+- 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: So Diana doesn't know Juliette betrayed Kelly. (/Thread-So-Diana-doesn-t-know-Juliette-betrayed-Kelly)
RE: So Diana doesn't know Juliette betrayed Kelly. - FaceInTheCrowd - 02-18-2017
The characters in Grimm are like distant cousins of the ones in Game of Thrones. They make and break alliances, friendships and enmities based on circumstances. Enemies can become allies and eventually friends even though they still remember all the bad things they did to each other in the past, and although I don't think we've seen it happen, it's just as likely that friends and allies who turn into enemies hold some nostalgia about the days when they used to be friends.
All the consequences are short term. Your evil scheme blows up in your face and you lose everything, but if you come around and join the side of good your past is eventually forgiven even if it isn't totally forgotten. This is probably the biggest fantasy element of the series.
RE: So Diana doesn't know Juliette betrayed Kelly. - Kwu9888 - 02-18-2017
(02-18-2017, 01:11 PM)syscrash Wrote: Actually nothing. The show will not even bring it up again. For one the show went out of it's way to absolve Juliette. Second beased on the fact. Adalind would be just as culpable as Juliette would be. Third the show has never had past actions effect current situations.
OK syscrash I know I'm going to regret this but have to ask how is Adalind as culpable as Juliette.
RE: So Diana doesn't know Juliette betrayed Kelly. - syscrash - 02-18-2017
Discussing actions and reactions that is an observation. a character being an idiot is an opinion.
My answer was in response to your definition of "If the show wanted to "absolve" Juliette".
You then go into the description of what you think should be the definition of Juliette being absolved.
Quote:the writers would have put together an episode by now where Juliette is kidnapped and placed on trial by relatives of the neighbors who were slaughtered on the night she sold Kelly out to the Royals. Or at the very least, she would have been haunted by visions of Kelly's decapitated head, the same way Renard was haunted by Meisner.
First your description is a consequence not the actions of absolution. The definition of absolve is "set or declare (someone) free from blame, guilt, or responsibility.set or declare (someone) free from blame, guilt, or responsibility.". And that is exactly what the show did.
AS I pointed out in the following statement. "For one there was never a conversation about killing Kelly. Two the writers put her upstairs when Kenneth killed her." Two things to show she was not to blame or responsible for Kelly's death.
You then add the following
Quote:G&K simply cooked up a ridiculous persona for Juliette to hide behind so she could conveniently project her own crimes away from herself. It was a stupid, insulting idea, and I still want to punch them both for it.Neither the show or the interviews give any indication that Eve was created to avert responsibility. The show even provided Eve making the statement that she was sorry that Nick did not get a chance to bury Juliette. For those that read and comprehend understand that was a metaphor for Nick not having a chance to resolve the issues of the past season. It was not insulting it was a very profound way of addressing past actions. Something that is not normally dealt with on the show. For you to find it insulting says more about you then the writers.
RE: So Diana doesn't know Juliette betrayed Kelly. - Hexenadler - 02-18-2017
(02-18-2017, 03:12 PM)FaceInTheCrowd Wrote: The characters in Grimm are like distant cousins of the ones in Game of Thrones. They make and break alliances, friendships and enmities based on circumstances. Enemies can become allies and eventually friends even though they still remember all the bad things they did to each other in the past, and although I don't think we've seen it happen, it's just as likely that friends and allies who turn into enemies hold some nostalgia about the days when they used to be friends.
I'm sure that's what the writers would love to have us believe, but no. It's just lazy storytelling.
Let me put it this way: If all the alliances and friendships in my life kept shifting to the extent they do in "Grimm," I'd be downright suicidal, knowing that no one can ever be entirely trusted.
RE: So Diana doesn't know Juliette betrayed Kelly. - FaceInTheCrowd - 02-18-2017
I kind of think the same thing about Game of Thrones, but the alternative would be to have goody-two-shoes regular characters who never step over any moral lines taking on an endless parade of evil guest villains. Would be very 1960s TV but with better visual FX.
RE: So Diana doesn't know Juliette betrayed Kelly. - syscrash - 02-18-2017
Do you people watch the news. How does what is going on in the middle east not indicative of what happens on games of throne. You have factions over there that switch side so fast. even the media gets confused who is fighting who. You have the same faction fighting on different sides depending on the region they are located.
RE: So Diana doesn't know Juliette betrayed Kelly. - Kwu9888 - 02-18-2017
(02-18-2017, 03:28 PM)syscrash Wrote: Discussing actions and reactions that is an observation. a character being an idiot is an opinion.
My answer was in response to your definition of "If the show wanted to "absolve" Juliette".
You then go into the description of what you think should be the definition of Juliette being absolved.
Quote:the writers would have put together an episode by now where Juliette is kidnapped and placed on trial by relatives of the neighbors who were slaughtered on the night she sold Kelly out to the Royals. Or at the very least, she would have been haunted by visions of Kelly's decapitated head, the same way Renard was haunted by Meisner.
First your description is a consequence not the actions of absolution. The definition of absolve is "set or declare (someone) free from blame, guilt, or responsibility.set or declare (someone) free from blame, guilt, or responsibility.". And that is exactly what the show did.
AS I pointed out in the following statement. "For one there was never a conversation about killing Kelly. Two the writers put her upstairs when Kenneth killed her." Two things to show she was not to blame or responsible for Kelly's death.
You then add the following
Quote:G&K simply cooked up a ridiculous persona for Juliette to hide behind so she could conveniently project her own crimes away from herself. It was a stupid, insulting idea, and I still want to punch them both for it.Neither the show or the interviews give any indication that Eve was created to avert responsibility. The show even provided Eve making the statement that she was sorry that Nick did not get a chance to bury Juliette. For those that read and comprehend understand that was a metaphor for Nick not having a chance to resolve the issues of the past season. It was not insulting it was a very profound way of addressing past actions. Something that is not normally dealt with on the show. For you to find it insulting says more about you then the writers.
As usual syscrash we have 2 totally different opinions of the story you insist on saying Eve/Juliette is a strong woman but then you say she is upstairs with no idea what is happening like she didn't hear anything all I can say if that's true is DUH you and I have had this conversation a lot and we will never agree you keep trying to make her innocent and I just don't buy it especially when she slowly crept downstairs. Oh nevermind it's not worth it I respect your view of the world of Grimm no matter how convoluted
RE: So Diana doesn't know Juliette betrayed Kelly. - FaceInTheCrowd - 02-18-2017
(02-18-2017, 04:20 PM)syscrash Wrote: Do you people watch the news. How does what is going on in the middle east not indicative of what happens on games of throne. You have factions over there that switch side so fast. even the media gets confused who is fighting who. You have the same faction fighting on different sides depending on the region they are located.
Yes, but bringing Game of Thrones into a discussion is way less messy than trying to use the alphabet soup of real life global factions. Besides, people in the US TV audience are probably paying more attention to Game of Thrones.
RE: So Diana doesn't know Juliette betrayed Kelly. - syscrash - 02-18-2017
I am not stating my opinion on the character. I am stating the perception the show is trying to create. Your saying what she should have known does not change the intent of the perception. It would be the same as a character going outside in a rain coat then coming back in and it is wet. The perception is it is raining. Even if there is a shot out a window of the sun. And that is where we disagree. You seem to want to take a logical interpretation instead of viewing it from the writers perspective. You have said more then once you feel the writers are wrong. or that it is bad writing. You seem to come from a position that you are correcting what you see as being wrong.
Quote:Yes, but bringing Game of Thrones into a discussion is way less messy than trying to use the alphabet soup of real life global factions. Besides, people in the US TV audience are probably paying more attention to Game of Thrones.But you where using game of thrones as an example of how unbelievable the switching of alliances and the forgiving of grudges would be. You even compared it to 1960 TV which we know lacks any reflection on reality. It was written as the writers wanted use to see the world. The same as when growing up we celebrated Columbus day until it became common knowledge that the whole story was a lie. You can not discover a land that is inhabited.
I was pointing out Game of thrones imitates reality more then any of the 1960 TV shows. If you watch GOT it is a commentary on the middle east and the dynamics of the conflicts.
RE: So Diana doesn't know Juliette betrayed Kelly. - FaceInTheCrowd - 02-18-2017
I don't know if either Grimm or Game of Thrones is unbelievable as far as the alliance/enmity exchanges are concerned. I do get a little wide-eyed at how both series make them happen so easily, with the characters never saying things to each other that illustrate that even if they are now allies they haven't just forgotten everything that happened between them in the past (more so on Grimm than GOT, I think). I thought that was also your point when you cited "lazy storytelling."