File: "FKSPOILR LOG9605" Part 45 TOPICS: SPOILER: LK - Nat SPOILERS: Last Knight (also AtA) - Think a moment .... LK Request Spoiler: Last Knight (9) SPOILERS: Last Knight parallels to an English ballad Revelations (LK and AtA spoilers) SPOILERS: Last Knight LK and AtA comments SPOILER: LK (HF), Distorted views SPOILER: Last Knight Math Last Knight - Major Spoilers fictional resurrections Last Knight spoilers Last Knight thoughts ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 00:44:30 -0500 From: Margie Hammet <treeleaf@i.......> Subject: Re: SPOILER: LK - Nat At 10:19 PM 5/20/96 -0400, Lisa P. wrote: >S >P >O >I >L >E >R > > >S >E >C >T >I >O >N > >I agree with those who feel cheated out on the "love scene" between Nick >and Nat. ....after 3 years of building up to this moment, more time >could have been spent in showing the deep feelings that they feel for each >other. It just seemed rush. No romance. Because this was a lousy time and a lousy reason for making love. They had both been through traumatizing experiences. They were both feeling desperate, and Nick was feeling guilty. Nick wasn't trying to make love, he was trying to assuage his pain and guilt. (I'm not saying he was aware of that, of course.) Margie (treeleaf@i.......) N&NPacker The Unnamed Faction ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 02:31:11 -0400 From: Ray Heuer <RayHeuer@a.......> Subject: SPOILERS: Last Knight (also AtA) - Think a moment .... Ok, what I am about to say may have been said a dozen times by now, I refused to read the LK spoilers until I saw the ep, and now I'm only up to about Friday night. Here's my take on things: NICK: I hate to say it, Knighties - Nick is a murderer. Nat performed the ultimate act of love and trust - she asked (hell, she practically begged) Nick to make love to her, knowing that the results could be fatal. Nick does NOT bite Nat in the throes of sexual pleasure, he chomps her right then and there. Nat has a slight flash of fright, just as Nick bares her neck (and, Bricky-boy, "making love" requires baring more than THAT), but again, her love and trust override her fears. Then, when LaCroix (see below) comments that she is "on the brink", Nick ignores her repeatedly expressed wishes and consigns her to death. Does the phrase "reckless disregard for human life" sound familiar detective? I would add to my charges that he was a liar and hypocrite, except that he makes good his promise that they would be together by asking LaCroix to stake him. I'll just add to those who claim that he should have taken his own life that I believe he wanted to "die in Nat's arms" as she did his. I also think that FK canon is that a vampire cannot stake him/herself nor remove a stake from him/herself, which would require the actions of "his closest friend", reminiscent of the Vachon/Tracy stake scene in AtA. (Yes, Vachon "staked himself" in the sense that he provided all the motion and force, but Tracy held the stake, and we've seen this sort of "self-staking" before, always by accident.) And just to add my opinions on the blood tears/water tears issue, I chalk it up to lack of continuity combined with budget constraints. If the "blood tears" scenes in K:tE are any indication, they must be hell on makeup, not to mention uncomfortable for the actor. LACROIX: Is it just me, or is Uncle a first-class Peeping Tom? Every time Nick tries to bring someone across, there's LaCroix with some wry comment. Has he been all the time, watching? This is all speculation, and I think deliberatly left open to speculation by TPTB. *I* think that Uncle yelled, "Damn you, Nicholas!" because at that moment he realized that he couldn't strike the blow. Certainly not so soon after Nick's saving his life in AtA. "Quid Pro Quo, Nicholas, I always pay my debts." (NiQ) And LC owes Nick his life (unlife? undeath?). I'm sure that LaCroix would see his inability to strike as a sign of weakness, as Divia charged during the fight, and thus a victory for Nick's "goodness" over LC's "evil" (not that Uncle would use those labels). So if Nick is alive, what about... NAT: I had to watch LK three times before I realized the answer: NAT IS ALIVE!! Perhaps as a vampire, but alive. Throughout the ep, we see a distorted vision of LaCroix, dressed as he is in the climactic scene, speaking the same dialogue. What we are seeing (IMHO) is Nat's groggy perception of LaCroix's speech in that scene, and almost everything else is a Nat flashback. (LC had flashbacks in AtA, why can't Nat have one in LK?). The question I can't figure out is whether she's been brought across. Nick is so helpless with this sort of thing that he always seems to need Uncle to "grade" him. If Nick had simply said "Yes" after "...or had you intended to add her to our entourage?", I think Uncle would have shrugged and accepted it. While LC's opinion of Nat is vague in canon, I suspect that it is lower than that seen in most fanfic. LaCroix sparing Nat the fate promised in BMV would pay the debt from AtA (a life for a life, Quid Pro Quo). TRACY: I don't see much hope for her, unless Nick went back later, or Vachon rose from the grave (I think he would have drawn some attention at a hospital dressed in filthy, rotting clothes). But the most telling question of all is, Where are her parents? If Reese had time to take care of the paperwork that a shooting in his precinct would cause, the Commissioner should have had time to be at his daughter's deathbed. Of course, that would have made Nick's vamp-out scene impossible, so.... It's tragic that Tracy's last act as a police officer should have been a mistake. Nick was negotiating with a perp unarmed. Tracy steps into the perp's line of sight and points a weapon at him. Dawkins' reaction is obvious and predictable, and should have gotten them both killed. Where did Tracy go to the police academy, Spelling University? Nope, unless Nick went back again, Tracy's perked her last perk. And if he did, that would not only be a betrayal of Nat's trust (bringing over Tracy while refusing to do so with Nat), but an indication that he *can* control himself if he wants. OTHER RANDOM THOUGHTS: The HF Cure: According to Janette's account, it was not the sex and the "sipping" that made her mortal again, if was her rage/grief/catharsis when Robert was killed. The emotions that Robert had awakened in Janette's "cold, dead heart" burst forth and "cured" her. Although Nick did not give the cathartic scream that they both did in HF, Nick *might* have been mortal at the moment LC raised the "stake". But if so, I think Uncle would have struck without a second's thought. Reese vs. The Water Cooler: I wish that he would have gotten water this time, and then said something along the lines of "something terrible is about to happen" just before Dawkins broke free. But they haven't done any water cooler scenes lately, have they? Tracy's outfit: Personally, I think that sweater-and-slacks oufit was the most fetching outfit she's worn all season. Pity someone had to go and put a hole in it. I thought back to Urs' outfits in AtA and I wondered if the wardrobe person decided to go out with the best the budget could handle. For the women at least. Nat's outfits: Again, about the yummiest I've seen. Although having her wear a cream outfit with a peek of white lace in the scene where she offers herself to Nick rings too much of "virgin to the sacrifice" for me. The bust of LaCroix: Forgetting about where it came from (LC's had 19 centuries to comission another), why is it sitting on the bar? We see LaCroix close his steamer trunk (how delightfully retro!), so he's obviously not bringing it with him. IMHO, he planned to give it to Nick, if Nick decided to stay on in Toronto. Chomping through the centuries: Those brief flashes of Nick muching on victims, all beautiful women, suggest that Nat shared some of Nick's memories. Perhaps she also shared his blood. Wouldn't it be ironic if Nick became mortal in the act of bring Nat across? Of course, that situation is easily remedied, since LaCroix is standing right there, peeping as usual. "You have thought this out ...?" Hell no. He may have planned for the murder/suicide if the plan failed. But what if it worked? If he had been able to just "sip"? Would he and Nat have made love *on the floor* *with LC due any minute*? Sounds like a great JADFE story. Oh, and I hate to break it to the Vaqueras, but on close examination, Vachon had that stake still in him when he delivered his "wish me luck" exit line. Now where did I put that asbestos suit? -- Ray Nat Vamp Camp Damn you, Nicholas! Rage! Rage! Against the dying of the Knight! ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 00:01:10 -0500 From: Robbi Egersdorf <egersdor@m.......> Subject: LK Request Can someone please send me the post that described what happened in LK verbatim. I accidently deleted it. Thanks Robbi Long Live the Knight egersdor@m....... ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 00:08:56 -0700 From: Amy R. <akr@m.......> Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight > At 11:10 -0700 5/19/96, Cynthia (and Jane?) wrote: > >And, by the way, Nat was wrong to stop him. She constantly tells Nick > >that he has no right to make decisions for other people. How dare she > >make this kind of decision for Tracy? Actually, how dare *Nick* make this kind of decision for Tracy? *Usually*, consent is important to him. Nat was acting on Richard's behalf, in that case.... And then the person who was quoting Cynthia & Jane wrote some stuff about it being perfectly all right to bring Tracy across, because then she could commit suicide if she didn't like being a vampire, just as Urs could have. That really riles me, but probably only because I've lost count of the number of times I've explained my Theory of Urs (and Free Will in Vampirism) By Way Of ND. :-) One of the interpretations of FK has always been from the pov of the religion Nick was raised in, which is where he got the idea that both vampirism and suicide automatically damn you. *That* is the major reason why Nick is less than happy about being a vampire, as it is why neither he nor Urs ever walked into the sun. Everyone is entitled to her own opinion, of course, but this is a very important part of *Nick's* outlook, even when he suppresses it. It is why he finally decided to let Nat die rather than bring her across -- he couldn't bring himself to damn her. (That's what LC's for... ;) ) As to why he damned Janette.... does accusing him of extreme selfishness threaten my status as a Knightie? *** 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: Tue, 21 May 1996 04:15:45 -0400 From: Deborah Bender <DBendr@a.......> Subject: SPOILERS: Last Knight parallels to an English ballad I have had a chance to read only a fraction of the posts on this ep. The ones I have seen were insightful and creative. I am ready to buy the Sorcha solution. This episode has been compared to a variety of works of art, including the last act of Hamlet, the series finale of Blakes' Seven, and the it-was-all-a-dream copout in Dallas. For some reason, the last few minutes of it put me in mind of an entirely different work, the English ballad Matty Groves. For this to work, you have to do some gender-switching: Natalie=Matty Groves, LaCroix=Lord Arlen, Nick=Lady Arlen. The setup for this ballad (which I learned off a Fairport Convention album) is that Lady Arlen seduces a reluctant commoner and Lord Arlen comes home early and finds them in bed. He demands that Matty get up and fight him. Being a more practiced swordsman, Lord Arlen deals Matty Groves a fatal blow. The ballad then goes on. Lord Arlen took his own dear wife And set her on his knee, Saying, "Who do you like the better of us, Matty Groves or me?" Then up spoke his own dear wife, Never heard to speak so free, "I'd rather a kiss from dead Matty's lips Than you in your finery." Lord Arlen he stood up And loudly he did bawl. He ran his lady through with a sword And pinned her against the wall. "A grave, a grave," Lord Arlen cried, "To put these lovers in. But bury my lady at the top, For she was of noble kin." I am not claiming an exact parallel, but if LaCroix did stake him, that's the underlying dynamic. Deborah Bender DBender@a....... The Witches Trine, a magazine beyond Wicca 101. Email me for details. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 06:48:10 -0500 From: TippiNB <Tippinb@i.......> Subject: Revelations (LK and AtA spoilers) Do I Still Need To Put A Spoiler Space Here? All I ever needed to know I learned from LK and AtA: Never EVER tell a vampire to make love to you. You'll either get your head lopped off or drained to within an inch of your life. No thank you! Not even sex with a vampire is worth *that* particular risk, thank you very much! Wicked Cousin Tippi, dollar bill wrangler of the Thong Throng! *Charter Member of the Unnamed Faction*Voyeur of the Menage LaCroix* "TV shows, like vampires, have a way of coming back from the dead." Firmly believing that LK was the 1st ep of the 4th season. Why not? http://www.netcom.com/~tippinb/wicked.html ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 06:46:00 CDT From: Jill Kirby <jtkirby@m.......> Subject: SPOILERS: Last Knight There's been a lot of wonderful discussion already on this list, and I'm not going to repeat it here. Suffice it to say that even though I was curled up in a tight painful sniffly little ball the entire time I watched, I <did> think that this is one of the best FK episodes ever. Beautifully executed. Outstanding acting and directing, and a few truly heartbreaking bits of dialogue. And neither Nick or Nat are dead-- though they could be. Depends on a whole lotta things. I've seen the script (as have many others) and the only reason the ending is ambiguous is that it was <filmed that way.> The script is very, very clear about what happens. The episode, as filmed, is not clear. We have to give Ger and the film editors a lot of credit (and thanks) for leaving the ending open for possibilities, both in fanfic and future film opportunities. I'm not as upset about the episode as I thought I'd be, given the script. However, I am angry as hell about the name of the suicide victim. How unspeakably cruel it was to use that particular name, especially with all the references to how she "had no life." In a way, I'm relieved about how LK came out on film. But it's going to take me a long while to stop being angry about the blatant slam to the fans. There have been fan names in episodes before; it's always been sort of funny. This one wasn't funny at all. Thanks for all the discussion and emotion that's been displayed. I know it's helped me get through all of this, and I'm sure it's helped others just as much. We're a very lucky group of fen. Jill Jill Kirby - jtkirby@m....... - http://www.mcs.net/~jtkirby/ Among familiar things grown strange to me Making my way, I pause, and feel, and hark, Till I become accustomed to the dark. --E. St.V. Millay ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 09:09:52 EDT From: Lisa McDavid <D020214@u.......> Subject: Spoiler: Last Knight The script called for weird lights and angles on LaCroix, but -- the script did *not* say that the background should be clearly recognizable as Nick's loft. When it came to the repeats from the monologues in the tag, it said something about maybe not using it, but that it would tie all this together. Since Ger was directing, I imagine it was Ger's idea that the monologues would be done in the loft and from what really does appear most of the time to be the prespective of someone lying on the floor. Ger said some things last year at the Gerthering which I took to mean that he'd like to think Nick eventually becomes mortal. I know he said of that motor cycle, "I like to think of it as our <Nick and Nat's> honeymoon Winnebago." He suggested that in the last scene of the last episode, they might ride off into the sunrise on it. So whether the clear tears were intentional or not, I do think Ger was trying to suggest that Nat isn't dead after all. Since the call from that directed them to make it ambiguous came at 2 a.m. on the final night of shooting as they were doing the tag (according to Nigel at Syndicon East), Ger must have already planned it. I don't know whether the second time Nick drinks from Nat in the script was cut before or after that. I wish I knew. Obviously, as far as the spoken dialogue is concerned, Nick thinks Nat has died. The way Ger filmed the whole episode, though, certainly looks as though he meant to leave it open as to whether Nick is mistaken. Cousin Lisa -- "That will be trouble." Lisa McDavid mcdavid-lisa@s....... ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 09:24:36 EDT From: Lisa McDavid <D020214@u.......> Subject: Spoiler: Last Knight Just a comment that I don't remember seeing answered. Someone noticed Nat's line about "six years ago" and asked when Dark Knight originally aired. Dark Knight first aired in 1992, but the six year figure is correct. The scene in Only the Lonely (1992) in which we saw Nick brought into the morgue was a flashback to two years earlier. That makes it 1990, so six years is right. Cousin Lisa -- "That will be trouble." Lisa McDavid mcdavid-lisa@s....... ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 09:51:58 +30000 From: Valerie Meachum <valerie@l.......> Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight Darn, that was my last Really Cool Insight that I thought nobody had said anything about yet! :-) For the reconrd, at this point I'm almost *certain* that it's Nat's perception, for any of several possible reasons: (a) the classic hovering-around-one's-body routine, which would explain how she can *see* when she's lying on the floor with her eyes closed; (b) since there's no good timeframe on when the scattered-through-the-ep speeches were made, maybe they're actually *after* she regains something resembling consciousness (either after being brought across or just through sheer stubbornness)--the only one that's repeated in the non-hallucinatory loft scene is the bit spoken over the teaser; the rest could (and almost *must*) be *after* th end of the ep; (c) the most far-out idea, presented for the sake of completeness and just for fun, is that they're dreams/premonitions that actually come to her or to Nick (though as Lisa pointed out the angle on LaCroix is really her position on the floor) *at the times we actually see them in the ep*. Right now I'm leaning toward (b), and toward sheer stubbornness. This is subject to change iwthout notice. Later! Valerie Lynn Meachum <valerie@l.......> THE CRUCIBLE * by Arthur Miller * directed by Valerie Meachum * June 6-22, 1996 Rosebriar Shakespeare Company, Columbus, OH * (614) 268-7986 Visit us on the Web at http://members.aol.com/wiliqueen/rosebriar.html ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 06:58:12 PST From: June Russell <Kat@g.......> Subject: Re: LK and AtA comments Deb and Dianne commenting: :>2) Umm... LaCroix could close up the Raven without Nick noticing??? C'mon, :>the Raven was Nick's only recreation! It would be as impossible as us not :>noticing the absence of Forkni! : :Well he might have done it really fast and besides Nick was busy that :evening. Unless it was more than one evening...I...I am confused. It depends on how soon after AtA this episode is supposed to be. Remember how empty the Raven was at that point. I can see LC deciding that it just wasn't worth it to fix the place up after the fight with Divia. Also, things within the community had changed for him after that. It would seem to be a good point to "move on". Maybe Nick was busy for a couple of days. Who's to say he goes there every night. In the meantime, LC could have been very busy packing and making arrangements. Kat Kat ( June Russell ) pacifier.com!grendal!kat kat@g....... Heu! Tintinnuntius meus Sonat! ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 07:24:53 PST From: June Russell <Kat@g.......> Subject: Re: SPOILER: LK (HF), Distorted views Amy wrote: :As easily as I could go all Light Cousinly at this point, it seems :reasonable to believe that one reason LC would not allow Nick to die is :because the only way, now, to deprive him of the mortal he loves is to :keep him here in the world of the living -- "such as it is" -- while she :slips away. I think that if LC didn't stake Nick then Nick could just walk out into the sun. If Nat really is Nick's mortal love (as Fleur is for LC per BMV), I don't think Nick would take it easily were LC to let her go. Kat Kat ( June Russell ) pacifier.com!grendal!kat kat@g....... Heu! Tintinnuntius meus Sonat! ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 10:39:29 -0400 From: Carrie Krumtum <CKrumtum@g.......> Subject: Re: SPOILER: Last Knight Math >In short (well, okay, too late for that): > >B = 1 + (-1 + (MPD) + Y) = 0 + MPD + Y = MPD + Y > OUCH! My head hurts. Man oh man oh man oh man. Just when you thought you were safe from algebra forever... Forever Math! :)= Carrie, Slovenly Knightie AKA Carrie the Cruel CKrumtum@g....... It's hard to judge someone when you're blinded by your love for them. --Mother Teresa ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 07:42:57 -0700 From: Cynthia Hoffman <choff@v.......> Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight On Tue, 21 May 1996, Amy R. wrote in response to Natalie making decisions for others ... this gets confusing, doesn't it? > Actually, how dare *Nick* make this kind of decision for Tracy? > *Usually*, consent is important to him. Nat was acting on Richard's > behalf, in that case.... I fail to see how Nat acting on Richard's behalf when he's unconscious and knows nothing at all about vampires in any case is justifiable when Nick's behavior isn't. In the FK universe, everyone makes decisions for everyone else all the time. We always get our knickers in a twist about it too, but that doesn't change the fact that in the case of Tracy, Nick was dealing with someone who was in a position at least to KNOW what she was up against when she woke up. And I don't believe for a minute that Natalie stopping him had more to do with Tracy than with her own "you'll do it for her, but not for me" stand that followed her stopping him. Natalie has a right to be angry that Nick will do the bringing over to vampirism thing for others and not for her; I just dispute her right to make that decision for someone else. (Do I contradict myself? Very well, I contradict myself ... I contain multitudes ...W.W.) > That really riles me, but probably only because I've lost count of the > number of times I've explained my Theory of Urs (and Free Will in > Vampirism) By Way Of ND. :-) My preferred way of looking at the possibility is to assume that Tracy could choose not to come across via a Near Death scenario. Even early fanfic (hi Val!) insisted that choosing to wake up was important. I don't think that suicide would be the only way out if Tracy really didn't want it. > One of the interpretations of FK has always been from the pov of the > religion Nick was raised in, which is where he got the idea that both > vampirism and suicide automatically damn you. On the other hand, Nick has been around for a long time now, and his experience in the world has had an impact on him. The Catholic Church has changed its views amazingly in the past 25 years, not to mention eight centuries. While suicide is still frowned on, I doubt that even the staunchest Catholic would insist that Nick starve himself because his food is blood. Isn't that part of the mass? > *That* is the major reason why Nick is less than happy about being a > vampire, as it is why neither he nor Urs ever walked into the sun. No, it's not the major reason Nick is less than happy about being a vampire. Most of the time he seems more concerned with seeing sunlight and having sex that doesn't result in another person's untimely demise. The damnation stuff doesn't come up all that often. Unless it's in relation to Natalie. > Everyone is entitled to her own opinion, of course, but this is a very > important part of *Nick's* outlook, even when he suppresses it. It is why > he finally decided to let Nat die rather than bring her across -- he > couldn't bring himself to damn her. (That's what LC's for... ;) ) See above. And see fanfic, to be posted soon. (Coming soon, the scenario we've finally discovered where Nat gets to stay alive and we don't feel like we've betrayed the integrity of either the episode or the characters in it.) > As to why he damned Janette.... does accusing him of extreme selfishness > threaten my status as a Knightie? Oh, go ahead. It was selfish. But it also made sense where Janette's character was concerned. To wit: Janette spent 1000 years as a reasonably well-adjusted, almost happy vampire and Nick spent 750 of those years with her. She's emminently practical; "I'm human now? Let's see what this is all about." Oops. "I'm a vampire again? Damn you for not listening to me, but I know how to do this. See you next century." As I've said before, I don't think bringing Janette back across was damnation; but then I'm a Buddhist former Orthodox Jew; next life if I'm Christian I'll get back to you. Cynthia Cynthia Hoffman/choff@v....... Raven ** IB ** MBDtK We cater to the occasional fetishist ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 08:44:54 -0600 From: Deb <drowland@a.......> Subject: Re: Last Knight - Major Spoilers John Folden wrote: Unless of course the entire last episode was simply Nick's Knightmare brought about because of Divia's "bad Blood". Ooooo...now this idea I like! I had been perturbed that Divia's attack drove Vachon mad and gave him a wound that apparently never healed but Nick's facial scratches were completely healed when he showed up to save LaCriox. At least in the ficton universe Nick doesn't heal as fast as the other vamps because of his avoidance of human blood. Maybe he got a "transfusion" of Divia's blood during her biting him and it boosted his powers enough to heal then led to this Knightmare of an ending. BTW: did anyone else get the impression that Nat was more than a little upset at what she was seeing when Nick bit her? She wasn't showing any of Alyssa's enjoyment of the act. I think it was the first time she truely understood the violence and agony of Nick's existance and if he had been able to ask her THEN if she wanted to come across she would have chosen to die. just MY .02 Deb Knightie with strong Cousinly urges "You can't run away forever, but there's nothing wrong with getting a good headstart." _Rock and Roll Dreams Come Through_ by Meatloaf ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 08:51:07 -0600 From: Deb <drowland@a.......> Subject: fictional resurrections I think these characters were killed or apparently killed then returned: 1. Kirk (Generations- he fell into the Nexus) 2. Dr. Who (I'm not a Whoian but isn't that how he keeps changing appearances?) 3. Superman 4. "Sir John Smythe" (Elizabeth Peters' master art thief) 5. about half the characters on any daytime soap 6. Fox Mulder (just how *did* he get out of that burning boxcar?) probably more but I've GOT to get back to work now. Deb ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 08:44:25 -0700 From: Amy R. <akr@m.......> Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight On Tue, 21 May 1996, Lisa McDavid wrote: > the morgue was a flashback to two years earlier. That makes it 1990, > so six years is right. And it conclusively answers my old question about the missing year: the characters did live it (though I suppose the bombing reference in BB established that, too). Of course, it is still up in the air as to whether a year passed (for them) between seasons one and two, or whether the three seasons' worth of episodes are merely spread out over four years. At least the BB reference makes it clear that the lapse is not between seasons two and three. Of course, putting Nat's birthday in April, when it took all that trouble to establish her as a Cancer.... did they *ever* change the calendar on that set? Sometimes it seemed as if it alternated between the same two pictures for the entire run. (I can't believe I'm talking in the past tense...) And staying on the topic of Nat, was her packing in the morgue just a leftover from the earlier, insane scripts that had her actively suicidal? She hadn't been told yet that Nick was leaving, had she? Though perhaps, by then, she could read the signs. Perhaps she was planning to leave if he refused her, as she most probably expected him to do -- remember AMPH. *** 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: Tue, 21 May 1996 11:14:54 -0500 From: Margie Hammet <treeleaf@i.......> Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight At 09:09 AM 5/21/96 EDT, Lisa McDavid wrote: >Obviously, as far as the spoken dialogue is concerned, Nick thinks Nat has >died. The way Ger filmed the whole episode, though, certainly looks as >though he meant to leave it open as to whether Nick is mistaken. I hope you're right, 'cause that would make me feel a whole lot better. Especially if LaCroix didn't accept this walking off into Heaven together business, and didn't do what Nick asked him to. It doesn't restore my faith in the creative Powers That Be, though. Not if JP meant to have it be that Nat died and that LaCroix did what Nick asked. And not if it took a Sony executive to tell them to make the ending more ambiguous. Does anyone know for sure if that's true, BTW? I know Ger said in the Prodigy chat that they got a call telling them to change the ending, but he didn't say who the call was from. Margie (treeleaf@i.......) ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 09:08:00 PT From: Tami Lafrank <tamilyn.lafrank@a.......> Subject: Re: Last Knight spoilers Lisa McDavid wrote: >As usual, I must be insane, because I like Last Knight and I don't think >it's a tragic ending. I loved this ep. It was beautifully acted and filmed. It made me feel rather than just view. That's good TV. So, if you're insane, I must join you. :-) >I think, with the human tears and the fact that it took great trauma >plus the beloved's blood to bring Janette back, that Nick did regain >his mortality. Imho, Nat isn't dead. The script says "he has drained Well, I'll disagree a little. I don't think he was mortal. I think he may have found a bit of redemption and light, but I don't think he made it back across. However, as the story closes, I have to agree that Nat is still alive. >When he comes right down to it, I don't think LaCroix will be able to >bring himself to stake Nick and I think he knows Nat isn't dead. Oh, I whole-heartedly agree. There is no way he will kill Nick. He'd kill himself first. Unless he kills Nick and then watches the sunrise. He doesn't want to live without Nick, that is perfectly clear across all seasons. >I've got strong ideas as to what I think happened next, but I'll save >them for Fkfic-l. Oooo, I can hardly wait. Do hurry with the story. If you need a beta reader just holler. >Anyway, I'll miss the show, but I do feel that the ending was well >and truly left open -- and I'm happy for it. I agree. The ending was open enough for several different scenarios in the future. We must keep campaigning for its return. Tami LaFrank : TCL58@a....... or TCL20@a....... Faithful Ravenette, IB, MBDtK : "Have another hit, I think it's helping" : Owner: Sacred Raven Health Spa We have enough youth, how about: "Come in, relax. We're dying a fountain of *smart*? : to prolong your life" ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 10:26:46 -0700 From: Amy R. <akr@m.......> Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight (My second message of the day already, unfortunately, but...) Cynthia wrote: > While suicide is still frowned on, I doubt that even the > staunchest Catholic would insist that Nick starve himself because his food > is blood. Isn't that part of the mass? That's not fair, Cynthia. The Real Presence is NOT comparable. And no one is asking Nick to starve -- he's gotten by on cow's blood for a hundred years now, more or less. And what I was saying is that the belief that vampires are automatically damned lurks somewhere in Nick's mind, not in contemporary theology. Regarding Richard, I meant to hold him up as one of the exceptions to the rule of Nick usually preferring to have consent before bringing someone across. Obviously, I need to integrate IWR as completely into my view of Nick's view of vampirism as I have into my view of Natalie's view of vampirism. That being as it may, I do not think Nat was trying to stop Nick from bringing Tracy over at all. I think she was willing for Tracy to be made a vampire, and just wanted Nick to see that there was no conflict in doing the same for her. > As I've said before, I don't think bringing Janette back across was > damnation.... Neither do I, but I insist that it is still a plausible way of looking at vampirism, especially FK vampirism. That's all. *** 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: Tue, 21 May 1996 15:07:11 -0400 From: "C. Monique Solis" <CMSolis@a.......> Subject: Last Knight thoughts Okay, delurking long enough to get these few things off my chest. One: I loved it--it's Forever Knight. I hated it. I feel like I've been cheated. If they were going to end it like that why couldn't they have taken their time and worked out "all the loose ends" for us? Taken two episodes to finish it and done it up right? Two: Poor Nat! I was bouncing around the room thinking "Yes! He's going to do it--they're going to do it!" (My husband thought I was nuts at this point) and got the disappointment of my life! I'm sorry guys but a little smooch & Pepe le Peu wrist kiss is NOT foreplay. Don't TPTB have sex lives? I don't think that's what Nat had in mind when she told Nick to make love to her. Nothing like making it just a little exciting. GEEZ! Three: And who are they fooling? Did we actually SEE LaCroix kill Nick....NO. That is not closure! If they have no intentions of making a fourth season (oh, ya sure, 2 hour movies) they should have shown it! I can't see them making 2 hour movies about a series that in their opinion was not cutting it according to the network and especially now that everyone is dead! Uggh! Okay enough. I just have one question... Is anyone else going to have a hard time watching the 1 &2 seasons now that everyone is DEAD? You know its bad when someone you know who doesn't really care how it ends is pissed off about the Romeo & Juliet style ending. okay deep breath! <sniffle> goodbye sweet knight. Monique Forever and ever Knightie!! cmsolis@a....... ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 16:37:17 EDT From: Tanya Smith <bodybldr@v.......> Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight Just a quick note; I am dealing with vampire redemption in my fiction. I believe their salvation must be differentiated from mortal salvation; however, I am convinced that God will provide a way. For more on the divine battle, see The Search. =========================================================================
Previous |
This month's list |
Next |