File: "FKSPOILR LOG9605" Part 43 TOPICS: Spoiler: Last Knight (2) SPOILERS: Last Knight Not that there are arguments (no spoilers) SPOILER: Last Knight (Tracy) LK spoilers: Cousinly praise Last Night-oh, er--I mean, Last Knight FKSPOILR Digest - LK spoilers SPOILER: Last Knight (3) Spoiler: Last Knight(Tracy) Spoiler. Last Knight. Spoiler: LK SPOILERS: Last Knight (ep 22) Tracy Spoiler: LK: Forevermores Not faith, but the bottom line SPOILER: Last Knight, Echoes (2) Spoiler: Last Knight -- Tears Tears-Blood/Water? Spoiler -Last Knight Spoilers LK: Distorted views ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 09:52:22 PDT From: "Leslie I.Plummer" <lplummer@i.......> Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight At 09:00 AM 5/17/96 +0100, you wrote: >Warning: Completely emotional reaction to follow! > >S >P >O >I >L >E >R > >I keep crying...what do you tell the people at the office? --They keep thinking someone's died in my family! >Lisa Ryder: kudos. --She was great w/that last line & she was dead on (no pun) correct! Respect for Tracy for this line alone, if no other... >I can point to three times in my life when I was really happy. Joining >the FK universe was the third. And I was a fool every time. --I guess that makes you the most mortal woman Nat knows... >LC was right about love. Damn him for it. --Wouldn't it be wierd if LC's monologues were written TO THE FANs, & not to Nick? Just a thought. What if the whole episode was written to us, specifically? (meandering, here, I know) kinda draws one in a little further! I think I'm creating a fic challenge.. What if these characters know/knew about us? How would they respond to our reactions? Hmm... Leslie ***FOREVER MEANS... FOREVER!!!*** (doesn't it?) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 12:49:31 -0400 From: Sharon Scott <Sss44@a.......> Subject: Re: SPOILERS: Last Knight Beautifully understated acting, from everyone. Applause at Tracy's demise (I know, I know, I don't mean to insult Tracy fans, but it's my opinion and I'm sticking with it). Nick finally honors Nat's decision, even if she dies in the process. (But couldn't they have shown us just the tiniest bit of "making love"? Sheesh). Flashforwards. Flashbacks. The first time a tv show has *ever* made me cry. The ending was ambiguous enough that it was believable to me. Although I think if Nick had wanted to die, standing on the roof as the sun came up would have been much more effective. Mainly because I think LaCroix staking Nick was the one unbelievable part of the ep. LaCroix--the ultimate control freak, the master who's been hounding his creation for almost 800 years, the father who refuses to let his child be what *he* wants to be--I just don't buy that that character, who we've been watching for 3 seasons, would ever, ever, ever kill Nick just because Nick wanted him to. Sorry, it's not possible. It's just not. Scottie sss44@a....... ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 13:53:47 -0500 From: Cyberspace Vanguard Magazine <vanguard@p.......> Subject: Not that there are arguments (no spoilers) After reading as many spoilers as I felt I could possibly handle before and after LK, I've come to a definite conclusion. Over the years, and especially now that the show has ended, each one of us sees what we want to see in the FK. Having talked to many people on the IRC, I realize that each of us watched LK with some sort of definite idea of what we would see, whether we knew what would happen or not. I think that that's an important part of the appeal of FK. Whoever watches it gets what they want/need out of it. Since we're all so different, there will be many different opinions on the outcome of LK. Each of us will believe what we need to believe. I'm not sure who said it, but "for those who beleive, no explanation is necessary. For those who do not, no explanation will suffice." Therefore I don't think any of us needs to justify any conclusions we come to, just to enjoy them as best as we can under the circumstances. After all, it's not just what we have in common that keeps us together, it's the differences that make life interesting. ---- Sorcha ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 10:37:41 -0700 From: Idalia Kakesako <idaliak@i.......> Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight (Tracy) Listmommy declared spoiler space below: S P O I L E R S P A C E At 11:40 PM 5/19/96 -0400, Deb & Dianne wrote: >Ok, those dead, those alive: >1.) Tracy is dead. - why? - sheet over face. Not only that. Did anyone else notice the door shutting sound at the end of the Tracy-on-the-gurney scene? I thought that sound was supposed to be symbolic of how her life was over: the door to her life had slammed shut. (Please don't throw things at me!) -- Idalia Kakesako <idaliak@i.......> Light Cousin, NatPacker, N&NPacker; TTwF "awaken to this hunger and then watch my heat/ grow paler than the moonlight that you make me eat" ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 13:44:21 -0400 From: Carol Lynn <Expotech@a.......> Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight >he is Nick's closest friend. Clearly spoken. Unavoidably >the truth. To Nick, Lacroix is not the devil; he is Nick's closest friend. > ...there is no conceivable way that Lacroix would stake his favourite >son. We know how Lacroix feels about killing his children. While I don't want to be dogmatic on the subject of Nick's death, the writers obviously expected him to die. There was a very Roman sub-theme running through this episode. The initial suicide was in the 'proper Roman manner' - a warm bath and slit wrists. When a high class Roman wanted to commit suicide, he carefully gathered up his best friends to witness the deed or to help him do it to make sure it was done right and honorably. LaCroix is *still* a Roman general. I think that when Nick tells LaCroix he is Nick's best friend, he is asking for LaCroix's help in a manner that he knows LaCroix can't refuse. Hence, LaCroix's, "Damn you, Nicholas." He was acknowledging that Nick had touched his honor with that request and that he wouldn't, *couldn't*, refuse to honor Nick's wishes made in that context. Of course slittintg Nick's wrists would have been of little use. So, the stake. Kudos to the writers for adding that level of subtlety. I also agree with several posts that said that while LK may not be an ending we *like*, it is a *fitting* ending. I was very worried (early on, pre-spoilers a few months back) that we would have a happily-ever-after end. Of course, I will happily entertain other endings in fiction. Carol Who is surprised that I have now spent three hours reading stuff about a 47 minute TV show and now needs to go and do some real work. Thank goodness I work for myself. I would certainly have fired (or stirctly taken to task) a person who spent all the time I've spent in the last several weeks reading posts about TV shows. Carol Lynn Expotech@a....... -- "I will listen to any hypothesis on but one condition-- that you show me a method by which it can be tested." ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 14:16:49 -0400 From: Diane Shea <KerrRaven@a.......> Subject: LK spoilers: Cousinly praise Spoiler for LK follows shortly! Since many Knighties have come around to a deeper understanding of LaCroix's pain and motivations after watching AtA (and rightly so,) or at least have expressed a real apprecation at how incredible an actor Nigel is, I figured I would do the same for Ger. As a Cousin I have always taken Nick's quest for mortality to be foolish and self destructive at worst, and misguided at best. I'm of the belief that if he wants to do good he can do it as a vampire, and do it for a longer time than any human could. I don't mind him trying to atone. Atone all you want, we'll make more angst. I do mind him being an occasional brick in his understanding of life. Ah, but we come here not to dis Nick, but to praise him, right I forgot. Old habits die hard! Anyway, in Last Knight I face the same problem that supporters of Nick faced with LC in AtA. I can now feel for him. Previously, I figured Nick would come around sooner or later and see the error of his searching. But no such luck. As he knelt down beside Nat, those tears of anguish coming from his soul, I knew both me and LaCroix were screwed. I cannot take Nick's quest lightly any longer. I can still disagree with it, but I can't take his feelings for granted as I rewatch episodes. I blame this all on Ger. He has, in this one masterful scene, made the term brick sound offensive to me. I can't deny those tears that ran down his angelic cheeks. If, perhaps, they were intended to let us know that he was mortal at that point (I never even thought of this) I can care less. That's not part of the emotion here. What's important is how heart-wrenching it was to see, and how I will never be able to make fun of my dearly beloved brick in quite the same way again. For a Cousin, this is true pain. If the Knightie's view of LaCroix has been shattered, and is slowly being rebuilt to include acceptance, then know that the same phenomenon is taking place on the opposite side of the wall as well. Remember, there *are* good things about Last Knight, without ever having to go deeply into what happened afterward. --Cousin Diane (*Not* a Light Cousin, and *never* a Knightie, but learning to appreciate ... different tastes, as it were.) Eternal Seducer ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 14:33:23 EDT From: Tanya Smith <bodybldr@v.......> Subject: Last Night-oh, er--I mean, Last Knight Lacroix would never kill Nick because of only one reason: Lacroix is WAY to selfish to sacrifice Nick, even if it makes Nick feel better. Sorry, I don't buy the Abraham metaphor. A Cousin who acknowledges Lacroix selfish ways P.S. If Nick has Lacroix kill him over Nat, Nick is the biggest WUS I have ever seen and deserves worse than death, the little pansy. He should have been in psychotherapy. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 18:46:41 GMT From: Jamie Melody Randell <immajer@n.......> Subject: Re: FKSPOILR Digest - LK spoilers Catherine Siemann wrote: >>Now if what you're saying is "Since there's no way in hell Janette's dead, >>I am using this as a constant, a standard, a measure by which to declare >>Natalie's aliveness!!!" . . . then that's pretty cool. Actually, it's Nick's Constant: Where R represents the determination (i.e. will) of the person in question Where K represents random factors beyond anyone's control Where B represents the outcome of the situation in question Where C represents Nick's proportional involvement in the matter B=R(1/C)+K Do we have any mathematicians who can check this for validity? -- -:-:-:-:- Jamie M.R. <immajer@n.......> -:-:-:-:- Asst. Listowner, The Smoking Natpacker, ConvCoS, NDNEDnik -->>> Illustrated Webgoddess & Keeper of Warm Fuzzies <<<-- ** List Rules <http://cac.psu.edu/~jap8/FK/FKRules.html> ** The Truth Is Out There. Just maybe not in our jurisdiction. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 12:03:35 -0700 From: "Toni C. Holm" <tch@w.......> Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight Cynthia & Jane said: >Re Laurie's scorpion story ... >Nick never forgot about the nature of the vampire ... he tried to make >sure Natalie paid attention to the nature of the vampire ... she said she >didn't care. What she really forgot about was the essential nature of Nick. -- She says "Make love to me" -- He bites her without any attempt at lovemaking. She says I'll "spend an eternity in darkness.. with you", he decides he "can't condemn her to this darkness". Nick? Did you pay any attention to what she was saying? Do you ever pay any attention? Foolish or not, Nat was at least clear about what she wanted. After you've bitten her is a fine time to have a crisis of conscience on the subject. Oh that's right, she made you do it... Laurie C-F said: >This isn't about faith, or love, or nobility, or anything else good and >noble and admirable. This is about gluttony, and self-indulgence, and >lack of discipline and GUILT. And, imo, it was a truly sucky way to >end a marvellous television series. I have to agree. Let's add weakness, lack of responsibility and no respect for others. It may have been entirely in character, but it still stinks. -Toni <tch@w.......> ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 15:47:19 -0400 From: "Margaret L. Carter" <MLCVamp@a.......> Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight(Tracy) Blood from head wound? The blood on the wall need not have been from the head wound. When I watched her fall, what I saw was a serious gut shot where the bullet went all the way through, leaving a hole in her back. The blood on the wall is from the wound in her back, and as she slides down the wall, her hair smears the blood. (Yuck.) I think she's dead, but in fanfic all is possible. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 13:00:35 -0700 From: "Val A. Wirth" <valworth@i.......> Subject: Spoiler. Last Knight. Okay, I just saw Last Knight, and I feel the undeniable need to delurk with my own observations. First, the whole thing thing struck me as a sort of dream sequence. I mean, it was all wavy and fuzzy, and we even had a somewhat Nick and Nat love scene, and their beepers didn't even go off once. Now, is that the FK, that we have all come to know and love. Okay, maybe the whole thing wasn't a dream. I kind of like the idea of a FK movie beginning with a scene with Nick and Nat at Tracy's tombstone, which would be engraved with the inscription, "Tracy Vetter, She Was A Good Cop". Sorry, Perkulators, but you know, she would have loved that. Second, if it wasn't all a dream, then at least the ending was.....can we all say, "ambiguous". But if you watch only the first fifty minutes of it, it really is a great Nick and Nat episode. You just have to make sure you turn the tape off before Nick says, "We'll be together forever." Because as we all know, they put that on tombstones, too. By the way, to the person who commented on Natalie's strange remark in "Only the Lonely". The one about Nick's dead body, not being bad, not being bad at all: This bothered me, too, the first time I saw it. I really think at that point in her life, she should have seriously been trying very hard to get on the Love Connection. You guys, don't think that Natalie was the inspiration for that really weird X-File episode, where that strange guy kept touching all the dead people's hair, do you? Val valworth@a....... The Truth is Out There But it's so much more fun making it up as you go. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 13:07:04 -0700 From: Raissa Devereux <raissa@i.......> Subject: Spoiler: LK S P O L E R S P O I L E R I for one do not believe that Nick and Nat are dead. The ep. looked like a dream sequence. However, if we get followup, and it turns out that Nat and/or Tracy really are dead, I will do what I always do. I will make Tracy and/or Nat ghosts. Just because a character no longer exists corporeally does not mean he/she doesn't exist. This is how I've always dealt with unambiguous death of my favorite characters. Catherine (BATB) became a guardian spirit who aids true lovers, little children, and the oppressed. She and Vincent do attend a masqued ball on Halloween, because that is the one night of the year that Catherine can become a physical entity and Vincent can safely appear in public. Gauda Pride did happen. But afterwards, Blake and Avon led the spirits of all the people the Federaation killed to the new Fed. nerve center, and infected all the computers with a paramormal computer virus. As I said, however, I am reluctant to declare anyone a ghost on FK at this time, because I cannot take the visuals on LK seriously. Furthermore, until we know for sure, making everyone ghosts would totally isolate LC, because he doesn't believe in them. Therefore, he won't be able to see them. Therefore, as far as he would be concerned, he would be alone. Divia's wish would have come true. I have gained enough respect for LC over the years, especially after AtA, not to want him so isolated. Raissa Devereux raissa@i....... The soul IS immortal PS I forgot to mention that Adric and all the Doctor's other dead companions are floating around the TARDIS. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 17:02:48 -0500 From: "[M A Martin]" <mmartin@b.......> Subject: Fwd. Re: SPOILERS: Last Knight (ep 22) Tracy OK, some spoiler space.. * * * * * * * * * * * * * Sandra wrote: > Also, rather than getting in the line of fire, it looked to me that > Dawkins (?) shot the first couple of times at Nick. I think it's > possible that the bullets passed through Nick and into Tracy (Nick > looked like he was between Tracy and Dawkins to me). Yeah, I thought the same thing as well. In fact, I thought Tracy's initial look was of astonishment because she saw the bullets go through Nick w/o causing him any damage. She finally put 2 and 2 together and came up with vampire. It was only when she left the bloody smear on the wall when I realized that she had actually been shot with the bullets that went through Nick. (At this point I became a bit ecstatic as I realized that TPTB actually had the guts to kill off yet another character. Little did I know what was in store...) I thought this was a cool way to do it (and still do). However, I kept wondering when Reese was gonna notice the bullet holes in the back of Nick's jacket. No one *ever* seems to, though. Meg (mmartin@b.......) "Failure is not an option. It is just a nagging possibility that helps me stay focused." Yeah, right... ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 16:27:03 -0500 From: Margie Hammet <treeleaf@i.......> Subject: Re: Spoiler: LK: Forevermores At 01:47 PM 5/20/96 GMT, Jamie Melody Randell wrote: >S >P >O >I >L >E >R > >S >P >A >C >E > > > >Natalie is as dead as Janette. That's all there is to it. I take this to mean, "You can't have it both ways," right? Good. Janette is alive. Natalie is alive. Except TPTB told us that Janette is alive. How do we get them to tell us that Natalie is alive? Or maybe I just shouldn't care what TPTB say. IMO, they betrayed us, they betrayed their own show, and in doing so, they betrayed themselves. Am I bitter? Yeah. I'm sorry. I was willing to trust in the vision of the creative PTB (as opposed to the monied PTB at TriStar and USA). If they had to replace Schanke and Janette to satisfy TriStar and USA, I was willing to accept it and give them a chance to make it work. And for me, it did work, however much I missed the old characters. And whatever decisions the creative PTB made, whether about character development, or whom to focus on, or plot, or theme, I was happy to let it unfold as they saw it. It was constantly thought-provoking, constantly entertaining, and I really believed they were doing an incredible job. But this is too much. I love Nick and Natalie and LaCroix. I swore I wouldn't let those characters become real to me, but they did anyway. And as I saw the show, no matter how much I try to rationalize it, and no matter how many perfectly reasonable explanations I can come up with for why it doesn't have to be that way, what I saw is that Natalie is dead, and that Nick betrayed her even though he didn't mean to. And the message I heard, the summing up of three years, is that it's okay, because Nick has faith now, and he and Natalie will walk off happily to Heaven. But as several people have said, in different ways, Forever Knight is about life, not death. It dealt with human issues and personal issues. It asked all kinds of questions. And I just don't think of the afterlife as being a place where people wrestle with human questions. So, to me, this show negates three years of what I thought the creative PTB were trying to do. Margie (treeleaf@i.......) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 18:00:55 -0400 From: Yolanda Rivera <Meriel68@a.......> Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight I haven't read everyone's letters yet and apologize in advance for any duplicate ideas or statements. S P O I L E R S P A C E I really had a problem with this episode. The thing that bothered me the most was how strange all the characters felt. Nat just seemed so driven all of a sudden to end things with Nick one way or another. Nick just didn't feel right in his desire to bring Tracy across. Sure, he's felt guilty before, but I don't think Nick would have brought anyone across now, without their consent. And LaCroix seemed so resigned and sad. I have NEVER seen LaCroix as resigned to things as he was in this episode. Because of the way it ended, I don't think LaCroix really killed Nick. I think even LaCroix would have a very hard time killing his" favorite child". I have a very hard time with the way Nat was acting.Nat always seems so levelhead and in control. This is the one time she just seemed lost and out of control . I am just very disappointed in the way the series has ended. All in all the final episode was good but I think it just left just as many unaswered questions as it did answered ones. just a few thoughts...... yolanda ps i really hate it that Vachon died!! ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 18:08:16 -0400 From: Linda Simon <lsimon@h.......> Subject: Not faith, but the bottom line They are not dead, they are NOT. They are not. Aside from the everlasting life they have in our hearts, I believe the three lead characters were left alive for movies, etc. There were so many plot devices in LK that left the door open, from the dream-like quality of multiple scenes to the unseen fate of Nick (of course LaCroix didn't kill his best beloved--probably knocked him unconscious and sped both him and Nat out of there). TPTB would be fools *extraordinaires* to kill off these characters. I give the creative PTB credit for artistic and literary vision, but do not forget that they are businessmen. The future holds vast revenues, and the golden geese were left alive! The fanfic on LK is very satisfying--all you wonderful writers, keep it coming! Kudos to Leslie for her survey and other activism to see that our love and rage and vision take a practical turn--everyone complete that survey! Love to you all. Linda Simon, NatPacker and chocolatiere "I know you're just a figment of my imagination, but you've got to stop sneaking up on me." Nat, DoN ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 15:25:13 -0700 From: Amy R. <akr@m.......> Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight, Echoes "Last Knight" spoilers. (Jamie said to use spoiler space until Sci-Fi airs LK tonight. Question: in which time zone? We've got listmembers in AK....) The final line of LK is LC's: "Damn you, Nicholas." This recalls the final line of AMPH, damning Divia. The remark about adding Nat to their "entourage" used the word from JD. N&N's little discussion about being together forever sounds astonishingly like Nick and Alyssa's from DoN. LC's remarks about the necessity of moving on could have been spliced into his lecture to Nick in PotM. Is it me, or is almost this whole episode recycled dialogue? Not that I mind... <g> The nice word for it is "intertextuality." Another point: When Nat asked Nick to make love to her, what she desperately needed was to be held and *told* how much he valued her. I know why Nat asked what she did, and I know why Nick did what he did, but still: his ability to totally misread this kind of stuff after all this time is truly astounding. What happened to the guy from BMV, huh? The one who said that he thought what women want is a man who isn't afraid to express his feelings? (HF Spoiler) JanetteZ wrote a nice post-HF piece called "Always" some months ago, in which she has both Nat and Janette call Nick on this point. I have now progressed to the point (from LK) that I am eagerly anticipating post-LK fanfic featuring Janette, who could righteously rip into any survivors for their callousness and/or stupidity.... That, or something bringing together Myra, Jenny, Sarah, Amy, Stonetree, Reese, Grace, and Tracy's family.... am I forgetting anyone? BTW: The bust of LC in the Raven, as near as I can determine, is indeed dressed in a toga, *not* modern clothes. And it has no lines indicating repair, so LC must have commissioned the replacement. The interesting thing is that, in the closed Raven, one glass was sitting on the counter, filled red, and it was right next to the bust. LC is arrogant, not vain, and for him to be contemplating such an item suggests the unusual state of mind that preceded his decision to depart. (I'm still less coherent than normal: sorry. Thank you all for being here, though.) *** Amy, Lady of the Knight (akr@m.......) *** "Now cracks a noble heart. Good night, sweet prince; And flights of angels sing thee to thy rest!" -- W.S. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 17:40:34 -0500 From: John & Donna Spert <jjs@i.......> Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight Well, I'm stunned... But not speechless :-) There are just a few points I wanted to cover: 1) Would LaCroix stake Nick? I think he would because Nick is his favorite. Divia figured that out after being in a tomb for 2,000 years. If you look at Nick as the son LC never had, you can see a lot of the way he treats Nick is as a very stern father. Keeping in mind how stern discipline was in Roman-era times, LaCroix may have felt he was keeping Nick from dangerous activities by being a responsible "parent". LC was at his worst to Nick in thwarting Nick in seeking to become mortal and loving mortals too much (whether humans or pets). In many other cases, LC allowed Nick his foibles no matter how much he disapproved (Blood Money; high-visibility mortal jobs like police officer; helping the Chinese woman in the Avenging Angel flashback). So in the face of Nick finally accepting LaCroix, in essentially telling LaCroix that he trusted he would do this thing which Nick wanted more than anything else *no matter how much LaCroix disapproved*, was more than LaCroix could take. He'd do it because he loved Nick too much not to. 2) But why would LaCroix do it now? After all, Nick's wanted out for a long time. Partly because Nick never really wanted to escape vampirism by dying. Mostly because Nick's tears seem to indicate that his acceptance of Nat's imminent death caused him to become mortal, as Janette's husband's death pushed her over. Can vampires cry? Nick didn't when he killed his wife, trying to bring her across. So LaCroix can either kill Nick now, or watch guilt overwhelm him to the point that he takes greater and greater changes in his job, until he comes to a possibly much more painful end. Not too mention how Nick would torment himself along the way. In essence, he killed Natalie for his own benefit. which brings us to: 3) Nick. After Last Knight, I feel Nick is the vampire equivalent of an alcoholic. With his first wife, with the woman LaCroix was saving up ("intoxicating, wasn't she?"), and with poor Nat, Nick loses control on the first taste. Nick doesn't want to be a vampire because, on some level, he knows that he can't handle it. That said, I think a very interesting show could be made with Nat and Tracy as vampires. Both would be masterless if Nick is human, and might well turn to LaCroix for guidance in how to be a vampire. Nick would have to control his impulses when on a case (no more vampire healing) and Tracy would have a whole new set of problems with her parents. Nick and Natalie would have a, let's call it, *strained* relationship. John ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 18:02:40 -0500 From: "Stormsinger/J.S. Levin" <wabbit@e.......> Subject: Spoiler: Last Knight -- Tears My personal opinion on the subject of bodily fluids is that vampires, like humans, have enough extra water in their bodies that they would not need to *waste* blood -- an entirely too valuable substance -- on secretions. I've never liked the "sweating blood" routine; there's just no *logic* to it. They're drinking blood, and blood, like the rest of our bodies, is mostly *water*. There's going to be some water to spare. Also, since perspiration in humans is either a metabolic reaction or a temperature control mechanism, surely vampires perspire *much* less than humans, and probably not in situations like lovemaking, where the perspiration is caused by a metabolic boost. Anne Rice is the one who came up with the "blood sweat and tears" thing, if you'll forgive the all-too-obvious pun <G>. No other source that I know of *prior* to her stories mentions it. Just MNSHO. Storm wabbit@e....... (J.S.Levin/Stormsinger) Their canon met my imagination and was outgunned. If you practice being fictional, you discover that "characters" are as real as people with bodies and heartbeats... ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 19:03:52 EDT From: "Maria E. Orive, Ph.D." <orive@b.......> Subject: Re: SPOILER: Last Knight, Echoes Dear All - Amy writes: > N&N's little discussion about being together forever sounds astonishingly > like Nick and Alyssa's from DoN. I noticed this as well and the thought occured to me: if, indeed, both Nicholas and Natalie are dead, would they spend eternity together? What would his _wife_ think of this? Of course, in the modern Christian (although I think perhaps, not Mormon?) theology, concepts such as "marriage" would not exist in the afterlife, and presumably, Nicholas, Natalie and Alyssa could all spend eternity "basking in the eternal light" or whatever. But I couldn't help imagining the following scene: (near St. Peter's gate) Natalie: Oh, Nick, I'm so glad you kept your promise, that we would be together forever. Fetching Blonde Lady in Flowing Robes: Nicholas, you did it! You achieved redemption, and now we can always be together, just as you promised! Natalie: Um, Nick, what the hell is going on? Nicholas: Oh .... umm ... LaCroix, help! (a little humour to lighten the load for those who are sad today) best wishes, Maria orive@b....... ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 18:23:07 CDT From: Bruce Rawitch <brucer@i.......> Subject: Re: Tears-Blood/Water? Margie Wrote: So sometimes vampires cry tears of blood, and sometimes they cry regular tears. That kind of inconsistency doesn't bother me. I just figure we mortals don't know everything about vampire physiology. Bruce will jump in here again, providing consistency where none is meant.... Sometimes the vamps cry full blood tears, sometimes they only weep plasma/ blood serum, which is clear.... There ya go, a better explanation than TPTB deserves.... Bruce ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 19:19:37 -0400 From: Susan Honig <Susankenn@a.......> Subject: Spoiler -Last Knight SPOILER SPACE ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; I don't want to repeat most of what I read. I want to thank Laura Fenster for a wonderful Last Knight party. It was so helpful to be with 25 other souls as we cried over the last show. Thank God for the blank spots on the satelite feed so we could talk between the show. At the end of the showing we acted out the blooper script that Laura had obtained of Last Knight. What a hoot. It really eased the tension. We all came out laughing instead of crying. There were actually one or two individuals who watched the show "unspoiled". You should have seen their faces. My reaction is that it was not as bad as I thought it would be. Tracy was Tracy - when did she go to the police academy. No one interups a hostage negotiator and comes into the line of sight. She did what she does best - and this time Nick could not save her. She is dead. We see here being rolled out. I am in the crowd that believes that Nat is still alive. We hear Nick and LaCroix talk about her in past tense but we did not see her die. She is still on the brink as far as I could see. I also believe that it would be out of LaCroix's character to stake his beloved Nick. After 800 years of keeping him on a leash , He would believe that time heals all wounds. I look at his speeches as someone talking back to Nick after he hits him over the head with the stake. I also believe that he would bring Nat across to keep Nick happy. He would feel that once the deed is done Nick would accept it . I see that Leslie Plummer has sent out a survey which I for one will gladly answer. I believe we need to coordinate a new SOS plan and get everyone writing letters to Scifi for our movie. As time goes by, the chances will get slimmer and slimmer. Let us go for it now???. Just my 02. Now that it is over I will go back and rewatch season 1 and 2 to maintain my FK fix. Some of those episodes I have not seen for a year of more and I look forward to seeing the discussions of the old episodes on the list as they air on Scifi. Sue susankenn@a....... ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 19:43:54 -0400 From: Diane Shea <KerrRaven@a.......> Subject: Spoilers LK: Distorted views Spoilers for LK to follow shortly.... Deb and Dianne wrote after their humourous post; >>Please don't think we weren't affected by the ep. (I mean, surely it's *obvious* that we were). Don't think we are callously mocking your pain? We are just trying to find a way to enjoy our show.<< A thankyou to Deb and Dianne for posting all the possible outcomes that we didn't get to see. And thanks a lot for making me laugh about the Shillelagh of Death! >>Nick changes his mind and brings her across and the three of them (and the Shillelagh of Death) ride off into the sunset together - getting slightly singed in the processes.<< Seriously LOL!! Even though I won't believe anyone's rationalization (however well constructed) unless there are hints hidden within the show, I can still enjoy a humourous one. About those hints that they hide in the show: As many have already pointed out, I too wonder about the distorted LC sequences in the beginning. I like what someone said about it being Nat who is seeing this, (since at one point we see Nick too) as she lies on the floor. That maybe this is trying to tell us in no uncertain terms that LaCroix didn't stake Nick after the "Damn you Nicholas" line, but is trying one last time to talk some sense into him before the end. I'm not the one to figure things like this out. After my first viewing of HF I thought Janette was dead. I saw all of that ep but didn't understand the returned picture line which was crucial to proof of her being alive. I understand it now. I didn't understand the distorted scenes of LaCroix in this ep. I'm waiting to understand them. <tapping finger, waiting> But really, what did LaCroix mean when he said "This and all else that has happened tonight should make that clear to you." Previously I had taken these distorted scenes to be simply for our benefit, like that one in HF where LC is floating around the Raven (rollerblade alert:) talking about Janette. This whole LK sequence is truly different from that. When he talks about "all else that has happened tonight" he is narrowing it down to a discussion of events, and not just a monologue that can take place in our minds or as the "unconscious" rambling of the Forever Knight universe. It is revealed that Nick is there with him in later sequences. I still don't know what it's suppose to mean, but if anyone has any inside info into it, do tell!! Cousin Diane (wondering if we're really seriously missing something very important in the ep???) Eternal Seducer =========================================================================
Previous |
This month's list |
Next |