FKSPOILR
Logfile LOG9605 Part 43
May 20, 1996
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
=========================================================================
Knight graphics and parchment background created by Melissa Snell and may be found at http://historymedren.about.com/
