FORKNI-L
Digest - 6 Mar 2008 to 7 Mar 2008 (#2008-63)
Fri, 7 Mar 2008
There are 2 messages totalling 115 lines in this issue.
Topics of the day:
1. New? Amsterdam, its relation to Nick, and the use of historical flashbacks
(2)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 16:09:38 -0600
From: Roxana Elizondo <roxeliz@h.......>
Subject: Re: New? Amsterdam, its relation to Nick, and the use of historical
flashbacks
Walt wrote:
> John Amsterdam is a "homicide detective" (sound familiar?)
> who is also immortal (again, sound familiar?),
> But, the gimick here is that he can't leave the island of Manhattan.
Really? I didn't know that. I'll admit that while I'm looking forward to the
series I haven't really sought out much information on it. It was originally
scheduled to premiere during the Fall but its air date got pushed back twice I
believe. I chose to watch election coverage over New Amsterdam but I did record it
and I plan on watching it before Thurday's episode.
> Assuming that he has the same moving on problems as
> Nick, doesn't that make life all the more difficult for Amsterdam?
> Oh, maybe not now - it's not hard to hide amongst 2,500,000
> people, but what did he do whan the entire island had a population of 5K?
I think you bring up an interesting point and you're not alone. The review in
the Hollywood Reporter had this to say, "how is it that this guy can be hiding
in plain sight in Manhattan for centuries without ever having changed his name
and only one human has a clue about him?" I guess he could sort of keep to
himself and go into hermit mode. Surely during his first century or so Manhattan
still had some secluded hovels. It's also one of my quibbles with Moonlight. Mick
was brought over in the 1950s so people he knew when he was mortal are still
alive, yet he chose to stay in Los Angeles. He's even kept the same name. Yes Los
Angeles is a large metropolitan city but why risk it.
I was reading the review over at variety.com and these bits jumped out at me.
"Leave it to the minds currently running network TV that immortals don't teach
history but rather pursue procedural-friendly vocations."
Although this is sort of true in regards to Nick with his Toronto incarnation
and his previous rookie Chicago days I think it should be pointed out that our
immortal did spend time teaching history ('Spin Doctor' flashback). Granted it
was history that happened before his own lifetime but the intent is the same.
Nick had the mind of scholar and while he didn't enjoy having to depend on blood
to survive, he did have a voracious appetite for learning and it reflected in
the occupations he chose to pursue. But you know if Amsterdam or any other TV
immortal identifiably taught history then I get the impression reviewers would be
like, "And how does our friendly immortal bide his time? Well our hero
certainly isn't idle, he spends his days teaching history (wink, wink) at a local
community college." It's almost like they'll mock you if you do and they mock you
if you don't.
Another bit from the review that I found pertinent:
"Only in the second episode does the series hint at having more depth than just
another procedural with a lame twist, flashing back to explore one of
Amsterdam's earlier lives and relationships. With 366 years of history at their
disposal, the glut of potential backstories at least raises the possibility of
fleshing out the character's past and diverting attention from the thoroughly
predictable crimes he's (so far) tasked with investigating."
I find the reviewer's observation interesting in that he's pointing out a
dramatic device that has been employed quited frequently in the world of syndication
most notably with Highlander: The Series and of course with our own Forever
Knight. It reminds me of Jim Parriott's comments about how the flashback
sequences were conceived to pad out the show for its longer Canadian delivery time. The
pleasant surprise being that the production ended up loving that aspect of the
show and it opened up several possibilities story and character wise.
TV Guide's Matt Roush also liked the idea of flashbacks:
"But the flashbacks to his former life (and not just the origin stuff involving
a Native American shaman) is what could set this show apart...The fact that
the show can play with four centuries of American and New York history makes it
more interesting than just another yarn about a supernatural hero."
Native American shaman? Now I'm jonsing for the Vachon conversion scenes.
So several reviewers have pointed out the dramatic possiblities of the
historical flashback and shows like Highlander and Forever Knight have already shown
interesting ways to utilize them. My only disappointment with the way the
flashbacks were handled in FK were that more times than not they tended to do the same
song and dance between Nick and LaCroix. I believe GWD once joked in an
interview about how he'd love to see a flashback with Nick and LaCroix getting along
famously and running a brothel. FK had such a long period of time from which
they could draw stories from and that was one of the show's strengths. But it's
unfortunate that they couldn't get a little crazy as Ger had suggested because
it was so nice to see when they did. 'Blood Money' was memorable for me because
of the unconventional way in which they showed Nick in flashback. He wasn't
LaCroix's wayward child trying to break free but instead we get a different
incarnation of Nick--consumed with material wea!
lth and with little thought to the mortals he's double crossing. And of course
there's 'For I Have Sinned' which featured Nick as the epitome of what LaCroix
wanted for him. How great would it have been if we'd gotten more glimpses into
Nick's dark period or for that matter mortal!Nick because young, idealistic
Nick is so gosh darn appealing. Aside from Nick being pretty darn sexy in those
flashbacks with Joan of Arc it would have been great to get more textual
acknowledgment of the evil Nick was trying to get away from. I'd much rather see than
be told Nick has done evil things in his past. And lastly I've always been
extremely disappointed that we never got any flashback sequences or more
elaboration on Nick's time in the Crusades. It was a defining moment for him and it would
have been wonderful to see them document the disenchantment Nick came to feel
by the time he crossed paths with Janette and LaCroix.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 15:53:01 -0700
From: Walt <wdoherty5@c.......>
Subject: Re: New? Amsterdam, its relation to Nick, and the use of historical
flashbacks
>> John Amsterdam is a "homicide detective" (sound familiar?)
>> who is also immortal (again, sound familiar?),
>> But, the gimick here is that he can't leave the island of Manhattan.
>
> Really? I didn't know that.
It wasn't mentioned in the show itself but in some of the
promotional literature.
>> Assuming that he has the same moving on problems as
>> Nick, doesn't that make life all the more difficult for Amsterdam?
> With 366 years of history at their disposal, the glut of potential
backstories at least raises the possibility of fleshing out the character's
past and diverting attention from the thoroughly predictable crimes
he's (so far) tasked with investigating."
"There are eight million stories in the Naked City,"
This could be one of them. '->
>
> It reminds me of Jim Parriott's comments about how the flashback
sequences were conceived to pad out the show for its longer Canadian
delivery time. The pleasant surprise being that the production ended
up loving that aspect of the show and it opened up several possibilities
story and character wise.
Some of the episodes have more flashback than present day story.
Or at least it seems that way. "1966"'s falshback is at least as
interesting
as the modern story.
>
> TV Guide's Matt Roush also liked the idea of flashbacks:
> "But the flashbacks to his former life (and not just the origin
stuff involving a Native American shaman) is what could set
this show apart
>
> Native American shaman? Now I'm jonsing for the Vachon conversion scenes.
Well, she was a shawoman, and you know how
they disciminated against women in those days;
we, of course, do not do that now.
>
> And lastly I've always been extremely disappointed that we never g
ot any flashback sequences or more elaboration on Nick's time in the
Crusades. It was a defining moment for him and it would have been
wonderful to see them document the disenchantment Nick came to feel . . . .
That could have been a movie of the week in and of itself.
I think the reason they never really got to doing anything
like the crusades was that by the time they had the money,
vision, and idea to do it, they had to make use of LaCroix
and/or Jenette in the flashbacks. Remember that in season
one, except for the opener, LaCroix appears *only* in
flashbacks.
The crusades would've been nice, but there was no
place for the other vampires to show up.
>
>
Walt Doherty
Phoenix, AZ
------------------------------
End of FORKNI-L Digest - 6 Mar 2008 to 7 Mar 2008 (#2008-63)
************************************************************
Knight graphics and parchment background created by Melissa Snell and may be found at http://historymedren.about.com/
