Hexenadler - 11-03-2015
(11-03-2015, 06:22 PM)Lin S. Wrote: If surprise is the primary element you are going for in a show then eventually you aren't revealing hidden personality of your characters you go all over the map with characters who no longer have a core.
Nail. Head.
RE: Too much moral grayness in GRIMM? - izzy - 11-03-2015
(11-03-2015, 05:24 PM)irukandji Wrote: It's hard enough being a parent when two people are married and have been committed for sometime, and also have everything going for them. These two? What have they got to give a baby? Immense immaturity and a history of not only hating one another, but some serious criminal activities to boot.
I don't have an issue with Nick taking the baby on his terms. But living with Adalind and pretended to be one big happy family? I just don't see it.
I think you have an excellent point about Rosalee, Lin. If she has to handhold Nick into believing being a father is a good thing, that's a serious redflag to me.
My dearest deadly jellyfish,
I oft tell my male proteges that they will never know the full range of emotions a sentient being is capable of until they marry and have children. I do not tell them it will be a positive experience, but rather the truth that they will never, ever know the full range of emotions capable a human being is capable of unless they do.
That aside, historically men scale to the task put in front of them. the question with Nick is, is he going to be a man or a little boy. I think Nick is still a boy, in fact I think he is rather a punk. If his character was a real person, I would hope that the duty of fatherhood would chisel away at the immature exterior of the boy and reveal a man underneath it all.
Had you met me 30 some years ago, I suspect you would be shocked to now view the person I have become. Life events that are thrust upon you can be trans-formative, the can elevate you spiritually and force you to become something other than your would have if left of your own accord.
Maybe, just maybe, this child can be what saves Nick and Adalind from the innate, destructive path they are on and transform them into more reflective individuals.
Your fan,
Izod