+- 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: Why Juliette as a character didn't click with the audience (/Thread-Why-Juliette-as-a-character-didn-t-click-with-the-audience)
RE: Why Juliette as a character didn't click with the audience - brandon - 09-19-2017
I considers Nick and Adalind very similar and has nothing to do with sex.
RE: Why Juliette as a character didn't click with the audience - wesen - 09-19-2017
(09-19-2017, 07:45 PM)brandon Wrote: I considers Nick and Adalind very similar and has nothing to do with sex.
They do share similar values, hopes and dreams.
Looking at Juliette and Nick's relationship, it's clear that their relationship would have been doomed even if Adalind hadn't been in the picture. They just had conflicting wants and desires, Juliette wanted to settle down with Nick the human, not the Grimm. Nick wanted to continue being a Grimm, and without his powers, he'd probably be feeling a part of himself would always be missing.
Quote:I think a distinction that must be made is between compromise and avoidance. If you agree to something because you are afraid of a fight, you will not be happy with the compromise. Of course nobody is completely happy with a compromise because usually each person is giving up something that they want. But you have to be able to live with the compromise without feeling resentful.
Resentment occurs when you make compromises that are really not OK with you. These are often compromises that require you to give up a part of your self-definition. You are pressured into a position of agreeing to something that violates your principles. People often agree to these compromises out of fear of conflict or even a loss of the relationship. If you are in a relationship in which you are afraid of your partner for any reason, you need to really think about whether this person is a healthy choice for you.
RE: Why Juliette as a character didn't click with the audience - irukandji - 09-20-2017
(09-19-2017, 07:45 PM)brandon Wrote: I considers Nick and Adalind very similar and has nothing to do with sex.
Well they both like sex. Wouldn't that be a similarity they share?
RE: Why Juliette as a character didn't click with the audience - brandon - 09-20-2017
no, both had a difficult childhood.
And also discovered that they were not as different as they thought the fights they had.
the important thing is that they came together to protect their child and that made them be seen differently.
juliette was always perfect until she changed to be a "Hexenbiest".
I think she could never handle the change, the way she thought she would be seen as a "Hexenbiest".
RE: Why Juliette as a character didn't click with the audience - Hexenadler - 09-20-2017
(09-19-2017, 10:11 AM)Hell Rell Wrote: For the millionth time, Adalind has changed. She was no longer the petty Hexenbiest she was portrayed as in earlier seasons.
And for the millionth time, simply sweeping her actions under the carpet - especially an action as serious as rape - was completely irresponsible on the part of the writers.
If they wanted to "reform" Adalind and make her a better woman, great. I'm a huge sucker for redemptive arcs. But if you're going to do that, you HAVE to acknowledge and contend with the absolutely vile crap she pulled in previous seasons. You HAVE to. The writers barely did that, if at all. What pissed me off about Nick and Adalind's love affair is the painfully obvious ways the writers manipulated the characters into those positions. The fact of the matter is, Nick switched gears in his attitude towards Adalind far too quickly. I think they were already sleeping together by the second or third episode in S5, and that's just flat-out lazy storytelling.
Greenwalt & Kouf stroked their beards and said to themselves "Hey, you know what would be a neat twist? Having Nick and Adalind fall in love!" Of course, being the guys in charge, nobody in the writer's room dared to suggest how the idea was innately problematic in light of everything Adalind had done up to that point in the show. Saying "Adalind has changed" is a ridiculous statement. If I ran over a child with my car while I was drunk, I could easily claim I wasn't the same man who killed that child because I'm now sober, but do you really think the grieving parents would accept that logic?
I could see Nick voluntarily sharing a home with Adalind purely out of his responsibility towards his newborn son, and NOT because of any developing feelings towards Adalind. But G&K had Nick and Adalind bunker up almost right out the gate, and that's what I find repulsive as hell.
RE: Why Juliette as a character didn't click with the audience - dicappatore - 09-20-2017
(09-20-2017, 07:25 AM)Hexenadler Wrote:(09-19-2017, 10:11 AM)Hell Rell Wrote: For the millionth time, Adalind has changed. She was no longer the petty Hexenbiest she was portrayed as in earlier seasons.
And for the millionth time, simply sweeping her actions under the carpet - especially an action as serious as rape - was completely irresponsible on the part of the writers.
If they wanted to "reform" Adalind and make her a better woman, great. I'm a huge sucker for redemptive arcs. But if you're going to do that, you HAVE to acknowledge and contend with the absolutely vile crap she pulled in previous seasons. You HAVE to. The writers barely did that, if at all. What pissed me off about Nick and Adalind's love affair is the painfully obvious ways the writers manipulated the characters into those positions. The fact of the matter is, Nick switched gears in his attitude towards Adalind far too quickly. I think they were already sleeping together by the second or third episode in S5, and that's just flat-out lazy storytelling.
Greenwalt & Kouf stroked their beards and said to themselves "Hey, you know what would be a neat twist? Having Nick and Adalind fall in love!" Of course, being the guys in charge, nobody in the writer's room dared to suggest how the idea was innately problematic in light of everything Adalind had done up to that point in the show. Saying "Adalind has changed" is a ridiculous statement. If I ran over a child with my car while I was drunk, I could easily claim I wasn't the same man who killed that child because I'm now sober, but do you really think the grieving parents would accept that logic?
I could see Nick voluntarily sharing a home with Adalind purely out of his responsibility towards his newborn son, and NOT because of any developing feelings towards Adalind. But G&K had Nick and Adalind bunker up almost right out the gate, and that's what I find repulsive as hell.
So, if your assumptions intermixed with the facts and the writers mistakes. Then answer the question. Why, Juliette as a character didn’t click with the audience? Are we, the ones whom didn’t click, all wrong and you are the one who got it right?
RE: Why Juliette as a character didn't click with the audience - rpmaluki - 09-20-2017
Speaking only for myself, I can say Juliette most definitely didn't click with me as a viewer. A relationship, much like a new show, you give it a shot and see whether or notit resonates with you. If you like it, you root for it as you would the show you liked. You would want it to last as long as possible, preferably the duration of that show but it took me a handful of episodes where she had a bit more to do than just playing Nick's girlfriend to realise that Juliette was not the person I wanted/felt was right for Nick (whom I had loved instantly) for the reasons already brought up by some posters, particularly @wesen. It wasn't that Juliette was a bad character, she was just not right for Nick as he was presented, a new grimm in a dangerous and secret world. What ruined at chances of me warming to her was the way the show dragged out every obstacle (with very little satisfactory resolutions) that I lost all patience with them as a couple. I wished for them to introduce a new love intrest too soon and I don't think this was a reaction the writers hoped to incite from their audience. I couldn't even enjoy them in S3 when they had no secrets between them and Juliette joined the scoobies because that was when I started liking Adalind as a character, someone I had actually loathed more than any fictional character imagined until Ward from Agents Of S.H.I.E.L.D. and I wanted to see more of her than I ever did Juliette.
They turned her into a hexenbiest and I thought, finally she may get interesting and I may like her for once because I was looking forward to them working out her transformation together as a unit and I felt sorry for her around the time of her confession to Nick and things seemed to fall apart. I thought nope, they would get through this since we had four years of them getting through other stuff. I thought this was a do-over the character and the relationship needed but then she burnt the trailer and set Kelly up to be beheaded and I went from indifference to pitying to hating the new Juliette and wanting her gone for good.
The writers had four years to do Juliette right for the show they wrote but they never did. She is the first and only leading lady I have ever disliked for the male lead of all the shows I have ever watched.
RE: Why Juliette as a character didn't click with the audience - wesen - 09-20-2017
(09-20-2017, 07:25 AM)Hexenadler Wrote:(09-19-2017, 10:11 AM)Hell Rell Wrote: For the millionth time, Adalind has changed. She was no longer the petty Hexenbiest she was portrayed as in earlier seasons.
And for the millionth time, simply sweeping her actions under the carpet - especially an action as serious as rape - was completely irresponsible on the part of the writers.
If they wanted to "reform" Adalind and make her a better woman, great. I'm a huge sucker for redemptive arcs. But if you're going to do that, you HAVE to acknowledge and contend with the absolutely vile crap she pulled in previous seasons. You HAVE to. The writers barely did that, if at all. What pissed me off about Nick and Adalind's love affair is the painfully obvious ways the writers manipulated the characters into those positions. The fact of the matter is, Nick switched gears in his attitude towards Adalind far too quickly. I think they were already sleeping together by the second or third episode in S5, and that's just flat-out lazy storytelling.
Greenwalt & Kouf stroked their beards and said to themselves "Hey, you know what would be a neat twist? Having Nick and Adalind fall in love!" Of course, being the guys in charge, nobody in the writer's room dared to suggest how the idea was innately problematic in light of everything Adalind had done up to that point in the show. Saying "Adalind has changed" is a ridiculous statement. If I ran over a child with my car while I was drunk, I could easily claim I wasn't the same man who killed that child because I'm now sober, but do you really think the grieving parents would accept that logic?
I could see Nick voluntarily sharing a home with Adalind purely out of his responsibility towards his newborn son, and NOT because of any developing feelings towards Adalind. But G&K had Nick and Adalind bunker up almost right out the gate, and that's what I find repulsive as hell.
The problem with your thinking is whether Nick considers what happened to him as rape. I mean, yes you could technically call it rape because he didn't consent to sleeping with Adalind, but if he doesn't feel violated would that have caused him harm? Also, if we're going down this road, then wouldn't Adalind have been Nick's victim in the first place because he kissed her without her consent when they fought at the ruins in season 1? That would have been considered sexual assault. And what about Juliette? She slept with Rachel as Renard, so that would make her a rapist as well. So exactly which of the main characters are the victims and who are the rapists/sexual attackers? Also, we're talking here about television, things happen a lot faster than what you'd expect in real life. I didn't feel what happened between Nick and Adalind happened too quickly, in television land. I also think the writers were already aware that the show was coming to an end soon, so it's not surprising that things went a bit faster than what you'd expect them to. I think they were starting to wrap things up.
I also don't know what kind of show you've been watching but Grimm has never been known to be this deep, complex, character driven type of show. Even in the first season, those complaints you have about how issues not being addressed or ignored were already apparent. The writers chose to go for a show that focused more on the action/WoW and humour rather than realism. The fact is, the show often depicts the characters shrugging off any issues they have with each other,and moving on quickly.
It's strange that you only seem bothered between Nick and Adalind's relationship, when there have been issues with Nick and Juliette even without Adalind in the picture, Nick withholding the truth and endangering Hank, allowing Wu to end up in a mental hospital without telling him that he wasn't crazy, Nick taking up too much of MonRosalee's time and endangering their lives, etc. I also find it strange that you have no problem with JuliEve and Nick reuniting (as evidenced by your fanfic) and embarking in a sadistic relationship even after JuliEve was responsible for the death of Nick's mother. You have a problem with Nick and Adalind being together because Adalind is a rapist yet you have no problem with Julieve and Nick hooking back together again? Seriously?
RE: Why Juliette as a character didn't click with the audience - Hell Rell - 09-20-2017
(09-20-2017, 07:25 AM)Hexenadler Wrote:(09-19-2017, 10:11 AM)Hell Rell Wrote: For the millionth time, Adalind has changed. She was no longer the petty Hexenbiest she was portrayed as in earlier seasons.
And for the millionth time, simply sweeping her actions under the carpet - especially an action as serious as rape - was completely irresponsible on the part of the writers.
If they wanted to "reform" Adalind and make her a better woman, great. I'm a huge sucker for redemptive arcs. But if you're going to do that, you HAVE to acknowledge and contend with the absolutely vile crap she pulled in previous seasons. You HAVE to. The writers barely did that, if at all. What pissed me off about Nick and Adalind's love affair is the painfully obvious ways the writers manipulated the characters into those positions. The fact of the matter is, Nick switched gears in his attitude towards Adalind far too quickly. I think they were already sleeping together by the second or third episode in S5, and that's just flat-out lazy storytelling.
Greenwalt & Kouf stroked their beards and said to themselves "Hey, you know what would be a neat twist? Having Nick and Adalind fall in love!" Of course, being the guys in charge, nobody in the writer's room dared to suggest how the idea was innately problematic in light of everything Adalind had done up to that point in the show. Saying "Adalind has changed" is a ridiculous statement. If I ran over a child with my car while I was drunk, I could easily claim I wasn't the same man who killed that child because I'm now sober, but do you really think the grieving parents would accept that logic?
I could see Nick voluntarily sharing a home with Adalind purely out of his responsibility towards his newborn son, and NOT because of any developing feelings towards Adalind. But G&K had Nick and Adalind bunker up almost right out the gate, and that's what I find repulsive as hell.
I agree with you about how irresponsible the showrunners were with this plot. I've written about this myself and blasted them for it. This is clearly a case of "a man can't be raped" at work. It's a common problem in entertainment.
Adalind being a changed person and the writers sweeping her rape of Nick under the rug wasn't what I was discussing. Adalind did change because that's the way it was written so I can't deny that's what happened. I'm not going to be dishonest about her changing because I disagree with how it happened. I would be on the losing side of any discussion if I said Adalind hasn't changed and is the same scheming Hexenbiest she was in earlier seasons. I'm separating my feelings about what happened and discussing what actually did happen.
Overall, I would like to discuss Adalind's characterization and her relationship with Nick without being accused of sweeping Nick being raped under the rug. I don't need to type NICK WAS RAPED every single time their relationship is brought up.
RE: Why Juliette as a character didn't click with the audience - FaceInTheCrowd - 09-20-2017
(09-20-2017, 10:28 AM)Hell Rell Wrote: Overall, I would like to discuss Adalind's characterization and her relationship with Nick without being accused of sweeping Nick being raped under the rug. I don't need to type NICK WAS RAPED every single time their relationship is brought up.
Plus, there is the fact that these incidents took place in Oregon, where what the characters did would not be rape no matter how bad you may think they were. The closest charge that could potentially be brought would be "sexual abuse in the third degree." It's a Class A misdemeanor, and the argument that impersonation negates consent has never been tested in court.
Prosecuting for identity theft would be a felony charge with a more severe penalty.