From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 14 16:48 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id QAA10291 for ; Tue, 14 May 1996 16:47:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 8C8109BA ; Tue, 14 May 1996 16:04:52 -0400 Message-Id: <199605142047.QAA10291@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 16:01:47 EDT Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Tanya Smith Subject: Last Knight--Peaches? To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 159 Status: RO X-Status: "life is like a ripe peach" sounds goofy to me. Sounds like "Life is like a box of chocolates..." Forrest Gump. We could call Lacroix Forest Grump. (-; Tanya From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 14 16:54 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id QAA11748 for ; Tue, 14 May 1996 16:54:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 53E03593 ; Tue, 14 May 1996 16:10:26 -0400 Message-Id: <199605142054.QAA11748@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 15:06:19 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Sarah Welsh Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight questions To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 496 Status: RO X-Status: OK, I said I wasn't going to read the spoilers, but I can resist anything but temptation, right? For those of you who've seen it, I have a few questions: 1) How many people are "dead" (in TPTB's mind anyway) at the end? 2) How many can be resurrected by us, keeping in mind that Alexandra had been dead for hours when LaCroix brought her across and that LaCroix was staked in a fire and seemingly burned to ashes and he came back? Apprehensively, Sarah *definite* Cleopatra welshkin@dfw.net From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 12 08:56 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id IAA27018 for ; Sun, 12 May 1996 08:56:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 503445AF ; Sun, 12 May 1996 8:56:03 -0400 Message-Id: <199605121256.IAA27018@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 12 May 1996 07:52:43 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Sarah Welsh Subject: Mini-spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 640 Status: RO X-Status: Just read the TV schedule's blurb for Last Knight: "The death of a close friend makes Natalie realize her feelings for Nick, forcing him to choose between her and eternal life." He doesn't want eternal life anyway! Or, at least, he didn't until maybe this season. Do you suppose they did this on purpose to build the tension? I have to admit I squealed when I read this. I haven't exactly avoided spoilers for LK, but I hadn't heard about this. We actually get to end with Nick-n-Nat episode? Oh, wow. Can't wait. I read spoilers for AtA, but I just can't for this one. I don't want to know until I know. Sarah welshkin@dfw.net From owner-forkni-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 12 12:54 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id MAA20960 for ; Sun, 12 May 1996 12:54:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id ABA19821 ; Sun, 12 May 1996 12:54:50 -0400 Message-Id: <199605121654.MAA20960@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 12 May 1996 12:54:24 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show Sender: Forever Knight TV show From: Marcia Tucker Subject: Last Knight Party/Wake in Chicago To: Multiple recipients of list FORKNI-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 570 Status: RO X-Status: I've decided I don't want to be alone when I watch "Last Knight" next weekend, so if anyone in the Chicago area is interested, I'm hosting a Party/Wake next Sat. night. The episode airs at 11:35 pm here. The party can start whenever anyone gets here. I've also got oodles of tapes. I'm providing food. I plan to wear black. Kleenex will be provided. E-mail me off-list, please, if you're interested. I live in the SW suburbs and have crash space if you want to stay over. Marcia Tucker scfimarci@aol.com Dark Knightie / Unnamed / Immortal Beloved / Light Cousin From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 12 13:00 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id NAA21789 for ; Sun, 12 May 1996 13:00:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 74761C21 ; Sun, 12 May 1996 13:00:27 -0400 Message-Id: <199605121700.NAA21789@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 12 May 1996 12:59:34 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Melanie Moser Subject: TV Guide Listing "Last Knight" To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 892 Status: RO X-Status: (I suppose this is a mini-spoiler, depending on how little you like to know about an episode beforehand). Here's the TV Guide listing for "Last Knight" from the web. URL: http://www.iguide.com/tv/tvguide/programs/11/004wx73r.sml ----------------------------------------------------------------- Forever Knight Crime Drama The loss of a close friend forces Nick to evaluate his relationship with Natalie (Catherine Disher), and prompts him to make a decision that will have permanent implications. Reese: Blu Mankuma. Dawkins: Roger Honeywell. Nick: Geraint Wyn Davies. Tracy: Lisa Ryder. ----------------------------------------------------------------- I can't believe it's ending... if there's water marks on this message, it's only my tears.... :-( Mel Moser N&NPacker, moser@clark.net Check out my Forever Knight Fan Fiction page at: http://www.clark.net/pub/moser/fkfanfic.htm From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 12 15:29 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id PAA09314 for ; Sun, 12 May 1996 15:29:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 3B1A0553 ; Sun, 12 May 1996 15:29:10 -0400 Message-Id: <199605121929.PAA09314@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 12 May 1996 14:36:35 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: TippiNB Subject: Re: TV Guide Listing "Last Knight" To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 648 Status: RO X-Status: Mel wrote: S P O I L E R S P A C E >The loss of a close friend forces Nick to evaluate his relationship >with Natalie (Catherine Disher), and prompts him to make a decision >that will have permanent implications. Reese: Blu Mankuma. >Dawkins: Roger Honeywell. Nick: Geraint Wyn Davies. Tracy: Lisa Ryder. My local TV "chronilog" says, and I'm quoting from memory but the wording is pretty close, "Nick has to choose between immortality and true love with Natalie." My little Cousinly/Unnamed Faction heart is NOT hoping for one of those options, and I think we ALL know what it is!! ;) Wicked Cousin Tippi Charter Member of the Unnamed Faction From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 12 16:50 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id QAA20500 for ; Sun, 12 May 1996 16:50:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 87FA8AA4 ; Sun, 12 May 1996 16:50:04 -0400 Message-Id: <199605122050.QAA20500@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 12 May 1996 16:47:01 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Roxanne Piccen Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight (Ep Synopsis) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 894 Status: RO X-Status: Well, well, well. Amazingly enough, my local newspaper's t.v. section actually lists FK in the highlights section this week. (Figures they'd only do that for the final episode.) FWIW, following is the brief synopsis of Last Knight: S P O I L E R S P A C E "Series Finale: Forever Knight. In the series finale, "Last Knight", Nick and Natalie (Geraint Wyn Davies, Catherine Disher) lose a close mutual friend. In working through their grief, Natalie realizes how much she loves Nick, while Nick realizes he must finally choose between eternal life and true love." Roxanne RoxanneP@aol.com (Home) // CHIRMP@AM.DAMES.COM (Work) ***************************************************************************** Save Forever Knight! // Save American Gothic! Check out: http://members.aol.com/CuznJamiMR/SaveForeverKnight.html http://www.best.com/~owls for The Trinity Guardian From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 13 14:17 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id OAA21087 for ; Mon, 13 May 1996 14:17:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id FB4E6B5A ; Mon, 13 May 1996 13:53:09 -0400 Message-Id: <199605131817.OAA21087@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 13 May 1996 10:52:28 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Valery King Subject: LAST KNIGHT reaction To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 706 Status: RO X-Status: I haven't put in any spoilers here; but I need to get this out to try to get my head straight again, so forgive me. Don't read this if you want to come to this "cold". I really don't want to ruin anything for anyone, and you might find it depressing. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 I hated this episode. Hate, hate, hate. I can't be coherent about it yet and say why in any reasonable way. Maybe when I've gotten some rest; I couldn't sleep very well last night because of this. Are TPTB really so annoyed with us that they'd inflict this on us right at the end? I'm going to do my best to try to forget this episode even exists (heck, I did it with a whole *season* of Blake's 7!). --Valery kingv@ucs.orst.edu From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 13 14:43 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id OAA25874 for ; Mon, 13 May 1996 14:42:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id E6B39922 ; Mon, 13 May 1996 14:42:40 -0400 Message-Id: <199605131842.OAA25874@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 13 May 1996 11:41:19 -0800 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Elizabeth Mosler Subject: Re: LAST KNIGHT reaction X-cc: kingv@UCS.ORST.EDU To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 799 Status: RO X-Status: >I haven't put in any spoilers here; but I need to get this out to try to >get my head straight again, so forgive me. > >Don't read this if you want to come to this "cold". I really don't want to >ruin anything for anyone, and you might find it depressing. > When you are feeling better, please post your opinions to the list regarding this last episode. I am one of these odd people who would rather know in advance what to expect, then to receive the bad news cold turkey as I watch the episode this Saturday. :-(= ===================================================== elizabeth m. (emosler@leland.stanford.edu) 'Our fate is not determined by what we experience, but by how we perceive what we experience.' - Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach WWW: http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~emosler/rose.html From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 14 08:24 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id IAA17604 for ; Tue, 14 May 1996 08:24:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 2897E6DC ; Tue, 14 May 1996 8:23:57 -0400 Message-Id: <199605141224.IAA17604@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 07:21:47 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Deb Kroll Subject: SPOILER: LAST KNIGHT X-To: fkspoilr-l@psuvm.psu.edu To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 533 Status: RO X-Status: WAAAA!!!!!!! I just saw last Knight and let me tell you, have tissues ready! I can't belive they did this. I was balling my eyes out at the end. The only part I REALLY liked was when Nat says "Make Love to me Nick". Some of those Nat/Nick scenes had me floored! This one is definately a keeper, but be warned that ending is SO sad waaaaaaa!!!! :`( demona@execpc.com -------------oO-OO*OO-Oo----------------- Demona@execpc.com -- CompUSA Technician Gargoyles fan ** Forever Knight Fan ------------//oOO-*-OOo\\---------------- From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 14 09:09 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id JAA25393 for ; Tue, 14 May 1996 09:09:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 89A0FDBC ; Tue, 14 May 1996 9:09:36 -0400 Message-Id: <199605141309.JAA25393@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 08:53:05 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "Gaylin J. Walli" Subject: Spoiler: Francesca, Jane Doe, Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1534 Status: RO X-Status: Apache(?), oh geez, someone asked what Hollyhocks meant in the language of flowers. I admit I haven't been to careful about who`s said what, but for what it's worth, Hollyhocks were meant to symbolize fruitfulness or female ambition (actually the white hollyhocks were for the later specifically). Stupid questions: I'm trying to make sure the Known Vampire list is up-to-date on the FK Website. I checked the list rules, so I think I'm okay asking about all of these episodes. Somebody smack me if I screw up...I've missed a bunch of episodes so I'm going on the kindness of strangers as to what has happened... Francesca was a real vampire that Nick accidently killed in what year? Sometime during the 1700s? Do we know how old she was? So who was Lisa? Vachon gets it, but who does it? Divia? Does anyone else get it? Who does Divia? Did Divia do her master, The Ancient one, and if so, during what year? Do we find out if it's a male or a female Ancient One? What happens to Urs? Who else did Divia do, anyone? Are there any other new vampires that I've forgotten about? I need to ask a specific question about a vampire in Last Knight, but I'm not sure if it's cool to do so yet. I checked the spoiler list rules which are silent, but it seems a shame to spoil things for everyone if I'm one of two people who's seen it. Can someone who's seen it please contact me privately about it? Thanks in advance for you help with the web page. Jasmine, Faithful Ravenette, gjwalli@mtu.edu http://www.hu.mtu.edu/~gjwalli/fktoc.html From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 14 10:06 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id KAA07517 for ; Tue, 14 May 1996 10:06:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 5770DE68 ; Tue, 14 May 1996 10:05:28 -0400 Message-Id: <199605141406.KAA07517@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 06:36:17 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Roxanne Piccen Subject: Re: LAST KNIGHT reaction To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 772 Status: RO X-Status: Valery wrote: >Don't read this if you want to come to this "cold". I >really don't want to ruin anything for anyone, and you >might find it depressing. Please, please, please, when some of your anger has subsided, post to the list what happened in this ep to produce such strong feelings. I prefer to know bad news in advance so I can better prepare for the impact. (It actually did help somewhat knowing what was coming with AtA. At least I wasn't caught completely off guard.) Roxanne RoxanneP@aol.com (Home) // CHIRMP@AM.DAMES.COM (Work) ********************************************************* Save Forever Knight! // Save American Gothic! Check out: http://members.aol.com/CuznJamiMR/SaveForeverKnight.html http://www.best.com/~owls for The Trinity Guardian From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 14 12:06 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id MAA07074 for ; Tue, 14 May 1996 12:06:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id A0CA53E0 ; Tue, 14 May 1996 11:26:16 -0400 Message-Id: <199605141606.MAA07074@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 11:17:17 +0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: John Folden Subject: Re: SPOILER: LAST KNIGHT To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 959 Status: RO X-Status: > From: "Deb Kroll" > > WAAAA!!!!!!! I just saw last Knight and let me tell you, have tissues ready! I > can't belive they did this. I was balling my eyes out at the end. > The only part I REALLY liked was when Nat says "Make Love to me Nick". Some of > those Nat/Nick scenes had me floored! This one is definately a keeper, but be > warned that ending is SO sad waaaaaaa!!!! :`( I read a pretty detailed spoiler that also mentioned Nat saying that line above. I had *hoped* that the PTB would smarten up and realize what a great ending they would have if they rolled credits right after she said that line. It would have left it completely open to speculation. In the original spoiler I saw, it had Nick taking too much blood from Nat, and then actually going back for more to finish her off rather than bringing her accross. Someone else said that later it was edited and Nick didn't go back for the second drink....????? Did he? From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 14 12:50 EDT 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id MAA16825 for ; Tue, 14 May 1996 12:50:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.626E89F0@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; Tue, 14 May 1996 12:46:35 -0400 Message-Id: <199605141650.MAA16825@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 12:45:34 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "Carol A. Morrison" Subject: Re: SPOILER: LAST KNIGHT To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 875 Status: RO X-Status: John Folden asked-- >In the original spoiler I saw, it had Nick taking too much blood from Nat, and > then actually going back for more to finish her off rather than bringing her accross. >Someone else said that later it was edited and Nick didn't go back for the > second drink....????? Did he? S P O I L E R S P A C E No, Nick doesn't go back for a second drink. He leans down and kisses Natalie on her right check and tells LaCroix "I can't condemn her to this darkness." Tracy's last words to Nick -- "You...could have trusted me." Nick's last words to Natalie -- "I won't leave you. Whatever happens, we'll be together." Natalie's last word to Nick -- "Forever." Nick's last words to LaCroix -- "No. Not the Devil, Lacroix." (Lacroix: "What then") Nick: "You...are my closest friend." Lacroix's last words to Nicholas -- "Damn you, Nicholas." From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 14 13:46 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id NAA28684 for ; Tue, 14 May 1996 13:46:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 37047C78 ; Tue, 14 May 1996 13:25:00 -0400 Message-Id: <199605141746.NAA28684@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 10:28:33 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: LC Fenster Subject: Re: SPOILER: LAST KNIGHT To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1305 Status: RO X-Status: >S > >P > >O > >I > >L > >E > >R > > >S > >P > >A > >C > >E > >>In the original spoiler I saw, it had Nick taking too much blood from >>Nat, and then actually going back for more to finish her off >>Someone else said that later it was edited and Nick didn't go back >>for the second drink....????? Did he? >No, Nick doesn't go back for a second drink. He leans down and kisses >Natalie on her right check and tells LaCroix "I can't condemn her to >this darkness." It's not quite that clear. The way it was shot, frankly, you can't tell. Nick leans over her, and since the shot is from behind, you can't tell what he's doing, though I think he is drinking. It seems to match the script, where he is NOT vamped out when he takes the second drink. But it is ambiguous, and if one wants to believe that he's only kissing her, one can. Certainly, at the end, when he rises, he was kissing her. However, what is not ambiguous is the fact that LC told him he had a choice: bring her across or let her die, and he chose to let her die. Whether he drank again or not. "I can't condemn her to this darkness." Laurie, who knew what was coming, but still got depressed "Oh, Nicholas. You have thought this through, haven't you?" "What? And spoil the fun?" from the Last Knight blooper script From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 14 13:55 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id NAA00515 for ; Tue, 14 May 1996 13:54:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id C4C26F0B ; Tue, 14 May 1996 13:28:57 -0400 Message-Id: <199605141754.NAA00515@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 13:22:17 +0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: John Folden Subject: Re: SPOILER: LAST KNIGHT To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1500 Status: RO X-Status: > From: "Carol A. Morrison" > > John Folden asked-- > > >In the original spoiler I saw, it had Nick taking too much blood from Nat, and > > then actually going back for more to finish her off rather than bringing > her accross. > >Someone else said that later it was edited and Nick didn't go back for the > > second drink....????? Did he? > > S > > P > > O > > I > > L > > E > > R > > > > S > > P > > A > > C > > E > > > > No, Nick doesn't go back for a second drink. He leans down and kisses > Natalie on her right check and tells LaCroix "I can't condemn her to this > darkness." > Would you believe I just got another reply from someone else who claims to have seen the episode and states that he DID go back for the second drink???? Now, I'm really confused....Not that I doubt you, but are you sure all he did was kiss her? > Tracy's last words to Nick -- "You...could have trusted me." I know where this comes in....(should be a good scene!) > Nick's last words to Natalie -- "I won't leave you. Whatever happens, we'll > be together." > Natalie's last word to Nick -- "Forever." Ok, mind if I ask where these come in at??? Especially, Nat's last words... was that before, after, or during the "drink"? Unlike some lucky(or unlucky people) I won't get to see this episode until 3am next Saturday.... :( > Lacroix's last words to Nicholas -- "Damn you, Nicholas." I believe this is at the very end of the show during a very, ahem, "pointed" moment? From lucienlc@ix.netcom.com Tue May 14 14:42 EDT 1996 Received: from dfw-ix11.ix.netcom.com (dfw-ix11.ix.netcom.com [206.214.98.11]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id OAA11396 for ; Tue, 14 May 1996 14:42:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pat-nj3-04.ix.netcom.com (lucienlc@pat-nj3-04.ix.netcom.com [204.31.242.100]) by dfw-ix11.ix.netcom.com (8.6.13/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA07006; Tue, 14 May 1996 11:40:45 -0700 Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 11:40:45 -0700 Message-Id: <199605141840.LAA07006@dfw-ix11.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: lucienlc@popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 To: cousin@westnet.com, Susankenn@aol.com, Janette92@aol.com, pearl@gramercy.ios.com, zac@hogpa.ho.att.com, moser@clark.net, lsimon@HULAW1.HARVARD.EDU, ejdjd@ix.netcom.com, reginag@ix.netcom.com From: lucienlc@ix.netcom.com (lucienlc) Subject: Last Knight Party/Wake Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 217 Status: RO X-Status: A Hi folks. I have not heard from you as to whether you still expect to attend my Last Knight party this weekend. I would appreciate it if you could let me know, so I have some idea of the numbers to expect. Laurie From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 14 16:46 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id QAA09976 for ; Tue, 14 May 1996 16:46:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id D68846A6 ; Tue, 14 May 1996 15:59:47 -0400 Message-Id: <199605142046.QAA09976@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 12:49:16 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: LC Fenster Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight - Silly question To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 377 Status: RO X-Status: The first line in Last Knight, spoken by LaCroix, is: "Life is like a ripe peach." Did they have peaches in Rome back in the first century? I know Italy is one of the largest exporters of peaches today, but did they have them in Lucius the General's time? Laurie, who still thinks it an odd metaphor for a vampire to use. Has LaCroix been missing peaches for 2,000 years? From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 14 17:08 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id RAA15468 for ; Tue, 14 May 1996 17:08:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 1523D5BA ; Tue, 14 May 1996 16:37:19 -0400 Message-Id: <199605142108.RAA15468@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 16:50:02 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "Carol A. Morrison" Subject: Re: SPOILER: LAST KNIGHT To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1118 Status: RO X-Status: S P O I L E R S P A C E John Folden wrote-- >Would you believe I just got another reply from someone else who claims >to have seen the episode and states that he DID go back for the second drink???? >Now, I'm really confused....Not that I doubt you, but are you sure all he >did was kiss her? > Well I'll put it to you this way. Nick bites Natalie on the left side and when she is lying on the floor her head is turned to the left. Nick leans down over her right side. This is about the time he tells LaCroix that he can't condemn her to this darkness (Kind of hard to drink and talk at the same time). They pull away and you see him kissing her on her right cheek. Her head is still turned the same way to the left and there are no bite marks on the right side of her neck. >Ok, mind if I ask where these come in at??? Especially, Nat's last words... >was that before, after, or during the "drink"? Essentially right before the "drink." >> Lacroix's last words to Nicholas -- "Damn you, Nicholas." > >I believe this is at the very end of the show during a very, ahem, "pointed" >moment? > Right From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 14 17:18 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id RAA17906 for ; Tue, 14 May 1996 17:17:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 44D38105 ; Tue, 14 May 1996 16:52:58 -0400 Message-Id: <199605142117.RAA17906@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 16:49:47 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Dotti Rhodes Subject: Re: SPOILER: Last Knight questions To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 503 Status: RO X-Status: At 03:06 PM 5/14/96 -0500, you wrote: >1) How many people are "dead" (in TPTB's mind anyway) at the end? One definitely and two possibly.....(because of the ambiguous ending) > >2) How many can be resurrected by us, keeping in mind that Alexandra had been dead for hours when LaCroix brought her across and that LaCroix was >staked in a fire and seemingly burned to ashes and he came back? > Two, if they are indeed dead (which we're not sure of). Am I right? Dotti R Knightie 4-Ever dottir@wsii.com From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 14 17:21 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id RAA18632 for ; Tue, 14 May 1996 17:21:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 8BACC696 ; Tue, 14 May 1996 16:54:57 -0400 Message-Id: <199605142121.RAA18632@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 17:08:23 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "Carol A. Morrison" Subject: Re: SPOILER: Last Knight questions To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 740 Status: RO X-Status: S P O I L E R S P A C E At 03:06 PM 5/14/96 -0500, you wrote: >OK, I said I wasn't going to read the spoilers, but I can resist anything >but temptation, right? > >For those of you who've seen it, I have a few questions: > >1) How many people are "dead" (in TPTB's mind anyway) at the end? > >2) How many can be resurrected by us, keeping in mind that Alexandra had >been dead for hours when LaCroix brought her across and that LaCroix was >staked in a fire and seemingly burned to ashes and he came back? > >Apprehensively, > >Sarah >*definite* Cleopatra >welshkin@dfw.net > imho....the only one that can't be resurrected is Tracy. Unless......this whole thing was one of Nick's nighmares which I really believe it was!!! From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 14 18:00 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id SAA27692 for ; Tue, 14 May 1996 18:00:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 4AE6EA5D ; Tue, 14 May 1996 17:14:37 -0400 Message-Id: <199605142200.SAA27692@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 14:08:10 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Elizabeth Mosler Subject: Re: SPOILER: Last Knight questions X-cc: dottir@wsii.com To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 493 Status: RO X-Status: >At 03:06 PM 5/14/96 -0500, you wrote: > >>1) How many people are "dead" (in TPTB's mind anyway) at the end? >>One definitely and two possibly.....(because of the ambiguous ending) >> Me: Okay, one maybe dead is Nat. Who is number two? elizabeth m. Personal Home Page: http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~emosler/rose.html Work Home Page: http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~emosler/binding.html. *Jody to Perry the Vampire dog: "Good boy!" Woofpacker forever!* From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 14 20:45 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id UAA04629 for ; Tue, 14 May 1996 20:45:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id FA25D23B ; Tue, 14 May 1996 20:32:47 -0400 Message-Id: <199605150045.UAA04629@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 17:25:06 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: LC Fenster Subject: Re: SPOILER: Last Knight questions To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 678 Status: RO X-Status: > >S > >P > >O > >I > >L > >E > >R > > > >S > >P > >A > >C > >>For those of you who've seen it, I have a few questions: >> >>1) How many people are "dead" (in TPTB's mind anyway) at the end? From this episode? Two or three; it's unclear. >>2) How many can be resurrected by us, keeping in mind that Alexandra >>had been dead for hours when LaCroix brought her across and that >>LaCroix was staked in a fire and seemingly burned to ashes and he >>came back? All of them. As usual. They can be resurrected by us or by TPTB, should they be so inclined. Of course, they can't necessarily be resurrected as *humans*; they may have to be resurrected as vampires. :-) Laurie From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 14 21:04 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id VAA09564 for ; Tue, 14 May 1996 21:04:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 94A1ADB6 ; Tue, 14 May 1996 20:51:25 -0400 Message-Id: <199605150104.VAA09564@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 17:55:35 +0000 Reply-To: redjasper@earthlink.net Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Lisa Wolters Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1203 Status: RO X-Status: * * * * * * * * So I've read the spoilers from those of you who've already seen "Last Knight," and have formed my very own Cheesy Rationalization(tm) with which I plan to live from now 'til Saturday, when I see the ep, and then for the rest of my life. RULE #1: Nick did not let Natalie die or kill her. Nat's alive. RULE #2: When in doubt, see Rule #1. There. I feel much better now. And it's the only way I can bear to watch "LK" much less remain emotionally involved with FK. To think otherwise is to think that TPTB are being deliberately malicious, callous, reprehensible, unfeeling, unthinking, cold, um.... monstrous, corrupt, foul, depraved, nefarious... you get the idea. Thinking that Nat died would also make me think that TPTB had not a hint of a clue about what the show, or the character of Nick Knight, is about anymore. That would not only make me very, very sad, it would make me very, very angry and bitter toward the show, which has given me so much. I can't accept even the possibility of this final blow to the series and its fans. Lisa W. * redjasper@earthlink.net ...trying to hum and think happy thoughts... From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 14 21:05 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id VAA09743 for ; Tue, 14 May 1996 21:05:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 93259DD6 ; Tue, 14 May 1996 20:58:32 -0400 Message-Id: <199605150105.VAA09743@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 20:55:24 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Diane Shea Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight - Silly question To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 783 Status: RO X-Status: Laurie asked about LaCroix's statement of; >>"Life is like a ripe peach." Did they have peaches in Rome back in the first century? I know Italy is one of the largest exporters of peaches today, but did they have them in Lucius the General's time?<< If this has been answered 10 times already sorry, I live in digest-land. :) At the moment I'm looking at a picture of "Peaches and a Glass Jar" in my art history book. It's part of a wall painting from Herculaneum (a neighbor city to Pompeii) circa 50 A.D. These peaches are green, but they are peaches. >>Laurie, who still thinks it an odd metaphor for a vampire to use. Has LaCroix been missing peaches for 2,000 years?<< Well let's hope there's some reason for them to use lines like this! --Cousin Diane Eternal Seducer From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 15 01:17 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id BAA23161 for ; Wed, 15 May 1996 01:17:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 1D3E0982 ; Wed, 15 May 1996 1:12:57 -0400 Message-Id: <199605150517.BAA23161@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 01:05:33 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Chana Rossman Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1381 Status: RO X-Status: There are spoilers for Last Knight down there, somewhere... Keep going... Lisa Wolters wrote: > I formed my very own Cheesy Rationalization(tm) with which I plan to > live from now 'til Saturday, when I see the ep, and then for the rest > of my life. >RULE #1: Nick did not let Natalie die or kill her. Nat's alive. >RULE #2: When in doubt, see Rule #1. Ha. I'm glad I'm not the only one who is rationalizing like mad. I've got a whole scenero worked out to explain how what we think happened in the episode really didn't happen the way it appeared to. The sad part is I haven't even seen the blasted thing yet. Based on what I've heard, I can't help but feel like the writers ended up making Nick look rather inept. He does seem to have a habit of not being able to control himself in this particular regard. (Maybe Natalie should have paid more attention to Nick's "ex"wife in Dead of Night...) I firmly believe that Nick's love and concern for Natalie's well-being would have (and should have) overpowered any physical desires. Ah well, I'll reserve final judgement until Saturday at 2:00 am. I will add that this Knightie/Natpacker/Nick&Natpacker would have been happy if the show had ended with a simple passionate kiss and a lot of promise for the future... Chana Rossman bonney@interpath.com * I have been one acquainted with the [K]night * From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 15 14:16 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id OAA27543 for ; Wed, 15 May 1996 14:16:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 25F0EDDA ; Wed, 15 May 1996 13:51:58 -0400 Message-Id: <199605151816.OAA27543@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 15 May 1996 09:48:45 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Karen Stortz Subject: Re: SPOILER: ATA / LK / comments X-cc: lucienlc@ix.netcom.com To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1446 Status: RO X-Status: "Last Knight" comments and questions below. You have been warned! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 >>From what I know of LK...I think the ending stinks. . . I have >>difficulty believing LaCroix would actually DO...THAT. >(...even in the original script, there was some deliberate >ambiguity about this...the Romeo and Juliet stuff made it more >conclusive. But once they pulled that out...) Ack-- I must have re-subscribed to the spoiler list in the middle of this discussion--- what the h*** is going on in this ep? From what I can infer, LaCroix stakes Nick??? That would be a really STUPID ending to the series. Nick becomes mortal? I'm okay with that. Nick becomes mortal and then dies (preferably in the course of some noble deed)-- I wouldn't like it, but I could learn to live with it. Nat becomes a vamp and she and Nick move on while she continues to seek a cure for them both-- I could even live with that. Nick gets killed while still a vampire? NO WAY! It's a total defeat--death without redemption, which was always his TRUE goal. Every time I get my hopes up regarding this show's potential, the powers-that-be manage to screw up the premise all over again. I can't tell from the little I've seen on the list so far how they end this, but I sense major disappointment in the works.... And what's all that about deliberate ambiguity, Romeo and Juliet stuff, stuff pulled out, and changes? Please explain this before I go nuts! From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 15 18:30 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id SAA29722 for ; Wed, 15 May 1996 18:30:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 8003720A ; Wed, 15 May 1996 17:00:36 -0400 Message-Id: <199605152230.SAA29722@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 15 May 1996 16:27:21 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Carla Pickering Subject: Slight LK spoiler, & Lyrics To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 923 Status: RO X-Status: Someone *made* me really listen to the lyrics of "Black Rose". After the spoiler items on LK, they were *devastating*... Here I am, rational adult sobbing my eyes out at midnight and I haven't even seen the episode yet.... I've been playing the tape (I don't *have* a CD player) at work and home and after getting most of the Black Rose lyrics and reading spoilers, I really have to be careful that no one thinks I'm seriously loosing it! "There is more truth and depth to a *good* piece of *fiction* than a contrived and stylish non-fiction work; there is more real life in my imagination than in some of the people I come across." Oh yes, and I want the lyrics and sheet music too!!!! Saille (carla p.) at Crowhawwk in Exeter, RI with Joanna Darkwind, Wolfish Wonderpup; Vaquera and Apricot Sympathizer with Light Cousinly and Dark N & N Leanings.VACHON LIVES!!! RAGE, RAGE AGAINST THE RAVAGING OF THE KNIGHT@%^& From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Thu May 16 17:48 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id RAA13828 for ; Thu, 16 May 1996 17:48:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id B06C69EC ; Thu, 16 May 1996 15:56:20 -0400 Message-Id: <199605162148.RAA13828@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Thu, 16 May 1996 14:27:47 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Sarah Welsh Subject: Re: SPOILER: LK Details from Laurie To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <9605161535.AA17513@dfw.dfw.net> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 241 Status: RO X-Status: Can we say "out of character?" Can we say "out of the blue?" Can we say "TPTB are out of their minds?" What say we just chalk this whole last episode up to one of Nick's guilty dreams? Or even LaCroix'? Sarah Cleopatra welshkin@dfw.net From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Thu May 16 13:34 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id NAA13856 for ; Thu, 16 May 1996 13:34:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 20440861 ; Thu, 16 May 1996 11:27:27 -0400 Message-Id: <199605161734.NAA13856@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Thu, 16 May 1996 08:21:03 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: lucienlc Subject: SPOILER: LK Details (Warning: LONG) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 19136 Status: RO X-Status: Marcia asked that someone post detailed spoilers of LK, instead of the little snippets that have heretofore appeared. Accordingly, I have dug out my spoilers from a month or so back that went to the private spoiler loop of folks who wanted to be spoiled then. I have edited them to account for what actually did and did not show up on screen, having now seen the episode. And I think I deserve hazard *pay* for having to sit through the blasted thing enough times to get it right. :-) WARNING: these are detailed. _Very_ detailed. If you don't want to be spoiled, please don't read them. I'm only doing this as a service to those who find it easier to deal with something if they know what's coming. Several more precatory comments (so I don't need to leave spoiler space ). This is a long post, containing detailed spoilers and lots of quotes. If your copy gets cut off, e-mail me. I thought it would be better for folks to form their own opinions rather than rely on my own perceptions, so there isn't much analysis or commentary. Just details. Another fan (Lora Haines - President of the FK fan club) makes the big time. As a suicide. Okay, away we go. Form your own opinions: TEASER: Story opens on the a stream of running water, a faucet filling a tub. A woman's hand turns the water off, tests the temperature. Cut to the LOFT, where we see LC. His figure is hazy, eerily distorted. He almost looks two-dimensional. Something is very odd. LC: "Life is a gift. As sweet as a ripe peach, as precious as a gilded jewel. I have never understood the logic of wilfully surrendering such a treasure. And what is there to gain? How dark can your existence be when compared to an eternal void? Unless, of course, you have faith that there is something beyond." While LC is speaking, throughout this speech and the others in the teaser, we cut back and forth between him and the woman, signing the last page of a journal, slipping it into an envelope. We see her, hazy, in the steam of the bathroom mirror. Cut back to LC. We don't see who he is talking to or what he is looking at. LC: "What do you see from where you stand? A bright light at the end of the tunnel? Is it a ray of hope, a glimmer of something better? Or will it burn you like the rising sun? Is that sound you're hearing the trumpeting of St. Peter's angels ... or the screams of Memnoch's tortured souls? You can't answer that, can you? Because you will never know the answer until the deed is done. And is your faith really that strong?" "I understand the need to move on. It is something that happens to us all ... and your time has truly come. I also understand that with the beauty of this life there comes pain and despair. No one is immune. But consider what you have in your hands, before you give it up. Don't trade a treasure ... for an empty box." As the above is being said, the woman slips into the bath, fully clothed. She lifts and exposes her wrist. She slits her wrists with a scalpel, and drops back into the water, staining it red. They show the envelope, addressed to Dr. Natalie Lambert. END TEASER ACT ONE Natalie is at the crime scene, kind of in shock. Nick and Tracy are talking about the case, about how nobody saw this coming. Nick asks Tracy to finish up, so he can take Nat out of there. If anyone figures out where she's sitting while she reads from the journal, please let me know. A room in the morgue we've never seen? Nat (reading from the journal): "Do as I ask, not as I've become. Don't let yourself become empty. First time I've lost someone to suicide. First time I've had a suicide note addressed to me, a night of firsts." "You know, I think that Dr. Lora Haynes in there was right on the money when she pegged me as a kindred spirit." Nick: "Nat, she took her own life. She obviously had some pretty big problems." Nat: "Think so? You know, Nick, I used to think suicide was sacrilege. But I'm not so sure anymore." Nick: "Nat, don't talk like that." Nat: "Why not? You've considered it yourself." FLASHBACK to "Last Act" ["So we're feeling a little self-destructive" scene. Those who have never seen first season Nick will finally have the opportunity.] Nick suggests that Nat not do the work on the case, but she tells him it's okay, she owes it to her friend, she can handle it. Nat: "But you know what I can't handle? I think I understand her, and that scares me to death." Cut to Reese and Tracy discussing the case, the note, the impact on Nat. Tracy asks if she can knock off early for the night. Their discussion is interrupted by a prisoner who is being disruptive and causing problems. Cut back to Nick and Nat. Nat: "You know, when she and I would get together, years ago, we'd talk for hours. About our careers. Professional gossip. We slowly came to realize that we never really talked about ourselves. And you know why? Because there was nothing there to tell, our personal lives were non-existent. That was a bit of a depressing discovery; we, uh, sort of lost touch after that. Her leaving me the note and her journal: she meant for me to learn from her mistakes. It's my wake-up call, Nick. Time to get a life." Nick: "You've got one, and it's not empty. Nat: "Not now. ... Six years ago ... April 14 ..." Nick: "What was that?" Nat: "The day they brought you in." FLASHBACK to "Only the Lonely" (their first meeting) Nat: "My life changed that day. I don't want to end up like Lora, Nick. Nick: I won't let you." Nat: "Well then, it's simple. You just have to love me as much as I love you." On Nick's totally dumbfounded look, END OF ACT ONE ACT TWO Beautiful shot of the Toronto skyline. Cut to LaCroix, in the loft, same weird shots and angles as before. LC: "Love. It warps our senses, twists our souls. 'Can take us past hope, past cure, past help.'" He sighs. LC: "I know about love. Its suffering, its anguish, its pain. 'Heaven makes means to kill our joy with love.' And yet we must have it. At any cost. But are you so enamored that you will overlook your love of life? And you do love it. I've seen you smell the sea, gaze at the stars at night. Are you willing to sacrifice one mistress for another? Look into your heart and tell me that you're willing to make the choice." [Note: Ger, as director, decided to get *clever* with the camera in the next scene. It made me dizzy just watching it.] Nick: "I can't. "You know I can't." Nat: "I've been wrong about a lot of things in my life, but I'm not wrong about _this_ ... about what I feel from you. I'm asking for an end, Nick ... for a resolution. I'm not willing to go on like this. We can be together." Nick: "I can't damn you into becoming what I am." Nat: "There is a way. I have faith in you ... and whatever follows." FLASHBACK to the scene where he kills Alyssa in the Dead of Knight flashback by draining her completely. Nick. "Natalie ... it's just too much to ask. The next bit is really eerily filmed, a combination of warped sound effects and slow motion. Back in the precinct, Dawkins, the prisoner, breaks free, grabs a gun, and takes a hostage. Then we get back to normal filming. Dawkins escapes down a corrider without the hostage. Reese sends his people looking for him. He doesn't know that Tracy hasn't left yet, and she goes looking for Dawkins on her own. Cut back to Nick and Nat. Nick: "Whether I bring you across or not, either way, it could be a death sentence." Nat: "A lonely existence like Lora's is a death sentence. With you, there's at least hope. It's partly my decision, Nick. And I'm not afraid to try." At which point the phone rings and Reese alerts him to the situation at the precinct. With some awkwardness, he leaves. Nick, at the precinct, asks Reese to let him go after the guy alone. He's met him before, arrested him once, figures maybe he can establish rapport with him. Reese gives permission. Neither of them knows that Tracy has gone after him on her own. Nick finds Dawkins, starts to whammy him as Tracy, unbeknownst to them both, closes in from behind Nick. Dawkins loses it and fires, striking Tracy. He squeezes off several more shots as Nick vamps out completely and slams him to the wall. (Note: the filming is bad, imo; I'm still trying to figure out how she got struck in the back of the head.) Nick, still vamped, turns in horror to see Tracy as she slowly collapses, bleeding badly. Nick frantically calls for help. Tracy to Nick: "You could have trusted me ..." As other cops rush in, END OF ACT TWO. ACT THREE LaCroix again, at the loft, speaking to the unseen. LC: "Haven't you tired of this incessant guilt? Hasn't it swayed your back and stooped your shoulders to the point of throwing it off? You insist on taking responsibility for the actions and emotions of those around you, when they alone are truly responsible. It is foolish. It is so unnecessary. It is so mortal. And it must stop. This and all else that has happened tonight should make that clear to you." Cut back to the precinct, medics hastily getting Tracy out of there, Nick, angsting over Tracy getting shot. Reese, telling him it's not his fault. Several hours later, Nick and Reese watching Tracy. Reese tells him that there's a review board report the next day, that it's going to be rough since Dawkins didn't make it. He also tells him that, if Tracy dies, there is life after the loss of a partner. They recall Schanke (Black Buddha flashback). After Reese leaves, Nick stands there, watching Tracy at death's door, his eyes glowing. Another Black Buddha FLASHBACK, with Nick blaming himself for Schanke. Cut back to Nick agonizing over the decision: should he or shouldn't he? He moves to Tracy's bedside. He's fully vamped out, moving in on her neck. Offscreen Nat: "_Nick_" He turns sharply, still vamped, and sees her. She stands shocked, betrayed. Nick: "If she dies, it's my fault." Nat: "How do you know that that's what she wants? And why is it so easy to consider bringing her across ... and so impossible to consider bringing me?" Nick looks at Tracy, moves past Nat and leaves. Cut to the RAVEN The place is deserted, chairs turned up. The LC bust from Pompeii is there. (Hey, how'd they fix it?) LC is loading a shipping trunk. LC: "Good evening, Nicholas." Nick: "You're leaving." LC: "It's time. For both of us. We have come full circle in this life." Nick: "LaCroix, I'm in trouble." LC: "Yes. I know. Your partner. Is she ...? Nick: "No. But her chances aren't good." LC: Nicholas ... don't you see? You have overstayed your welcome. The pain you are causing your mortal friends is no longer acceptable to them. Those that do survive will not allow their relationship with you to continue in the way that it was. They will demand change. And you will be compromised. One way or another." Nick: "Even if I wanted to leave, I couldn't. Too many loose ends to tie up..." LC: "I've seen you leave looser." Nick: "I can't just walk away. Natalie needs me. I have to be here for Tracy." LC: Nicholas, the time has come. I will be at your loft tonight for your decision. And then I'm leaving. With or without you." Close on Nick as END OF ACT THREE ACT FOUR Close on LC, in the loft, again speaking to someone offscreen. LC: "For all the things that we are, there is a price to be paid. Love can be tasted but never savoured. In our darkest moments we may envy mortality, but we should never aspire to it. Guilt ... is a poison. And staying past our time ... is death. But it need not be. If we truly care for a mortal ... truly love one ... then we must go. Isn't that something that _you_ taught _me_?" And we see that LC is talking to Nick, who is looking away. Something is definitely bothering him. FLASHBACK to "Be My Valentine" [Fleur - all the scenes put together where Nick confronts LC and demands/pleads that he leave Fleur alone] LaCroix moves closer to Nick. Cut back to LaCroix and Nick in the loft. LC: "Leaving ... is the purest form of love." Nick half turns toward him. Cut to MORGUE - Nat reading Lora's diary. Nat: "Everyone's pain is my problem but mine is mine alone... I have solutions for all but none for myself. I have to stop and think 'Where am I? What am I doing?' I'm not coming, I'm going. I'm gone." Nat glances around; she's been packing. The contents of her desk have been put into a box. She puts the diary into the box and puts the cover on. The phone rings, and she picks it up. Cut to Nick, in the Caddy. He turns on the radio. Some woman is speaking. A listener asks what happened to the Nightcrawler. "He said it was time to move on." MULTIPLE FLASHBACKS: Nick and Nat (Black Buddha), Nick and Janette (Human Factor) dealing with the theme of leaving, moving on. Nick enters the loft. Nat is there. Nat: "Tracy Vetter passed away twenty minutes ago." Off their reactions, END OF ACT FOUR ACT FIVE Nick: "LaCroix thinks I'm a fool, bearing this guilt. Trying to somehow atone for what I've done. Maybe he's right. All it's ever caused is pain. And more death..." Nat: "That's not true." Nick: "Tracy ... Cohen ... Schanke ... How many others over the centuries .... because of what I am?" Nat: "And how many lives were you able to _save_ because of what you are? You've more than made up for what you've done in the past." Nick: "It's not enough. It's never enough." Pauses. "I'm leaving. Tonight." Nat: "Not without me." Nick: "I'm leaving _because_ of you. You don't want my love. It will only destroy you." Nat: "There is a way... there is one cure that we haven't tried. Janette became mortal by making love to Robert ... taking just a little at a time." Nick: "It was a lot more complicated than that, Nat." Nat: "I'm willing to take my chances." Nick: "Well, I'm _not_. What if I take too much?" I'm not willing to live a life of eternal pain ..." Nat: "Is it any worse than living a life of eternal regret? It's partly my choice too, Nick." He looks down and she walks over to the window. "Does LaCroix ever talk to you about faith?" Nick: "In what?" Nat: "In yourself ... in an afterlife ... I don't know, in a greater being who loves us no matter who we are or what we do?" Nick: "Faith is a mortal folly, Nat." Nat: "His words or yours? You really believe that's true?" FLASHBACK to "For I Have Sinned" [Nick offering immortality to Joan of Arc: "Faith. Pure and simple faith."] Nick: "I'm not sure." Nat: "I won't accept that the sum of our existence can be measured in the few short years that we're alive here. It would make everything that we believe meaningless. It would make our whole lives here meaningless. I know that's not true, and so do you. You have faith, Nick. And, if it's a mortal folly, then you're the most mortal man I've ever known." Nick: "You cannot deny what I am!" Nat: "You can't deny what's in your heart." Nick: "What are you saying?" Nat: "I have faith that there is a future for us ... Here, as we are ... or somewhere else." She walks slowly over to him. "I believe in you. I trust you. Make love to me, Nick ... take just a little at a time." Nick: "I'm afraid of what might happen." Nat: "Don't be afraid. I'm not afraid of death. Or of an eternity in darkness, as long as I can spend it with you." She's caressing his face looks to him, cups his face in her hands. "All I have is faith, and love. All I'm asking is for you to make love to me. I trust you" They look deep into each others' souls, Nick looks down. When he looks back up his eyes are glowing. Nick: "I won't leave you. Whatever happens, we'll be together." Nat: "Forever." They kiss once, gently. Nicks caresses her hand. Then Nick bites into her. (Hey? Anyone here ever here of foreplay?) We get a montage of flashbacks, from Nick's many lifetimes. Is Natalie receiving these images? Nat, swoons and collapses. (We see no blood, btw.) Nick lowers her to the floor, leans over her, still high on the experience. Behind him, we see LaCroix. LC: "Well ... all that remains now is to turn off the lights and lock the door on our way out. Unless of course you have decided to add her to our entourage. Oh, Nicholas. You _have_ thought this through, haven't you?" Nick (stricken): "I couldn't stop myself. I've taken too much." On Nick, as he looks to Nat, lying there, still. END OF ACT FIVE TAG LC: "There she lies at the brink, Nicholas ... her fate is in your hands. Bring her across, or let her die. You must decide." Nick: "LaCroix? Is it possible for a vampire to have faith?" LC: "That's a strange question at this moment in time." Nick: "Have you ever had faith in anything but yourself?" LC: "I have seen too much." Nick: "Then maybe I haven't seen enough." LC: "After nearly 800 years? Nicholas, be done with her. Time heals all - we must move on. You cannot deny what you are." Nick slowly bends over to Natalie. "I can't condemn her to this darkness." He kisses her, then rises. LC: "A wise decision. We even have time for a burial, if you'd like." Nick stands ... crosses to the fireplace ... lifts the most elaborately carved excuse for a stake I have ever seen from the firebox. He's very upset. Nick: "She had faith in me ... in what's beyond. That we could have a life together. That this would would be a beginning ... not an end..." He walks back and sits down, holding the *stake*. Nick: "I have that faith too." LC (as we come full circle to the teaser): "Don't be foolish, Nicholas. Life is a gift. As sweet as the freshest peach, as precious as a gilded jewel. I have never been able to understood the logic of wilfully surrendering such a treasure. What is there to gain? How dark can your existence be when compared to an eternal void? Or do you have faith that there is something beyond? What do you see from where you are? A bright light at the end of the tunnel? Is it a ray of hope, a glimmer of something better? Or will it burn you like the morning sun? Are the sounds you hear the trumpeting of St. Peter's angels ... or the screams of Memnoch's tortured souls? You can't answer that, can you? Because you will never know the answer until after the deed is done. Is your faith really that strong?" Nick remains silent. LC (trying to suppress his hurt): "And so ... in your eyes ... I'm the Devil." That evokes a reaction. Nick stands and faces him. Nick: "No. Not the Devil, LaCroix." LC: "What then?" Nick: "You ... are my closest friend." As he speaks, he hands LC the stake. Nick kneels beside Natalie's body ... reaches out and takes her hand, his back to LC. LC: (sotto) "Damn you, Nicholas." He hoists the stake in one smooth motion. Cut to the exterior of the loft, then the sunrise. The End. Except for the hundreds of alternate endings yet to be written. :-) One bright spot: the earlier versions of the script (I've seen two of them), were far WORSE than this, difficult though that may be to believe. Laurie From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Fri May 17 09:25 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id JAA10065 for ; Fri, 17 May 1996 09:25:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id A59B1615 ; Fri, 17 May 1996 9:06:50 -0400 Message-Id: <199605171325.JAA10065@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 08:55:09 EDT Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Mary Anne Espenshade Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight comments To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1368 Status: RO X-Status: Comments and questions. Mostly questions. I've saved a huge file of spoilers about LK. I haven't read them yet... I don't know if I will. I had even managed to avoid most of the early rumors, and those I did hear about I discounted as too unbelievable. Did our feeble attempts to save a show we loved really bruise their fragile egos so badly? What did we do to make TPTB hate us so much? How did we matter so much that spiting us and hurting us was so important? Did they think this is what it would take to make us go away? Will it? It will certainly cut off any grass roots letter writing by people who aren't connected like we are. Or is it somehow our fault? (Such a Knightie thing to say!) I've read the Forever Not challenge stories and far more of them ended tragicly that happily. Did they think that was what we really wanted then? What we enjoy making up as fanfic is often a far cry from what we'd want to be canon on the show. Am I in such a minority in thinking that there is so much sadness in the real world that I at least want my fantasies to have happy endings? The last time a producer/network did something like this I never watched the show again. And I still can't even with the whole thing on tape. (BatB, 1-2) I hope that isn't going to happen again, but I haven't decided yet. -- Mary Anne Espenshade mae@aplexus.jhuapl.edu From drowland@aea3.k12.ia.us Fri May 17 12:27 EDT 1996 Received: from aea3.k12.ia.us (mailhub.aea3.k12.ia.us [205.221.30.6]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id MAA26840 for ; Fri, 17 May 1996 12:27:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [205.221.30.225] by aea3.k12.ia.us with SMTP (Apple Internet Mail Server 1.1); Fri, 17 May 1996 10:27:12 -0600 X-Sender: drowland@mailhub.aea3.k12.ia.us Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 To: moser@CLARK.NET From: drowland@aea3.k12.ia.us (Deb) Subject: LK Details Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 10:27:12 -0600 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 408 Status: RO X-Status: Melanie: thanks for your take on the episode. I won't see it until midnight tomorrow but had to read lucienlc's post. I feel a lot better after having read your comments. I haven't dared to say anything but in my heart I secretely thought that if Nick became human that would be the end of the series. Likwise if he brought Nat over. Anyway. Thanks for the post. Deb Knightie with strong Cousinly urges From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Fri May 17 14:33 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id OAA28871 for ; Fri, 17 May 1996 14:33:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 987A400E ; Fri, 17 May 1996 14:07:07 -0400 Message-Id: <199605171833.OAA28871@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sat, 15 Jun 1996 12:59:35 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Chana Rossman Subject: Last Knight and fanfic To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1275 Status: RO X-Status: S P O I L E R . . . . . Cousin Jean wrote: >Fanfic? FK allowed me to start writing again (o wondrous love), but I swear, I >think all my stories died last night. I don't even know if I can finish the >one I started. (Writing takes heart, after all.) The only one I have left is >the one where, having done the deed, LC raises the shutters in the loft to the >morning sun, and I can't write that. Try considering this a challenge rather than a curse. How inventive can you be in "explaining" away this horrible episode. There is, obviously, the old "it was just a dream" sequence. (Redundant but effective.) But you can also see how clever you can be. (Permit a slight non-FK reference but B5 is currently an excellent example of how things can be turned around and twisted in the most amazing ways.) Ironically, I'm having the exact opposite reaction. I've never written a complete story in my life (except for required stuff for English classes) but I've been hacking away at computer late into night trying to work out a plausible solution. This can be explained. I can't remember the source of the quote, but remember "Nobody ever dies." We can explain even this! Chana Rossman bonney@interpath.com * I have been one acquanited with the [K]night * From sherric@empnet.com Fri May 17 15:34 EDT 1996 Received: from empnet.com ([204.157.74.3]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id PAA14384 for ; Fri, 17 May 1996 15:34:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from sherric@localhost) by empnet.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id MAA19047; Fri, 17 May 1996 12:36:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 12:36:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199605171936.MAA19047@empnet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: sherric@empnet.com (Sherri) Subject: RE: your post on LK :) To: Melanie Moser X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.10.06.22 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Length: 318 Status: RO X-Status: I agree with you about the ending - after I quit shaking, I thought about it, and decided it left the future pretty much open, except, of course, for Tracy... Very eloquently put. :) Sherri sherric@empnet.com Founding Member, SFKS Save FK: http://members.aol.com/CuznJamiMR/SaveForeverKnight.html From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Fri May 17 16:01 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id QAA21928 for ; Fri, 17 May 1996 16:01:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id B5FA877F ; Fri, 17 May 1996 15:48:09 -0400 Message-Id: <199605172001.QAA21928@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 14:50:31 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Diane Shea Subject: Non-crucial LK spoiler To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 765 Status: RO X-Status: Small non-crucial spoiler for LK follows; > > > > > > > > > Laurie writes; >>The place is deserted, chairs turned up. The LC bust from Pompeii is there. (Hey, how'd they fix it?)<< OK, how about, the archaeologists who were excavating Pompeii came across it and painstakingly reconstructed it. Then sometime during LaCroix's travels this century he happened to notice it in a museum somewhere, (or perhaps was told by an enforcer?) and decided he had better deal with it before it wound up on the cover of National Geographic for all the world to ponder. You know how those covers affect people sometimes. He'd be recognized in a moment. Best to "retrieve" it and keep it in the Raven. I've done my rationalizing for the day! --Cousin Diane Eternal Seducer From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Fri May 17 09:46 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id JAA14912 for ; Fri, 17 May 1996 09:46:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id E82FA778 ; Fri, 17 May 1996 9:44:29 -0400 Message-Id: <199605171346.JAA14912@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 08:40:27 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Sarah Welsh Subject: Re: SPOILER: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <9605170714.AA22435@dfw.dfw.net> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 739 Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 17 May 1996, Apache wrote: > I'm going to leave spoiler space, since lots of people won't see > it until Saturday. > > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > * > She played the scene exactly like she > played Natalie's fantasy sequence while reading the vampire novel in the > vampire-novelist episode last year ("Stranger than Fiction"?). Yeah, and just like Nick's dream in NiQ. I'm telling you, Last Knight is someone's bad dream. (As in, "You'll never believe what I dreamed *last night*.") If there's a "last night", there must be a next day to be looking back from. They're all going to wake up the next morning in fanfic. We always treated them better than TPTB anyway. Sarah Cleopatra welshkin@dfw.net From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Fri May 17 09:39 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id JAA13212 for ; Fri, 17 May 1996 09:39:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id D1BBEDC1 ; Fri, 17 May 1996 9:36:42 -0400 Message-Id: <199605171339.JAA13212@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 09:00:05 +0100 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "Kennedy, Jean" Subject: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1970 Status: RO X-Status: Warning: Completely emotional reaction to follow! S P O I L E R This was absolutely shattering. First reaction: God, they must hate us, to do this. As far as I'm concerned, there was nothing ambiguous about the ending. HF was ambiguous; at least there they tossed us a lifeline: some bodies, the portrait, dialogue. There's no lifeline here; we just don't see the deed. Natalie sacrifices herself for love. Nick sacrifices himself for love. LC sacrifices the thing he loves most (and so, by extension, himself) for love. My heart's breaking. I saw this at midnight, and I'm still in tears. (Very awkward -- what do you tell the people at the office? ) And I'm listening to the Braveheart soundtrack, which isn't helping! Good thing I can touch-type, because I can't see my keyboard. *Devastating* monologue. Lisa Ryder: kudos. Tracy got on my nerves, but I had started to respect the character, and her key scene was done elegantly. The single spot of comic relief (compulsive editor mode on): Reese saying, "I'm here for you. Gotta go now." (Paraphrased.) Fanfic? FK allowed me to start writing again (o wondrous love), but I swear, I think all my stories died last night. I don't even know if I can finish the one I started. (Writing takes heart, after all.) The only one I have left is the one where, having done the deed, LC raises the shutters in the loft to the morning sun, and I can't write that. I can tell you without exaggeration that 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. "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me." Fool me three times . . . ? Maybe I'll have a more rational reaction later. Right now I'm bitter and crushingly sad. Yeah, it was just a TV show. And I was just a fan. LC was right about love. Damn him for it. Cousin Jean Faith, hope, and charity have been staked and left in the sun to die. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Fri May 17 06:40 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id GAA16017 for ; Fri, 17 May 1996 06:40:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 25F1CA1F ; Fri, 17 May 1996 6:40:06 -0400 Message-Id: <199605171040.GAA16017@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 06:37:54 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Beth Brown Subject: Re: SPOILER: LK Details To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 198 Status: RO X-Status: In a message dated 96-05-16 11:41:41 EDT, Laurie wrote: >Another fan (Lora Haines - President of the FK fan club) makes the big >time. As a suicide. Well, don't you think this says it all? Beth From owner-forkni-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Fri May 17 06:04 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id GAA12724 for ; Fri, 17 May 1996 06:04:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 11B30F3F ; Fri, 17 May 1996 6:03:44 -0400 Message-Id: <199605171004.GAA12724@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 07:33:04 -0230 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show Sender: Forever Knight TV show From: Jason Ryan Subject: How long is Last Knight? To: Multiple recipients of list FORKNI-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 251 Status: RO X-Status: How long is last knight? Will it be two hours? or one, hope someone can help. *************************************** "La vie pour toujours, ma chere petite" -Jason Ryan ibe0018@InfoNET.st-johns.nf.ca *************************************** From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Fri May 17 04:26 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id EAA05511 for ; Fri, 17 May 1996 04:26:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 6AF12076 ; Fri, 17 May 1996 4:26:01 -0400 Message-Id: <199605170826.EAA05511@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 04:24:00 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Melanie Moser Subject: Re: SPOILER: LK Details (Warning: LONG) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <199605161734.NAA13856@mail.Clark.Net> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 12953 Status: RO X-Status: On Thu, 16 May 1996, lucienlc wrote: > > WARNING: these are detailed. _Very_ detailed. If you don't want to be > spoiled, please don't read them. I'm only doing this as a service to those > who find it easier to deal with something if they know what's coming. > > I thought it would be better for folks to form their own opinions rather > than rely on my own perceptions, so there isn't much analysis or commentary. > Just details. > > Having just sat through LK, I sit here in shock (minus one box of tissues) and as therapy, will begin what's soon to be a deluge of mail and opinions regarding this episode. If you haven't read Laurie's detailed spoiler first, I recommend you do so, as I will be removing some of it. I am adding a few opinions to a few key moments detailed in this spoiler (awesome job, Laurie, I think you really caught much of the essence of the episode)... Overall, this is a very emotional and intimate episode. If you haven't seen it yet, I recommend watching it with a very open mind (and heart). IMHO, I think it was superbly done (and I'm a tough critic): great directing from Ger, well written script, superbly acted, and probably one of the most daring dramatic series episodes I have ever lived through. Let me reiterate that: "one of the most daring dramatic series episodes I have ever lived through". Yes, I believe many will dispute this episode to the finest detail, debating the why and wherefore's, but I doubt I'll get involved in any of these debates, if I even do more than skim them. Personal preference: I usually just accept most of an episode as it is. Especially this one. Enough said. What LaCroix narrates throughout the episode is crucial. To me, he describes the thoughts and feelings from the vampire point of view, his world view. A father's last words to his son? With his encounters with Nick in the episode, we get the message that it's time for them (him and Nick) to move on. That by Nick's staying, he's only hurting those mortals around him more. The Nick & Nat interaction in the entire episode revolves around how much the death of her friend gives Natalie a rude awakening about the status of her life (and lack there of). The impression left here is how lonely Nat has always been. The one thing that changed that was when Nick entered her life. (Come on, she remembers the exact date!). Believing her friend left her diary and suicide note for Nat for a reason, to warn Nat not to fall into the same trap, Nat pressures Nick into deciding what they are going to do with their relationship. One personal thought here: let me say that unless you've been here before (loneliness, emptiness, depression, suicidal), it may be hard to comprehend how Nat could feel this way. (Been there, felt that, have recovered; but I was shocked to see how realistic the scenes were acted. Wow!). (Don't they have some sort of mental health plan / therapy for these people thru the Metro P.D. benefit plan?) I also believe this episodes accurately shows the depth of the love between Nick and Nat. A true Romeo & Juliet type of love, but with the additional twist of believing in an afterlife where they can be together. Then there's the debate over "how come you can bring across, but not me?" My belief is that Nick loves Nat too much to 'taint' her goodness by bringing her across. If anybody understands it, I think Nick does, knowing what the vampirism does to a 'good' soul. I think he also knows he's not very good at bringing someone across... especially when it's someone he loves so much. From Laurie's spoiler: > > Nick finds Dawkins, starts to whammy him as Tracy, unbeknownst to them > both, closes in from behind Nick. Dawkins loses it and fires, striking > Tracy. He squeezes off several more shots as Nick vamps out completely and > slams him to the wall. (Note: the filming is bad, imo; I'm still trying > to figure out how she got struck in the back of the head.) I think the bullets ricocheted (sp?) (listen closely to the background sound effects) off the wall(s), thus hitting Tracy in the back of the head. Whether this is realistic or not, I'm not sure. I thought this was a rather quick (and drastic) way to get rid of Tracy. Why was Tracy killed in this episode? Was it necessary? Pay attention to the dialogue between LaCroix and Nick that follows: > LC: Nicholas ... don't you see? You have overstayed your welcome. The > pain you are causing your mortal friends is no longer acceptable to > them. Those that do survive will not allow their relationship with > you to continue in the way that it was. They will demand change. And you > will be compromised. One way or another." > > LC: "For all the things that we are, there is a price to be paid. Love can be > tasted but never savoured. In our darkest moments we may envy > mortality, but we should never aspire to it. Guilt ... is a poison. And > staying past our time ... is death. But it need not be. If we > truly care for a mortal ... truly love one ... then we must go. Isn't that > something that _you_ taught _me_?" > This is probably the key area I just don't get about this episode. Other than Nick being blinded by his love, why can't he see that by sticking around, he has only and will continue to hurt Nat? I think he realizes this by the next encounter he has with Nat. > > Nat glances around; she's been packing. The contents of her desk have been > put into a box. She puts the diary into the box and puts the cover on. The > phone rings, and she picks it up. > Has Nat already made a decision here that she's not returning, one way or another, to her job? > Nick: "I'm leaving _because_ of you. You don't want my love. It will only > destroy you." > Nat: "There is a way... there is one cure that we haven't tried. > Janette became mortal by making love to Robert ... taking just a little > at a time." > Nick: "It was a lot more complicated than that, Nat." > Nat: "I'm willing to take my chances." > Nick: "Well, I'm _not_. What if I take too much?" I'm not willing to live > a life of eternal pain ..." > Nat: "Is it any worse than living a life of eternal regret? It's partly my > choice too, Nick." Wat to speak up for yourself here, Nat! > > He looks down and she walks over to the window. "Does LaCroix ever talk to > you about faith?" > Nick: "In what?" > Nat: "In yourself ... in an afterlife ... I don't know, in a greater being > who loves us no matter who we are or what we do?" > Nick: "Faith is a mortal folly, Nat." > Nat: "His words or yours? You really believe that's true?" > > FLASHBACK to "For I Have Sinned" [Nick offering immortality to Joan of Arc: > "Faith. Pure and simple faith."] > > Nick: "I'm not sure." > > Nat: "I won't accept that the sum of our existence can be measured in > the few short years that we're alive here. It would make everything that we > believe meaningless. It would make our whole lives here meaningless. > I know that's not true, and so do you. You have faith, Nick. And, if > it's a mortal folly, then you're the most mortal man I've ever known." > Nick: "You cannot deny what I am!" > Nat: "You can't deny what's in your heart." > Nick: "What are you saying?" > Nat: "I have faith that there is a future for us ... Here, as we are ... or > somewhere else." She walks slowly over to him. "I believe in you. I trust > you. Make love to me, Nick ... take just a little at a time." A very interesting insight into Nat, seeing as she has had trouble believing in ghosts and reincarnation in the past? > Nick: "I'm afraid of what might happen." > Nat: "Don't be afraid. I'm not afraid of death. Or of an eternity in > darkness, as long as I can spend it with you." She's caressing his face > looks to him, cups his face in her hands. "All I have is faith, and love. > All I'm asking is for you to make love to me. I trust you" God, romance doesn't get any better than this.... > > They look deep into each others' souls, Nick looks down. When he looks back > up his eyes are glowing. > > Nick: "I won't leave you. Whatever happens, we'll be together." > Nat: "Forever." > > They kiss once, gently. Nicks caresses her hand. Then Nick bites into her. > (Hey? Anyone here ever here of foreplay?) I couldn't quite understand this either. Did they do this to save time? (I hope someone will tell us if the Canadian version is different here?) Or was Nick perhaps testing his self-control, before taking things further, at this point? We get a montage of flashbacks, > from Nick's many lifetimes. Is Natalie receiving these images? I got the strong impression that Natalie was receiving these images from Nick, based not only on what we were told in Francesca, but by the reactions Natalie has to what we see intercut with the images (great acting, CD! great editing too.) I also got the impression, based on the violence we saw in the images, that Nat was a little shocked by same of the images of Nick's past, with the last image being from when Nick was brought across. It's most likely due to lack of time, we only saw Natalie's impressions, not Nick's. Obviously, whatever he saw must of been darn good if he couldn't stop in time. > > Nat, swoons and collapses. (We see no blood, btw.) Nick lowers her to the > floor, leans over her, still high on the experience. Behind him, we see > LaCroix. > > LC: "Well ... all that remains now is to turn off the > lights and lock the door on our way out. Unless of course you have decided > to add her to our entourage. Oh, > Nicholas. You _have_ thought this through, haven't you?" > LC to the very core! (Though this is where I think he's like Nat, hiding his true feelings under sarcasm). > Nick: "LaCroix? Is it possible for a vampire to have faith?" > LC: "That's a strange question at this moment in time." > Nick: "Have you ever had faith in anything but yourself?" > LC: "I have seen too much." > Nick: "Then maybe I haven't seen enough." > LC: "After nearly 800 years? Nicholas, be done with her. Time heals > all - we must move on. You cannot deny what you are." > To me, this is where Nick truly separates from LaCroix. Nick accepts and still has faith. > Nick: "She had faith in me ... in what's beyond. That we could have a life > together. That this would would be a beginning ... not an end..." > > He walks back and sits down, holding the *stake*. > > Nick: "I have that faith too." > Faith confirmed.... > LC (as we come full circle to the teaser): "Don't be foolish, Nicholas. > Life is a gift. As sweet as the freshest peach, as precious as a gilded > jewel. ...... > Or will it burn you like the morning sun? Are the sounds you hear > the trumpeting of St. Peter's angels ... or the screams of Memnoch's > tortured souls? You can't answer that, can you? Because you will never > know the answer until after the deed is done. Is your faith really that > strong?" > > Nick remains silent. > > LC (trying to suppress his hurt): "And so ... in your eyes ... I'm the Devil." > > That evokes a reaction. Nick stands and faces him. > > Nick: "No. Not the Devil, LaCroix." > > LC: "What then?" > > Nick: "You ... are my closest friend." As he speaks, he hands LC the stake. I leave this one up to the rest of your to discuss... the Nick/LaCroix relatonship.... > > Nick kneels beside Natalie's body ... reaches out and takes her hand, his > back to LC. > > LC: (sotto) "Damn you, Nicholas." > > He hoists the stake in one smooth motion. Cut to the exterior of the loft, > then the sunrise. > An interesting ending.... leaving everything up in the air.... and many doors open. Does LaCroix do it? I'm not even convinced that Nat is dead yet. Do Nick and Nat both die, and meet in the next life to live happily after? Much as some people may disagree with me, I actually liked this ending. Sure, I would have preferred the storybook happily ever after ending. But, at the same time, IMHO, this would have made it more difficult to bring back another season or make the upcoming movies. This way leaves the door open to alot of possibilities (including alot of great fan fiction). (And it's sure better than the Romeo and Juliet end originally posted in the spoilers). So, yes it's over. This season. This chapter closes. Is the show over? Absolutely not. This season finale / series finale was riveting, amazing, a masterpiece of film making (acting, directing, editing, sound, cinematography) and we should all feel proud to have been privy to and part of it all. It's late and this message is rather long enough as it is. (Already preparing to duck the flames). I usually don't post messages about episodes, but this one really moved me. Mel Moser N&NPacker, moser@clark.net Check out my Forever Knight Fan Fiction page at: http://www.clark.net/pub/moser/fkfanfic.htm From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Fri May 17 03:21 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id DAA00090 for ; Fri, 17 May 1996 03:21:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 9DDA1994 ; Fri, 17 May 1996 3:15:51 -0400 Message-Id: <199605170721.DAA00090@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 03:13:36 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Apache Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <199605170635.CAA22398@cais.cais.com> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1545 Status: RO X-Status: I'm going to leave spoiler space, since lots of people won't see it until Saturday. * * * * * * * * * * * * Frankly, it was a worse experience than I thought it would be. I'd read the script. I even liked the Gotterdammerrung "everyone dies and Lacroix takes over for the fat lady and sings one last little aria" way the script was originally written -- except for the 'tale of woe/Juliet and her Romeo' tag -- I guess I have a weakness for operatic moves. The script remains my favorite part. With exception of Nigel Bennett, who plays a once-again-reserved Lacroix (his world-weary, "oh, I hope you thought this through" is *so* parental and resigned) I don't like how it was acted, and I don't like how it was shot. But I mean *like* -- not "I don't respect." They made choices that I can't feel any affection for, and on a first viewing, I can't even see through the emotional response to a cooler technical one. It's interesting that GWD, who directed, gave himself some really unflattering closeups; he really does seem to be a man without vanity. Catherine Disher's reading of the "bite me, bite me please" speech absolutely stood everything I thought I understood about Natalie Lambert right on its head. She played the scene exactly like she played Natalie's fantasy sequence while reading the vampire novel in the vampire-novelist episode last year ("Stranger than Fiction"?). Oh well. This never happened . Someone thought FK could be killed? Nah -- it's "far too old and powerful." Apache From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Fri May 17 02:59 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id CAA27663 for ; Fri, 17 May 1996 02:59:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 44963CC0 ; Fri, 17 May 1996 2:59:03 -0400 Message-Id: <199605170659.CAA27663@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 02:57:55 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Beth Brown Subject: Spoiler - Last Knight (from someone who has seen it) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1353 Status: RO X-Status: Spoiler space > > > > > > > > > > Well. I have finally seen it. So I finally read the spoiler posts. Honestly, until the last segment, I was thinking it wasn't going so badly. Thinking, maybe they *did* make the ending a little better. In my mind, I thought maybe they would have taken out the part about Nick asking to be staked, that the ambiguity at the end would have more to do with whether or not he had brough Nat across. So, boy was I upset! But the part where I lost it was when Nick said to LaCroix, " you are my closest friend." What a revolution from where things were in the beginning! Such a sacrifice on LaCroix' part; to be willing to assist in Nick's death because it is what he wants. I suppose there is wiggle room here; after all, Nat wasn't dead yet. Maybe just as LaCroix was going to stake Nick, she moved. I don't know. It's 2:30 am, and I am still shook up, I can't really think straight. One humorous note: A while back, there was a thread as to when everybody's birthday was. Well, we know Natalie's now - it's April 14. And Tracy. I, for one, am glad that she got to know Nick's secret, even if it was because she was being killed off. I know I have many more thoughts floating around in my head, but it's going to take some time to get coherent. Why did it have to end (?) this way? Beth bkbva@aol.com From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Fri May 17 02:35 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id CAA25531 for ; Fri, 17 May 1996 02:35:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 06DF61B8 ; Fri, 17 May 1996 2:35:51 -0400 Message-Id: <199605170635.CAA25531@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 02:34:15 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "" Subject: Last Knight (Maybe a little spoiler) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1588 Status: RO X-Status: Hi everybody. I don't usually post here. (I've gotten too accustomed to just lurking around and listening) But I just want to give a small opinion about Last Knight which I copied off satellite on Sunday night. I have to admit that I am now watching LK for the third time and I find that I dislike it a little less every time I see it. I don't think it will ever be one of my favorite eps but it sort of grows on you. To be honest the writing really sucks but GWD's direction almost saves the day. But the real saving grace here is the acting. Nigel is as good as ever but GWD and CD really get the chance to shine and do they ever take advantage of that chance! Both manage to show three seasons of love and the anguish of love unrealised in their body language and facial expressions that the words don't. Maybe the best way to see this episode is from the view of an undying romantic like myself. Real love, the truest of loves, like that between Nick and Nat, is so strong that it can exist not only through this lifetime but into the next. Yes, there is disappointment that we didn't get a cure for Nick or a different resolution of any kind, but we have to take what we have been given and make the best of this awful situation. OBTW, did anyone else catch the little statement that it was Sony that asked for the ending of Last Knight to be altered to something more ambiguous? Maybe they didn't want it to be so final after all. Hmmmm. Going quietly back to lurking, Charlotte Born Romantic, therefore Born Nick&NatPacker From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 14 16:48 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id QAA10291 for ; Tue, 14 May 1996 16:47:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 8C8109BA ; Tue, 14 May 1996 16:04:52 -0400 Message-Id: <199605142047.QAA10291@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 14 May 1996 16:01:47 EDT Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Tanya Smith Subject: Last Knight--Peaches? To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 159 Status: RO X-Status: "life is like a ripe peach" sounds goofy to me. Sounds like "Life is like a box of chocolates..." Forrest Gump. We could call Lacroix Forest Grump. (-; Tanya From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Thu May 16 16:53 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id QAA00500 for ; Thu, 16 May 1996 16:53:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 95395843 ; Thu, 16 May 1996 15:19:47 -0400 Message-Id: <199605162053.QAA00500@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Thu, 16 May 1996 11:28:21 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Karen Stortz Subject: dysfunctional relationships, Francesca, Last Knight (long) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 3360 Status: RO X-Status: Possible "Last Knight" spoilers near end of this post! The dysfunctional relationship between Nick and LaCroix in the present is certainly an amusing diversion, but it's hardly the main attraction of the series for me. The attraction of the series is that it has the potential (or at least, it once had it) to seriously explore the larger issues: faith, mysticism, rationality, good vs. evil, life vs. existence, afterlife vs. oblivion--dealing with how those elusive concepts are first defined and then manifested. Most FK episodes play with those concepts in one way or another without truly exploring them. "Francesca," for instance, is fun to watch. It does deal with the recincarnation not only of souls, but of those soul's biases towards good/evil, but it doesn't really explore the idea of the timeless preservation of good or evil, it merely (rather too openly) states the possibility and plays with it for a while. As I said, it IS fun to watch. The performances are excellent, the casting is excellent, and Nigel's direction is excellent. As far as the story exploring the concepts it presents, however, it's pretty much an appetizer with no meal backing it up. "Cherry Blossoms," on the other hand, has that elusive quality, substance. It deals with what happens when an immortal vampire is found again by a mortal enemy, but more than that, it revolves around the damage and danger inherent in what we DON'T notice in what we can see all around us, no matter how many other things we DO notice. That theme permeates not only the sub-plot with Nick and the old man, but the investigation of the hitmen as well. This theme is not once stated as dialogue. Sure, the FX in this episode are ridiculously cheesy, but the story itself has DEPTH. I miss that. In the day-to-day rush to put food on the table, drop off or pick up the dry cleaning, cover daycare when the kid's school is out, remember to get to the bank BEFORE I have to do it with groceries melting in the car, (dang, I forgot to go to the post awful), not to mention the really stressful stuff like finally getting through school, going through a divorce, and trying to find REAL employment, I enjoyed being able to collapse in front of the idiot box once a week and be effortlessly (at least, on my part) reminded that those ideas are not only still there, but that I am still able to think about them, and that ultimately, hope is found in them. As I've said, I miss that. Please don't slam those of us who think the earlier stuff was better. After reading the "Last Knight" spoilers, we are as disappointed as anyone else. I, for one, was hoping against hope that they would use the opportunity of KNOWING they were making the FINAL episode to revive the depth, the hope, and some of the sophistication of the earlier storytelling (minus cheesy FX). I haven't seen it yet, but based on the spoiler postings, I'd have to say they've come full circle in a way we never expected: depicting a triumph of despair and loss over hope, and failure where there should have been success is perhaps a more true reflection of the series overall than any of our individual favorite episodes could be. And when it's all said and done and the final ep has aired, maybe we can sit back smugly and say to ourselves, "They think they just DID something? We coulda had a V-8!" Karen From owner-forkni-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Fri May 17 01:33 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id BAA17937 for ; Fri, 17 May 1996 01:33:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 4EB73133 ; Fri, 17 May 1996 1:33:26 -0400 Message-Id: <199605170533.BAA17937@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 01:31:18 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show Sender: Forever Knight TV show From: Nathanial Cook Subject: Re: The Last Supper . . . To: Multiple recipients of list FORKNI-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 412 Status: RO X-Status: To all who are interested: I'm going to be quite busy this weekend, so I'll be nomail until Saturday night or so. If I don't reply, it ain't nuttin' personal. 'Kay? And yes, I can say "Lacroix" -- I just don't want to. (Prove to me it's spelled that way!) Well, I'll be seeing you all after this Friday's ordeal. Wish me luck. NAT!!! ("We who are about to die salute you" Raven) NatRobin@AOL.com From owner-forkni-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Fri May 17 02:14 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id CAA22670 for ; Fri, 17 May 1996 02:14:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id FCD50553 ; Fri, 17 May 1996 2:14:05 -0400 Message-Id: <199605170614.CAA22670@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Thu, 16 May 1996 23:14:50 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show Sender: Forever Knight TV show From: Dee Davidson Subject: IRC Channel for Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FORKNI-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 936 Status: RO X-Status: Hi all!!! I wanted to pass along that we on Efnet will be putting up a seperate channel on IRC for Last Knight spoilers. The channel will be called #fkspoilers, as for when it will be up I have no idea but stop in #ForeverKnight and someone can let you know if there is anyone there or not. I will be there tomorrow, no doubt I will probably be needing a shoulder to cry on because I get to see Last Knight at 3:30am tonight on KPDX (for you PDX ppl). The reason we are putting up this channel is because there are a few people that haven't seen the ep yet and some will not be able to see it for sometime and would like to surprised but for those who can't wait or need a shoulder to cry on your are more than welcome, even if you don't your still welcome. Hope to see some of you there. Dee * Cousin * Valentine * Diviant * TEDT * (not to mention a few other choice words) --IRC Channel repelent and all around pain-in-the-a** :) From owner-forkni-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Fri May 17 03:39 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id DAA01548 for ; Fri, 17 May 1996 03:39:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id E3E63235 ; Fri, 17 May 1996 3:39:17 -0400 Message-Id: <199605170739.DAA01548@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Thu, 16 May 1996 23:39:01 -0800 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show Sender: Forever Knight TV show From: Muldy Sculler Subject: Re: IRC Channel for Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FORKNI-L In-Reply-To: <9605170614.AA20744@aurora.alaska.edu> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 425 Status: RO X-Status: Dee, Thank you for having concern for those of us who have yet to see the very last episode. I just read someone's painful comments--the entire message was a spoiler. However, this guy was in such pain and so angry I was afraid to point out the spoiler rule. I, for example, will not see "Last Knight" until Sunday, 19 May, 11:00p. Barbara P.S. Smiley's next time I come in from the bush the video is in the mail to you. From soulseek@sprynet.com Fri May 17 04:32 EDT 1996 Received: from m2.sprynet.com (m2.sprynet.com [165.121.1.99]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id EAA05990 for ; Fri, 17 May 1996 04:32:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [199.174.136.60] (ad09-060.compuserve.com [199.174.136.60]) by m2.sprynet.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id BAA12747; Fri, 17 May 1996 01:26:50 -0700 From: soulseek@sprynet.com Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 01:26:50 -0700 Message-Id: <199605170826.BAA12747@m2.sprynet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: N&N Loop (Last Knight) To: asnelson@indiana.edu, acapozzi@wellesley.edu, AMORG@aol.com, egardner@facstaff.wisc.edu, CKrumtum@gnn.com, jclemens@world.std.com, bonney@interpath.com, Claudius@NETRIDE.COM, criss@marlboro.edu, fiorini@MARYWOOD1.MARYWOOD.EDU, dgthomas@ix.netcom.com, phase3@gate.net, dottir@wsii.com, efriedm1@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu, ILCzJules@aol.com, jasonl@cnwl.igs.net, shalott@chattanooga.net, dukarsja@udmercy.edu, RICHARD@iclnet.co.uk, jtfolden@erinet.com, Baigneuse@aol.com, lplummer@interlink.com, LoriArgyll@aol.com, lydiam@singnet.com.sg, d_Roberts@msn.com, moser@clark.net, catspaw@cruzio.com, rfulton@directnet.net, swells@phoenix.atticus.com, TGill10669@aol.com, valworth@aol.com X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.10.06.22 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Length: 1024 Status: RO X-Status: <---- Begin Forwarded Message ----> From: Jason Leger To: "'soulseek@sprynet.com'" Subject: N&N Loop (Last Knight) Date: Thu, 16 May 1996 23:45:48 -0400 Was anyone else completely and totally dissapointed with this episode, or was it just me. Nothing was really resolved. Is this what we all wanted to see? It was a good episode, but not a good final episode. Two friends who watched it with me kept asking "are you sure this is the last one". My answer "I think so". A little more knowledge of Lacroix's origins. A pathetic and ridiculous end to Vachon and Tracy's relationship. Urs in it to be nothing more than a victim. Nothing between Nick and Nat that we haven't all seen hundreds of times before. So like my friends asked me, I now ask of you. You guys sure this is it? Cause if it was.......well.....something about going out with a wimper comes to mind. Jayson <---- End Forwarded Message ----> From soulseek@sprynet.com Fri May 17 16:15 EDT 1996 Received: from m2.sprynet.com (m2.sprynet.com [165.121.1.99]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id QAA25101 for ; Fri, 17 May 1996 16:15:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [199.174.143.27] (dd01-027.compuserve.com [199.174.143.27]) by m2.sprynet.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA10202; Fri, 17 May 1996 13:07:40 -0700 From: soulseek@sprynet.com Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 13:07:40 -0700 Message-Id: <199605172007.NAA10202@m2.sprynet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: N&N loop (Last Knight) To: asnelson@indiana.edu, acapozzi@wellesley.edu, AMORG@aol.com, egardner@facstaff.wisc.edu, CKrumtum@gnn.com, jclemens@world.std.com, bonney@interpath.com, Claudius@NETRIDE.COM, criss@marlboro.edu, fiorini@MARYWOOD1.MARYWOOD.EDU, dgthomas@ix.netcom.com, phase3@gate.net, dottir@wsii.com, efriedm1@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu, ILCzJules@aol.com, jasonl@cnwl.igs.net, shalott@chattanooga.net, dukarsja@udmercy.edu, RICHARD@iclnet.co.uk, jtfolden@erinet.com, Baigneuse@aol.com, lplummer@interlink.com, LoriArgyll@aol.com, lydiam@singnet.com.sg, d_Roberts@msn.com, moser@clark.net, catspaw@cruzio.com, rfulton@directnet.net, swells@phoenix.atticus.com, TGill10669@aol.com, valworth@aol.com X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.10.06.22 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Length: 1102 Status: RO X-Status: A <---- Begin Forwarded Message ----> From: ILCzJules@aol.com Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 13:24:23 -0400 To: soulseek@sprynet.com Subject: N&N loop spoilr LK I have a couple of bits of information on Last Knight (LK): 1st) TV GUIDE, in a moment of insightit would seem, give FK an episode write-up for this week. At least in the Chicago Metro edition-shown Sat. CBS CHNL 2, 11:35-12:35. It states: What I found odd was that it mentions neither, Season nor Series Finale.-- Which leads me to whatI saw on FKSPOILR 5-16-96.--This was apparently accurate, per Laurie, who says she's seen LK. I read the entire Last Knight episode. we're talking word for word (12 printed pages). If it IS shown as was written there.. it ends much more resembling a cliffhanger than a wrap.--If that be, my dear souls, hope for resurrection is TRULY an option. The fight MUST continue! Illinois Jules <---- End Forwarded Message ----> From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Fri May 17 16:51 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id QAA02920 for ; Fri, 17 May 1996 16:51:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id BF9000A2 ; Fri, 17 May 1996 16:09:54 -0400 Message-Id: <199605172051.QAA02920@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 15:19:39 EDT Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Lisa McDavid Subject: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 375 Status: RO X-Status: The Bust, Take 2: Or, the Enforcers didn't mind, but LaCroix saw the thing in one of those museum reproduction stores and with his sense of humor, just had to have it. I suspect at least one of the Raven's younger vampire staffers got staked for adding a stuffed raven to it at some point. :) Cousin Lisa -- "That will be trouble." Lisa McDavid mcdavid-lisa@scarolina.edu From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Fri May 17 17:57 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id RAA18217 for ; Fri, 17 May 1996 17:57:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 3E0B2266 ; Fri, 17 May 1996 16:49:13 -0400 Message-Id: <199605172157.RAA18217@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 15:19:52 CDT Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Bruce Rawitch Subject: SPOILER/Sort of-Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 3507 Status: RO X-Status: Friends, Romans, Countrymen...... We come not to praise FK, but to bury it....!??! People, People, come on now-I have seen more non-productive angnst and emoting over LK than when they cancelled the show! We need to look at the positives- 1) I saw a posting from that good lady who posted the script for LK that some- body, probabaly a sony exec called and TOLD the FK folks to make the ending more ambigious. So now we have an unknown ending-LC holding the stake over Nick, Nat out cold, but not dead yet... and none of the totally definitative "No one lives, No one loves, everybody dies" ending we were originally expec ting. 2) The fact that some higher up took the interest in FK to have the ending made more ambigious indicated to me that they still see it as a viable property and didn't want future development options destroyed by a definite ending. With the "ambigious" ending, they can continue the series, or got the Alien Nation route, 2hr tv movies every few years.... 3) With the ambigious ending, it's far more likely that any future FK efforts that are made will be with the *same* cast-God spare us from a "FK-the next generation" 4) With FK airing on the Sci-Fi channel at a reasonable hour we will be picking up a whole new audience-especially when they begin to rerun season 1- for people like me who were brought across late in second season (first ep I rem- ber was A More Permamant Hell-and WHAM! I was hooked), I still have all of those 1st season eps and most of 2nd season to look forward to-and many more people will be joining the ranks of FK fandom-and when they find out that the show was cancelled, they will swell the ranks of SOS-FK....you get the picture. 5) If you're MAD about LK, don't write the list (well, do write to the list), but write to Sony, Sci-Fi channel, Tri-Star (blech), donate to the FK causes like the Pediatric Aid foundation, tell'em it's from FK-fold cranes- look up the SOS-FK page and DO something-don't just be a brick and angnst about it ;) 6) Lastly, I haven't see LK yet, just read the script online, but I will think of it this way- LC says "Damn you Nicholas", stakes him to the floor (thru the shoulder, or other non-critical body part-take your choice y;}) and then Lacroix brings Natalie across....What better way could he think of to control Nick than to bring across his mortal love as LC's fledgling? Just my take on things....It's what the 'responsible' parent would do, making the hard decsion for his child who lacks the strength to make the hard choice himself. (Ashes to Ashes really changed *my* take on LC) Whew! didn't know I had that much pent up on this.... I now return you to your regularly scheduled spoilers. Looking Forward to seeing Last Knight this Sunday Knight/Monday Morning at 12:30 am in Kansas City... Where I appear to be the only online FK fan-still looking more FK fans here in town... Cheers Bruce ____________________________________________ \ I've always felt that you can get more \ _ ______ | \ with a kind word and a 2x4 than you can \ / \___-=O`/|O`/__| \ with just a kind word..... \_______\ / | / ) / / `/-==__ _/__|/__=-| / Marcus the Ranger/ Babylon 5 / * \ | | /___________________________________________/ (o) From soulseek@sprynet.com Fri May 17 19:54 EDT 1996 Received: from m2.sprynet.com (m2.sprynet.com [165.121.1.99]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id TAA10299 for ; Fri, 17 May 1996 19:54:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [199.174.137.30] (ad10-030.compuserve.com [199.174.137.30]) by m2.sprynet.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA17986; Fri, 17 May 1996 16:44:58 -0700 From: soulseek@sprynet.com Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 16:44:58 -0700 Message-Id: <199605172344.QAA17986@m2.sprynet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: N&N loop (Last Knight -- A new idea...) To: asnelson@indiana.edu, acapozzi@wellesley.edu, AMORG@aol.com, egardner@facstaff.wisc.edu, CKrumtum@gnn.com, jclemens@world.std.com, bonney@interpath.com, Claudius@NETRIDE.COM, criss@marlboro.edu, fiorini@MARYWOOD1.MARYWOOD.EDU, dgthomas@ix.netcom.com, phase3@gate.net, dottir@wsii.com, efriedm1@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu, ILCzJules@aol.com, jasonl@cnwl.igs.net, shalott@chattanooga.net, dukarsja@udmercy.edu, RICHARD@iclnet.co.uk, jtfolden@erinet.com, Baigneuse@aol.com, lplummer@interlink.com, LoriArgyll@aol.com, lydiam@singnet.com.sg, d_Roberts@msn.com, moser@clark.net, catspaw@cruzio.com, rfulton@directnet.net, swells@phoenix.atticus.com, TGill10669@aol.com, valworth@aol.com X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.10.06.22 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Length: 1192 Status: RO X-Status: <---- Begin Forwarded Message ----> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 16:53:36 -0400 To: soulseek@sprynet.com From: bonney@interpath.com (Chana Rossman) Subject: Re: N&N loop (Last Knight -- A new idea...) I realize that many of us are saddened by the events which occur in Last Knight. As I ponder this, I had an idea (ohh, dangerous). I thought I'd ask your opinions before I posted to the list at large. What if the list were to have a formal fanfic contest in which writers had to come up with a "reasonable outcome" based on the events in Last Knight? (Of course people's ideas of a "reasonable outcome" may be different. Somehow I suspect a N&Ner would choose a different outcome than say a Cousin or a member of the Nat Vamp Camp. But then that could be part of the fun.) Of course, organizing it would be a challenge. Some folks would have to agree to judge the entries. It would be great if some prizes could be awarded. But the entire process might get people looking at the bright side of things again. So, what do you all think? Good idea? Bad idea? Chana bonney@interpath.com * I have been one acquainted with the [K]night * <---- End Forwarded Message ----> From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Fri May 17 22:49 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id WAA07760 for ; Fri, 17 May 1996 22:49:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 83B4D27E ; Fri, 17 May 1996 22:49:05 -0400 Message-Id: <199605180249.WAA07760@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 19:42:44 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Antonia Spadafina Subject: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 809 Status: RO X-Status: Hi all-- Sarah quoted Melanie as follows: > Regarding Nat's belief that death isn't the end: > A very interesting insight into Nat, seeing as she has had trouble > believing in ghosts and reincarnation in the past? ===I think the point is not that Nat didn't believe in ghosts, reincarnation, etc, so much as she didn't want to admit it to anyone. Remember, she tells Nick in Francesca that she ..."believes in ten impossible things before breakfast, including you." Also, in DoN, she tells Nick that she had a "spiritual experience", but she's going to "take the 5th" if asked about the goings-on. And I agree with Sarah's MHO that OtL was one of the best episodes extant. (I'm partial, since that was my first episode...). Trepidatiously awaiting the airing of Last Knight, Toni Knightie from NYC From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sat May 18 13:25 EDT 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id NAA06644 for ; Sat, 18 May 1996 13:25:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.003A9E90@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; Sat, 18 May 1996 13:22:02 -0400 Message-Id: <199605181725.NAA06644@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 13:23:18 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Sandra Gray Subject: Last Knight Speculations To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1713 Status: RO X-Status: I won't see LK until midnight Sunday (early Monday) here, but I thought it would be fun to post some of my speculations about it. I haven't been reading any of the spoilers. First, I think it's possible that Divia has survived and that she will possess one of the following people: Urs, Vachon, Nick or LC. If she possesses Nick, he may go on a killing rampage and Nat will be one of his victims. Killing her may so distress Nick that it will give him the strength he needs to fight off the possession, but he will be so upset, he'll kill himself (I hope this doesn't happen). Part of Nick's final redemption will depend on his ability to forgive LC for making him a vampire in the first place. Nick's reaction to LC in AtA certainly shows he has the capacity to make such a decision. Nick has to get past blaming LC and his own vampirism for all of his problems before he can be "saved". However, it also seemed to me that in AtA *LC* was being set up for a change in his thinking and a possible redemption. If this happens, it will confirm my worst fears--that TPTB have lost total sight of the show's premise that it's supposed to be *Nick's* story and I will probably *hate* the episode if this is what happens. The show is not supposed to be "Forever LaCroix". If LC *does* get redeemed ( :P ), talk about casting all the past eps in a new light!!! We would have to go back to see how each ep impacted on *LC's* character. And assume the voiceover is not just a narration on Nick too. :) I will not read any responses (if there are any) to this post until after seeing LK, since I'm still trying to avoid being spoiled on LK. --Sandra Gray, forever Knightie --tmp_harkins@dirac.physics.jmu.edu From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sat May 18 13:39 EDT 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id NAA08059 for ; Sat, 18 May 1996 13:39:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.D5821E10@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; Sat, 18 May 1996 13:35:09 -0400 Message-Id: <199605181739.NAA08059@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 13:35:15 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "M. Vrzoc" Subject: Wanted Long Spoiler for Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <199605181731.NAA09529@nismail.uwindsor.ca> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 253 Status: RO X-Status: I thought I saved this detailed, transcript of the final episode ... but I didn't. Could someone forward me a copy? Many thanks. M. Vrzoc (vrzoc@uwindsor.ca) | Just a little off the top! | -- A. Boleyn From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sat May 18 13:39 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id NAA08118 for ; Sat, 18 May 1996 13:39:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id F11E0166 ; Sat, 18 May 1996 13:39:46 -0400 Message-Id: <199605181739.NAA08118@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 13:38:43 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Sharon Bhandari Subject: Last Knight--tears To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1827 Status: RO X-Status: Here's some space because I know some of you will not be watching until tonight: * * * * * * * * * * * * Ok, did anyone catch that a *clear* tear fell down Nick's face when LaCroix is talking about the strength of Nick's faith? You can really see it fall down his right cheek when LaCroix says "So, in your eyes I am the devil." I do know that I am not seeing things since everyone else I saw this episode with saw the tear as well (Hi! - waving- I don't think I could have gotten through watching this episode alone. Thanks for being there!) What do you all think this means? I think I am still too stunned to make a coherent argument, but I will say that I am glad that they left it ambiguous on this point. What I mean is, when we were contemplating this episode earlier this year some wondered if he would become mortal or not. This way, we are just not sure. Do you think her blood did something unusual to him? As someone said before, he must have been getting something good, like all her love, for him to keep on drinking. On another note, I really enjoyed the Romeo and Juliet allusions. Especially in the scene between Nick and Nat in the end where she is talking to him about her faith and love. Her words reminded me of Juliet's words to Romeo: "My bounty is as boundless as the sea, My love as deep; the more I give to thee, The more I have, for both are infinite." I think these are the perfect words for Nat at this time. In contrast to LaCroix, she does represent another type of infinite power. However, i am reluctant to say that they are opposite powers since I do think that LaCroix loves Nick. Ug, I need a support group or something!!! Sharon Bhandari Natpacker (and I think some Cousinly tendencies are peeking through) sbhanda@emory.edu From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sat May 18 13:49 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id NAA09225 for ; Sat, 18 May 1996 13:49:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 44E091D1 ; Sat, 18 May 1996 13:49:16 -0400 Message-Id: <199605181749.NAA09225@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 13:47:23 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Siona Subject: Re: Last Knight--tears To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <199605181739.NAA12292@access.netaxs.com> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 148 Status: RO X-Status: On Sat, 18 May 1996, Sharon Bhandari wrote: > Ug, I need a support group or something!!! We ARE a support group. Siona@netaxs.com Dark Knightie! From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sat May 18 14:18 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id OAA12704 for ; Sat, 18 May 1996 14:18:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 4AC2C208 ; Sat, 18 May 1996 14:18:04 -0400 Message-Id: <199605181818.OAA12704@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 11:15:28 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Valery King Subject: Re: Last Knight--tears To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <9605181749.AA28693@ucs.orst.edu> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1374 Status: RO X-Status: On Sat, 18 May 1996, Siona wrote: > We ARE a support group. Truer words were never said. In fact, I have been acting as a kind of "crisis intervention counsellor" for net-less FK fans of my acquaintance. I received a panicked call on my answering machine from a friend in Portland yesterday, right after she'd watched her tape, and I "talked her down" for about an hour. Then I received another call from another friend, and did the same for her. I talked with a co-worker about it on Friday, as well. And I expect when my SciFi Channel friends see it Monday, I'll get another call or two. I am so incredibly grateful for all of you people. I've never seen such emotional reaction from people over a tv show before; perhaps that's what TPTB were after, and if so they succeeded. However, if I were one of these PTB, this is NOT the kind of reaction I'd want to elicit. [WARNING! Entirely emotional and irrationally bitter rant below!] Crossbows and torches, anyone? How 'bout tar and feathers? I apologize to people who liked it, but I've never felt so betrayed over a mere "entertainment" in all my life. I couldn't even talk about it for days (my apologies to people who emailed be asking about it, for not responding to you). Maybe in a month or so I can be rational. Since I'm going to the Ger-thering, for Ger's sake I hope so ;-) --Valery kingv@ucs.orst.edu From soulseek@sprynet.com Sat May 18 16:37 EDT 1996 Received: from m2.sprynet.com (m2.sprynet.com [165.121.1.99]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id QAA29631 for ; Sat, 18 May 1996 16:37:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [199.174.150.53] (dd08-053.compuserve.com [199.174.150.53]) by m2.sprynet.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA21597; Sat, 18 May 1996 13:35:08 -0700 From: soulseek@sprynet.com Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 13:35:08 -0700 Message-Id: <199605182035.NAA21597@m2.sprynet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: RE: N&N loop (Last Knight -- A new idea...) To: asnelson@indiana.edu, acapozzi@wellesley.edu, AMORG@aol.com, egardner@facstaff.wisc.edu, CKrumtum@gnn.com, jclemens@world.std.com, bonney@interpath.com, Claudius@NETRIDE.COM, criss@marlboro.edu, fiorini@MARYWOOD1.MARYWOOD.EDU, dgthomas@ix.netcom.com, phase3@gate.net, dottir@wsii.com, efriedm1@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu, ILCzJules@aol.com, jasonl@cnwl.igs.net, shalott@chattanooga.net, dukarsja@udmercy.edu, RICHARD@iclnet.co.uk, jtfolden@erinet.com, Baigneuse@aol.com, lplummer@interlink.com, LoriArgyll@aol.com, lydiam@singnet.com.sg, d_Roberts@msn.com, moser@clark.net, catspaw@cruzio.com, rfulton@directnet.net, swells@phoenix.atticus.com, TGill10669@aol.com, valworth@aol.com X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.10.06.22 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Length: 1580 Status: RO X-Status: <---- Begin Forwarded Message ----> From: Jason Leger To: "'soulseek@sprynet.com'" Subject: RE: N&N loop (Last Knight -- A new idea...) Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 01:33:53 -0400 <---- Begin Forwarded Message ----> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 16:53:36 -0400 To: soulseek@sprynet.com From: bonney@interpath.com (Chana Rossman) Subject: Re: N&N loop (Last Knight -- A new idea...) I realize that many of us are saddened by the events which occur in Last Knight. As I ponder this, I had an idea (ohh, dangerous). I thought I'd ask your opinions before I posted to the list at large. What if the list were to have a formal fanfic contest in which writers had to come up with a "reasonable outcome" based on the events in Last Knight? (Of course people's ideas of a "reasonable outcome" may be different. Somehow I suspect a N&Ner would choose a different outcome than say a Cousin or a member of the Nat Vamp Camp. But then that could be part of the fun.) Of course, organizing it would be a challenge. Some folks would have to agree to judge the entries. It would be great if some prizes could be awarded. But the entire process might get people looking at the bright side of things again. So, what do you all think? Good idea? Bad idea? Chana bonney@interpath.com * I have been one acquainted with the [K]night * <---- End Forwarded Message ----> HEY CHANA, I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA. IT SOUNDS LIKE SOMETHING I'D ENJOY TAKING PART IN. THERE'S MY TWO CENTS. JAYSON . <---- End Forwarded Message ----> From soulseek@sprynet.com Sat May 18 16:37 EDT 1996 Received: from m2.sprynet.com (m2.sprynet.com [165.121.1.99]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id QAA29627 for ; Sat, 18 May 1996 16:37:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [199.174.150.53] (dd08-053.compuserve.com [199.174.150.53]) by m2.sprynet.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA21672; Sat, 18 May 1996 13:35:42 -0700 From: soulseek@sprynet.com Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 13:35:42 -0700 Message-Id: <199605182035.NAA21672@m2.sprynet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: N&N loop (Last Knight --spoilers!] To: asnelson@indiana.edu, acapozzi@wellesley.edu, AMORG@aol.com, egardner@facstaff.wisc.edu, CKrumtum@gnn.com, jclemens@world.std.com, bonney@interpath.com, Claudius@NETRIDE.COM, criss@marlboro.edu, fiorini@MARYWOOD1.MARYWOOD.EDU, dgthomas@ix.netcom.com, phase3@gate.net, dottir@wsii.com, efriedm1@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu, ILCzJules@aol.com, jasonl@cnwl.igs.net, shalott@chattanooga.net, dukarsja@udmercy.edu, RICHARD@iclnet.co.uk, jtfolden@erinet.com, Baigneuse@aol.com, lplummer@interlink.com, LoriArgyll@aol.com, lydiam@singnet.com.sg, d_Roberts@msn.com, moser@clark.net, catspaw@cruzio.com, rfulton@directnet.net, swells@phoenix.atticus.com, TGill10669@aol.com, valworth@aol.com X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.10.06.22 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Length: 1058 Status: RO X-Status: <---- Begin Forwarded Message ----> From: shalott@chattanooga.net Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 13:09:30 -0700 To: soulseek@sprynet.com Subject: Re: N&N loop (Last Knight --spoilers!] if you haven't seen LK please don't read this--- spoilers ahoy! well, i agree with Mel. i liked it. i really did. i thought perhaps a 2 hour show would've served the story a lot better, but it was good. of course as a N&Npacker, the resolution (OR LACK THEREOF) was truly a torment. i see this as a CLIFFHANGER not an end! perhaps my reality is becoming blurred. perhaps not. do you really think that the mac daddy could kill his favorite son? and why the hell did nick take too much? i couldn't stop? bs! he loves nat- he would've been more careful. perhaps he WAS swept away with passion or some other trashy romance novel cliche, but nat was his soulmate!! i mean why didn't they discuss the procedure? some signal for him to stop? something? i loved the episode, but my heart is heavy on this day. -jen <---- End Forwarded Message ----> From soulseek@sprynet.com Sat May 18 19:02 EDT 1996 Received: from m2.sprynet.com (m2.sprynet.com [165.121.1.99]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id TAA17024 for ; Sat, 18 May 1996 19:02:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [199.174.130.43] (ad03-043.compuserve.com [199.174.130.43]) by m2.sprynet.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA07376; Sat, 18 May 1996 16:01:21 -0700 From: soulseek@sprynet.com Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 16:01:21 -0700 Message-Id: <199605182301.QAA07376@m2.sprynet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: N&N loop Last Knight : A Better Ending To: asnelson@indiana.edu, acapozzi@wellesley.edu, AMORG@aol.com, egardner@facstaff.wisc.edu, CKrumtum@gnn.com, jclemens@world.std.com, bonney@interpath.com, Claudius@NETRIDE.COM, criss@marlboro.edu, fiorini@MARYWOOD1.MARYWOOD.EDU, dgthomas@ix.netcom.com, phase3@gate.net, dottir@wsii.com, efriedm1@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu, ILCzJules@aol.com, jasonl@cnwl.igs.net, shalott@chattanooga.net, dukarsja@udmercy.edu, RICHARD@iclnet.co.uk, jtfolden@erinet.com, Baigneuse@aol.com, lplummer@interlink.com, LoriArgyll@aol.com, lydiam@singnet.com.sg, d_Roberts@msn.com, moser@clark.net, catspaw@cruzio.com, rfulton@directnet.net, swells@phoenix.atticus.com, TGill10669@aol.com, valworth@aol.com X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.10.06.22 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Length: 863 Status: RO X-Status: <---- Begin Forwarded Message ----> From: VALWORTH@aol.com Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 18:28:28 -0400 To: soulseek@sprynet.com Subject: Re: N&N loop Last Knight : A Better Ending Dear Fellow N&N packers, I haven't seen Last Knight, but I've read too many detailed spoilers to think I'm going to like it. I've been writing, I believe (IMO) better ending for the series, since I started on the fiction list. So if any of you N& N packers (not on the fiction list) feel really depressed after seeing LK and would like a better ending, then you can email me, and I'll send you one. Just let me know, if you want a funny one or a serious one. They're not masterpieces, but I can guarantee you they will make you feel a little bit happier about Last Knight. A Believer in Knights that are Forever. Val valworth@aol.com <---- End Forwarded Message ----> From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sat May 18 22:20 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id WAA08731 for ; Sat, 18 May 1996 22:19:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 992EEB65 ; Sat, 18 May 1996 22:19:52 -0400 Message-Id: <199605190219.WAA08731@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 21:17:27 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Sarah Welsh Subject: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1386 Status: O X-Status: Just saw it. It wasn't as bad as I expected it to be, actually, but I've been reading the spoilers so I at least knew what was going to happen. The character development wasn't out of the question, but it was so ... sudden. There's no way I can do a complete spoiler post on this thing. Not for a while anyway. One nitpick: I thought LC said "ripe peach" at the beginning and then "freshest peach" at the end. Am I right? Or did I hear the first one wrong? One irrelevancy: Tracy's hair was still bad. Nick's looked sorta cute in the scene with the firelight shining up on his face, but looking at the clips, I like him with short hair better. With the contrast, I just realized how much prettier Cath's hair is now than first season. (Don't read that as a putdown -- I've always thought she's gorgeous. She's just more gorgeous like this.) One other irrelevancy: How hard do you suppose it was for Ger and Cath not to crack up in that real serious scene where he's talking with his fangs in? We know that they have to loop the dialogue in since the vamps sound like Daffy Duck trying to talk around their teeth. Must have been a lot of takes. That tear at the end was *definitely* clear. Yes, I know that in reality it was just Ger emoting, but in the story..... ?? Very interesting. This is not a final chapter, not by a long shot. Sarah Cleopatra welshkin@dfw.net From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sat May 18 22:56 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id WAA13247 for ; Sat, 18 May 1996 22:56:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id A103019F ; Sat, 18 May 1996 22:55:53 -0400 Message-Id: <199605190256.WAA13247@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 22:50:54 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Carrie Krumtum Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 565 Status: O X-Status: >That tear at the end was *definitely* clear. Yes, I know that in reality >it was just Ger emoting, but in the story..... ?? Very interesting. >This is not a final chapter, not by a long shot. Is there canon on the tear issue? I thought this was from the Anne Rice novels that Fanfic had borrowed since we have never seen a vamp cry on FK. Perhaps in the FK universe all the tears are clear. What sayist thou? Carrie, Slovenly Knightie AKA Carrie the Cruel CKrumtum@gnn.com It's hard to judge someone when you're blinded by your love for them. --Mother Teresa From owner-fkfic-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sat May 18 23:09 EDT 1996 Received: from allison.clark.net (allison.clark.net [168.143.0.3]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id XAA14511; Sat, 18 May 1996 23:09:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from allison (allison.clark.net [168.143.0.3]) by allison.clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) with SMTP id XAA27822; Sat, 18 May 1996 23:09:01 -0400 Message-Id: <199605190309.XAA27822@allison.clark.net> Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 23:07:33 -0400 Reply-To: g4akl@EROLS.COM Sender: Forever Knight TV show stories From: Arletta Asbury Subject: ***Last Knight spoiler*** To: Multiple recipients of list FKFIC-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 8040 Status: O X-Status: WARNING: "Last Knight" spoilers ahead! Do NOT read this until you've seen the episode. You have been warned. S P O I L E R S P A C E S P O I L E R S Title: "An Alternate Ending" (Last Knight Spoiler) By: Arletta Asbury g4akl@erols.com This is my first attempt at Fanfic, so please, remember that and try to be kind. It was inspired by my hatred of the ending of "Last Knight". I hate it, hate it, hate it! Laurie said something about "...for the hundreds of alternate endings yet to be written" and this is one of them. DISCLAIMER: The characters of Nick, Natalie, LaCroix, etc. are characters of the Forever Knight show and as such are the property of TPTB which are now, I guess, James Parriot and The SciFi Channel. I have just borrowed them. Also included in this alternate ending is part of the transcript of the "Last Knight" episode for what, I think, will be obvious reasons later. The copyright to that episode belongs to TPTB and I do not mean to infringe on their rights and I am merely quoting it as necessary. (In fact, if they want, they can have the copyright to this whole story as compensation for borrowing their property. Just ask for it, please don't sue me about it!) ******************************************************************** Nick said "I won't leave you. Whatever happens, we'll be together." Nat whispered "Forever." Nick nodded. They kissed once, passionately. Nick kissed her wrist. Then Nick bit Natalie's neck. The look on her face as he does so, is a mixture of emotions including fear. Then Nat collapses in his arms. Nick lowers her to the floor. Behind him stands LaCroix watching the events unfolding. Lacroix says emotionlessly "Well ... all that remains now is to turn off the lights and lock the door on our way out. Unless of course you have decided to add her to our entourage. He pauses before continuing, "Oh, Nicholas. You _have_ thought this through, haven't you?" Nick shakes his head in confusion and shock, "I couldn't stop myself. I've taken too much." "There she lies at the brink, Nicholas ... her fate is in your hands. Bring her across, or let her die. You must decide." "LaCroix, is it possible for a vampire to have faith?" Nick asks. "That's a strange question at this moment in time." Nick asks Lacroix "Have you ever had faith in anything but yourself?" "I have seen too much." replied Lacroix wondering where this conversation was leading. "Then maybe I haven't seen enough." "After nearly 800 years? Nicholas, be done with her. Time heals all - we must move on. You cannot deny what you are." Nick leans over to Natalie. "I can't condemn her to this darkness." He kisses her, then rises. "A wise decision. We even have time for a burial, if you'd like." Nick stands ... crosses to the fireplace ... lifts a very elaborately carved rod/stake. Lacroix is still almost emotionless but Nick is clearly very upset with tears in his eyes. "She had faith in me ... in what's beyond. That we could have a life together. That this would would be a beginning ... not an end..." He walks back to Lacroix and sits down, holding the stake. "I have that faith too." Lacroix says "Don't be foolish, Nicholas. Life is a gift..... Nick wasn't really listening as Lacroix spoke...... "What is there to gain? How dark can your existence be when compared to an eternal void? Still not listening, Nick doesn't reply to the question. ...........You can't answer that, can you? Because you will never know the answer until after the deed is done. Is your faith really that strong?" Nick still remains silent as he sits holding the stake with tears not yet fallen from his eyes. Lacroix says, trying to suppress his emotions, "And so ... in your eyes ... I'm the Devil." Nick turns to him before saying, "No. Not the Devil, LaCroix." "What then?", he asked. "You ... are my closest friend." As he speaks, he hands Lacroix the stake. Lacroix looks deeply into his son's eyes and knows that he is determined. Nick kneels beside Natalie's body ... reaches out and takes her hand, his back to Lacroix. Lacroix knew not what to say or do. Here was his son requesting his help to end his suffering. He could not bear the pain of his own actions or of a future without Natalie. "Damn you, Nicholas." For nearly eight centuries his son had struggled with the conscience of a knight. But the events of this evening were too much for him to bear. Lacroix sensed his pain and knew only one way to resolve the situation. Lacroix hoisted the stake in one smooth motion. And paused. -- Tears, clear tears were in Nicholas's eyes. Lacroix heard Natalie's heart still beating faintly. Nick felt a blow and then the room went dark. * * * Natalie awoke in a hospital bed groggy and not fully realizing what has happened. She lay there and tried to remember but flashes of images she had never seen before clouded her mind. Eventually, she looked up to see an IV transfusion and tubing leading into her left arm and feels with her right hand a small neat bandage at her throat. Closing her eyes, she shook her head as realization finally dawns. * * * Lacroix enters the room and speaks quietly, "I must talk with you Dr. Lambert". She glances at the patient in the other bed then returns her gaze to Lacroix and he nods in understanding. "She is unconcious and needn't concern us. "Are you sufficiently recovered to leave this...hospital?" Lacroix asks. "Yes, I believe so. Tell me what,.... how,........ why,..... where's Nick?" "All in good time, doctor" as he lifts her into his arms and flies out of the room and the hospital to the open night sky. Natalie closed her eyes against the onrushing air as Toronto lay beneath her feet. The view was dizzying and she was still weak from blood loss. When Lacroix put her down gently, she opened her eyes again and found herself sitting on Nick's sofa. He holds up his hand to still the question she was forming. "You should not put such trust in one so.... suicidal." "What are you doing? Let her go! Let me go...." came a voice from the other side of the room. Natalie turned to see Nick handcuffed (with his own handcuffs?) to the radiator there. She started to rise but Lacroix pushed her back down on the sofa. "Tell me doctor, is it possible that so much of your blood, the blood of his true love, could have been the 'cure' he is seeking?" "Wh..what do you mean?" "I *mean* I can no longer feel him thru our blood bond. He is too weak to break the handcuffs and free himself. And he is warm to my touch." "What have you done?" Natalie gasped and shook her head speechless at his words. Nick struggled against his cuffs proving Lacroix right. "What should I do? Hmmm. Bring you across....bring him across, again? Hmmm. I think not, *yet*. I'll give you ten years of mortal life together. Start a family, enjoy the sunlight, whatever you wish *but* after the bloom fades on the myth of happy mortal life as it will in that time, I'll return and claim my children. Both of you." Natalie's eyes widened in surprise but she said nothing in reply. Nick stiffened and shot Lacroix a questioning look as he said "What do you mean 'both of us'?" "I saved you both last night. Now you both owe me your lives. And I *will* reclaim what is mine, eventually." The look of defiance on Nick's face was unmistakeable but Lacroix chose to ignore it. "One more thing, Nicholas, you must give up that foolish job of yours. It is *much* too dangerous for you as a mortal. Nicholas, do you promise to find another amusement?" Reluctantly, Nick nodded in agreement, police work was too dangerous, *now*. With that answer, abruptly, Lacroix was gone........for a while. The End ************************************************************** Send comments: g4akl@erols.com Nick & Nat Packer with lite Cousin tendencies From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sat May 18 23:36 EDT 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id XAA19482 for ; Sat, 18 May 1996 23:36:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.5DDA5C20@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; Sat, 18 May 1996 23:33:06 -0400 Message-Id: <199605190336.XAA19482@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 23:10:59 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Melissa Puzio Subject: SPOILER:LAST KNIGHT/COUSIN MEL IS PISSED!!!!!!!! To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1565 Status: O X-Status: Well, so much for future tv movies! I mean how can you have a Forever Knight or even a Forever LaCroix with only Uncle and Captain Reese left? I'm hoping that we get to have a Bobby Ewing in the shower type of ending (esp. if its Nick or Uncle in the shower :D) cause that's the only way we have a show. Right now, I'm just venting some of my NatPacker frustration. I wasn't too broken up when they said Tracy Vetter passed away 20 minutes ago, but once again we can attribute everything to Nick's fault. I am just so damned pissed off, its not funny. If Nat was gonna die., we could of at least seen Her and Nick attempt to make love. But noooo! Our Nat is dead because once again $#$%^&%&@#$@#$@#$ Nick #%$#%#%^ up! And then the coward had to go and whack himself off,. but was to chicken to do it himself, he had to go and ask Uncle to do it for him!!!!! And of Course this is major Nick angst ep. "Tracy is dead because of what I am." No, Tracy is dead because of some whacko Idiot with a gun and if she hadn't just let Nick hypnotise him, she'd be alive. And of course he tries to bring her across.... Ughhhh!!!!! Can we just say the last episode was ashes to ashes!? I am now happily (or is that unhappily)joining Dame Marci in 2nd/3rd season limbo. I will provide some intelligent comments when I settle down and sober up! Is this TPTB's revenge for SOS FK? Cousin Mel *NatVampCamp*Valentine*Chiante Drinking Member of the Thong Throng* *High Priestess of Jagrism at Temple Nedved* miss68@pgh.net, Penchk68@aol.com, or CousinMel@prodigy.com From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 00:02 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id AAA24087 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 00:02:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id C5388C9B ; Sun, 19 May 1996 0:01:19 -0400 Message-Id: <199605190402.AAA24087@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 23:57:19 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Roxanne Piccen Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1305 Status: O X-Status: Well, forty minutes until LK airs in my area. On the one hand, I'm dreading it and on the other hand, I just want it to be over with. I would like to thank everyone who has seen the ep in advance for providing the detailed spoiler info, so that some of us are prepared in advance for what is to come. S P O I L E R S P A C E I have to say that when I read the t.v. listing that said Nick and Nat lose a close mutual friend, I thought it would be Tracy. Then when I found out Tracy gets killed later on, I figured the way TPTB are having characters die left and right that the "friend" would either be Capts. Stonetree or Reese. After all, they wouldn't want to miss an opportunity to off another regular character. :-p BTW, didn't someone say that Gillian Horvath thought that LK wasn't that bad? I don't remember if she said she *liked* it or not, but considering what we know about the deaths in this episode, why would she say that? Roxanne ---> Cleopatra - "Nobody Ever Dies" RoxanneP@aol.com (Home) // CHIRMP@AM.DAMES.COM (Work) ***************************************************************************** Save Forever Knight! // Save American Gothic! Check out: http://members.aol.com/CuznJamiMR/SaveForeverKnight.html http://www.best.com/~owls for The Trinity Guardian From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 00:53 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id AAA03627 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 00:53:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id FDB5F6A9 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 0:53:00 -0400 Message-Id: <199605190453.AAA03627@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 00:50:35 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Beth Brown Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 874 Status: RO X-Status: In a message dated 96-05-18 23:00:18 EDT, you write: >That tear at the end was *definitely* clear. Yes, I know that in reality >it was just Ger emoting, but in the story..... ?? >Is there canon on the tear issue? we have never seen a vamp cry on FK. >Perhaps in the FK universe all the tears are clear. What sayist thou? I was not going to get into this issue, but I couldn't stand it any more. Not that I have the answer. However, it had been bothering me since I saw it, so here is what I finally did. See if anyone agrees with me: At the end of "Baby, Baby", atop the CN tower, I think Serena is crying. And there is something streaming down the left side of her face, and it's very dark. A blood tear? Or just something wrong with my copy of the tape? *Please*, someone else look at it and tell me what they think. Just more fuel for the fire. Beth From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 01:14 EDT 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id BAA09116 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 01:14:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.F7719760@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; 19 May 1996 1:10:28 -0400 Message-Id: <199605190514.BAA09116@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 01:09:24 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "Lori A. Martello" Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 407 Status: RO X-Status: Spoiler Space s p o i l e r s p a c e After all the spoilers I read I thought LC staked Natalie for Nick...I've just rewatched the end several times and froze the frame where LC lifts the stake...and there is no way that he is staking Natalie...Its Nick he gets..the stake is directly lined up with Nick's back..and the "Damn You Nick" I interpretted as Nick finally beat LC...made a friend of him. Lori From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 02:20 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id CAA20176 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 02:20:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 363D7F73 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 2:20:29 -0400 Message-Id: <199605190620.CAA20176@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 02:17:59 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Bobbie Williams Subject: Last Knight--Another emotional response To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2434 Status: RO X-Status: It's 2:00 a.m. I just saw LK about three hours ago, and, hopefully, I will be excused for this rather emotional post. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * This isn't really a spoiler--but I just had to get add this to the outpouring of thoughts and emotion that this episode will no doubtedly unleash--besides, a friend of mine tells me it can be very therapeutic to put things in writing--to put them to rest. Well, it's over, isn't it. I swore I wouldn't watch, but in the end I couldn't let it go--I couldn't let go of this TV show in which I and so many others had invested so much time, effort and emotion. It was pretty much what I'd expected (I'd only seen one major spoiler before tonight). In all fairness, the episode was beautifully written and acted. The characters were intriguing. The story was interesting and I liked the philosophical undertones of the concept of "faith." But I didn't see anyone I recognized. I didn't see the strong, self-confident Nataile from "Only the Lonely." The woman who was determined to cure the man/vampire she loved. Who was the first to tell him when he was wrong, and until this season, the first to come to his defense when he was right. I didn't see Nicholas, the vampire/cop, searching for his mortality, for his redemption. The vampire who, in "Near Death" was certain that the path to salvation laid among "the living." The man who knew, deep in his heart, what true love is, not only for Nat, but for humanity in general. I didn't see the possessive/obsessive LaCroix, who would stop at nothing to keep Nick at his side for eternity. In the end, I understood why the characters acted as they did. I understood how the recent series of events had sent them down the paths they chose. I can relate to Nat's loneliness, to Nick's need to love and to be loved. I understood LaCroix's need for companionship and his fear of living alone for eternity. I cried for these characters. I cried for the demise of a show I dearly loved and for which I had fought so hard to save. I cried for the actors who must've been feeling the loss as we all are. But I'll never know what happened to "my" Nat, "my" Nick or "my" LaCroix. Perhaps it's best this way. Please excuse the ramblings. As I said, I've only seen the episode once, and I'm not sure when I'll watch it again. Perhaps I'm totally wrong, but at 2:15 a.m.--it feels pretty right. Bobbie Mourning the Knight From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 02:52 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id CAA22319 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 02:52:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 9D3B131B ; Sun, 19 May 1996 2:52:00 -0400 Message-Id: <199605190652.CAA22319@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 02:49:23 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Carrie Krumtum Subject: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1769 Status: RO X-Status: I really don't know where to begin. It is the problem of pain, not closure, that strikes me as being at the heart of this ending. How much pain have we seen these characters go through? In life, in love, in death. Perhaps you all will think me crazy, but, having just experienced the pain of loss to death, I did not find the ending so terrible. I found Nick's solution to be...noble. I'm not saying that I agree with his decision. I'm just saying, that from a certain point of view, his choice was valiant. Choosing, as he did, to walk away from the darkness, with a faith that there was something better on the other side. Assuming he truly believed that, regardless of the accuracy of the theology, his choice was an honorable one. And LaCroix.... I find myself thinking of him very differently than I did just two short weeks ago. I'm not sure what I think now. I FEEL...sorrow for him. What will his next choice be? I wonder.... I think that I would feel very much as Natalie did. The risk would be more than worth it for me. Her faith, her needs, her love seemed all too clear and understandable. If there is strength, true strength in the world of FK, she possessed it. Whether you choose to believe that the characters die or somehow escape that fate, the decisions they made, all of them, seem to me to be, at least so soon after witnessing them, noble and honorable in the extreme. Perhaps later, when I find myself able to stop crying, I will have more to share. Now, I am too sad to say much more. Sadness is not necessarily a bad thing. For me, it is a release. I will cry somemore, and remember my own pain. Really good story telling always makes its mark on the emotions of the listener, always. This then, WAS really good story telling. Carrie From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 02:56 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id CAA22465 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 02:56:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 3299CF94 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 2:56:10 -0400 Message-Id: <199605190656.CAA22465@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 01:55:34 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Lady Sushi Subject: Last Knight: Did Nick die? To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2376 Status: RO X-Status: L A C R O I X , T H E B L A C K A N G E L What, you expect ME to put in normal spoiler space? :) Well, just finished watching Last Knight. Truly, a B7 ending if I've ever seen one. And that brings up the inevitable question: did Nick die? In my never completely humble opinion, no. LaCroix chose to damn him, rather than let him be with Nat in whatever way. Lecture to follow. LaCroix assumed for so long that he was not only Nick's devil, but evil incarnate, that he came to believe that. Yes, he had faith, but it was in himself; Ashes to Ashes proved exactly how shaky that faith is, though, and Divia's visit turned the foundation to sand. LaCroix is trying desperately to keep that sand from running away. He has to believe he is the devil, or he is nothing; in his reality, he is. In Nick's, though, which is the swaying factor in LK, he's only a misguided mentor-turned-reluctant student. Nick called LaCroix a friend (I have to admit, however, I expected him to say father; recent developments have changed that possibility, however, and Nick has become more of the father figure). LaCroix, expecting to be called evil, *believing* he was evil, couldn't handle it. He snapped, he raged, and for a moment he considered killing Nicholas. At the last second, he realized that was what Nick wanted: escape in any way possible. He may have believed that Nick said that only to anger him. LaCroix's reality had shifted irrevocably. He would never again be the man he'd made himself into. What did he have to live for? I think Lacroix plunged the stake into his own heart. The evil he'd surrounded himself with (the same thing which may have kept Divia alive for so long) was gone. He'd died before, maybe he'd stay dead, maybe he wouldn't. When it all came down, LaCroix was left as a child, lost as his world washed away. Maybe a single pearl of something stayed for a moment, when he almost killed Nick, but he let it go when he realized that all that was inside was sand. * Cousin "Susan" Phoenix * Camera Fanatic of the Thong Throng * LA * * Charter Unnamed * Cold Shower Sisterhood * SKLed Miklos * Darkest Knightie * * NatPack Sympathizer * Queen of I Need Sleep * Hot Flash Disguised as a Woman * phoenix@ionet.net **Faciemus ut Dewus Mountainus e Tuo Nasone Exeat!** From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 04:12 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id EAA29236 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 04:12:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id E44CDCC8 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 4:12:43 -0400 Message-Id: <199605190812.EAA29236@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 05:11:21 -0300 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "l.d. steele" Subject: Spoilers: Last Knight, Fever and blood tears (long!) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 6111 Status: RO X-Status: Forever Knight has been inconsistent in the matter of tears. Serena in "Baby, Baby" seems to cry blood tears at the end, but... I distinctly remember Nick crying once before in his loft and it wasn't blood. ARGH! The episode name is on the tip of my tongue. Second season ep -- I'd check but I loaned the entire season away and they haven't given it back yet. Please correct me if I'm wrong. I don't really have the heart at the moment to start writing :) and everywhere. Please just assume that I don't mean to offend anyone. s p o i l e r s for last knight -------------------------------------- I was at a "Last Knight" wake/party when I saw it. Definitely the best place to be. I had read all of the spoilers, including the very detailed ones. I know exactly what was going to happen and I'm glad I did -- it allowed me to distance myself better emotionally. I've never cried over TV characters before, and I didn't cry during "Last Knight". My throat got sore, and my eyes watered, but that doesn't count. One of my roommates was there with me at Lynn Stapelton's place (thank for having us, Lynn!). I force her to watch FK occasionally, but she's not a diehard fan. She knows the characters and has watched maybe... 8 or 9 episodes total. I asked her what she thought of "Last Knight". (paraphrasing) Heather thought it fit. The story arc within the loop tied it all together. She thought it was a good episode, and that the ending made sense. Of course she also made remarks about Nick acting without thinking things through, but that was just his character. She thought the ep could have done w/o the LC scenes throughout the episode, but overall? She liked it. *** But what about me? Objectively speaking, it was a good episode. I was all ready to rationalize everything away, but Tracy (at least as far as Last Knight is concerned) is dead, cold and in a morgue. I don't believe Nick became human at the end due to Natalie's love/blood. I do believe that she would have accepted becoming a vampire, and that Nick couldn't accept that. Nick. I'm sorry, but the Knighties just lost completely the faint shreds of Knightiedom within my fannish heart. Warning!: I'm disappointed, it's 5am and Nick analysis follows. He didn't listen to what she was saying. Nick could not face bringing her across. Natalie, over the course of the 3 seasons, has lost her brother, her goddaughter, and two close friends -- all violently. Would she have enjoyed being a vampire? I don't really think so. She was reacting from pain, anger and love. Natalie may have spent the next thousand years trying to make a wall around her heart so that she couldn't be hurt by humans, but so what? Nick acted in character. Sandra: I don't want to fight -- I probably won't reply to this email. Nick has never been able to control himself. The example we have on him taking "sips" finally ended with a big slurp. I always thought that that woman was his "trial meal" to see if he could control his hunger. After that failed, he probably felt his customary guilt and didn't bother to practice. Result? He probably saw some fascinating images in Nat's blood, couldn't stop and plonk! "I took too much." Nick has always wallowed in guilt, and takes the blame for things he is , as well as the things he responsible for. This is not a characteristic I particularly admire. Yes it is "chivalrous", and yes it is what makes him what we term a "good" vampire, but it blinds and hampers him. As a result, he makes decisions for others w/o taking into account what want. He chooses and they pay. Nick decided what was for Natalie. Nick withholds the truth, and then doesn't. He tells all in tricky situations but then doesn't tell in situations where it might do some good. "1966", "Forward into the Past", "Dying to Know You", "Let no man tear Asunder", etc. He tells. Whoopee! But then in situations where it would he just walks away and leaves them to fend for themselves. How many people (I absolve the Knighties) wanted to just smack him when he left Tracy with a dead Vachon in "Ashes to Ashes"? He have "trusted her". It wasn't like in BB where he didn't know if she could keep a secret. I'm not going to go on. I don't want people to think that I hate Nick. I don't. In some ways, I admire him. If I didn't, I couldn't write fanfic about him. I see Nick, and (due to GWD's great acting) I see a character with both good and bad traits. Someone who has let the past 800 years of his existence drag him down instead of remembering the good and accepting the bad. Nick chose to die rather than bring Natalie across. In the end, he found the faith he so desperately desired. Let me state quite clearly here my opinion on what Nick has always wanted: absolution. He enjoyed being a vampire but it weighted down his soul with guilt. He belived in a sole God and the belief of the Dark Ages of irredemable sins. Once Nick started to try and be "good", he couldn't deal with the "decay" in his soul. Nick's quest for humanity was a tool, a eupherism for what he truly wanted. When he thought he could get into heaven w/o going the humanity route (Near Death), he jumped at it. In the end, Nick won. Vachon is dead, senselessly. Urs is dead, senselessly. Tracy is dead, senselessly. Natalie is dead, senselessly. Nick, before he died, regained his faith. His quest was over. In essance, Natalie sacrificed herself on the altar of Nick's conscience and he found a point that he could not cross. Janette is now a vampire again after tasting love and mortality. LaCroix has just killed his daughter for the second time, and with the death of Nick, is all alone -- something he probably fears. Of all the characters introduced into the series, I believe Nick is the only one who won. ------------------------ I'm going to bed now. I'm sorry if this post isn't very rational, but I did my best. In the future fanfic, I will probably rationalize "Last Knight" away like a trooper. Right now, at 0505 am, I can't. Dawn h36a@unb.ca or aa300@fan.nb.ca From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 04:42 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id EAA00960 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 04:42:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 0B7EC1A8 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 4:42:27 -0400 Message-Id: <199605190842.EAA00960@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 01:36:39 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Idalia Kakesako Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1577 Status: RO X-Status: I don't know which ending would've been worse: the so-called ambiguous one we were given here, or the one in which Nick was shown reacting to being staked (i.e., dying). As much as I hate to accept it and as much as I'll probably end up buying into the Cheesy Rationaliztions of others ... from the dialogue in this episode, from the emotional reactions of the characters, I'd have to say that Nick and Nat are dead. Maybe LaCroix refused to kill Nick, maybe Nick didn't finish off Natalie ... but I dread seeing a sequel to this episode in which Nick and LaCroix are merrily living their vampire lives in a new city, acting as if nothing between them had changed. *Everything* has changed. LC was *crying* here! A creature many have characterized as pure evil, as having no empathy ... he revealed himself in these last two episodes as not being so very different from the mortals he claims to despise. (A trait, BTW, which endears him to me, allowing me to call myself a Light Cousin and not a person who absolutely hates him. Obviously, I am one who liked having LC made 3 dimensional via "Be My Valentine" and the last two episodes.) And now I must sort out the rest of my reactions to this episode. I do feel it's important to note that, from reading the LK script Laurie so graciously posted, I was concerned that LC would be portrayed as his old, one dimensional, first season self. I'm happy that Mr. Bennett chose to give those harsh-sounding lines a more compassionate reading. Idalia Kakesako Light Cousin, NatPacker, N&NPacker From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 04:50 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id EAA01444 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 04:50:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 3A06D66B ; Sun, 19 May 1996 4:50:55 -0400 Message-Id: <199605190850.EAA01444@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 04:49:00 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Stuart Drucker Subject: Re: Spoilers: Last Knight, Fever and blood tears (long!) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1648 Status: RO X-Status: I don't want to just say "ditto" to l.d. steele, but she really hit a bullseye there (yep, Lacroix looked pretty definitive at the end). From Lacroix's perspective, he put his feelings about Nick ahead of his own utilitarian ethic (as versed by his questioning of faith and attitude toward Natalie's condition)). He's the one who ultimately loved someone enough to "set them free". As much as I hate the ending, I can't help but appreciate the depth in character that Sadowski and GWD put into the production. We've got three different POV here: Lacroix's stoicism (very Roman), Nick's unreconstructed medieval dualism of heaven and hell, and Natalie's romantic but hopeless love. They do an excellent job of putting you into the mind of these people, so that you can almost say that IS a Dark Ages Crusader would act after 800 years. If the series was to be put to rest, it was a lot more interesting script than just a happy ending. Funny to think that our favorite vampire show was a morality play after all. I agree that Nick was pretty selfish about his redemption, and thus completely in character. The ending's so ambiguous that even Lacroix could be considered "redeemed", if accepting Nick's free will counts. Personally, I'd be a lot more interested in seeing where Lacroix's character would go from here than whether Nat is across, or Nick was really staked. I'd hate to have faith in a God that would redeem someone that just killed his greatest love, though. Somehow, a think a little more than an "instant of atonement" would be good enough. On that note, back to sleep. Stuart Drucker stuartdruc@aol.com sdrucker@pipeline.com From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 05:05 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id FAA02150 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 05:05:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 4CA9E3AD ; Sun, 19 May 1996 5:05:45 -0400 Message-Id: <199605190905.FAA02150@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 05:05:33 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Marjorie Hammet Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1321 Status: RO X-Status: >Choosing, as he did, to walk away from the darkness, with a faith that there was >something better on the other side. But Nick's problem wasn't learning how to die; it was learning how to live. Nick has believed that being human will solve all his problems. He's believed that all he has to do to to be happy is to become mortal. And of course that's not true If this show were not the ending, I think I might have liked it. I am not religious, but I know that Nick is, and I did like the idea that he finally believed that God would forgive him. I'm assuming that's what he did believe, because, as I interpreted it, he is willing to go into the afterlife to be with Natalie forever, as he promised her. If Natalie were still alive, and Nick were now free of his fear of damnation, then he could go on and live, and continue his search for mortality, since that huge fear is no longer holding him back. But to have Nick and Natalie just walk off into Heaven together, is, to me, just a copout on the part of TPTB. One of the things I liked about FK is the complexity of it. And if not every episode was as complex as every other episode, the series as a whole was very complex. To have Nick and Natalie just die is terribly simplistic, and I feel betrayed by TPTB. Margie (mgleaf@aol.com or treeleaf@io.com) From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 05:20 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id FAA03051 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 05:20:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 614DFF93 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 5:20:38 -0400 Message-Id: <199605190920.FAA03051@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 05:18:48 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Marcia Tucker Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2799 Status: RO X-Status: s p o i l e r s p a c e Comments: 1. Thanks to whomever posted the script. (Sorry, foggy brain prevents me from remembering who this was). I wanted the preparation, got it, and was not destroyed as I feared when I actually saw it. Not that I feel good about it, of course. I watched the episode with two others who knew NOTHING about it and they of course were totally stunned and shocked - and angry. 2. Marian Gibbons - thanks for your long post - you said most of what I feel. 3. Margaret Carter - my dear, we are ever so much closer in thinking than you first thought! Your proposal of what happened (LC staking Nick but Nick coming back from that) is the premise of one of the two short post-LK stories I've written this past week in trying to deal with this whole thing. I've thought of the LC-bringing-Nat-across part, but did not include that, although I accept this as viable. 4. This episode was a mistake, start to finish. In particular, I find Natalie's 180 degrees attitude change/belief system change unacceptable. I can't believe she would ever put that much pressure on Nick in that circumstance (he's just lost another partner). NO ONE should be making life decisions at times like that. Okay, trauma and stress make people do weird out-of-character things, but I can't accept that for the series finale of this show. I realize that the scene in "Francesca" in the morgue where Nick describes sharing blood to Natalie was a set-up for this episode, but it is precisely because Nick did describe that (take one sip, then another, then another - you can see how difficult a habit it is to break, he says or words to that effect). It was a clear warning and her reaction showed that she recognized that there was a down side to this sharing stuff. I don't feel I can adequately say what I want to about Nick and LC in this episode. Others have said what I feel. In short, I can't accept Nick opting for an assisted suicide. This whole series has been about LIFE, not death. I can't accept LaCroix complying with same. It makes me want to refer to this episode as "Divia's Victory" because it truly would leave LC as she wanted him left - alone. I can't see her winning after all that happened in "Ashes to Ashes". Instead of long treatises on this episode - I leave that to the eloquent others - I write fan fiction. I will be posting to FKFIC-L the two pieces I wrote to work out my own intense feelings this past week. Although I wrote these before seeing the episode, I have since edited them to fit. Pardon the cheesy titles: "Past Night" - similar to Margaret Carter's scenario "Next Knight" - an explanation of the episode as a nightmare. Marcia Tucker scfimarci@aol.com Dark Knightie / Immortal Beloved / Unnamed NOBODY DIES - NOBODY DIED From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 06:13 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id GAA05910 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 06:13:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id CBE5E213 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 6:13:44 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191013.GAA05910@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 06:10:13 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: MS CHRISTINA L KAMNIKAR Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight & Denver Party To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 5362 Status: RO X-Status: Well, I'm glad I was semi-intoxicated. One of those teeny bottles of white zinfandel and two glasses of pink champagne managed to soften the blow from a knife in the heart to a punch in the stomach. And, of course, the wonderful company of Linda, Lisa, Peggy, Joe and Gay. All of us were glad to be among friends and fellow fans when we watched this. Incidentally, Ger's recipe for chocolate pizza is quite nice, though next time we're going to use chocolate chips instead of unsweetened. I'm commenting after only one viewing - can't manage to watch it again *yet* - so if I miss something, it's understandable. Also, I haven't seen any of the spoilers beyond the plot summaries posted a few months ago, so if I repeat what everyone else has said, forgive me. Direction: another nice job by Ger, but that fading back and forth in the morgue from Nick to Natalie had me kind of dizzy (might have been the alcohol, though). Maybe too many clips; and Lacroix's weird monologue at the beginning was kind of --- wooziness-inducing. [Would you call this man to talk you off a ledge? I think not] Acting: superb. Kudos to everyone on what must have been a difficult episode, especially Catherine Disher. And to whoever wrote Natalie's "You'll bring her across, but you won't even consider it for me?" Had to be asked! Glad she finally did!! Nick earns fifty Brick points for most of his actions in this episode. [Peggy's comment: "Only a guy would answer the phone in the middle of this kind of conversation"] Linda was glad Tracy bought it. In fact, she was exultant. Still is. I was bummed. What a waste! Again! I was mad they killed Urs last week for the same reason---they could have done something good with the opportunity they had, and they blew it to hell!! {Deep, cleansing breaths} Tracy's death scene with Nick was painful, great, I liked it---but then the actual death--- was glossed over, covered up, so long don't let the door hit you on the way out. Damnit. And Reese didn't even get a decent exit scene. Talk about your dangling threads. Lacroix's just leaving? He's that cocky, that sure Nick will leave with him? He doesn't really know him at all, does he? Doesn't Natalie have a life? Well? I mean, c'mon, this is pretty hard to believe. She always seemed too rational to go this self-pitying, frightened, bring-me-across-so-I-won't-be-alone route. Then again... she's probably aware this is the one way to get Nick to do this, by putting it in extreme terms. I'm exaggerating my reaction here a bit --- she loves Nick. [I still can't believe he didn't say I LOVE YOU! Brick!] And I don't think she's afraid of being a vampire. But I do think she had more faith he could just only take a little... but then, wasn't she listening in "Human Factor"? It was Robert's death that completed the cure. Arghhhhh........ Linda comments that they didn't make love, they should have, and this might have effected it too. She's got a point. And while the kissing was very, very lovely, there wasn't enough. This ep had too many clips, not enough development. **Bizarre thought. And given the continuity in this series, perhaps an insignificant one. When Nick thought Natalie was dead, when he was crying and talking to Lacroix---his tears were clear. Human. Maybe he got it. Maybe he came back across right then. But if you believe that Lacroix staked Nick, you were *not* paying attention to the monologue. I'll believe that happened when they do a TV-movie to that effect, which won't happen either, since, as some people delight in reminding us, "the show is called Forever Knight"! No Knight, no movie, no staking. Best bet: Lacroix bops Nick on the head, and brings Natalie across. I'm still kinda in shock. Not so much from the episode and what happened - Cleopatra Queen of Denial that's me, I'm fine, no problem--- but because it is OVER. The series is DONE. And until they come up with a movie tying up and settling all these questions, I'll be left wondering, and mourning, and watching old eps. We watched "I Will Repay" before & after "Last Knight", then popped in "Unreality TV", which kind of mellowed out most of the audience to the point where we could deal. A nice party, great people, good food. And I'm still mad at TPTB. As is most of everyone else who attended. That ending sucks, and not in a good way. Not because it's ambiguous (Linda's happy with it, I can almost deal, Peggy's recovering, Lisa & Joe & Gay have never seen all of first season so they still have good stuff ahead of them) but it's just so---abrupt. No dealing with the repercussions of Tracy's death (her father, cleaning out her desk, anything). Lacroix just suddenly decides to leave, and further depresses Nick into wanting to go. Natalie's ex-friend dies and leaves her a note that makes her desperate. Linda and I just picked apart the above paragraph, and while we have different opinions of the ep, we do agree that it was this abrupt so that it could be TOTALLY ambiguous about whether Nick and Natalie are dead, undead, or alive. The writers etc. didn't want to give the audience any solid leads in any direction about the resolution of the series. Damn them, anyway. If we never get a TV-movie, I will be seriously unhappy. Christina vqrw76a@prodigy.com Merc FoFoD Night Manager, CERK "Death can not stop True Love" From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 06:20 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id GAA06301 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 06:20:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id AF21E56D ; Sun, 19 May 1996 6:20:05 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191020.GAA06301@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 03:25:36 +0000 Reply-To: redjasper@earthlink.net Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Lisa Wolters Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 520 Status: O X-Status: Initial, just got home from a LK party reaction: * * * * * * * * * * Natalie: "All I have is faith, and love." Me: And faith and love will get you killed. What a hideous end to the show. What a hideous final message from a show that about hope. It was beautifully acted and filmed, but it was still hideous. And I decided on the long drive home just now that while I like it on the detached level of "good tragedy," I am sick to my stomach over it as being Forever Knight. Lisa W. * redjasper@earthlink.net From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 06:41 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id GAA07170 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 06:41:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id A5C5D270 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 6:41:18 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191041.GAA07170@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 03:22:54 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "Eric L. Steglat" Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1929 Status: RO X-Status: Re: Jean Kennedy's response to Last Knight: > >S > >P > >O > >I > >L > >E > >R > >This was absolutely shattering. First reaction: God, they must hate us, to do >this. As far as I'm concerned, there was nothing ambiguous about the ending. >My heart's breaking. I saw this at midnight, and I'm still in tears. (Very >awkward -- what do you tell the people at the office? ) > I saw the episode over a month ago. In fact, I saw it back to back with Ashes To Ashes. How's that for a double feature? All I can say is that the pain does fade. I was seriously depressed for about three days, then I started thinking up ways that they might not all be dead. And believe me, there are ways to bring them all back. Ex: Nat is brought across quickly by LaCroix (who simply banged Nick on the head.) Believe me, there are ways to "fix" the ending. I spoke to someone on the Production staff not long after I saw it, and asked the same question you asked: "Do they really hate us that much?" The answer I got back was "See the ending again..." The implication is that they aren't really dead. > >Maybe I'll have a more rational reaction later. Right now I'm bitter and >crushingly sad. Yeah, it was just a TV show. And I was just a fan. LC was >right about love. Damn him for it. I saw a good quote in a Sig file about this. (Sorry I don't remember the original poster)--"Yes, it was just a TV show, but it was the only one I loved!" The list is a good place for group grief therapy. I know, others here helped me through my initial shock as well... > Jenn--The occasionally responsible Vaquera... ************************************************************************** "The Tiger" From EarthLink Net | and "KitFox" (Jenn) "thetiger@earthlink.net" | "The longer I live, the more Tiger, Tiger, Burning Bright | attached to myself I get." In the Forest of the Night... | Amanda...Highlander From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 08:31 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id IAA12915 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 08:31:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 148F98D4 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 8:31:46 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191231.IAA12915@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 07:29:33 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: D Echelbarger Subject: SPOILER: LAST KNIGHT-- WATCH THOSE SUBJECT LINES! X-cc: catheboo@cco.caltech.edu, immajer@pipeline.com, jap8@cac.psu.edu To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 773 Status: RO X-Status: OK, people, our listmommy and Jaye are *obviously* off duty, so I'm taking it upon myself to remind you: DON'T PUT SPOILERS IN YOUR SUBJECT LINE, DAMMIT! yes, I'm shouting. That's because I, and a lot of other people, have been avoiding spoilers for LK for MONTHS... and then people go and put out subject lines like "Why Nat isn't dead", "did Nick Die?", "They're not dead"... THESE ARE MAJOR SPOILERS! THEY DO NOT BELONG IN THE SUBJECT LINE! Got it? Diane E Thoroughly ticked. Flame me if you want, but do it private e-mail, becuase you *won't* like the reply you'll get! # D Echelbarger gryphon@execpc.com # # WWW HomePage: http://www.execpc.com/~echelbar/ # # No, I'm not Maureen the Mad; I just play her on Real Life. # From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 09:18 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id JAA16294 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 09:18:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id A0689E94 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 9:18:38 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191318.JAA16294@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 09:17:23 +0000 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Laura W. Petix" Subject: Spoiler: Last Knight & waves To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1365 Status: O X-Status: I just finished my initial collection of "Last Knight" waves, and it's now online at http://www.dpcc.com/dpcc/assoc/lpetix/waves/ I hope the waves I've chosen will comfort those who need comforting, and at least not anger any one. If my choices are upsetting, I apologise. To tell the truth, I've been a little bit shocked by some of the reactions to this episode so far. I enjoyed it very much, and appreciated the way it made me *feel*. There aren't many TV shows that can do that. Emotion is such a precious thing. Be *thankful* that you *can* feel--it's so much better than coldness. Such brilliant, brilliant subtexts... how can you feel betrayed by the writers of this? The characters are so clearly speaking *to us*, as well as to each other. As a writer who has had to weepingly say goodbye to some of my own characters, I can say that this is similar to how I've expressed my love for the characters through the characters' dialogue to each other. Look at what they are saying to us: "I have faith that there *is* a future for us. Here, as we are, or somewhere else." "She had faith in me--in what's beyond... that this would be a beginning, not an end. I have that faith, too." "I won't leave you. Whatever happens, we'll be together." "Forever." Laura WP lpetix@dpcc.com Last Knight waves: http://www.dpcc.com/dpcc/assoc/lpetix/waves/ From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 09:42 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id JAA18045 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 09:41:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id DD4ABD22 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 9:41:48 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191341.JAA18045@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 09:36:52 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Larissa Field Subject: Re: Last Knight: Did Nick die? To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2338 Status: RO X-Status: Last Knight Spoiler Ahead: At 01:55 19/05/96 -0500, Lady Sushi wrote: > I think Lacroix plunged the stake into his own heart. The evil he'd >surrounded himself with (the same thing which may have kept Divia alive for >so long) was gone. He'd died before, maybe he'd stay dead, maybe he After watching "Last Knight" at 12:05am, I went to bed extermely upset and I found I couldn't sleep. So I got up and watched it again. With this second viewing, I realized things weren't as bad as they seemed to be. This is how I interpreted "Last Knight": First off, I agree: Nick did not die. However I do not think Lacroix drove the stake through his own heart. It seems to me that Lacroix either realized he couldn't do what Nick asked or wasn't willing to do it. I had to look at the whole episode to realize this. The answer lies in Lacroix's monologue scenes that take place in Nick's loft. I realized that his monologue begins with the same "speech" that he gave to Nick before he asked if Nick sees him as the devil. It's the speech about how he can't understand how someone would willingly take their own life...Faith in something beyond and all that. Continuing through the monologue he talks of moving on, guilt, etc. Lacroix is talking to someone, but who? In the last monologue scene, we see that Lacroix is actually talking to Nick... My point: I believe that this one-sided conversation starts when Lacroix walks into the loft and finds Nick and Nat--It begins with Lacroix telling Nick abou how he can't understand why someone would commit suicide. A small portion of the conversation is cut from the monologue (namely, Nick telling LC that he is his closest friend etc.) The monologue picks up AFTER Lacroix raises the stake: LC realizes he can't--or won't--kill Nick and proceeds to talk him out of it... If you follow this reasoning, then Nick *IS* still alive at the end of the episode. As for Nat, as I see it she hasn't yet died at the end of the episode. I suppose Nick, or Lacroix for that matter, still has a chance to bring her across... But never mind my cheesy theories on that matter. All in all, I thought this episode was pretty good. Yeah, you read that correctly: I liked it. But then again, the way I saw it there is hope... Larissa From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 10:43 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id KAA24492 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 10:43:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 72034430 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 10:43:14 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191443.KAA24492@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 07:41:58 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "Andrew E. Nystrom" Subject: Last Knight Spoiler: Tracy To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 962 Status: RO X-Status: Since most posts seem to be focussing on Nick and Nat I thought I'd take a different slant and look at Tracy's death. Throughout the season she really grew on me, in a way that Schanke never did. No offense to any fans at him, but I actually found him irritating. Tracy however was a more likable character to me. Maybe because she always seemed so unbeat. the scene where she got shot actually overshadowed Nick and Nat's. Of course this also has a lot to do that it was done mor dramatically, what with the blood on the wall and the hole in the chest. Very disturbing scene. Not something you want to see happen to someone you actually like. and given her relationship with Vachon, her comment that Nick could have trusted her was dead on. I never did understand that: she could obviously be trusted with the vampire secret. It's a shame that if the show does return as a TV movie, she's the only definitely dead character (from this ep anyway). -- Andy From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 10:47 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id KAA24969 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 10:47:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 0A88281E ; Sun, 19 May 1996 10:47:30 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191447.KAA24969@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 09:46:40 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: D Echelbarger Subject: SPOILERS: LAST KNIGHT Rationalizations! Get your red-hot rationalizations here! :> To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 3676 Status: RO X-Status: I watched it. Held myself together through the whole thing (which is how *I* deal with disasters) then started reading spoilers with Scott Bakula singing the "Man of LaMancha" suite from the Quantum Leap CD... and I'm leaking like a seive. I'm gonna stop reading spoilers until I'm more in control. And, to deal with it, I'm gonna inflict all my rationalizations on y'all. I sent this (with much additional text) to a few friends. I'm editing out the reactions and just giving you the explanations... (be thankful) Here we go.... That first flashback-- Last Act-- *very* nice the way they started it in B&W and segued into color.... OK, at the third 'wierd distorted LC' flashback, I've decided this whole thing is an LC-induced nightmare. After all, he *says*, in effect, that it's an object lesson to Nick... and the effect is *much* too much like what they did in "Curiouser and Curiouser", last season. That's my rationalization, and I'm *sticking* to it! :P OK, empty Raven... Wait a minute, it's night... why's it empty? And that bust was smashed at Pompeii, dammit! This is *definitely* a hallucination! Hmm... is it just me, or does LaCroix seem even paler than usual? Because, compared to him, Nick seems almost human-colored.... or maybe it's just the lighting? Nope, I still vote for the Curiouser & Curiouser solution.... Just occurred to me.. this season, they've been doing mortal flashbacks in B&W (NIQ) and vampire in color... could we interpret the fact that Nick's *start* B&W, then slide into color, to imply that he's *almost* mortal again? OK, they *say* Tracy's dead, but they didn't *show* it... so I maintain that Vachon revived, crawled up *out* of the dirt, and arrived in time to bring her over.... Yup, that's what happened... Assuming this is real, which it isn't. OK, so much for "the mortal doesn't get the vampire's memories"... *nice* montage (yup, she's ignoring the obvious again!). And of course, for the next 2 hrs, Nick will have all of Natalie's modern MD skills... could come in *very* handy, no? Hey, wait a minute! Nick's eyes are brimming with *human* tears! No question! During LaCroix's soliloquie, his eyes have WATER tears in them! So LaCroix's standing over Nick holding a stake. Big deal. Yeah, like he's gonna *voluntarily* kill Nick? Assuming Nick's still a vampire, which he *isn't*. So there. So, instead, LC bops Nick on the head, gives Nat a little drink, and vamooses with her still-comatose-but-definitely-vampiric body. For that matter, LC wouldn't even have to help Nat. I can see her standing at that damn doorway from "Near Death" and *refusing* to go through. "No, I will *not* go on! Nick needs me!" (Damn straight, Nat! Give 'em hell!) And Nick can spend *several* TV-movies trying to find her, and working out a way to bring *her* over without *him* dying.... Yes! That's it, that's what *really* happened. So THERE! :P But of course, since this is *all* a hallucination on Nick's part.... yhe whole question's irrelevant.... Yup, that's my rationalization, and I'm *sticking* to it! :) ... feel better now. Got Scott (lovely voice, that man has!) singing "Don Quixote" endlessly in the background. Helps. Helps a lot. Back to reading spoilers... It is NOT over! Tracy & Nat are vampires, Nick's mortal, but it's *not over*! You hear me? IT'S NOT OVER, DAMMIT! Diane E # D Echelbarger gryphon@execpc.com # # WWW HomePage: http://www.execpc.com/~echelbar/ # # "Death cannot stop True Love" Wesley, _Princess Bride_ # From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 12:29 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id MAA06146 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 12:29:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 43D29A0F ; Sun, 19 May 1996 12:29:19 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191629.MAA06146@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 12:27:07 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Naomi P Kraus Subject: Re: SPOILERS: LAST KNIGHT Rationalizations! Get your red-hot rationalizations here! :> To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <199605191447.KAA24986@mailrelay1.cc.columbia.edu> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 177 Status: RO X-Status: I'm with those who say that Tracy's death isn't final because we never saw her die. Some strange things have been known to occur in FK hospitals. N.P. Kraus npk1@columbia.edu From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 12:57 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id MAA09522 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 12:57:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 3D694989 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 12:57:46 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191657.MAA09522@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 11:54:57 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Laura Ruggiero Subject: Spoilers: Last Knightmare and Promo To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1603 Status: RO X-Status: I will not see Last Knight until tonight at midnight but I have to share this. I have tried to remain unspoiled for this last ep, in fact the last spoilers I read for it was when all the early speculation occurred. Then last night/this morning at 12:30 am I saw my first promo/commericial for this ep, 23.5 hours before the ep airs. I saw Tracy, sinking down a wall leaving a smear of blood, Tracy in intensive care, Nat asking Nick to make love to her, Nat on the floor with Nick saying he couldn't control himself. ARRRGGGH! Then, to add to my "fun" waiting for this ep; I had a very realistic dream last night. I am at my computer working, with the TV pulled up near by, when I realize that it is almost time for FK to start. And, OH NO, the tape isn't set in the right spot. I quickly try to set the tape to the right spot, and just get there (I love having a VCR with a "real time" counter) as the ep starts. I hit the record button, and begin to watch. The teaser opens on Nick and LaCroix siting in a sound stage with 2 women. They are appearently on a talk show. I do not know if there is a live audience. Suddenly, Nick vamps out and attacks one of the women, LaCroix kills the other woman. Then Nick gets a angsty and LaCroix makes some scathing remark I can't remember. As they fade out to the opening credits, I am screaming at my TV that they can't do this. Then I woke up. It took awhile to get back to sleep. I hope the ep isn't as bad as either the promo or my dream make it. Laura Ruggiero (larug@siu.edu) Die-Hard and Methos FW I had a normal childhood, but I overcame it. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 13:02 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id NAA10066 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 13:01:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id CFCA5765 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 13:01:52 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191701.NAA10066@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 11:45:32 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Lillian Feden Subject: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2588 Status: RO X-Status: Just some quick comments, I still have to digest what I saw last night. Cynthia had said that she didn't catch Nick's declaration of love, spoken or implied, to Natalie. I believe Nick DID express his love for Nat at the end, before he killed her (accidently). He said he would never leave her, he would be with her wherever, forever. He never said the "L" word. My Mom never uses the L word, and when pressed will say she says it's too easy to say the word and not mean it. Yet I have no doubt my mom loves me, but sometimes you just gotta hear it, you know? I do NOT believe Nick went back and drained Nat completely. I was watching with a friend who's not on the list and who has no access to spoilers, except through me. We both think he just kissed her, and let her die, not necessarily nice or very responsible, but not exactly going back to murder her as some had said. I haven't read too many of the other spoilers, so I may have missed it if other people remarked on this. Sorry. Nat's head position is exactly the same, he kisses her cheek, her neck on that side is unmarked. Wishful thinking? We (my friend and I) don't think so. Did the script call for that? Was it filmed that way? Was it edited out? I do NOT want to believe that Lacroix staked Nick. But I guess that's up to Tri-Star and Sony. I wonder how Lisa Ryder felt in that final scene where they put the sheet over her face and wheeled her out. I was sad. I was sorry to see her die. I wasn't crazy about her, but I didn't want to see her dead, and I was starting to like her, just a little. Glad they included Janette in the flashback. It was nice that they acknowledged her existence, and Schanke's. But boy, this really did look like a farewell episode, didn't it. I mean, it was so FINAL. Re: Directing: Okay, I love alot of Ger's direction, but that cutting back and forth thing between Nick and Nat at the morgue was sort of distracting. Performances: Wonderful, from everybody, right down to the crazed gunman. Ooops, this wasn't so quick after all, was it? Extremely off-topic: I'm a little sensitive right now and took it personally when I couldn't sign onto newsgroups and got the error message "Connection Refused". What? Why? What did I do? NOBODY likes me... WAHHHH. I think I'll go watch something like "Who Framed Roger Rabbit". Lillian feden@mcs.com http://www.mcs.com/~feden Pragmatic Knightie; IB; MBDtK; PGEB (hormones took over) Fourth L on the right, contemplating the existence of intelligent life in the broadcast executive offices From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 13:19 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id NAA12103 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 13:19:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 21FF1F32 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 13:18:29 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191719.NAA12103@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 13:13:40 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Michelle Mark Subject: LAST KNIGHT...or maybe not... To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2896 Status: RO X-Status: A I know I'm in the minority, but I really liked it. It brought up some great issues-faith, life after death, love, and how it all relates to being a *vampire*. I need to watch it again but here are my initial observations. It made sense to me to end the series this way. LC was right about several things: 1. They had come full circle. It was time to move on. It's a vampire thing. 2. Nick really was past the point of doing any good there, and was just dragging his friends down with him in his quest. 3. For a vampire, truly loving someone means letting them go I think a lot of people overlook the fact that Nick *is* a vampire. Yes, he *wants* to be mortal, but he is still a vampire, and if he dosen't play by vampire rules, all hell will break loose. Which is exactly what happpened. He should have listened to dad. I love the part where LC asks Nick to choose between eternal pain and eternal regret. (What a choice...can I pick door #3??) I think this episode shows us a lot about the nature of vampires and how they *must* live, and the consequences of ignoring that. I have a small problem with the Nick/Nat scenario. I believe she has truly loved him all these years, but I was never convinced he was in love with her, therefore, to me, this ending seemd a bit ridiculous. I can see Nick dying for Janette but not Nat. They should have developed the relationship a bit more over the past 3 seasons. That part just didn't move me. The part that *did* move me was the conversation between LC and Nick, as Nat lay dying, about faith and about their relationship-("and so in your eyes, I am the devil...") I'll go into this more in my LC post. There was so much great LC stuff in this ep. I didn't think anything would top AtoA, but this did. So the question remains..did he stake him? I really don't think so. He probably whacked him upside the head, and brought Nat across. (fanfic anyone?) Sure, Nick will be royally ticked when he wakes up, but 100 years from now he'll probably thank LC. This whole scene was so typical of a cliffhanger, and left so ambiguous, I can't see how anyone would get upset over it. After reading all the spoilers, I thought it would be horrible. It wasn't. I sincerely doubt we have seen the last of FK. Did it seem like a lot of this episode was dream-like? The echoing voices, slo-mo, etc? Oh yeah, and Tracy...I had forgotten about that part. No great loss IMO. The acting in this ep. was the best I have ever seen. (with the exception of one person who didn't even die convincingly well) Nigel and Ger both deserve a Gemini for this one, especially for the last scene. CD was great as well, but I think Nigel and Ger really pushed the envelope. Almost had me reaching for the puffs...which is quite an accomplishment. Ok, thats all for now. I'll have more to say about the LC/Nick thing later. Cousin Michelle From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 13:19 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id NAA12105 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 13:19:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 3F4E514F ; Sun, 19 May 1996 13:19:18 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191719.NAA12105@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 10:15:47 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Elizabeth Mosler Subject: Re: SPOILERS: LAST KNIGHT Rationalizations! Get your red-hot rationalizations here! :> X-cc: npk1@columbia.edu To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 668 Status: RO X-Status: >I'm with those who say that Tracy's death isn't final because we never saw >her die. Some strange things have been known to occur in FK hospitals. > >N.P. Kraus >npk1@columbia.edu Me: Well, also we only have Nat's word that Tracy died. In the highly emotinally charged fram of mind that Nat was in, she might have told this to Nick to add fuel to her argument that if he could bring Tracy across, why not her. elizabeth m. Personal Home Page: http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~emosler/rose.html Work Home Page: http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~emosler/binding.html. *Jody to Perry the Vampire dog: "Good boy!" Woofpacker forever!* From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 14:12 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id OAA18370 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 14:12:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id B6A59A9E ; Sun, 19 May 1996 14:12:44 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191812.OAA18370@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 11:10:51 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Cynthia Hoffman Subject: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 8892 Status: RO X-Status: This one comes from Cynthia and Jane. Jane may be typing, but she's not writing this one alone .. the thoughts belong to both of us. Last Knight is a beautiful episode. We have watched it three times now, and love it more each time. We will undoubtedly watch it many more times. We are glad that FK ended with an episode of this quality. The true tragedy would have been if FK had been ended with something like Hearts of Darkness or Let No Man Tear Asunder. We agree with Catherine Siemann that the set of assumptions that Natalie has no life without Nick, which underly this episode, are misogynistic. However, this is the set of assumptions that has underlaid Nat's character since Dark Knight. They are a large part of the reason why neither of us are big fans of Natalie. Ger's directing was great with one single exception. That morgue scene makes for a very queasy stomach. It doesn't get any better on future viewings either. Fred's music was wonderful. It didn't overwhelm the episode, nor was it sentimental. It added a dimension to the episode instead. The script and the acting were equally good. No matter how anyone feels about the ending, you have to give Michael Sadowski and all of the actors credit for pulling it off without histrionics and within the parameters of each character. No-one dropped out of character in this episode. Those tears were Ger's ... not Nick's. They probably didn't have enough tape or money to re-shoot the scene. Now for specifics. Tracy: No Nick should NOT have trusted her. Witness how she was killed: by walking directly into the line of fire when Nick almost had the guy putting his gun down. I don't care if Nick is mortal or a vampire. A GOOD cop does not move into the line of sight of someone that another cop is talking down. In fact, no-one should interrupt anyone who is trying to negotiate with anyone in that kind of situation. Tracy is definitely 100% dead. They pulled the sheet over her head. To quote an original cousin: Bye Button. 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. Oh, and as for "how can you do this for Tracy and not for me", Tracy was DYING. Nat was still alive and healthy. Figure it out! Reese: for a captain, he is easily flummoxed. Oh, and why, in the middle of a hostage situation in the precinct, is he (personally or by someone else) having them phone Nick? Aren't there enough cops there already? Oh, and even in Canada, cops check their guns at the door to avoid exactly this kind of situation. One sympathetic note for Reese: he never did get a glass of water out of that cooler. Natalie: can you say manipulative? We thought you could. Nick didn't want to do it. He came up with a lot of good reasons why he shouldn't do it. But Nat couldn't leave well enough alone. She pushed .. and pushed .. and pushed him into it. She pushed all the right buttons because she knew what they were. Nick needs to feel loved and trusted. She told him she loved him and trusted him. Hell, she told him HE loved and trusted her even when he was expressing his doubts about that very fact. As much as we hate blaming the victim, in this case ... Then there is the "sex" scene. If you can call it that. Janette became mortal because she and Robert MADE LOVE. Nick fed. His idea of foreplay was to kiss the inside of her wrist. No removing their clothes (not even socks and shoes). No going up to the bedroom, or even to the couch in the room where they were standing. No sweet nothings murmured in her ear. He did better with Alexandra, the bimbo barmaid. Hell, he's done better with Natalie in the past. Natalie manipulated him into getting hot and bothered. He said he wouldn't be able to stop. She said she wasn't afraid to die. Ergo... Oh, and what was that 180 degree shift in her thinking. Where was the Dark Knight flashback when she was telling Nick how much being a vampire has enabled him to help other people? Wasn't it only four years ago that she was telling him that capturing criminals and saving people with the help of the vampire didn't count? And now, four short years later, he's more than made up for 800 years of past misdeeds? So, how long would he be trapped in purgatory while Nat went on to other lives? This kind of puts a stake into the "I'll stay with you no matter what" idea. No matter what kind of afterlife you believe in, or which version of reincarnation you ascribe to, there are no guarantees that you will end up in the same place at the same time. In fact, the opposite is more likely to be true. Nick was true to form. You can be angry at him for killing Natalie, but he clearly stated more than once that he didn't want to do it. He was trying to leave to save her life. This time he told her. He wasn't going to leave without warning. She coerced him into doing what she wanted. Be careful what you wish for... Natalie is dead. When confronted by Lacroix, Nick clearly said that he would not "condemn her" to a vampire existence. Lacroix then said "wise decision". Lacroix is not going to bring her across either because he agrees with Nick. By all means rescue her in fanfic, but in the show she is history. They can't even use the excuse given for Lacroix at the beginning of season two. That being that she is too old and powerful. Lacroix: time to move on. That trunk has seen a lot of mileage. It first came to North America with Nick inside in the 1920's. Then, Nick used it again in Black Buddha, and now Lacroix has packed it with his belongings. Did Nick give it to Lacroix for his birthday or something? Aren't budget restraints a bitch? Oh, and that bust, it was not the same one as in AMPH. First of all, it had a nose, and there was no chunk missing from the head. Second of all, it was wearing modern clothes, not a toga. Details, details. Picky, ain't we? Nigel walks away with the dialogue award for the night. It was well-scripted and well-spoken. Lacroix reiterated many of the thoughts that have passed through our minds at one time or another during different episodes. It is fascinating that Lacroix can have these kinds of conversations with Nick, but not with anyone else. He frequently shows up at Nick's loft to discuss life, liberty and the pursuit of vampire happiness. Then again, he is Nick's closest friend. Clearly spoken. Unavoidably the truth. To Nick, Lacroix is not the devil; he is Nick's closest friend. Guess that shoots the "Lacroix is 100% evil in Nick's eyes" theory in the foot. Oh well, back to the drawing board. Nick: It is impossible to talk about Nick's actions and speech independent of any other character. Everything he did or said impacted upon someone else. Interestingly enough, when Tracy was dying and his mortal life in Toronto was crumbling about his ears, he went to Lacroix not Natalie. In fact, he spent a large part of this episode trying to escape Natalie. Everything Nick did was completely in character. He is rarely able to stop himself before draining his victims. We can only think of a couple of occasions. Richard Lambert: but Natalie was there to stop him. Serena: with whom he was having sex ... in a bed no less. And last, but decidedly not least, he had absolutely no trouble stopping and bringing Janette across at the end of Human Factor. Then again, he wanted to bring Janette across. If by any remote chance we are wrong and someone does either save Natalie or bring her across in a believable manner, how is Nick going to explain that last memory she received from his blood while he was feeding? You know, the one of him and Janette in a clinch. Not to mention why he decided to let Natalie die instead of bringing her across. Neither of us would want to be Nick when Natalie wakes up. Ambiguous endings can be the font of endless debate. However, in this case, there is no conceivable way that Lacroix would stake his favourite son. Especially not after Ashes to Ashes. We know how Lacroix feels about killing his children. We have considered two options. One: Lacroix throws the spear across the room and then bitches at Nick because they're stuck in the loft for the day with a dead body and only cow blood to drink ... unless Nick has some human blood in the fridge. He has been backsliding after all. Two: Lacroix stakes Nick somewhere non-lethal, pinning him to the ground, and then bitches at Nick because they're stuck in the loft .... You get the picture. More later ... this one's more than long enough. But just for the record: we really really liked this one. Cynthia and Jane Cynthia Hoffman/choff@violet.berkeley.edu Jane Credland/janes@interlog.com Raven ** IB ** MBDtK We cater to the occasional fetishist From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 14:24 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id OAA19877 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 14:24:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 6724FB74 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 14:24:50 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191824.OAA19877@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 11:24:14 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Cynthia Hoffman Subject: Re: SPOILERS: LAST KNIGHT Rationalizations! Get your red-hot rationalizations here! :> To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <199605191718.KAA26554@violet.berkeley.edu> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 958 Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 19 May 1996, Elizabeth Mosler wrote: > Well, also we only have Nat's word that Tracy died. In the highly > emotinally charged fram of mind that Nat was in, she might have told this > to Nick to add fuel to her argument that if he could bring Tracy across, > why not her. Did some of you see a different episode to the one we saw? Or are you subconsciously (or consciously) ignoring the scene in the hospital where Tracy was laid out on a gurney, a nurse covered HER face (and it was recognizably Tracy's face) with a sheet, and she was wheeled out. We've watched it three times. Twice from the satellite feed and once on air. That scene was there every time. It's only possible purpose was to make absolutely sure that we knew that Tracy was dead. Besides Tracy would make a lousy vampire. Cynthia and Jane Cynthia Hoffman/choff@violet.berkeley.edu Jane Credland/janes@interlog.com Raven ** IB ** MBDtK We cater to the occasional fetishist From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 14:27 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id OAA20173 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 14:27:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id C3C672BE ; Sun, 19 May 1996 14:27:25 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191827.OAA20173@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 14:23:49 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: esalmas Subject: LAST KNIGHT To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1753 Status: RO X-Status: This is the first time I'm posting to this list so please forgive any gaffs. SPOILER SPACE So much to like, so much to hate in this episode. LaCroix's dialog was some of the best I've heard and I liked the way it all comes full circle. I wondered why he was delivering it from Nick's loft rather than CERK. Rather than rehashing things I've read on the list -- some questions -- not that I expect answers from anyone -- just that they bugged me. Where in the hell was Tracy's family as she lay dying? I missed the episode with her mom and dad but didn't get the impression from the spoilers that either of them had died. So wouldn't they be there at the hospital? The time line is too accelerated for all the action. Tracy couldn't have been shot and had surgery in a time frame that would allow Nick to visit and sit with her and it still be the same night -- not to mention his conversation with Reese about losing a partner and then the entire scene with Natalie and LaCroix. Am I missing something? Was it more than one night? So much for foreplay. Natalie asked him to make love to her -- not go right for the throat. He's shown more affection for people with whom he's only had a passing acquaintance. Maybe it was just me being disappointed that there wasn't a "love scene" since Nick sure can kiss and I wanted *something* nice to remember. Could have used something that would have brought on the desire for a cold shower rather than the need to mourn the passing of lots of "good friends." Saturday nights just won't be the same for me without FK to look forward too -- at least new episodes. I need to digest this some more. Eileen Salmas esalmas@gnn.com "The truth is out there. It's just not in my jurisdiction." From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 14:58 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id OAA24521 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 14:58:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 25583C5D ; Sun, 19 May 1996 14:58:47 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191858.OAA24521@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 12:01:37 +0000 Reply-To: redjasper@earthlink.net Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Lisa Wolters Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight--challenge! To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 941 Status: RO X-Status: Black humor follows... * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * We inadvertently came up with a new game at Tami's last (k)night in trying to find Cheesy Rationalization that could bring Natalie back to life. Someone (Jane?) suggested that since they brought LaCroix back by simply stating that he was "too old and powerful to kill," maybe they could do the same for Nat. So this is my challenge--complete the following bit of dialogue for "About Last Knight...", the fourth-season opener where Nat appears back at work in the morgue, with no explanation. (Yes, I'm very happy living here in Denial Land. Won't be my neighbors?) Natalie: "I'm simply too ______ and _______ to kill." My offering: "I'm simply too overcaffeinated to kill." (yeah, I know, it's only one adjective, but it's my game so I can break the rules!) Play nice! Don't know about you guys, but need the distraction! Lisa W. * redjasper@earthlink.net From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 15:05 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id PAA25683 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 15:05:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 1DC8B368 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 15:05:44 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191905.PAA25683@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 15:03:16 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Gehirn Karies Subject: Re: SPOILER: Last Knight/Fallen Idol To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 3334 Status: RO X-Status: I want to thank Lisa-Marie in Beautiful East Providence for the LK wake. It was fun to see that video we didn't see, and the Oatmeal commercial. AAAACCCK! No wonder Nigel could deliver the "Let's get naked" line without spewing his ribena. He is a bloody chameleon. Okay, before I spend my entire afternoon and supply of coffee beans reading all the spoilers for Last Knight that I have carefully avoided, so I could ENJOY the show.... Hah! Pipe dream! I can't say I'm stunned, more like STUNG. Ouch. Here's my take. First off, Nat, gal pal, this is the nineties. If you're going to have sex bring protection. If you're going to have sex with a guy one generation away from Mad Cows disease, BYO cattle prod. (Barbed wire could be fun too.... And a bell.) Secondly, Nat, didn't you read "Physical Therapy" by Ophelia? Sex with an infected guy has to be thought out, or you're ... DEAD! Sheeesh! Now, if LaCroix staked Nick, his blood would cascade over Nat, she'd Vamp out, pull out the stake and voila. Nick brings her across without doing it "intentionally". Perfect form for Nick. My other rationalization is that LaCroix scewers Nick, packs him for the trip, calls 911 for Nat who is "On the brink" which could mean anything, really, coming from LaCroix. There ya go. Now, to get the claim ticket for that luggage.... If a bit of Nickies blood could temporarily restore Joey's brain in FA, then why wouldn't the same woman who thought of injecting Joey suggest a little dose to Tracy? Especially when the usually unwilling donor was quite willing? That baffled me. It was immaturity by TPTB, "Okay obsessed FK fans, you don't like our new gal? You live with her destruction! There! Is that what you wanted?" Ah ... no. This type of situation should obey the same moral code as finding a member of your staff has a substance abuse problem. Lisa gets a chance to join a weekly crash program in acting, a support group for the fashion challenged (What the #@%$ was that light blue turtle neck all about?) and a one on one coach to work on Javier. Hav e air. Hav e air. Has he hair? I digress.... The same diction-miester could have helped GWD with com-pos-it. Tracy had some fine moments, as did Urs and Screed and that other guy. I feel for all you guys who came on third season because of these characters, you don't deserve to be trifled with so mercilessly. It's why the rest of us were so bitchy all season, 'cept upside down and backwards BTW: Amanda Rules. (She would have had a net thrown over Dawkins ASAP.) Don't the bloody Canadian Cop-shops have tranquillizer guns? HEY! Where were his $%# darn handcuffs? J. H. Chr$%&! First they all miss the fact that the Commish doesn't like chocolates, and NOBODY calls to thank him and catches a clue, then the strings Rockin' zombie glides into the interogation room with a weapon, and now this. Sloppy cop shop Reese. I gotta go call my little sister, ya never know when you could loose your favorite far-too-easy-to-bait and tease-gun toting-cop loving-red blazer wearing-Barbie doll-blonde.... TPTB in Real Life aint any less evil than TPTB of FK, eh? Eeeew.... Massive spontanious morbid brain drain. See you all in hell. Gehirn Karies SoulDebris@aol.com "Fortunately, there are exceptions." LaCroix, AtA. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 15:22 EDT 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id PAA27979 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 15:22:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.79860DA0@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; 19 May 1996 15:18:46 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191922.PAA27979@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 15:16:08 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Arletta Asbury Subject: Re: SPOILER: Last Knight--challenge! To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 435 Status: RO X-Status: At 12:01 PM 5/19/96 +0000, you wrote: >Black humor follows... >* >* >* >* >* >* >* >* >* >* >* >* >* >* >* >* >* >We inadvertently came up with a new game > >Natalie: "I'm simply too ______ and _______ to kill." > >My offering: "I'm simply too overcaffeinated to kill." >(yeah, I know, it's only one adjective, but it's my game so I can >break the rules!) > My suggestion for Nat would be the obvious: I'm too much in love to kill. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 15:29 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id PAA28893 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 15:29:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 638D4888 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 15:29:09 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191929.PAA28893@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 12:20:33 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: K Swanson Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1160 Status: RO X-Status: Cynthia writes: >Tracy: No Nick should NOT have trusted her. Witness how she was >killed: by walking directly into the line of fire when Nick almost had This is interesting. I took her 'You should have trusted me' line to mean trusted her with the knowledge that he was a vampire, as she has just witnessed him vamping out. If she meant it about being a cop, agreed, he shouldn't have trusted her. ('I'm a good cop' just doesn't ring true....) >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. Oh, and as for "how can you do >this for Tracy and not for me", Tracy was DYING. Nat was still alive and >healthy. Figure it out! Plus, I think it was easier because he didn't 'love' Tracy, so if it went wrong, there would be guilt, but not Nat-sized guilt. >Then there is the "sex" scene. If you can call it that. Janette became >mortal because she and Robert MADE LOVE. Nick fed. Exactly! I'm screaming at the TV for him to do MORE than feed. Take her to the bedroom at least.... Karyn Swanson kswanson@direct.ca From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 15:33 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id PAA29810 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 15:33:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id DB242DA4 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 15:32:30 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191933.PAA29810@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 15:18:29 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Melanie Moser Subject: Re: LAST KNIGHT...or maybe not... To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <199605191719.NAA12103@mail.Clark.Net> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1806 Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 19 May 1996, Michelle Mark wrote: > I know I'm in the minority, but I really liked it. It brought up some great > issues-faith, life after death, love, and how it all relates to being a > *vampire*. I need to watch it again but here are my initial observations. > It made sense to me to end the series this way. LC was right about several > things: Welcome to the minority! Since I saw LK several nights ago, I was beginning to think I was the only one that liked it. There's a growing number of us. I think those of us that like it do for pretty much the same reasons, those you mentioned. > > I have a small problem with the Nick/Nat scenario. I believe she has truly > loved him all these years, but I was never convinced he was in love with her, > therefore, to me, this ending seemd a bit ridiculous. I can see Nick dying > for Janette but not Nat. They should have developed the relationship a bit > more over the past 3 seasons. That part just didn't move me. As I've watched the show over the years, I've come to think that Nick loves her, but is cautious about letting himself feel too much more, realizing that she's mortal and there's little chance of a relationship between them (unless a cure is found). I think this season there appeared to be less of a relationship between them due to the distance Nick placed between them after BMV. They probably could have hinted at how they still felt about each other a bit more during this season, before leading up to this episode (a hug or two a little more often, right Dotti?) (Can you tell I'm a Nick&Natpacker?) The old romantic in me believes that Nick and Nat are each other's true love. Mel Moser N&NPacker, moser@clark.net Check out my Forever Knight Fan Fiction page at: http://www.clark.net/pub/moser/fkfanfic.htm From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 15:59 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id PAA02598 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 15:59:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 8F34B85C ; Sun, 19 May 1996 15:59:01 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191959.PAA02598@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 15:30:34 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Chana Rossman Subject: Last Knight Re: vampire tears To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 429 Status: RO X-Status: >We've seen vamp tears on FK before--sometimes clear, sometimes not. No >consistancy in it, but that's hardly surprising. > >Karen I'm planning to ignore the inconsistancies myself. As far as I am concerned, the clear tears in Last Knight signified something very special. I am much happier that way. This is not an end, but a new beginning! Chana bonney@interpath.com * I have been one acquainted with the [K]night * From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 16:00 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id PAA02633 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 15:59:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 92FA1AC2 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 15:59:07 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191959.PAA02633@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 15:38:17 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Gehirn Karies Subject: Re: SPOILER: Last Knight--challenge! To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 506 Status: RO X-Status: Jane, Lisa, Tami-Heidi-Buffy party goers started: >Natalie: "I'm simply too ______ and _______ to kill." I'm simply too full of faith and love to kill. Aaaaccckkk! I'm simply too ornery and drenched in formaldehyde to kill. I'm simply too horny and soaked to the skin to kill. I'm simply too torn between Nick and LaCroix to kill. >Play nice! Uh-uh. >Don't know about you guys, but need the distraction! Yup. Gk SoulDebris@aol.com "Stop it!" Nat, popcorn scene. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 16:00 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id QAA02650 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 16:00:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 93998963 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 15:59:08 -0400 Message-Id: <199605192000.QAA02650@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 12:38:32 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Cynthia Hoffman Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <199605191928.MAA03467@violet.berkeley.edu> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1389 Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 19 May 1996, K Swanson wrote: > Cynthia writes: Actually, that was Cynthia and Jane, but we digress. > This is interesting. I took her 'You should have trusted me' line to mean > trusted her with the knowledge that he was a vampire, as she has just > witnessed him vamping out. If she meant it about being a cop, agreed, he No. We took that line to mean that he should have trusted her with the knowledge that he was a vampire. We simply disagree completely. Tracy has never given Nick any reason to believe that she's trustworthy. Her behaviour as a cop is simply emblematic of this. If he is going to judge her by anything, it has to be by this. > Plus, I think it was easier because he didn't 'love' Tracy, so if it went > wrong, there would be guilt, but not Nat-sized guilt. Again, we disagree. Nick doesn't love Nat. He never, ever, ever said that he did. We have seen 70 episodes, and he never said it once. Not even in Be My Valentine. Nick was willing to bring Tracy across to save her life. His actions weren't provoked by thought, but by instinct. If Natalie had been the one lying on that hospital bed (and dying as the result of someone else's actions), he probably would have done the same thing. Cynthia and Jane Cynthia Hoffman/choff@violet.berkeley.edu Jane Credland/janes@interlog.com Raven ** IB ** MBDtK We cater to the occasional fetishist From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 16:00 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id QAA02813 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 16:00:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id ACE03ABA ; Sun, 19 May 1996 15:59:50 -0400 Message-Id: <199605192000.QAA02813@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 12:41:37 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Ida K Egenberger Subject: Re: SPOILERS: LAST KNIGHT Rationalizations! Get your red-hot rationalizations here! :> To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <9605191825.AA22914@watmail.ucr.edu> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1203 Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 19 May 1996, Cynthia Hoffman wrote: > Did some of you see a different episode to the one we saw? Or are you > subconsciously (or consciously) ignoring the scene in the hospital where > Tracy was laid out on a gurney, a nurse covered HER face (and it was > recognizably Tracy's face) with a sheet, and she was wheeled out. I haven't really thought about how Tracy died until reading the posts about it this morning (I had all night to think considering I couldn't fall asleep). But now that I recall the scene with Tracy being wheeled out and the cover put over her face it reminds me of I Will Repay after Nick had just brought Richard across and they were wheeling him out of the room. It could happen. What disturbed me about Tracy's injury and death is that her parents weren't there to be with her. It would have been a nice time to actually show the police commissioner even if it were only at a distance. From what has happened with these past episodes, do we think it's a good idea to ask the PTB for a movie? If we do get it we'd probably see the downfall of the entire vampire race, everyone dies, they'd bring back Stonetree to kill him off. Ida Egenberger egenberi@watserv.ucr.edu From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 16:05 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id QAA03533 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 16:05:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 65A578A6 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 16:05:00 -0400 Message-Id: <199605192005.QAA03533@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 16:00:45 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Arletta Asbury Subject: Re: (spoiler)LAST KNIGHT...or maybe not... To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2155 Status: RO X-Status: >So the question remains..did he stake him? I really don't think so. He >probably whacked him upside the head, and brought Nat across. >Did it seem like a lot of this episode was dream-like? The echoing voices, >slo-mo, etc? When I first saw this ep, I hated this ending because IMHO the most like scenario is for LC NOT to stake Nick. They both would leave Nat lying there dead, pointlessly, and LC would drag Nick off to be his travelling companian again. I just can't believe LC would be so altruistic as to kill Nick just because Nick wanted it. I would like to thank whoever first pointed out on the list the tears issue because it let me justify in fanfic a whole new ending that isn't so depressing, at least to me and a few others (thanks all). However, after seeing the ep twice (and the last 10 minutes twice more besides that), I now think that the real ending may be something really cheesy. As in DALLAS and the dream eps, the real ending here may be that the whole ep of Last Knight may have been Nat's nightmare. 1. LC is pictured as being evil as Nat sees him, not as Nick sees him especially after the love and respect shown in Ashes to Ashes. 2. Nick kissed Nat (on the hair) as a sign of affection at the scene of the investigation and in front of other cops and co-workers. Nick NEVER shows affection for Nat in front of their co-workers. He is always professional in his attitude toward her before others. (at least in the eps that I have seen.) 3. The wavy dream-like shots of LC with no apparent explanation, slo-motion sequence inside the police station, and the general dream-like quality of this ep that a lot of others have commented on. 4. Nat just blurts out that she loves Nick. I was cheering, but she's avoided that before when there were other more suitable occasions for that declaration. 5. And finally it could have been Nat's subconcious warning her not to trust a guy who is basically suicidal. (If you're an immortal vamp and want to become mortal and live maybe 40 more years only, then from that POV he's suicidal.) There are just my opinion and I could be wrong. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 17:21 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id RAA13097 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 17:21:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id FE2016E9 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 17:13:42 -0400 Message-Id: <199605192121.RAA13097@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 14:05:24 +0000 Reply-To: redjasper@earthlink.net Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Lisa Wolters Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1572 Status: RO X-Status: I promise I'll go away today after I post this... * * * * * * * This episode really is like a traffic accident, isn't it? You can't bear to look, but you can't bear not to. :) Amidst all of the things that I hated, will hate tommorow, will hate next Tuesday, next month, next year, etc., I have to point out three extremely powerful moments that I loved that will not stop haunting me: 1. The look on Nick's face as he and Natalie are clasping hands (after she tells him that she loves and trusts him--which Cynthia and Jane pointed out is exactly what he craves), and then the look on his face as he looks down, then looks back up vamped out, not scary at all, but full of love, trust and faith. That was poetry. (Though I sure as h*** could have lived without everything that happened after that bit.) 2. Nick on bended knee with the wooden stake held next to him like a sword, with LaCroix next to him. A knight about to take an oath, indeed. I can't get that image out of my head. That was beyond poetry. I held my little self together amazingly well last night, but I completely lost it at that point in the scene this morning when I watched my tape. I'd ask someone to make a gif of it, but then I'd burst into tears at my computer every time I looked at it. 3. Tracy sliding down the wall. As much as I've poked fun at the character, as as many stupid things as she's done, as much as I don't think she should have known what Nick was, that moment broke my heart. Unlike Vachon's death in AtA, Tracy's had impact. Lisa W. * redjasper@earthlink.net From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 17:22 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id RAA13208 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 17:22:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 28DF6A6F ; Sun, 19 May 1996 17:14:53 -0400 Message-Id: <199605192122.RAA13208@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 14:01:18 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Patty Winter Subject: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1953 Status: RO X-Status: Cynthia and Jane write: Tracy is definitely 100% dead. They pulled the sheet over her head. Hey, this is television. Nothing is 100% definite. :-) Especially in a show that has immortal characters! If someone called Sony tomorrow and said, "Hi, we're a big company and we want to sponsor an entire season of Forever Knight [or a made- for-TV movie], only we want Tracy and Natalie back," you can be darned sure that the FK writers would find a way to explain their reappearance! Okay, so there probably won't be such an angelic intervention. But if there's more FK in some form in the future, and if there's a compelling reason to have one or both of those characters around [in contemporary time, not flashbacks], it would happen. It wouldn't have to be a "Dallas"-type dream explanation as Arletta mentioned. Someone at Tami's party last night offered a scenario whereby Vachon rises from the dead and rushes to the hospital to bring Tracy across. Hey, all those hospital folks thought that Nick was dead, too; they've been fooled before! :-) Well anyway, the proper forum for *how* that could happen is FKFIC-L. I'm just trying to point out that it *could* happen. And knowing that it could is making my reaction to "Last Knight" ambiguous. If this were a show where people always died definitely, I would be sad to see Natalie dead. But knowing that she might turn up again in the future just leaves me with a "que sera sera" feeling. Patty p.s. I just realized that I unconsciously wrote this message on the assumption that only two recurring characters had died. I guess I'm assuming that Lacroix didn't stake Nick. Or more accurately, if the show never comes back, he did; if the show does come back, he didn't. :-) ========================= patty@wintertime.com ========================= Support "Due South"! If you're a fan, let CBS know ASAP! =========================== Sunnyvale, Calif. ========================== From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 17:24 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id RAA13462 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 17:24:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 862AB788 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 17:17:30 -0400 Message-Id: <199605192124.RAA13462@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 21:04:11 GMT Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Jamie Melody Randell Subject: SPOILER: last knight: Natalie. To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 6099 Status: RO X-Status: Last Knight diatribe follows. A r e W e S t i l l D o i n g spoiler space? Well, better safe than sorry. Nat has a life. But it's a life that, for six years, has had a vampire in it. Imagine the implications. No close friends, because she can't afford to get too close; she's keeping too many secrets. She can't tell her pals about the guy in her life who won't commit, because what if she accidentally says too much? She works odd hours, night hours, always on call, because she's the only one Nick can call when there's a crime victim with two little holes in the neck, or some problem in the vampire community that only a human can solve. And slowly but surely over the course of those years, Nick and his vampiric nature have taken over more and more of her existence, of her thoughts, until there's no room left for anything else. She's lost people she loves, she's lost and lost and lost until the only thing left is Nick; and though he's there in her life, a part of her life, ALL of her life at times, he's not *really* there; there's always that wall between them, that barrier which their love can never cross. So when her friend Laura Haynes dies (yeah, guys, real subtle -- kill the fan club president in effigy -- maybe FORKNI-L was Dawkins' middle name, so you could kill us too? Verrrrry nice. We love you too. Watch your backs.) after the destruction wrought by Divia, after Schanke, after Tracy, after all the pain and loss and horror, Nat decides that dammit, she wants more than just the pale shadow of love; she's tired of the excuses, and the distance, and the endless hoping without any tangible results. And she has faith in Nick, poor girl: she believes in him, and she should know better, since you can't believe in someone who doesn't have faith in himself. And it should be noted that to my knowledge, self-preservation instincts have never been a Natpack characteristic... "Brave but stupid" -- good words for Natalie. Who else dares to face down a starving vampire, a sick vampire, a vampire who could mop up the floor with her? She does what she thinks is right and doesn't think too much about the possible consequences; has a deep, unconscious faith, I think, that if she does the right thing, somehow the evil won't touch her or harm her... despite all evidence to the contrary. And so, feeling alone, having lost so very much, she reaches out -- having seen the 'miracle' of Janette, having heard the wonders of bloodlust from Nick, and knowing that she's stepped too far into the world of the vampire, of loving the vampire, to ever go completely back to the sunny world of mortal innocence, she reaches out to Nick; knowing in her heart that he won't betray her, that he won't hurt her... Except that he does. Or maybe he doesn't. I gotta say, they really did make this more ambiguous than I'd thought from the script. But dammit, if they were going to be ambiguous, they could have been ambiguously HAPPY. Where was the blood? Nick's always been a sloppy eater. And how do we know Nat was dead? Because LC said so? DID he ever say so? (Channel 55 screwed up the sound on last night's LK showing, so I've only seen it once, and don't remember the exact dialogue.) And even if he did... when did LC achieve this miraculous reputation for never telling a lie? Nick... well, he didn't know the difference between Janette vampire and Janette mortal; we're gonna trust HIS word that he "took too much"? Like he would **know**? Something else. Nick brings people across like some people change their underwear. He brought Janette back across, something Nat has to have at least surmised; he was willing to bring Tracy across, but not Natalie, not even to save her life?? This has gotta be having an effect on Nat. I mean, it just doesn't compute: he brings people across because he loves them, or because he feels guilty about their deaths. So if he's unwilling to bring Nat across, that must logically mean that he doesn't love her, right? So the whole thing turns into an issue of "if you love me, you'll bring me across", REGARDLESS OF HOW NAT ACTUALLY FEELS ABOUT BECOMING A VAMPIRE. I don't think she wants to be a vampire -- but I think she needed to know that Nick would be more willing to give her that, than to let her die. So oddly enough, I find this episode in character for Natalie. Acting on impulse, from emotion and from caring, the same impulse that led her to begin her association with Nick in the first place, when she could've just kept walking; and to help out all his little vampire buddies, without thought for her own safety -- she can be that kind of reckless for Nick's benefit, but not for her own? But Nick chickened. Faced with the erroneous belief that Natalie was dead (she's not, says the Webgoddess matter-of-factly) he opted to join her in death -- the safe, easy, cowardly way out -- rather than brave the dangers and difficulties and challenges of eternal life together. One might argue that he "did what was right", others that he "did what he rationalized was right"; all I know is that death is always easier than life, and that's why it's never the right answer to ANY question. In any case, I think Nat's reactions were rather realistic, that same 'brave but stupid' thing that's propelled her through six years, and everything just finally coming to a head. Which has nothing to do with how I feel about the episode, nor how I feel about TPTBs reasoning behind this episode. I just feel that this ep wasn't as misogynistic as some think. And I like the idea that Natalie finally stood up to Nick and said, "Enough!" -- and that anything that might have gone wrong from that point forward is really Nick's fault. :-) {{{{{{{{{{{{{{{Hugs}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}} for the spoiler list. -- -:-:-:-:- Jamie M.R. -:-:-:-:- Asst. Listowner, FORKNI-L; The Smoking Natpacker, ConvCoS -->>> Illustrated Webgoddess & Keeper of Warm Fuzzies <<<-- ** List Rules ** The Truth Is Out There. Just maybe not in our jurisdiction. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 17:29 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id RAA14101 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 17:29:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 1704A12D ; Sun, 19 May 1996 17:28:42 -0400 Message-Id: <199605192129.RAA14101@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 14:21:47 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "Diana L. Edwards" Subject: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 3190 Status: RO X-Status: SERIOUS SPOILERS AHEAD After watching this episode three times, I have to join the minority group that liked it. In the end it would have been impossible for TPTB to satisfy every viewer with the last episode. I *do* like the LC from the last two episodes very much. I do not think that LC was out of character. I *love* the interaction between Nick and LC in the last two episodes and I do find myself wanting so much more, but I do not want a Forever LaCroix. The only single instance where I have felt anything for Tracy was in her dying words: "You could have trusted me." Then the look on Nick's face. Ouch! This scene was well done. Play it against Nat's last words: "I trust you." It has always been my personal opinion (because in my mind, regaining mortality is out of the question and Nick won't bring her across) that one of two things would be a believable ending for Nick and Nat. 1) Nick runs from Toronto and doesn't look back 2) Nick kills Nat. I never wanted her to die, but IMO, this was almost inevitable from the start. It is a very poignant statement -- Nick killing Nat -- when you consider what she represents. (whatever you think she represents; mortality, love, food, etc.) Nat 'knew the risks when [she] signed on.' (Her own words.) Nat fell in love with a Vampire and that Vampire killed the Mortal who loved him. Nat admitted she knew that Nick might kill her and he did it like he has killed many Mortals before her. (I use the words Vampire and Mortals, not man and woman.) I'm not saying that Nick did not care for Nat. I truly think he did. In the end, he did tell her: "You can not deny what I am." Nick knows that Nat can never afford the luxury of denial. This is Nat's final warning --*Nick gives her an out*-- and it is a warning she refuses to heed. As for the end, I do not think that LC kills Nick (whether he stakes Nick is another matter) because LC loves Nick, knows that Nick doesn't want to die (or he would do it himself) and would essentially be committing suicide by killing Nick because Nick and LC can not live without each other, IMO. Add to that LC's 'life is a gift' theme. Nat has a slight chance of becoming a Vampire at this point, IMO. I don't think it would be out of character for LC to bring her across, but he may decide not to do so. Most of this ep seems to be time filler and events don't unfold as well as they could have, IMO. The Nick and Nat scenes were kind of wham, bam, thanks, but no thanks. However, the last scene with Tracy, last scene with Nat and every scene with Nick and/or LC were so well done. The direction was excellent. LC's monologues had the feel of a pendulum ticking away the final moments. (Notice the back and forth motion.) The final dialogue between Nick and LC really, really got to me. I've waited three seasons (ok, a year and a half) for that and it did offer this episode its own redemption. It is my belief that this ep had to end on a down beat. FK is ultimately a tragic show. I would not have been happy with a happy ending for it, and all-in-all, I like what we got. Just my opinions. Thanks for listening. ~~Diana (Cousin) frisson@ix.netcom.com From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 18:06 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id SAA19087 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 18:06:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 49A1559A ; Sun, 19 May 1996 18:05:55 -0400 Message-Id: <199605192206.SAA19087@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 15:01:02 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Karen Stortz Subject: About "Last Knight" ... (long) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 9559 Status: RO X-Status: Last Knight Spoiler space: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I won't see this ep til tonite, but I've been reading the spoilers and debates. I'm confident that the performances will be excellent: this is a great cast of fine actors who nearly always make the very most of the material they are given. A fine performance, however, can only cover for bad material to a somewhat limited extent. And from what I've read, the material is pretty bad. It's rather tacky that Tracy finds out about Nick at the end. Knowing about Vachon doesn't automatically give her that right, in my not-so-humble opinion. Schanke was a far better friend to Nick than Tracy was; if anyone had the right to know about Nick before dying, it was he, not Tracy. I can't believe what I'm reading about the way Natalie is written in this one. She believes not only in living, but in living as fully as possible. Sure, she panics when she thinks the world is coming to an end in AMPH. That's why she wants Nick to bring her across. Her fear of Spark came from the realization that he would <> her instead of bring her across. Her telling Nick that he was right not to bring her across was based on knowing that the world wasn't coming to an end: living as a vampire would be limiting (avoiding daylight, fear of discovery, sterility, etc.) compared to living the human life she had before the scare. Even so, she tells Nick she doesn't know what she wants. I CAN believe her wanting Nick to bring her across so they can be together, and perhaps she felt that way to some extent even after the meteor scare. After all, the progress she's made in her work to reinstate his mortality has gone slowly, and sooner or later, he'll have to move on. This ISN'T a case of living without Nick being worse than death (I groan at the mere thought of the silly sentimentality, the negative image of a woman being incomplete and having a meaningless and empty life without a man, and the horrendous and irresponsible suggestion made in the show that suicide is the answer to lonliness). If Natalie was written true to form, it would be a case of living as a human without Nick being more limiting than living as a vampire with him. I can't see her accepting death as an alternative, much less saying it to Nick. Natalie would also be the first to tell Nick that bringing her across wouldn't be an end to the search for mortality, but the means by which to continue it. Natalie finds logical arguments to back up what she's doing, even when her true reasons are emotional ones, so I find it surprising that I've seen nothing to indicate that she does this. Natalie is VERY resourceful. She's natually patient, ironically, far more so than Nick. Nick isn't the only vampire Natalie knows, nor is LaCroix. She's no longer suffering from end-of-the-world panic. And she probably met at least half the TO vamp community when she treated them for "lab rat fever." If she wanted to become a vampire in order to be with Nick and he refused, she'd find someone else, plan it, wait until s/he owed her a favor and knew it, and do it (she knows they're not all like Spark--we've seen in Urs that they don't ALL run around killing with abandon). Then, regardless of whether she expected a good or bad outcome from it, she'd find Nick. I don't want to argue about whether Nick's actions are in or out of character because the truth is, an arguement can be made for either case. I WILL say I think they cop-out on us. My take on it is this: I can't see Nick so totally losing control that he nearly kills Natalie, all so suddenly. Self-control is Nick's strongest vampiric skill, and he's better at it than a lot of others who are a lot older and more experienced. Realistically, it would make a lot more sense if he ended up killing her slowly, the way he did that gal in the flashbacks in whatever that forgettable episode was. Janette's secret was that she needed less and less each time: Nick could manage it once or twice, but he'd end up wanting more and more rather than less. He's far more possessive than Janette, so her cure couldn't work for him. Even the way they wrote it with him losing control all at once, why the heck doesn't he just bring her across? The fact that we've seen him do it for casual acquaintances and strangers so often, but that he refuses to do it for Natalie, makes him come off as a complete twit. The situation with Tracy is the clincher. Think about this: he feels responsible for Tracy being shot, so he's WILLING to bring her across. He IS responsible for Natalie, but he's NOT WILLING to bring her across. He cares for Natalie, so he CAN'T bring her across. But Tracy's his partner, and he cares for her, so he WANTS to bring her across. Nick isn't the "Last Knight" in this ep, he's the Psychotic Knight! And consider this: Natalie might cast herself and Nick as the characters while she reads her Emily Weiss novel, but in NIQ, the dream of Natalie begging Nick to take her, him making love to her and bringing her across, <> in the background--that was NICK'S dream, that's HIS suppressed fantasy. Seems odd that when he finds himself living it, he's so suddenly (and inexplicably) able to turn off, in mid-stream, the very vampiric temptations he was so fully ingulging in. Regarding the often-lamented lack of foreplay: that's unforgivable in most contexts , in this case, from a story POV. If we could SEE them starting to become, uh, involved (they wouldn't even have to remove any clothing if it was done well), if we could SEE him becoming aroused at a far faster rate than she, then we'd have some context for believing his loss of control. For him to just bite and afterwards say, "opps, gee, I couldn't stop" is about as believable as a politician's campaign promise. It's a given that if Nick DID bring Natalie across, it would forever alter their relationship. Their interactions would become MUCH more complex. OR If Nick did manage to take only a little, then more the next time, etc., it wouldn't take Natalie very long to figure out what was going on. Interesting to think what their reactions to that situation might be. Would Nick, unable to trust himself with her, move on, suddenly, without warning, and without saying good-bye? Or would he want to bring her across and give into the vampiric temptation to keep taking more and more, on and on, without end? Would Natalie still want him to bring her across? Or would she be so shocked that she'd want to break away from him permanently? Again, their relationship would suddenly become MUCH more complex. In fact, these kind of character interaction questions are far too complex to deal with in any single episode. And THAT, boys and girls, is the REAL CHEAT. TPTB knew they were cancelled. They knew they needed four more eps to complete the season. Once they knew they were going to make those last four, they could have given us (and SHOULD have given us) an arc. Yes, I KNOW arcs are harder to strip, but they wouldn't even HAVE anything to strip in the first place if it hadn't been for the fans, considering that the show was in danger while still in its first season, at the end of its first season, and the end of its second season. The fans kept it alive, and the fans deserve some kind of decent closure. If TPTB wanted to bring the Nick/Nat situation to a crisis point, they could have started it three episodes earlier while Reese was hunting for his serial killer. I for one, refuse to debate whether some little reaction shot or other in an earlier ep was a set-up for the events in "Last Knight"; as far as I'm concerned, that's just reading into it after the fact, and it certainly does NOT constitute an arc. A REAL arc is too obvious for anyone to miss (such as the events leading up to Delen's transformation or Londo's association with Mordan on B5). Putting an arc in at this point would hardly make any difference now, anyway. The original rationale for not doing so was so that the eps could be stripped without any regard to any need for sequence, but the three seasons are so radically different from one another that they have to be kept in some sort of order anyway. If TPTB had wanted a true arc, Nick and Nat could have started the slow route I mentioned earlier, perhaps even with some promise of success early on. If not that, one might have confronted the other and, they should have at least begun considering their options. Or, they could have made it look as if there was going to be some success with bringing Nick back across, and a failure of it working could have triggered some of the events in the last ep. What I CAN'T ACCEPT are the contrivances devised to end everything in a single episode, or the hopeless and negative attitudes in the way they end it. I'm venting now, because I probably won't care enough to want to write about it after I've seen it. I heard spoilers for things I thought were ghastly in past episodes, but actually seeing it was worse. Yeah, I'll probably watch it tonight. I'll probably tape it, just to complete my collection, if for no other reason. I'll probably put it away and never watch it again. Then I'll probably start wondering how JMS plans to wrap up this season on Babylon 5. Anyone want to make any bets about whether Sheridan is Valen, and whether he'll morph into a Mimbari or part-Mimbari (the way Delenn morphed into a part-human) before he takes Babylon 4 back into the past? Karen From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 18:09 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id SAA19452 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 18:09:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id CF9F5530 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 18:09:40 -0400 Message-Id: <199605192209.SAA19452@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 15:07:42 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Amy Rambow Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight, Accepting It To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2411 Status: RO X-Status: I've been reading the spoilers for hours, and I'm still not caught up. I hoped that I could resist posting until I saw what everyone else had to say, but you all know how that goes. :) One part of me feels like snarling at all the Cousins and Ravens. That's awful, isn't it? And unfair. But every time I read something dismissive, I get closer to plunging off the deep end of insane, irrational -- even "snarky" -- Nick-defense. I will let my hero die. I will not allow him to be damned. As yet, in my reading, no one has discussed what seemed obvious to me -- that the whole episode was a flashback loop (ironic: Nick's own personal Hell -- his memories). All of the commentary from LC was delivered to Nick, as he lay on the floor of the loft with the stake through his heart. Nick was 800; he should survive a decent interval with a stake in his heart (look how far LC got in NiQ). LC was attempting to convince Nick to ask him to remove the stake, to save him. Nick chose to follow Natalie into that other eternity. And LC, who has always, since Fleur, defined Love in the letting go, had to let Nick die. You all may rationalize away the deaths. I won't stop you. I'll even help. I have three scenarios for Tracy and two for Nat already. And saving Nick has no *logistical* problems whatsoever. But, philosophically, I have to accept this ending, these deaths. I want to hate this episode, but all I can hate are TPTB for making it such that I can't hate it. True Love and Faith -- that's what I've always asked from the show, and that's what they gave us here. All of the characters went out in the best part of their natures -- Tracy, the good cop; Natalie, the generous woman in love; Nick, in a declaration of faith. And LC, in giving up Nick, as he gave up Fleur, was finally also true to the best of his character as I understand it. I know I'll have more to say after I've seen the episode again, after I've copied out the dialogue, after I've read all of your posts. (Just to start with, they gave us Nat's birthday as April 14, and defined the "six years" of Nick's stay in Toronto.) But I can see no way out of the deaths that preserves their nobility. I asked for closure, and they provided it. D**n them. *** Amy, Lady of the Knight (akr@mail.nwlink.com) *** "Now cracks a noble heart. Good night, sweet prince; And flights of angels sing thee to thy rest!" -- W.S. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 18:10 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id SAA19611 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 18:10:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id F20CA70A ; Sun, 19 May 1996 18:10:37 -0400 Message-Id: <199605192210.SAA19611@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 18:01:39 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Chana Rossman Subject: Last Knight: Blurred images explanation To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 805 Status: RO X-Status: Hey, just had a sudden insight. (I don't think anyone has suggested this one...) Throughout the episode we see blurred images of LaCroix's oratory to Nick. We don't know what quite to make of them because of (1) their dreamlike quality and (2) the perspective from which they are shot. We are not looking at LaCroix from Nick's perspective. In fact, we see Nick in some of the shots. What if we are viewing all of this from Natalie's perspective? She is laying on the floor. The shots are all sort of shot at an upward angle. She is semi-unconcious (at least) which would explained the blurred, dream-like quality. I'll have to go back and watch it yet again to see if this idea really works. But hey, it's a theory! Chana bonney@interpath.com * I have been one acquainted with the [K]night * From owner-fkfic-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 18:20 EDT 1996 Received: from allison.clark.net (allison.clark.net [168.143.0.3]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id SAA20897; Sun, 19 May 1996 18:20:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from allison (allison.clark.net [168.143.0.3]) by allison.clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) with SMTP id SAA20818; Sun, 19 May 1996 18:20:47 -0400 Message-Id: <199605192220.SAA20818@allison.clark.net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 18:20:54 -0400 Reply-To: Maryann Jorgensen Sender: Forever Knight TV show stories From: Maryann Jorgensen Subject: The Shower LAST KNIGHT SPOILERS(kind of) To: Multiple recipients of list FKFIC-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1853 Status: RO X-Status: They're NOT DEAD! They're NOT DEAD! They're NOT DEAD!**stamping of feet** NOT, NOT, NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Pam walked down the hall. She couldn't believe Bobby had been dead for a year (ya, tell me ya don't know where this is going) Pam paused, hearing the shower, she didn't remember turning it on. She walked into the steam filled room. It was hard to see as she pulled back the shower curtain to shut the water off. "Hi, honey." Startled Pam looked into the wet face of Bobby Ewing. "Want to join the party?" It was then that she noticed all the others in the shower. "I want you to meet some new friends of mine." Bobby pointed to the others, but whispered to Pam "It's starting to get a little crowded in here." Louder he added, "This is Don Schankie and Amanda Cohen - they're cops. God! Schankie, do you have to eat that slovaki in here! The bald headed guy sucking on the rat is Screed and that's his friend Vachon. He just joined us last week. The blonde's name is Urs but she seemed pretty "dead" to the world when she joined us. Pam looked at all the people in what was becoming an increasingly small bathroom. "Oh and these two joined us "Last Knight", The lady is Dr. Natalie Lambert. And the blonde guy," Bobby followed Pam's gaze. "HEY! Pam, back up here!" Now that he had her attention back(where it belonged), "Like I was saying the blonde guy's name is Nick..." Maryann - the Knightie with a Nattitude majorge@jax-inter.net Still grinning like a fool from the memories of seeing Ger wearing "cherry" boxers. * Knightie, Natpacker , N&Ner, Paris-ite, Janewayan * ******************************************************************************** And I have a life ... really ... it involves blond gorgeous men and art pencils. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 18:46 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id SAA23832 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 18:46:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id EAF3C4F1 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 18:31:54 -0400 Message-Id: <199605192246.SAA23832@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 18:29:48 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Arletta Asbury Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 627 Status: RO X-Status: >Nick was willing to bring Tracy across to save her life. His actions >weren't provoked by thought, but by instinct. If Natalie had been the >one lying on that hospital bed (and dying as the result of someone >else's actions), he probably would have done the same thing. > No, he wouldn't that's the whole point. He is willing to save anyone else's life EXCEPT Natalie's by making them a vampire. He is not willing to SAVE her life by that means. Nat called him on it at the hospital, and rightly so. His claim that it's for her own good - not to suffer the darkness strikes me as just plain wrong-thinking on his part. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 18:49 EDT 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id SAA24206 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 18:49:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.65CC7020@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; 19 May 1996 18:45:49 -0400 Message-Id: <199605192249.SAA24206@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 18:48:41 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Stephanie Babbitt Subject: Last Knight spoilers & reaction To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2402 Status: RO X-Status: First off, I agree with Sharon B. that I would have been much worse off seeing this alone. Thanks to the Atlanta FK contingent for staying up all night! At the viewing (allusion to dead bodies intended), Sharon observed that she would have been bawling a week ago but after LK felt like she'd been hit over the head. So did I, and I RESENT IT! I started out feeling drained, went into the next day miserable, and now I'm getting mad, which is probably better for my productivity. I wrote my own next-episode scenario, complete with sarcasm and tongue-in-cheek references, and I'm about to post it to the FIC list (look for "Last Knight Plus One." I feel immeasurably better now. That said, I'm still mad. I'm mad at the following people for the following reasons: * I'm really, really mad at the writer (Sadowski?) for shoving this bit of heavy-handed moralism down our throats and for writing most of the characters SO OUT OF CHARACTER! And was using Lora's name for the suicide supposed to send the fans a message about the ultimate outcome of our SOS-FK efforts? * I'm mad at GWD for agreeing to direct this ep and for jerking us around so completely. It's probably not rational, but it's there. * I'm mad at most of the cast for accepting the distortion of their characters. I read that CD insisted on playing Nat in BMV differently than the script called for because it was so out of character. But this! Natalie suicidal? Nick considering bringing Tracy across? LaCroix giving Nick *choices*? What is this world coming to? It's almost like everyone just wanted to be done with it and get the hell out of there (which may not be too far from the truth). *I'm mad at myself for caring this much. That said, the acting was incredible. CD portrayed Natalie especially well. In BMV and NiQ, it almost seemed that she was doing the love scenes with Nick reluctantly. Here, the passion was real. Nigel was awesome as always, even given lines that to me had no place anywhere near LaCroix's lips (a *peach*?). The way GWD reacted when CD touched his face gave me goosebumps. Lisa Ryder did a great job. There now, I've said something nice. Be looking for the Atlanta quote list. At least we had fun before, during, and after the carnage. And as I kept repeating at the party: I'm not giving up. The show must go on. The show will go on. Taking deep breaths, Stephanie (now and always a Vaquera) From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 18:49 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id SAA24227 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 18:49:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 69035F78 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 18:49:45 -0400 Message-Id: <199605192249.SAA24227@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 17:31:54 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Margie Hammet Subject: Re: Spoilers: Last Knight, Fever and blood tears (long!) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 594 Status: RO X-Status: At 05:11 AM 5/19/96 -0300, l.d. steele wrote: >Forever Knight has been inconsistent in the matter of tears. Serena in >"Baby, Baby" seems to cry blood tears at the end, but... I distinctly >remember Nick crying once before in his loft and it wasn't blood. In Stranger Than Fiction, it seemed to me that Nick had tears in his eyes in the tag, and they weren't blood. 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. Margie (treeleaf@io.com) From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 20:17 EDT 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id TAA04483 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 19:59:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.1E2BE7F0@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; 19 May 1996 19:55:24 -0400 Message-Id: <199605192359.TAA04483@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 19:56:14 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Carrie Krumtum Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 616 Status: RO X-Status: > He is not >willing to SAVE her life by that means. Nat called him on it at the >hospital, and rightly so. His claim that it's for her own good - not >to suffer the darkness strikes me as just plain wrong-thinking on his > part. And who says that when you love someone so deeply that you can't even define HOW deeply for yourself that you 'think rightly' about them. I believe that Nick's love for Natalie placed her in a category all by herself. Literately. Carrie, Slovenly Knightie AKA Carrie the Cruel CKrumtum@gnn.com It's hard to judge someone when you're blinded by your love for them. --Mother Teresa From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 20:18 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id UAA04905 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 20:02:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 799D18B9 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 20:01:47 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200002.UAA04905@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 19:58:20 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Carrie Krumtum Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 923 Status: RO X-Status: >Natalie is dead. When confronted by Lacroix, Nick clearly said that he >would not "condemn her" to a vampire existence. Lacroix then said "wise >decision". Lacroix is not going to bring her across either because he >agrees with Nick. I don't think we can make this leap. What LaCroix says and what LaCroix does are almost ALWAYS two different things. He has an agenda of his own. I would not put bringing Nat across past him. Nor would I put allowing her to die past him. I do not feel his character has evolved to a stage, at least for this set of circumstances, that anyone can even guess what his agenda might be. His love for Nick could motivate him in either direction, so could his feelings about mortality, vampirism and the state of his own soul. Just MHO. Carrie, Slovenly Knightie AKA Carrie the Cruel CKrumtum@gnn.com It's hard to judge someone when you're blinded by your love for them. --Mother Teresa From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 20:35 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id UAA08823 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 20:35:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 2FD170D5 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 20:35:31 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200035.UAA08823@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 17:15:52 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Amy Rambow Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight, edging off topic To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 711 Status: O X-Status: We used to complain about this season leaning too much toward "Forever Vetter," and "Forever LaCroix" has become the slogan of the wishful. I may have been spending too much time with a certain irreverent Vaquera , but it occurs to me that "Forever Janette" is a much more plausible scenario. :) More seriously, does everyone recall that filming ended on Ash Wednesday? Well, today, the day that most of us saw LK in the wee hours of the morning, is Ascension Sunday (at least on the west coast of North America, but that's another story). *** Amy, Lady of the Knight (akr@mail.nwlink.com) *** "Now cracks a noble heart. Good night, sweet prince; And flights of angels sing thee to thy rest!" -- W.S. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 19:28 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id TAA29092 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 19:28:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id A4B318C8 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 19:27:12 -0400 Message-Id: <199605192328.TAA29092@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 16:21:59 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Karen Stortz Subject: LK -- clear vs. blood tears To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 302 Status: RO X-Status: If anyone wants to believe he became human, ok, so be it. As far as I'm concerned, we can believe almost anything we want about this ep, but the tear arguement just doesn't wash. Go back and re-watch the flashbacks in "Bad Blood." Janette is crying. She is a vampire. The tears are clear. Karen From owner-forkni-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 19:20 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id TAA28157 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 19:19:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 9CCFCD72 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 19:19:49 -0400 Message-Id: <199605192319.TAA28157@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 15:58:11 PDT Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show Sender: Forever Knight TV show From: "Leslie I.Plummer" Subject: IF YOU WANT A 4th SEASON, PRESS HERE!! To: Multiple recipients of list FORKNI-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 8577 Status: RO X-Status: I, too, had a bad night after LK. I cried & yelled out (almost woke up the building) at certain points. But, I had to channel this immense energy into something positive. So, with the love of Nick, the faith & trust of Natalie, & the (ultimate) compassion of LaCroix (though NO spoilers here), here's what I offer to the FK masses as some... positive revenge! THANKS TO ALL THE FKers out there who have brought us the second season, these lists, spoilers, fic, internet organization, crane campaigns, all the factions/affiliations, the cons, the LK parties, NAFTE stormtroupers, etc. We wouldn't be here w/o YOU! Our humble & sincere thanks! But, this is the next dawn & we're still here & so is our dream! I suggest at least one way we can take back what is OURS (the future of FK)! So, if you're pissed, lost, depressed, lost, out of tissue, out of chocolate ... here's a few things WE CAN DO: ***FIRST*** BE GRATEFUL TO THOSE WHO HAVE HELPED US (& help them to continue to do so): =========================================================================== WRITE/CALL/EMAIL "Thank You" notes, complements, & requests to the stations which have run FK eps this year (other than USA). Many of these are one- station independents. They all LOVE love letters for the FCC file (comes in handy for 3-year license renewal). This feels much better than spending energy on nastygrams to the old PTW (powers that were!). (Write to the cable companies which carry SciFi, too!) ***NEXT*** BE AN IRRESISTABLE FORCE! ========================= *WE* are the Powers That Be! This is a case of Supply & Demand (classic capitalism). The networks & production companies don't care about quality or art. They care about profit, predictable return-on-investment, & new markets. The way networks & production companies find/decide on their new line-up is either someone has a bright idea & the marketing research backs it up, or there's a hole in the schedule & whatever is the Most Sure $$$ Thing gets to fill it. That's a TV fact. But, what can we do? We (the "Demand") must speak louder & to more people & not give up UNTIL our "Demand" is recognised & answered, on OUR terms. We are lucky. We don't have to invent the method; we just have to follow it! For all those Star Trekkers & other save-quality-TV groups before us, we salute you. Face it, Forever Knight has NEVER had any real promotion or merchandising developed. We have no Paramount, no Gene Roddenbury, or J. Michael (B5) to focus or give direction to the energy we all feel right now (& forever). But, we can still gather the demographics, the marketing research, the numbers, etc. BECAUSE of the Internet, these lists, & our refusal to settle for nothing less when it comes to Forever Knight! We are a force to be reckonned with! We can do it from the ground up! THINK LOCALLY, ACT GLOBALLY (for FK)! ===================================== 1) Gather information, analyse it into terms & stats which TV folks CANNOT ignore. We are the surest thing I've seen, but we & the stations which air/ed the show are scattered. Someone wrote that one reason the ratings were listed as lower than we know is that the eps were aired on so many different channels. SO, LET's GATHER & UNIFY UNREFUTABLE STATS OURSELVES! 2) Do the same for merchandising demographics. But while we're at it, let's determine what WE want to see produced & marketed (not some cheesy marketing guy's idea of the cheapest knock-off slime for $$$). Watch SCIFI's Anti-Gravity Room & other shows. They always have segments on cool stuff from this show or that creator/author. We must speak loudly & in unison & they'll have to come. (The profit motive can be more compelling than even Janette's gaze!) 3) Find a NEW home for the 4th season &/or movies: Yes, the PTW still have copyrights, but they will sell to the highest bidder or cave in if the "Demand" is truely undeniable. And, there ARE visionary, sympathetic, folks w/$$$ who would be interested in the show &/or merchandising. We just have to find them & be real convincing & peristent. WE CAN ALL DO THESE THINGS! Let me be the first to volunteer. Again (to borrow from Babylon 5's homepage & success -- yes, the "FK by other authors" was great & look what we produced!) I believe we need to gather viewing stats & a list of stations which air/ed Forever Knight. I will gather & compile these & provide to the list so that we all can write nice notes to them & so that newbies can have this resource THIS SUMMER! Please participate in the survey below: FOREVER KNIGHT VIEWERS/VIEWING POLL 5/19/96 =================================== ======= Please take a moment to answer these questions. The more responses, the more compelling our case becomes! LURKERS, I'm counting on you to participate, too! International responses greatly welcomed! Anyone willing/able to translate this survey into German & send to German viewers, please do so & let me know! To cut down on the swell of (post-LK/FK trauma stress relief) list traffic right now, please a) send your response to me privately (lplummer@interlink.com) b) send your response AFTER June 1 (I may be on jury duty & don't want my email/PC at work overloaded while I'm gone.) ABOUT THE STATIONS WHICH BROADCAST FOREVER KNIGHT IN YOUT AREA: --------------------------------------------------------------- 1) On what (non-SciFi) TV station(s)/channels do you/did you view Forever Knight? Pls include: --station name & channel/frequency --city/state/country from which station originates --owner, company name, contact --station address & telephone number (if you can look it up) --what type of station (independent, network (which), cable, etc.) 2) On what day/time do/did you watch FK on these stations? 3) Have you ever contacted your station about FK? About any other show? 4) Do you know if these stations will continue to run FK? How long? 5) Do you know if these stations have email or a website? If so, what are they? 6) Is Cable TV service provided in your area? Pls provide company name/ address info, as above. 7) Does your area Cable TV company provide SciFi Channel? When will it? 8) Do you have cable service? 9) Do you pick up FK via satellite? Please provide info. ABOUT YOU & YOUR AREA: ---------------------- 10) In what city/state/country do you live & how far is it to the station/provider on which you view FK? 11) How long have you been viewing Forever Knight (what season)? 12) Do you currently swap tapes w/other viewers (indicates desire to see other seasons, etc.)? 13) How old are you? What gender? What occupation (generally)? FOURTH SEASON QUERIES: ---------------------- 14) Would you be satisfied for a 4th Season of FK to be same characters, but different actors portraying them? (sorry, gotta ask) 15) If not, which first 5+ actors would you ABSOLUTELY have to have back for you to view/support the new season? (pls list in order, 1=most) 16) Would you view/support the 4th season if same characters were set in another city? THANKS! Please send this to me after June 1, either by email: Subject: FK TV Survey or snail mail: FOREVER MEANS...FOREVER: 11980-J Little Patuxent Pkwy, Columbia, MD 21044. Feel free to take the time to gather your station's info from the phone book, etc. if you can. This will greatly aid the compilation of data. I plan to have this data compiled for inclusion on the FK homepage (web god/des(ses) permitting) by July 1. Please copy this survey & hand it out to your FK friends/newbies for them to reply, too. I will keep adding new survey inputs to the stats for all to see. YOU HAVE THE POWER TO MAKE THIS DIFFERENCE! Thanks for letting me indulge in my positive revenge. It certainly helped w/today's sun scorchings (on top of tears!). Think of other ways you can contribute to the reality of FK continuing! I am also posting a merchandising survey (much shorter). "One always recognises family"... I thank you all for being here! p.s. How about we all do a Game of Clue movie take on this last ep. CLUE had three different & equally legit endings for the movie. How about the pilot of the 4th season being another (& MUCH BETTER) rewrite of Last Knight (maybe "Last Night"?) Leslie ***FOREVER MEANS...FOREVER*** N&NPacker... Wildly Romantic & Fiercely Optimistic A Fourth Season sort of gal From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Fri May 17 03:21 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id DAA00053 for ; Fri, 17 May 1996 03:21:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 72D05663 ; Fri, 17 May 1996 3:07:30 -0400 Message-Id: <199605170721.DAA00053@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 03:04:43 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Marian Gibbons Subject: Re: Spoilers: F/AtoA/LK (long) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1972 Status: RO X-Status: Dear All-- There are so many eloquent people on this list! Dear Catherine Siemans-- thank you for your very kind comments. Heavens! Disagree with my opinions all you like. (I do, often.) Dear Karen Stortz-- Thank you for identifying so clearly so many of TPTB. It is quite helpful to know who was responsible for what. I aim my responses toward Parriot because I believe he's the boss, and has the final say on what gets done, and because the functions of the other creative people in charge of stories are less visible. Your post helped make some of that invisibility go away. Thanks. and when you said: <...they've come full circle in a way we never expected; depicting a triumph of despair and loss over hope, and failure where there should have been success is perhaps a more true reflection of the series overall...> I wished said something half as concise. Dear Laurie Fenster-- You're right, too. Different season fans like different things about the show. My expectations were formed on "Nick Knight" and "Dark Knight" (and "Cherry Blossoms" -- my very first viewed FK ep.) My lack of ability to accept the live Lacroix because of the story issues his resurrection brings up for me didn't stop me from enjoying watching Ger and Nigel bring their interactions to life. They were always good together--even when I laughed when I shouldn't... I'm sorry to have been on this one-note kick for so long. I just kept feeling like I was yelling "Watch out for that train! Watch out for that--" (Wouldn't you know, I had a time watching the haunted house ep, too...) Dear All-- and despite my moaning and groaning, I will always be grateful to FK for the stimulus (hey, I always knew what day of the week I was in in relation to 'air-day') -- and the horizon broadening (who knew Brabant was so interesting?) -- and the camaraderie here (you guys are amazing!) Thank you for your patience. I'll shut up now. Marian Gibbons starbase5640@genie.com From soulseek@sprynet.com Fri May 17 17:00 EDT 1996 Received: from m2.sprynet.com (m2.sprynet.com [165.121.1.99]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id RAA05041 for ; Fri, 17 May 1996 17:00:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [199.174.149.108] (dd07-108.compuserve.com [199.174.149.108]) by m2.sprynet.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id NAA18485; Fri, 17 May 1996 13:57:06 -0700 From: soulseek@sprynet.com Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 13:57:06 -0700 Message-Id: <199605172057.NAA18485@m2.sprynet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: N&N loop (LK - no spoilers) To: asnelson@indiana.edu, acapozzi@wellesley.edu, AMORG@aol.com, egardner@facstaff.wisc.edu, CKrumtum@gnn.com, jclemens@world.std.com, bonney@interpath.com, Claudius@NETRIDE.COM, criss@marlboro.edu, fiorini@MARYWOOD1.MARYWOOD.EDU, dgthomas@ix.netcom.com, phase3@gate.net, dottir@wsii.com, efriedm1@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu, ILCzJules@aol.com, jasonl@cnwl.igs.net, shalott@chattanooga.net, dukarsja@udmercy.edu, RICHARD@iclnet.co.uk, jtfolden@erinet.com, Baigneuse@aol.com, lplummer@interlink.com, LoriArgyll@aol.com, lydiam@singnet.com.sg, d_Roberts@msn.com, moser@clark.net, catspaw@cruzio.com, rfulton@directnet.net, swells@phoenix.atticus.com, TGill10669@aol.com, valworth@aol.com X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.10.06.22 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Length: 1918 Status: RO X-Status: <---- Begin Forwarded Message ----> Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 16:32:29 -0400 (EDT) From: Melanie Moser To: soulseek@sprynet.com Subject: Re: N&N loop (LK - no spoilers) > > > <---- Begin Forwarded Message ----> > From: ILCzJules@aol.com > Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 13:24:23 -0400 > To: soulseek@sprynet.com > Subject: N&N loop spoilr LK > > Season nor Series Finale.-- Which leads me to whatI saw on FKSPOILR > 5-16-96.--This was apparently accurate, per Laurie, who says she's seen LK. I > read the entire Last Knight episode. we're talking word for word (12 printed > pages). If it IS shown as was written there.. it ends much more resembling a > cliffhanger than a wrap.--If that be, my dear souls, hope for resurrection is > TRULY an option. The fight MUST continue! Illinois Jules > > <---- End Forwarded Message ----> > I saw LK last night. Right afterwards, I responded to Laurie's Spoiler where she detailed most of the important dialogue from the episode. I usually don't post about episodes, but felt I had to here. It took me several hours to write it (Who needs sleep when FK is ending?), but in lieu of some of the cries of distress and negative comments about LK so far, I felt I had to respond. As a devoted N&Npacker, let me just say "I really liked this episode". I have a feeling I'll be in the minority. For those that have not seen LK yet, let me warn you. Watch it with an open mind and heart. It may take you several viewings to make up your mind on how you feel about it. I'll keep this short. If anyone not on the FKSPOIL list would like a copy of Laurie's spoiler posting and/or my response to it (my opinions about some of the key moments in the episodes), send me an email. Mel Moser N&NPacker, moser@clark.net Check out my Forever Knight Fan Fiction page at: http://www.clark.net/pub/moser/fkfanfic.htm <---- End Forwarded Message ----> From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Fri May 17 17:03 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id RAA05867 for ; Fri, 17 May 1996 17:03:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id B4367385 ; Fri, 17 May 1996 16:16:44 -0400 Message-Id: <199605172103.RAA05867@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 05:00:00 EST Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "Cork, Lisa A." Subject: Thank You for the LK details (SPOILERS) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 576 Status: RO X-Status: THanks alot for the details of the LK episode. Just reading the quotes from the episode posted the other day brought tears to my eyes. I really didn't know how I was going to make it through until tomorrow night! Well, I can't say too much except I am EXTREMELY unhappy.........But at least I know what to expect. Also, I can always dream that Nick stops LC just before the stake hits him and decides to bring Nat across...In my mind they will always live happily ever after..... Well..Off to the store to by a big box of kleenex...30 and 1/2 hours and counting..... Lisa From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Fri May 17 18:02 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id SAA19502 for ; Fri, 17 May 1996 18:02:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 9F63818D ; Fri, 17 May 1996 16:51:57 -0400 Message-Id: <199605172202.SAA19502@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 15:16:57 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Sarah Welsh Subject: Re: SPOILER: LK Details (Warning: LONG) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <9605170824.AA24428@dfw.dfw.net> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1099 Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 17 May 1996, Melanie Moser wrote: Regarding Natalie's loneliness: > The one thing that > changed that was when Nick entered her life. (Come on, she > remembers the exact date!). Of course, it *was* her birthday, which probably had something to do with it. I'm guessing you haven't seen first season? :) Only the Lonely -- one of the best eps ever, imho. Regarding Nat's belief that death isn't the end: > A very interesting insight into Nat, seeing as she has had trouble > believing in ghosts and reincarnation in the past? In second season's Near Death, she stated very clearly that she believes there's an afterlife. Regarding a too-quick moment: > (I hope someone will tell us if the Canadian version is different here?) Okay, everyone, repeat after me: There were "Canadian versions" only in the first season. Since FK was taken off CBS, all versions of FK have had the same number of minutes, no matter what country the episode is being shown in. Well, that's gotta be my quota of spoilr posts for today.... One more day till I see it for myself. Sarah welshkin@dfw.net From jclemens@world.std.com Fri May 17 19:08 EDT 1996 Received: from europe.std.com (europe.std.com [199.172.62.20]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id TAA03585 for ; Fri, 17 May 1996 19:08:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from world.std.com by europe.std.com (8.7.5/BZS-8-1.0) id TAA27439; Fri, 17 May 1996 19:08:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: by world.std.com (5.65c/Spike-2.0) id AA29712; Fri, 17 May 1996 19:06:15 -0400 Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 19:06:15 -0400 (EDT) From: John Clemens Subject: re lk spoiler To: moser@clark.net Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Length: 203 Status: RO X-Status: Hi Melanie, I would like a copy of that spoiler & your response.I'm hoping it will give me some perspective if I start crying my eyes out :). Thanks, CATHARINE NICKNATPACKER MORTAL OR OTHERWISE . From jclemens@world.std.com Fri May 17 20:48 EDT 1996 Received: from europe.std.com (europe.std.com [199.172.62.20]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id UAA18690 for ; Fri, 17 May 1996 20:48:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from world.std.com by europe.std.com (8.7.5/BZS-8-1.0) id UAA10617; Fri, 17 May 1996 20:48:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: by world.std.com (5.65c/Spike-2.0) id AA11829; Fri, 17 May 1996 20:47:24 -0400 Date: Fri, 17 May 1996 20:47:23 -0400 (EDT) From: John Clemens Subject: Re: SPOILER: LK Details (Warning: LONG) (fwd) To: Melanie Moser In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Length: 390 Status: RO X-Status: Hi Melanie, Thanks for sending me the spoiler & your response. I heard a little about the Romeo & Juliet ending. How is it different from this one? I'm not responding to what you sent me until I actually see LK, but I was kind of hoping to hear Nick tell Natalie "I LOVE YOU".It sounds very well written otherwise. THANKS AGAIN, CATHARINE NICKNATPACKER MORTAL OR OTHERWISE . From owner-forkni-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sat May 18 11:19 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id LAA20200 for ; Sat, 18 May 1996 11:19:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 4A800EC9 ; Sat, 18 May 1996 11:19:06 -0400 Message-Id: <199605181519.LAA20200@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 10:18:14 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show Sender: Forever Knight TV show From: Lady Sushi Subject: LK parties tonight: IRC address To: Multiple recipients of list FORKNI-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1428 Status: RO X-Status: I hope enough of you get this in time. I would have posted it earlier, but work and plotting my party and the V:tM I'm playing in next week has really bogged me down. Well, the LK party caht IRC address will be #LKparty18. Just join the channel. If I'm not already there, I'll show up eventually (as Tulsa). If you're having a party, please use the name of your city as nickname; if you're just on to see what's happening, most likely your listname would be best. I'll try to be on by 8:15 CST, although it could be as late as nine. The channel will stay on as long as there are people willing to stay on (I should be there until at least two, with a lull between 12:30 and 1:40, due to Last Knight). Looking forward to seeing as many of you there as possible. Also, I would like to announce my next FK party, date tentative. It's for the first episode of the fourth season. My place, more than likely still Tulsa, and we WIIL have more Ribena (and, in the 4th-season ep case, champagne or the like). Shall talk to you all later, must sleep now. I wouldn't want to crash at my own party, now, would I?... * Cousin "Susan" Phoenix * Camera Fanatic of the Thong Throng * LA * * Charter Unnamed * Cold Shower Sisterhood * SKLed Miklos * Darkest Knightie * * NatPack Sympathizer * Queen of I Need Sleep * Hot Flash Disguised as a Woman * phoenix@ionet.net **Faciemus ut Dewus Mountainus e Tuo Nasone Exeat!** From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sat May 18 11:31 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id LAA22011 for ; Sat, 18 May 1996 11:31:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 01D95703 ; Sat, 18 May 1996 11:31:23 -0400 Message-Id: <199605181531.LAA22011@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 11:30:44 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "Margaret L. Carter" Subject: Re: Spoiler: LK (end) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 3796 Status: RO X-Status: I find this episode credible right up until the final scene. It makes sense that Nick and Natalie's feelings would come to a crisis after forcing themselves to stay apart for so long; now Nat is faced with the suicide note and Nick with the loss of Tracy, esp. when he thinks it's his fault (again!). Natalie is making sense, at last! (If only Nick would listen.) Not everything is his fault, his good deeds ARE making up for his earlier crimes, their love can conquer adversity, and it's better to be together (even as vampires with the hope of a cure, maybe, in the future) than to renounce that love. Nat has every right to demand closure. Nick's final request to LaCroix seems (to me) perfectly in character, since he's a world-class virtuoso of guilt and despair. LaCroix's apparent character change, as some conceive of it (and dislike): I see it as a maturing process. Imagine spending almost 2000 years as a one-note "evil" hedonist. Also, I agree with the person who suggested that the first-season impression of LC as totally evil comes from seeing him through flashbacks in Nick's memory. When we see him in the present, (a) he has had time to change; (b) we see the real person rather than the "devil" Nick's memory has created. Hey, I absolutely loved the redemption of Darth Vader! Now, back to the climax of LK: Nick's reaction to his draining of Nat seems entirely in character. Right down to his failure to stop and think that suicide (which is what his request to LC amounts to) is far from a guarantee of reunion with one's beloved in the hereafter! The strict doctrine of the Catholic faith in which he was brought up would send him straight to Hell for suicide. At the very least, he should expect several millennia in Purgatory. That's a long time to wait for a reunion. However, I do not think killing him would be in character for LC. So I don't believe LC goes through with it. At first I visualized LC driving the stake into the floor, to give Nick a good scare and wake him up to the reality of what he is asking for. Then I decided that wouldn't be strong enough. I visualize LC staking Nick, then removing the stake shortly after (he could also use a dose of blood to restore Nick to "health"). Meanwhile, having resigned himself to the fact that Nick just is not going to let go of Nat, LC transforms her (he said she was on the brink -- there is no direct statement that she has died at any point). Then, when Nick regains consciousness, he has experienced another near-death ordeal, which ought to sober him up -- and he now has the *fait accompli* of Nat as a vampire, LaCroix's "gift" to him (just as Nick was LaCroix's gift to Janette, apparently). The responsibility of teaching her should get his mind off his guilt, and Nat's steadying influence will keep him from backsliding into killing again. Yep, that's how I see it. Of course, Janette is out there somewhere. The rivalry between her and Nat-as-a-vampire could get a bit awkward for Nick. Not to mention Nat's status as LaCroix's "child" rather than Nick's. I doubt that LC has completely gotten over his drive to control his family. I loved watching Nick and Nat declare their love -- finally! That's what I've been waiting through the whole series to see; too bad we had to wait for the very end. And I also think Nick should have spent some time on foreplay. Maybe that's why he has a bad track record with self-control. He needs some guidance -- know anybody who performs vampire sex therapy? (Maybe I should refer him to my character Roger, a psychiatrist who's a vampire.) And I wish Tracy had been able to know about Nick before the instant of her death. Overall, though, I do have to agree that this is the most depressing series finale I have ever seen. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sat May 18 13:23 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id NAA06329 for ; Sat, 18 May 1996 13:23:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 6551A197 ; Sat, 18 May 1996 13:21:33 -0400 Message-Id: <199605181723.NAA06329@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 10:17:55 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Cynthia Hoffman Subject: Re: Spoiler: LK (end) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <199605181531.IAA23473@violet.berkeley.edu> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1698 Status: RO X-Status: We've now watched this twice ... both of us (Jane's here too) liked it a lot, and have been reading the spoiler posts with great interest. Just a brief response here ... more later, I'm sure. On Sat, 18 May 1996, Margaret L. Carter wrote: > Meanwhile, having > resigned himself to the fact that Nick just is not > going to let go of Nat, LC > transforms her (he said she was on the > brink-- there is no direct statement > that she has died at any point). Others have said this before. Why would LC do this? He says to Nick "Wise choice." That doesn't sound to me like a man who's going to look at Nick and say "oh well, sonny boy wants it so I guess I'll bring her across." On the other hand, if LC did do it, Nick would have to explain to Nat why the last thing she got from his blood was his clinch with Janette ... not to mention why LC had to do it instead of Nick. I mean Nick doesn't ALWAYS have trouble stopping, now does he? > I loved watching Nick and Nat declare their love -- finally! That's what When did this happen? Having sat through this episode twice, I still haven't heard Nick declare his love to Nat. I heard her say he needed to love her the way she loved him ... he just said it was too dangerous. The other time he just stayed silent. Is this that subtext thingie again that I can never see? > the very end. And I also think Nick should have spent some time on foreplay. Yeah. Well they could have at least made it to the bedroom. Janette and Robert had clearly made love ... maybe that's one (of many) of the missing pieces. TTFN. Cynthia (with Jane) Cynthia Hoffman/choff@violet.berkeley.edu Raven ** IB ** MBDtK We cater to the occasional fetishist From owner-fkfic-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sat May 18 14:02 EDT 1996 Received: from allison.clark.net (allison.clark.net [168.143.0.3]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id OAA10729; Sat, 18 May 1996 14:02:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from allison (allison.clark.net [168.143.0.3]) by allison.clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) with SMTP id OAA09755; Sat, 18 May 1996 14:02:45 -0400 Message-Id: <199605181802.OAA09755@allison.clark.net> Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 14:02:11 -0400 Reply-To: Sharon Bhandari Sender: Forever Knight TV show stories From: Sharon Bhandari Subject: Re: Grief--AtA/LK SPOILERS X-To: Melissa Taylor To: Multiple recipients of list FKFIC-L In-Reply-To: <199605181730.NAA22837@graf.cc.emory.edu> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 950 Status: RO X-Status: Making some comments about Melissa Taylor's story but I might give away some stuff about Last Knight so here is some space: * * * * * * * * * * What a beautiful tribute to Tracy. I know it is about mourning Vachon, but she gives Tracy a grace of spirit that I wished we had seen earlier in the season. I was never a die hard Tracy fan, but I wanted her to be admirable and likeable for the sake of the show and Nick. I know that her character had the potential to be so much more and just when the writers have given her more depth, she is killed. Actually, it is in her last moments when she says "you could have trusted me" that I feel for her. The simplicity of the statement, and of Melissa's story, finally conveys a sense of character that is beginning to be rich and sensitive enough to balance the other, more turbulent people, on FK. Thanks Melissa:) Sharon Bhandari *Whew* I never post this much! Natpacker sbhanda@emory.edu From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sat May 18 23:36 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id XAA19447 for ; Sat, 18 May 1996 23:36:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 53530465 ; Sat, 18 May 1996 23:36:39 -0400 Message-Id: <199605190336.XAA19447@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 22:24:41 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Sarah Welsh Subject: vampire tears -- LK but no real spoilers To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <9605190254.AA17044@dfw.dfw.net> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 523 Status: RO X-Status: On Sat, 18 May 1996, Carrie Krumtum wrote: > Is there canon on the tear issue? I thought this was from the Anne Rice > novels that Fanfic had borrowed since we have never seen a vamp cry on FK. > Perhaps in the FK universe all the tears are clear. What sayist thou? Gotta admit, most of the examples I can think of are fanfic. :) We know that vampires *sweat* blood on FK. I really feel like we have seen a blood tear in at least one episode, but I can't come up with a name. Anyone else know? Sarah welshkin@dfw.net From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 00:12 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id AAA26242 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 00:12:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 49A78758 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 0:12:10 -0400 Message-Id: <199605190412.AAA26242@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 23:43:28 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Melissa Puzio Subject: Re: vampire tears -- LK but no real spoilers To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 558 Status: RO X-Status: Sarah wrote: >Gotta admit, most of the examples I can think of are fanfic. :) We know >that vampires *sweat* blood on FK. I really feel like we have seen a >blood tear in at least one episode, but I can't come up with a name. >Anyone else know? We saw Serena cry blood tears in "Baby Baby" after she killed Trilling and was unsuccessful in becoming pregnant and mortal Cousin Mel *NatVampCamp*Valentine*Chiante Drinking Member of the Thong Throng* *High Priestess of Jagrism at Temple Nedved* miss68@pgh.net, Penchk68@aol.com, or CousinMel@prodigy.com From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 02:05 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id CAA17836 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 02:05:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 1AC77066 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 2:05:24 -0400 Message-Id: <199605190605.CAA17836@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 01:04:05 +6 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Comments: Authenticated sender is From: Don Fasig Subject: SPOILER: LK: Damn! To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 438 Status: RO X-Status: I have not yet read any spoilers for this episode. Now that I've seen Last Knight I must post this before I do read any else I'll not get it out at all. Damn! Damn! DAMN! I've got a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach. Boy, when they put the kibosh on a series, they do it with a vengeance. They sure didn't leave us much wiggle room did they? Don Fasig Prepared to be convinced that it isn't as bad as it seems. phase3@gate.net From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 02:22 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id CAA20327 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 02:22:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 7B96C378 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 2:22:25 -0400 Message-Id: <199605190622.CAA20327@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 01:21:31 CDT Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "OREL, SARA" Subject: spoiler: LK To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: In reply to your message of Thu, 16 May 1996 16:00:03 CDT Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2754 Status: RO X-Status: I usually haven't been too worried about spoilers, but other than knowing in a general way what the show was about, I did avoid the spoilers this time around (and I am on digest, so to avoid LK spoilers and to read the AtoA ones has taken effort). I thought I would hate it, actually, and I didn't LIKE it too much, but I can accept it. I was comfortable with Nick's killing Nat, lying to her actually. It is in-character for him, all the way through, knowing better than the woman of the week what is best for her life. Disappointing that he applied this to Natalie, but really quite in character. I think he was considering bringing her across, but he just couldn't do it. Nor would he be able to kill himself, either, which is why he relies on Lacroix to do it for him. I am not sure how it would play, but I am pretty comfortable that Lacroix would not have done that -- it is time for Nick to take some responsibility for his own life, don't you think? It seems reasonable for the older one to simply turn and walk out, perhaps going to look for Janette? Anyway, if Lacroix did kill Nick, he might start to doubt his own standards (and tell me, who honestly believes that Lacroix was telling the truth when he said that he had seen too much to have faith? He looked as though he was lying, and we have seen him have faith prior to this point, haven't we? questioning, but having the faith to question) So tell me, what did Nigel say he thought happened at the end? And if everyone besides Lacroix (and Janette, too, by the way) is dead, then I really really really like the explanation that someone made of the "arc" of the show (I realize this is no Babylon 5, but there is nothing else like Babylon 5, so I just shrug and go back to normal tv), which is that there is no redemption, and the whole show is the triumph of dark and despair, and death being the only successful end, over the optimism and misplaced idealism of Nick's feelings about humans. Well it is late at night, summer finally (a long evening of wine under the stars), and the cat has discovered the neighborhood cats; they are howling at each other through the screens... Time for bed. As someone ended with Horatio's elegy for Hamlet, I suggest another: My rage is gone; And I am struck with sorrow. ... ... Beat thou the drum, that it speak mournfully; Trail your steel pikes. Though in this city he Hath widow'd and unchilded many a one, Which to this hour bewail the injury, Yet he shall have a noble memory. Aufidius on the death of Coriolanus. _Coliolanus_ Act V, Scene VI Thou hast done a deed whereat valour will weep. Sara Orel FA55%nemomus@academic.nemostate.edu From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 04:25 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id EAA00261 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 04:25:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id A8EB72EE ; Sun, 19 May 1996 4:25:23 -0400 Message-Id: <199605190825.EAA00261@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 04:23:23 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Marjorie Hammet Subject: Re: SPOILER: LK Details from Laura To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 594 Status: RO X-Status: >What say we just chalk this whole episode up to one of Nick's guilty dreams? >Or even LaCroix'? That's certainly one of my interpretations of it. At least the part starting with Nick coming back into the loft and finding Natalie there. More later, maybe, when I can stand it. If I can stand it. Sorry, Powers That Be, but you can do better than this. Margie (mgleaf@aol.com or treeleaf@io.com) (Apologizing ahead of time for what might be a duplicate post. The mail server for the on-line service I normally use for e-mail is down. I can send stuff to it, but then it just sits there.) From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 06:48 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id GAA07529 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 06:48:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 9CBDDBCE ; Sun, 19 May 1996 6:48:12 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191048.GAA07529@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 06:47:16 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Diane Shea Subject: Spoiler LK: Comments To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 6514 Status: RO X-Status: A Last Knight spoilers to follow: I fear this may be long. Keep in mind that I haven't read anyone's thoughts on this ep since Laurie's very detailed explanation of just what happens in it. BTW, I thank you greatly for doing that Laurie, it prepared me. If you don't want to hear a *positive* review of this episode then bail out now. I don't know what everyone else's opinion of this one will be, but I'm expecting it will be predominantly negative. Since I don't see negativism at this point to be in any way constructive, I'll attempt to find the good things that have been given us during Last Knight. As a pessimistic agnostic I probably have a rather different pov than a lot of people. I've always expected the worst. In ways it gives me strength to find the positive, instead of wallowing in the grief. I don't hate this episode. I find that it is beautiful, meaningful, and *not* to be ignored. My greatest fear of all is that it would be played out of character. I could forgive them *anything* as long as it made sense. It came close to the margin, but through the acting and direction, they pulled it off. I will not go into what I felt about what happened after the last scene ended. Since they left it arguably ambiguous you cannot in all fairness discuss the fates of these characters without beginning all sentences with "If we are to assume that..." In some ways that does annoy me, but at this hour I'm not going to worry about it. They chose to do it that way, and we can *never* say with certainty what happens after that last raising of the stake. Unless they make tv movies, another season, etc. Regardless of what may or may not have happened afterwards, what we saw, the emotions we were made to witness, was powerful. Everyone made sacrifices in this one: Nat chose to risk her life as a healthy mortal in order to make Nick into what he desires to be. She's prepared for whatever may come. She will accept whatever happens under one condition; that she be with Nick, either as a vampire, as a human, or in an eternity that can only be reached through faith. Nick has finally taken her desires to heart. He has gone beyond his fear for her safety to see what she truly wants. Now is the time for him to see this. Before, it was reasonable that he denied her. Her requests were made in moments of danger and emotion. But now he sees she is thinking rationally, and he would only be patronizing her if he brushed off her decision once again. He endangers her life at her request, and cannot be faulted for that. It is understandable that he failed in an attempt to do something of which there is no manual on. Just try to program one of these new VCR's for the first time without reading the directions and see how far you get. This is much like that. Janette was lucky. Nick has never been lucky. It's a shame. So Nick had a choice. Nat wasn't too far gone, she could have been made a vampire. But that would have been selfish perhaps. Perhaps not. I'm not here to judge. In fact I have little opinion on it. *He* felt it would be wrong. That's all I can go on. So given his feelings he made an honorable choice. But he had a promise to keep, and a soul to appease. He needed to join Nat. And this brings me to LaCroix. If you've not noticed in the last few episodes that LaCroix and Nick have been getting along much better, then you've missed something very important. Go back and discover this before your next viewing of LK. It's rather crucial to full circle effect of the series. Anyway, LaCroix has not changed in very many ways since Dark Knight, except one. One earth shatteringly important change has occurred within his character. It is not that he suddenly cares about Nick. He has always cared about Nick. The Cousins knew this all the while, the Knighties have been denying it adamantly (as is their job,) but it is impossible to maintain a one dimensional view of LaCroix any longer, upsetting as that may be to some. The great difference in the LaCroix of Dark Knight, and the LaCroix of Last Knight, is that he cares not only about Nick as his possession, son, brother, lover (the list can be endless) but that he cares about what Nick *wants*. LaCroix is a selfish bastard most of the time. But that makes his sacrifice all the more stunning. Ah, here come the "ifs". If he went through with what we saw him planning, (staking Nick at his request,) he has given to mortality--to the side of a power greater than he is--his own beloved son. The son he has worked for centuries to keep as his own. The son who he would fight the devil for, and for whom he would acknowledge the possible existence of God. Not an easy task for an ancient Roman vampire. LaCroix, like Nick did for Nat, has finally taken the feelings and needs of the one he loves seriously, even though it means letting him go. And frankly, this says a hell of a lot about love, about faith, and about how selfish bastard vampires can change over time. This is a very simple commentary, but I'm listening to Gravity Kills at 3:00 am and I don't want to get too deep in my mind or I might not get back again. Closing statements: The acting. Superb. I was trying not to cry so my vision wouldn't be blurry and I wouldn't miss things. Too bad that didn't work. If Nigel doesn't win another Gemini for Ashes, and Ger and Cathy don't win some more for LK, then something is truly wrong in the world. I felt the pain and agony that Nick was going through as those tears welled up in his eyes. I'm amazed that Ger can both direct and give such a moving performance all at once. Damn fine actor. The direction. I was *really* worried about the problems that Ger's infamously creative direction might cause in the last of all eps, but I found I had no great problem with any of it. The fact that the last episode is sad, and will probably disturb many a fan, does have a positive side too. It almost consecrates the whole series. Everything that has gone on previously cannot be taken lightly. There is no easy answer to the problems of life. This show did not take the happy sunshine road to glory. It would have made me happier if it had. I like a happy ending, strangely enough. But I am more moved by what they did here, through the sacrifices that everyone had to make. It is tragic, classic, timeless. I truly love all these characters. Selfish bastard Cousins can change too you know. --Cousin Diane Truly Eternal Seducer From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 08:46 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id IAA13917 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 08:46:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 26A0B137 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 8:46:35 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191246.IAA13917@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 08:44:35 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Catherine A Siemann Subject: Re: Spoiler LK: misogyny To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <199605191048.GAA16971@mailrelay1.cc.columbia.edu> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1976 Status: RO X-Status: I G U E S S T H I S is still necessary, huh? A one-note spoiler, since I have not even *begun* to process my feelings about this episode. Bless Laurie CF for throwing a large wonderful LK party -- the recovery process was a lot easier that way. But . . . So Nat's life is empty . . . why? She has a fascinating job, in which she gets to feel of use to society. She has friends (yes, we never see them unless they're about to be killed off, but she was godmother to somebody's child, and enough of her friends/colleagues pop up in order to die that unless it's completely disproportionate, she must have many more), loved ones (at the very least a surviving niece and sister-in-law), etc. Oh, but . . . no man. Of course, the fact that she's been "waiting" for the unattainable Nick all these years is probably a major factor in this. I just don't buy it. Nat has no life unless Nick becomes her lover? A woman's life is incomplete without a man? Oh, and, lest we forget . . . meeting the right guy was all it took to make Janette human again? That strong, in-control vampire we all knew and loved *really* just wanted to be a wife-and-mother? Look, I'm not opposed to love and romance, I understand the great happiness that relationships can bring, and I think that a lover, a family *can* be a central and meaningful part of anyone's life. But I find something deeply offensive in the underlying thought process, here. Nat was in shock over her friend's death, and she let it get to her. She was also dealing with her feelings for Nick and her frustration that his "backsliding" since first season, and particularly this season, was taking them further from the possibility of his cure that she seems to have been banking on. But I do not, cannot, believe for one moment that Natalie had "no life". And the Natalie we've seen for most of Forever Knight had too much self-respect to think that either. Words fail me. Catherine cas47@columbia.edu From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 10:11 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id KAA21097 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 10:11:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 01881513 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 10:11:27 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191411.KAA21097@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 10:07:29 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Larissa Field Subject: SPOILER: ATA/LK Question To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 551 Status: RO X-Status: Mild Spoiler for Last Knight Ahead I'm sure this topic has been exausted enough, but I havew to ask: It seems to me that just after Nick asks Tracy to finish up at the "crime scene" so he can get Nat out of there, that Tracy had a reflective moment where she seemed to relate to Nat's situation--loosing a friend to suicide. Does anyone think it could be possible that she *remembers* what happened to Vachon? In other words, has LC gotten around to erasing or changing that memory yet??? Just a thought. Larissa From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 11:44 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id LAA01051 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 11:44:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 00076BE6 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 11:44:28 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191544.LAA01051@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 11:41:56 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Sharon Bhandari Subject: Re: Grief--AtA/LK spoilers To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 193 Status: RO X-Status: Oops, my posting should have gone to the spoiler list. I'm sorry, I saw the spoiler note in the subject line and assumed it was sent there anyway. Sorry again. Sharon B. sbhanda@emory.edu From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 11:53 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id LAA01925 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 11:53:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 382B9F71 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 11:53:12 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191553.LAA01925@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 08:50:00 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Karen Stortz Subject: Re: vampire tears -- LK but no real spoilers To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 128 Status: RO X-Status: We've seen vamp tears on FK before--sometimes clear, sometimes not. No consistancy in it, but that's hardly surprising. Karen From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 13:17 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id NAA11838 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 13:17:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 03A49D18 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 13:17:38 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191717.NAA11838@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 10:13:59 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Elizabeth Mosler Subject: Re: Spoiler LK: misogyny X-cc: cas47@columbia.edu To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 980 Status: RO X-Status: Fr: Catherine >I just don't buy it. Nat has no life unless Nick becomes her lover? A >woman's life is incomplete without a man? > >Oh, and, lest we forget . . . meeting the right guy was all it took to >make Janette human again? That strong, in-control vampire we all knew and >loved *really* just wanted to be a wife-and-mother? > >Look, I'm not opposed to love and romance, I understand the great >happiness that relationships can bring, and I think that a lover, >a family *can* be a central and meaningful part of anyone's life. Me: Excellent observations. Although I wonder if Natalie meant that her life was nothing without love in it? Not so much the "having a man" part, but just the experience of love itself. elizabeth m. Personal Home Page: http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~emosler/rose.html Work Home Page: http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~emosler/binding.html. *Jody to Perry the Vampire dog: "Good boy!" Woofpacker forever!* From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 14:48 EDT 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id OAA23396 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 14:48:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.BE2375B0@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; 19 May 1996 14:44:54 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191848.OAA23396@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 11:46:34 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Valery King Subject: Re: Spoiler LK: Comments To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <9605191048.AA28286@ucs.orst.edu> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2013 Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 19 May 1996, Diane Shea wrote: > If you don't want to hear a *positive* review of this episode then bail out > now. I don't know what everyone else's opinion of this one will be, but I'm > expecting it will be predominantly negative. Since I don't see negativism at Diane, we need some positive comments, too. As one who really, really, really hated this episode (because of the story line, NOT anything about directing or acting or anything of a technical nature) and was depressed about it for days, I welcome some positive to counterbalance my negative feelings. I hope, in a little while, that I can come to some kind of balance and rationality in my views about it. I'm not going to go through your post point-by-point, but there was one thing you said that I really disagree with: > Before, it was reasonable that he denied her. Her requests were made in > moments of danger and emotion. But now he sees she is thinking rationally, > and he would only be patronizing her if he brushed off her decision once > again. He endangers her life at her request, and cannot be faulted for that. Nat's request was NOT made rationally. Neither of them was anywhere NEAR rational at this point! Nat's friend has just committed suicide, and addressed the note to her (some friend, huh?). Saying, in effect, my life is a wasteland and so is yours, honey, so you'd better do something about it PDQ. I think Nat was depressed, and maybe a little suicidal herself. Nick, too was in terrible pain with Tracy's death. Nope, neither one was thinking at all clearly, IMHO. What the two needed at this point was psychiatric intervention. I think Lacroix was doing his best here, but because I don't believe that he really understood the nature of Nick's attachment to Nat (or hers to him) that he could have succeeded. And, BTW, I agree totally about the Geminis. If Nigel, Ger, Cath and Jon Cassar (who directed AtA) don't at least get nominations, I will be very disappointed. --Valery kingv@ucs.orst.edu From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 15:33 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id PAA29806 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 15:33:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id DA6A6441 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 15:32:29 -0400 Message-Id: <199605191933.PAA29806@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 12:19:50 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Raissa Devereux Subject: Spoilers LK To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 4542 Status: RO X-Status: Hi guys, Here's an "It was all a dream" scenario that my friend Lyn and I came up with. Nat's friend kills herself. Nat gets the note and diary. She says to Nick that she isn't sure that suicide is a sacralidge anymore, and does try to kill herself. Hear me out Natpackers. The diary lays Nat's lonliness out for her on two fronts. First, she wants to be with Nick, but she knows that he probably does not have as much faith in himself as she does. He won't risk bringing her across, and his backsliding is proof that does not have as much faith as he needs in a cure either. Either way, Nat figures in her grief induced state that she and Nick can't be together. He will eventually leave her. Second, one more friend has left Nat, and whatever the cause, Nat realizes that she can no longer stand to have her friends die and leave her, too. She will no longer let people abandon her. Her solution- Beat 'em to it. Take control. LEAVE FIRST. Nick finds Nat, as she is dying, and recoils in horror. He has to save her soul. If she dies, she's damnmed. Plus, the brick finally realizes how much he loves her. One problem. If Nick brings Nat over to save her, that will damn her soul, too. As much as Nick loves Nat, he can't take the responsibility. Ergo, he goes to LC. LC can take the responsibility. LC can take any blame. LC brings Nat across for Nick, and because deep down, for his own reasons, he also finds suicide repugnant. THE DREAM-Guilt induced as always. Nick blames himself for Nat's state of mind, and the events that led up the her attempted suicide. His discussions with Nat in the morgue amid shifting camera shots represent the part of him that won't condemn Nat. The desire to bring the wounded Tracy across represents his desire to bring her across. Ease Nat's lonliness. Ease the burden of his secret on her, which is best embodied through Tracy, especially after AtA. As for the tag, Nick envisions LC staking him, because suicide is a sin, therefore, he can't kill himself. He envisions his death, because he can't reconcile the love and guilt regarding Nat. All he has left is the faith that LC will do the right thing. In real life, save Nat to ease Nick's guilt. In the dream, kill Nick, to ease his guilt over destroying Nat. As for symbolism, we have LC's reconstructed bust on the bar. It represents Nick's new understanding of LC and his past. The revelations associated with that statue have put Nick and LC's friendship back on track. Ergo, Nick knows that in real life and dream time LC will help him out of his jam. The human tears Nick cries in the end represent the fact that Nick cannot distance himself from his pain without help. He cannot cry the cold red, indifferent tears of a vampire. He needs LC to create the distance for him and make it all better. Btw, the tag is the least interesting ambiguity. The camera work creates all the dream sequence ambiguity we need, imho. We have the ultra Roddenburyesque guazed lighting throughout the ep. and the C&C like staging of LC's monologues. Furthermore, there are the unreal slow motion sequences. Just before Dawkins goes berzerk, we see an exterior shot of the station. People are walking by in slow motion. Dawkins takes that hostage in slow motion. Tracy takes the bullets in slow motion. And finally, when Nat faints away from the blood loss, she falls to the floor in slow motion. Then, of course, there is the exchange between Nick and Nat in the morgue before Dawkins breaks loose that I have already mentioned. That was filmed strangely to say the least. If GWD did not intentionally mean to create ambiguity through the camera work, there's only one thing I can figure. He said to himself, Well d**n, if this is the last ep. of FK I'm ever going to direct, then I'm throwing in every trick I know to say good bye. On a final note, I forgot to mention the significance of Dawkins. Dawkins kept saying that he wouldn't go back. I took this to represent the fact that whatever happened Nick wouldn't go back to being the man he was. The fact that Nick "arrested" Dawkins before means that there were occasions when he slid back into his old ways, and kept his good impulses down, but no more. The fact that Dawkins then kills Tracy represents the pain that Nick thinks his quest to become a better man has caused those he loves. Well that's it. This is by far my longest post, but I think I've said everything. Raissa Devereux raissa@imap2.asu.edu NatVampCamp/FoSiL From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 17:20 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id RAA12955 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 17:20:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id B50F5507 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 17:11:39 -0400 Message-Id: <199605192120.RAA12955@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 13:53:46 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Antonia Spadafina Subject: Spoiler: LK (long) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 14064 Status: RO X-Status: Hi all Well, it s been a busy morning. I finally saw LK after weeks of speculation. I m posting these thoughts before reading any of the flurry of postings I m sure await me in my mailbox. I hope you ll favor me with responses to the theories and questions I put forth. I have never written so detailed a report on a TV show before, so bear with me if I am not as organized as some. The first thing that hit me is that LC is in the loft. I asked myself why. Was the deed at the end done already and LC was standing over N & N while orating? And does the subject of LC s oration torture him as well? But in AMPH LC didn t "trade treasure for an empty box" or an ash-filled brothel. LC wanted life at any cost, even at the hands of a child; he chose to live. The water pouring into the bathtub and then the blood dripping slowly into the bath water were, to me, symbols of the ways a life can be spent - in a gush, with a devil-may-care attitude, not caring of the speed or intensity that the life is wasted, or a moment at a time, seemingly standing still, the savoring, the tasting of each vital experience. I ve always liked the scenes where N&N touched. They are poignant glimpses into what Nat wants and what Nick denies. But they all seem to be easy, without stress for Nick, without fear for Nat (though there have been moments in some eps where tension was palpable [OtL, FtB, SoB] ). I liked the way the flashbacks were interspersed with the action, and the way they faded in black & white and slowly gained color. A metaphor perhaps to illustrate that the longer we harbor a memory the stronger it becom es, the more we color it with richer experiences. _However_ , we the fans have our own flashback memories and would have been just as comfortable interjecting our own scenes and memories. TPTB utilized so many flashbacks to limit the amount of closure we received from the ep, IMO. I must say I can also commiserate with Laura, just as Nat. Sure, both were professional women with demanding careers. "The mind is willing but the flesh is weak" syndrome. How many of us have succumbed to that fate and survived - and how many were driven to the same ends? And thus Nat decides to "get a life", even over Nick s insistence that Nat s life isn t empty. Does he see himself fulfilling her in any way? Sometimes I agree with Nat s early feelings in MBiaV, that Nick is using her to help him perfect his sham of humanity. Okay hope time: Nat says her life was changed 6 years ago. That statement fills me with hope. Even if TPTB don t see fit to begin a movie with the end of the series, we may still expect to see those first three years we ve missed. ( Or was DK three years in duration? I haven t seen them yet.) And why can t Nick ever seem to remember Nat s birthday was the day they met? Is it that a vampire lives so long that 6 years is an inconsequential amount of time to remember - that the days, weeks, months meld into a mere moment for an immortal? Or is it perhaps that Nick can ignore the passage of time for his mortal love by denying her birthday? (BTW, does anyone else think it s strange for Nat to be admiring a stiff on her slab -handsome or not - as in the tell-tale "not bad at all" from the OtL flashback? Necromancy on TV. Sheesh!) "You ll just have to love me as much as I love you." Well, that was a mouth full. Was this the first time Nat actually declared her love for him? I know, I know, in BB, she alluded to people who loved and cared for him, but she never applied the statement to herself. In StF, she said: "Ain t love a b***h". In Fever, she was angered that Nick could accept death so casually without taking her feelings into accounts. Yes, _we ve_ always known she loves him, but bless the brick, I think sometimes he was blissfully unaware. I still can t formulate the words about my feelings regarding LC s words on love. Maybe more at another time. Nick to Nat: "I can t. You know I can t." Well, isn t that a nice excuse. Why can t he feel the way Nat feels? What he can t give her is a physical love, not a spiritual love. (Kinda reminds me of Beauty & the Beast.) Nat tries to force a closure of some kind. But Nick resists. He s killed all those he s loved (boo-hoo). He loved Fleur, and he protected her _and_ her son. He kills those for whom he feels lust, not love. (After all, he was brought across because he could not bear to live without Janette.) I think he never really loved - except maybe before he was turned, as we saw in QoH. He kills Alyssa (in DoN), yes. And maybe others, whose names and episodes escape me at the moment. But he has no trouble bringing Nat s brother Richard and the woman with leprosy (what s her name?) in IWR. Perhaps the blood of those he loves too deeply, too physically, i s a siren s song he can t ignore. Or maybe the blood of a loved one has the warmth he is missing from the sun. IMO, the love in the blood (good story title, hmmm?) becomes the greatest of foods: it contains warmth, light, trust, the path to salvation & redemption, all the comforts and protection a baby absorbs when suckling on his mother s breast. There is safety in drinking from such a fount, surrounded, protected by love. Tracy decides to be a hero. Is she imitating her partner s sometimes reckless behavior? Or is this another pitiful attempt to become her "father s person"? I have a lot of problems with this character (My apologies to all you percolators out there). The scene where Tracy is shot is just too jumbled to contribute much to the ep. Much too rushed. Maybe things do happen this way. Nick follows Reese s directions & confronts the perp in the locker room. He feels he can take chances, release the vampire, since no one else is around. Is he concentrating on Dawkins so much that he misses the presence of Tracy, another mortal? (I know, this has never been a strong suit of Nick s). He hypnos Dawkins with little trouble. Nick seems stronger. All the human blood he s ingested this season, perhaps, in SoB, NiQ, GVP, have bolstered his powers. Didn t Tracy realize she shouldn t have stepped out until Nick had the perp subdued? And why didn t Nick disarm Dawkins when he had the chance, instead of flinging him around in a vamped out state? Was the shock of seeing Tracy there enough to make him forget decades of police training? That s why I am sure Nick could not be in law enforcement if he were cured: his reflexes are those of a vampire, not those of a policeman: overpower & kill, not protect & serve. I ve watched the scene 6 times now. I still cannot tell how Tracy was shot in the back of the head. Gut, yes. Head, no. Where did the bullet ricochet from? (Someone asked that question last week in a spoiler.) I can t figure it. The angles were all wrong. And why are certain factions insisting that LC is totally out of character? His rhythm has slowed (more introspective) , but the tune is still the same (derisive). Okay, wait a minute, you say. Was Tracy actually shot in the head? The paramedic says she has a really bad head wound. Does this imply gunshot? Perhaps the force of the bullet to her gut knocked her backward with enough force to fracture her skull. - I know, there was blood. How else to explain it? Any medical people out there who can justify that amount of blood from blunt trauma to the occipital? Tracy: "You could ve trusted me." Once again Nick is wallowing in self-pity and guilt. And once again he presumes to do what _he_ thinks best for Tracy. Does Nick want to bring her across to save her? No. IMO, he wants only to assuage the guilt and pain. Nat acts as Nick s conscience in this scene. I have no doubts he would have brought Tracy across if Nat hadn t have interfered. Tracy would have survived; Nick didn t lust (oops, love) her. Also, Nat is a bit put out that Nick would bring a virtual stranger across and not the woman he supposedly loves. FWIW, I think Nat has always been fascinated by the vampire life. She just didn t admit it to herself until AMPH. The hysteria and fear of death - or hysteria and obsessive love - brought out the awareness to Nat s consciousness. Again, Nick is confronted by Nat s logic, and again he has no response but silence. Is that a glimpse of LC s quarters in the Raven? This speech of LC s is a study in subtle malevolence, undermining Nick s resolve to stay. Nick says the words that human propriety demand, yet I feel uncertainty backs them. LC: "You taught me that, Nicholas." This dig re: Fleur in BMV is classic LC. "Never aspire to mortality." "Guilt is a poison." (<== points back to ep: C&C). These are age-old maxims for LC. Nick: "I m leaving tonight." (LC s directive) "You don t want my love " (Again, LC s opinion) "Faith is a mortal folly, Nat." (The delivery is pure LC) "You can t deny what I am." (And this delivery says it s another s opinion, as well.) Then Nick intones: "I m not willing to live a life of eternal pain." Crikey!! His whole existence that we ve been a party to these three seasons has been defined by his pain and by his attempt to escape the pain. (Blackwing and Faithful Followers come to mind). How can such a line be rationalized? "I m afraid of what might happen." IMO, he s afraid he ll like the sensations too much, he ll kill her and add more guilt to his already heavy burden. He s afraid he ll get hooked (if he isn t already) to the "special" taste of love in the blood. 767 years as a vampire and a man still thinks with his gonads! (no flame meant, just an observation). Now, to the kiss. Yes, we ve seen better kisses between N&N (BMV and NiQ come to mind). Why is it so difficult for Nick to kiss Nat at this point? Granted, in NiQ the amnesia concealed his vampire nature. And I m a firm believer in the healing power of the mind, but not to the extent that the microbes in his blood wouldn t be aroused by hunger and take whatever steps were necessary to survive. (He could have taken that cop in the warehouse in NiQ. Oh, as an aside I just thought it was funny in NiQ that Nick went out into the sun via a "fire door"; I nearly lost control of my bodily functions ROTFLMAO; still wonder if that was planned, or is what I use for a sense of humor completely skewed from normal? You tell me.) The reptile brain is much more powerful, since it is unemcumbered by moral dilemma. And, remember, in BMV Nick was in total control for not just one kiss, but two (and we re led to believe quite a few more.) *The part of the scene I most admired - and I m not sure if it was GWD s direction or CD s feel for Nat s character, or feelings I am sublimating on the scene- is right after Nick sweeps Nat s hair back from her neck. Watch her eyes. At first, they meet his with a slight hesitancy, maybe last minute fear about the vampire aspect or maybe of her commitment. Then her glance flicks away \\I can t do this - I can t see him like this this is not who I love//. Then their eyes meet once again, but full of certainty, trust, acceptance, desire, as if to say: yes, I want him for my own, the man and the vampire; I know what he is and I accept it and want what he can offer no matter the risk; I _MUST_ see him; I must not deny my feelings. The other point I d like to make is re: Nat s heartbeat. It is my "cheesy rationalization" for why I believe Nat is alive. Her heartbeat fades in volume, not strength, as if Nick has let his awareness of it slide away. It doesn t falter or stop abruptly. I listened quite carefully. I believe she is only unconscious, though very weak. I think LC s entrance line at the end is right on target for the character. He equates the loss of a life to a light being extinguished. All actions hold the same significance. I feel LC is "all there" but in a more mature and subtle way - he s faced all his demons now and can afford to be less relentless and more magnanimous (don t cringe). A subtle and civilised evil that reshapes itself to those surrounding it is by far the most dangerous; it takes you off-guard, catches you unawares, makes you doubt your every resolve. (Check out the Coldfire Trilogy by CS Friedman - illustrates this type of evil quite well.) If I have completely missed the boat on LC and he has undergone some stunning transformation to demi-god, please fill me in because I must have missed it. Nick: "I couldn t stop myself " OTOH, at this moment I would ve expected some retort such as "You re not supposed to" (wasn t this line in an ep somewhere? Swiss cheese brain - trying to learn CGI & PERL for work, I fear I m an old dog and this is a new trick -and suffering from CRS). And, no, Nick does not take more blood. He leans over and kisses Nat on the cheek. You can hear the sound if you turn up the volume. LC: "We even have time for a burial if you like " IMO, this is not an accomodation to Nick s sensibilities so much as LC s need to put Nick s nose in it (like some wayward puppy). A funeral would cause him pain; it would show Nick the futility of loving a mortal. Repeating the opening lines of the ep I don t know how I feel about that yet. My take on the ending is thus: LC thrusts the stake into Nick, pinning him to the floor of the loft to prevent interference. He then brings Nat over, not because Nick s desires would be realized, but because LC knows how much Nick would despise the action and him in turn. Being someone s "closest friend" is anathema to LC s chosen demeanor. Bringing Nat across would once again alienate Nick from LC; they would be wary opponents. Then LC would remove the stake and revive Nick from his own blood. LC would once again have children (a boy & a girl), and would have fun keeping both of them out of the light. ( the rest is silence). Toni (though my name is long I prefer it with all its letters) Spadafina Knightie from NYC "Love is a sickness full of woes/All remedies refusing." From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 17:37 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id RAA15403 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 17:36:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 3C028E1F ; Sun, 19 May 1996 17:36:54 -0400 Message-Id: <199605192136.RAA15403@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 17:35:35 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "Margaret L. Carter" Subject: Re: (spoiler)LK: Love; ending... To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1684 Status: RO X-Status: "Me too" on the answer of whether Nick declared his love for Nat. His promise never to leave her covers that. You know how men are about saying the L-word! I have always believed that Nat is Nick's true love, Janette his old girlfriend for whom he now feels a warm friend-type love. (He didn't have to be in love with her in order to turn to her for sexual comfort when he was desperate.) I think it is quite in character for Nick to ignore Nat's declaration that she would rather be a vampire than lose him; instead, typically, he opts for the melodramatic and self-absorbed (though noble in intention) "joining her in death" decision. I found the end of THE ROBE, where Marcellus and his beloved walk happily to their execution and into Heaven (they aren't committting suicide; Caligula is going to kill them no matter what), credible and satisfying; I don't feel at all the same way about Nick's rash choice (as elaborated in earlier post). Count me among those who are relieved that the ep wasn't quite as bad as I expected. With no proof that Nick is staked or Nat completely dead, "there are always possibilities" (in the immortal words of Mr. Spock) (it was Spock, wasn't it?). The only way to handle 3rd-season BEAUTY AND THE BEAST to plausibly save Catherine was to declare the whole thing a delusion suffered by Vincent while lying delirious in the cave -- this ending is much better than that! I hate "it was all a dream" solutions and will be furious if that is the tack taken by any future TV movie. Marci, will your 2 stories be on your FTP site? Please say yes, for those of us who aren't on the fiction list. Margaret Carter, obstinate Nick and Natpacker From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 19:28 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id TAA29092 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 19:28:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id A4B318C8 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 19:27:12 -0400 Message-Id: <199605192328.TAA29092@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 16:21:59 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Karen Stortz Subject: LK -- clear vs. blood tears To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 302 Status: RO X-Status: If anyone wants to believe he became human, ok, so be it. As far as I'm concerned, we can believe almost anything we want about this ep, but the tear arguement just doesn't wash. Go back and re-watch the flashbacks in "Bad Blood." Janette is crying. She is a vampire. The tears are clear. Karen From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 20:39 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id UAA09229 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 20:38:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 9DD46FDD ; Sun, 19 May 1996 20:38:36 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200038.UAA09229@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 19:29:18 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Perri Smith Subject: Last Night Spoilers To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2162 Status: RO X-Status: Well, I was thoroughly spoiled going in, and I was still sitting there saying prayers right up 'till the end. And i suppose it was better than it could have been, but that's not saying a lot. :P Everyone did an excellent job of acting -- this one almost made a cousin out of me, which is saying quite a *lot* -- and niiice direction from Ger -- the flipshots with Nick and Nat would have been great if they'd been a little shorter. Tracy's death was very well-done - she died well, at least. And the scene in her hospital room, with Natalie demanding why he would bring Tracy across, but not her (although the answer is obvious -- he cares for Tracy enough to want her to live, but doesn't spend much time agonizing over her soul. But he *loves* Natalie and therefore agonizes a great deal. Where was I? Oh, yeah.) was a great confrontation. And Natalie's speech to Nick about faith was absolutely jerk-jerking. As for the bust -- I distinctly saw a chip out of the neck of the bust, and Pompeii has been fairly throughly excavated, I believe? Wonder how much it cost LaCroix to buy and restore that sucker? And they end was left quite open for a bunch of people who promised us closure, dammit! Whatever happened to happy endings, eh? Well, actually, they let us choose our own, didn't they? So far, I've heard two theories I like -- Nick became human and Nat wasn't dead (he *didn't* finish draining her, he just kissed her), or Nick ain't human, but LaCroix, instead of staking him, shoved him out of the way andbrought Natalie across, to give Nick a reason to live. -- and I'll be happy with either of these. And as for how I feel about the show as a whole.... well, read the .sig. Perri --------------------------------------------------------------------------- "do you hear the people sing, lost in the valley of the night it is the music of a people who are climbing to the light for the wretched of the earth there is a flame that never dies even the darkest night will end and the sun will rise" -- 'Les Miserables' THE KNIGHT LIVES FOREVER!!!!!!! --------------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 22:53 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id WAA29701 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 22:53:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 3BC1AB06 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 22:44:42 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200253.WAA29701@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 22:28:54 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "[M A Martin]" Subject: SPOILERS:Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2240 Status: O X-Status: Margie's description of Natalie and the The Theory reminded me of an interesting scene in the movie _The Abyss_. Not a great movie on the whole, but it had some memorable moments. In a nutshell, the main female character is on board a disabled deep-sea vessel with the male lead (and romantic interest). They need to get back to their underwater station because the vessel is rapidly filling with water, but there is only one survival suit. The man is tring to convince the woman to take the suit and swim back to the station, leaving him to die (despite the fact that he is currently wearing the suit and with the speed at which the water is rising there is no way he could take it off and give it to her before they both drowned - ah, brickish chivalry!). She comes up with the Hollywood idea: he keeps the suit, she drowns, he swims back to the station with her body (he's the stronger swimmer), they revive her at the station (hypothermia prevents brain (and other organ) death upon drowning). And yes, it works. This is a happy movie, not angst-ridden FK. But the interesting part is when she is convincing him that it is the only way to save both of them. She is much like Nat in her passion and her faith that this will work. He agrees, ultimately, and then has to watch her effectively drown. Quite a bit of mental anguish there, don't you think? (Nick wouldn't have handled it well, but it is a nice parallel since if the guy survives and she doesn't, she has given her life for him (guilt, guilt).) So as the water inches up, she becomes more agitated (kinda like Nat when she's seeing Nick's f/bs to other kills). When only a few inches of air remain, she is struggling and says something like "I don't think this is a very good idea!" as the realization of what she has done truly sinks in. She knows, rationally, that it was the correct thing to do but when faced with the visceral reality of possible death, she fights it (somewhat ineffectively, as it is now too late to change her mind). Well, perhaps it is not a perfect parallel, but it came to mind. Meg (mmartin@biomed.med.yale.edu) "Failure is not an option. It is just a nagging possibility that helps me stay focused." Yeah, right. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 23:03 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id XAA01315 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 23:03:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 9466C263 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 23:01:30 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200303.XAA01315@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 19:56:33 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: LC Fenster Subject: Re: SPOILERS:Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 864 Status: RO X-Status: Meg wrote: >Well, perhaps it is not a perfect parallel, but it came to mind. This put me in mind of a different parallel: the story of the turtle and the scorpion. The scorpion comes to the turtle and asks him to ferry him across the lake. The turtle at first refuses, afraid of the scorpion's sting which is deadly. But the scorpion points out that if he stings the turtle, he too will die, so he has no reason to use his sting and every reason to avoid it. The turtle agrees and starts to ferry the scorpion across the lake. But while they are on the way, the scorpion stings the turtle anyway. The turtle asks why, since now they will both die. The scorpion replies: Because it is my nature. Nick and Nat both did their best to forget about the nature of the vampire. To their cost. Laurie Cousin M+B+D+T+K From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 23:07 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id XAA01752 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 23:07:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 03C455B7 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 23:04:37 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200307.XAA01752@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 22:13:37 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: TippiNB Subject: Last Knight spoilers To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1655 Status: RO X-Status: Idalia wrote: >ObSPOILER: How *did* Tracy end up with a bullet in the *back* of her >head? I could see how she got shot in the stomach, but in the back of >her head? Must've been one of those Magic Bullets. Maybe that guy who shot her was the reincarnated spirit of Lee Harvey Oswald and that's why he kept saying "I'm not going back!!!" Because he was afraid the reincarnated spirit of Jack Ruby would be there waiting to shoot him again. So maybe Lee Harvey Oswald, now known as The Guy Who Shot Tracy (Darkens? Derkins?), did that single bullet thing again? It riccocheted off Nick's wrist, hit the wall, bounced off John Conelly, and shot Tracy in the back of the head. See what this episode has made me do? I've had to resort to silly explanations! To me, my main complaint besides the fact that this felt more like opening a wound than closure, was that some of the characters seemed like alien pod people imposters. Reese being insensitive about Tracy? (Saying essentially that if she died, Nick could get a new partner.) Nick biting something that doesn't moo? LaCroix not bapping Nick in the head with that staff and playing baseball with his brains? Get real! I have to say kudos to Lisa Ryder for that scene. If you have to go out, you might as well got out with a great last line -- one that has poignancy, and truth. I'm still no big Tracy fan, but she has my respect in this and the AtA eps. Wicked Cousin Tippi, dollar bill wrangler of the Thong Throng! *Charter Member of the Unnamed Faction*Voyeur of the Menage LaCroix* Come, dip your chip in the Velveeta Glory of LaCroix. http://www.netcom.com/~tippinb/wicked.html From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 23:11 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id XAA02479 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 23:11:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id FAA8997E ; Sun, 19 May 1996 23:11:31 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200311.XAA02479@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 22:59:03 +0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: John Folden Subject: Re: SPOILER: LAST KNIGHT To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1808 Status: RO X-Status: > From: "LC Fenster" > >S > > > >P > > > >O > > > >I > > > >L > > > >E > > > >R > > > > > >S > > > >P > > > >A > > > >C > > > >E > > > > >No, Nick doesn't go back for a second drink. He leans down and kisses > >Natalie on her right check and tells LaCroix "I can't condemn her to > >this darkness." > > It's not quite that clear. The way it was shot, frankly, you can't > tell. Nick leans over her, and since the shot is from behind, you > can't tell what he's doing, though I think he is drinking. It seems to > match the script, where he is NOT vamped out when he takes the second > drink. But it is ambiguous, and if one wants to believe that he's > only kissing her, one can. Certainly, at the end, when he rises, he > was kissing her. After watching the episode, I tend to believe he was NOT drinking a second time. If you listen closely in the background, you can hear what sounds like a "kiss" and then you hear it again when you actually see him kissing her cheek. The biggest thing is, of course, that there are no teeth marks on that side of her neck and there's no evidence on screen to suggest that he turned her head to bite the other side in the same spot as the first time. Nick didn't want to take her life anymore than he had already done and I suppose wanted her to "drift off" on her own. > However, what is not ambiguous is the fact that LC told him he had a > choice: bring her across or let her die, and he chose to let her die. > Whether he drank again or not. "I can't condemn her to this darkness." It also seems quite evident that she apparently wasn't dead YET, as least not by the last shot...It does seems to be an ambiguous ending for both her and Nick...Tracy, sad to say(fo some, I guess), seems to be entirely out of the running... John From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 23:28 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id XAA05470 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 23:28:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id B818B8DC ; Sun, 19 May 1996 23:23:58 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200328.XAA05470@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 20:20:23 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Cynthia Hoffman Subject: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 361 Status: RO X-Status: 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. Cynthia and Jane, being prolific ... Cynthia Hoffman/choff@violet.berkeley.edu Jane Credland/janes@interlog.com Raven ** IB ** MBDtK We cater to the occasional fetishist From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 23:30 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id XAA05877 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 23:30:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 43163699 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 23:27:51 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200330.XAA05877@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 23:25:32 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Jennie Hayes Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight (& some Ashes to Ashes) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 11425 Status: RO X-Status: Overall impressions: Wow. I find there is a *lot* of potential for the story to continue from this episode, and that's mostly all I wanted. But I was relieved to see that they gave Tracy a good death. I would rather she were alive, but I think that unless the whole ep is another 'Curiouser and Curiouser' (which is what I thought the episode resembled more than anything else) she has to be gone. It would be interesting if this whole thing were LaCroix's reacting to the guilt of what he did to Divia/what Divia did to Urs and Vachon. But I ramble. I actually have some specific responses to make this time... Cynthia and Jane wrote: >has no life without Nick, which underly this episode, are misogynistic. >However, this is the set of assumptions that has underlaid Nat's >character since Dark Knight. They are a large part of the reason why I have to disagree with part of this. Throughout first season, Natalie was portrayed as a normal woman, with an otherwise normal life, who happened to have gotten a little bit tangled with this vampire. She never really regrets anything except that once in awhile she wishes there were someone special in her life (Only the Lonely). Even then, I had a strong impression that *that* was more her way of trying to get herself less attached to Nick. Like she realizes that a relationship with Nick would be bad for her and is trying to find a way to distract herself - i.e. a different man. Obviously it wasn't working, but it's a totally different underlying assumption than we tend to see now. I will agree, however, that in *this* episode, and in several others throughout second and third season, there has been a lot of the attitude that Natalie has no life without a man. I think that's regrettable, because most of her actions and statements (especially those in this last episode) would make perfect sense simply from the fact that since the series started, she has lost a brother, a goddaughter, and several friends. Nick really may be pretty much all she has left by the end of this episode. That doesn't mean she needs a *man*, specifically, just that she needs *someone*. However, the way most people seem to take it (I mean characters on the show, here...), she'd be all better with a man in her life to take care of her. Sheesh. I think I'll stop talking now. :) >Ger's directing was great with one single exception. That morgue scene >makes for a very queasy stomach. It doesn't get any better on future Here, have some dramamine. It helps a little. ;-) I found that it distracted from the scene a lot. It made it seem totally unreal, which may have been some of the intent but it went a bit overboard, IMHO, and into seeming downright silly. On the other hand, the scene in the morgue with Nat reading Laura's journal was *superb*. I loved the way the balance was swinging like a ticking clock. >Fred's music was wonderful. It didn't overwhelm the episode, nor was it >sentimental. It added a dimension to the episode instead. I agree. I like the fact that the final note we heard struck in the episode sounded like a church bell. It gave an interesting flavor to that ending. >The script and the acting were equally good. No matter how anyone feels I thought the acting was superb. I had some problems with the script overall. It seemed a bit rushed, IMO. >Those tears were Ger's ... not Nick's. They probably didn't have enough >tape or money to re-shoot the scene. Either that, or Nick's search for humanity has changed them as well, now. I didn't really have any problem with Nick having non-blood tears. >Tracy: No Nick should NOT have trusted her. Witness how she was >killed: by walking directly into the line of fire when Nick almost had But as far as his being a vampire, she was perfectly capable of trusting him and keeping his secret, and he *knew* that. Despite several times where he was deliberately making it difficult to keep what she knew about Vachon secret, she never said a word to Nick about him. She wasn't like Schanke, for whom vampires didn't even exist, she knew they existed. >vampire. A GOOD cop does not move into the line of sight of someone that This was a foolish move on her part. No argument there, but this was an unusual circumstance and she made a mistake. There have certainly been mistakes on the part of cops before. >Tracy is definitely 100% dead. They pulled the sheet over her head. To >quote an original cousin: Bye Button. Well, yes and no. If at any point there is more FK, they can bring her back if they want her back. No matter what we say... >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. Oh, and as for "how can you do >this for Tracy and not for me", Tracy was DYING. Nat was still alive and She didn't say stop at any point. She brought up considerations that he hadn't taken into account, which is what she's always done for him. He's the one who made the decision and stopped. And while she wasn't dying, she was willing. With Tracy he simply couldn't know whether or not she was willing. That was the whole point of her comments. And it's been a problem with Nick - he does tend to forget to take what *others* want into consideration, and then he gets confused when they don't want what he wanted for them. >it. But Nat couldn't leave well enough alone. She pushed .. and pushed >.. and pushed him into it. She pushed all the right buttons because she >knew what they were. Nick needs to feel loved and trusted. Did it ever occur to you that Natalie *does* love and trust him? The things she is telling him are sincere. She can't continue to live the existence she is living. To her, the best option is if she can truly be close to Nick, which she can't unless she's brought across or he's brought back. The only other option would be to shut Nick out of her life completely, and I don't think she can do that. She'd feel like she'd abandoned him, and after all the times she's told him not to abandon her that would be hypocritical. She has manipulated him in the past, with Richard (I Will Repay). To me, this was nothing like that. >she told him HE loved and trusted her >even when he was expressing his doubts about that very fact. As much as >we hate blaming the victim, in this case ... Not the way I heard it. He said she didn't want his love, and she corrected his assumption. At least, that's how the dialogue went... >Then there is the "sex" scene. If you can call it that. Janette became >mortal because she and Robert MADE LOVE. Nick fed. His idea of foreplay Yeah, well, I was watching with a friend and we probably woke my neighbors yelling, "FOREPLAY, NICK!" This is one of the places where I felt the script was too rushed, like they were trying to fit too much into that one hour so they failed to include things that should have been there. In fact, I think this was the most blatant point where I thought the script was weak. >Oh, and what was that 180 degree shift in her thinking. (snip) >Wasn't it only four years ago that >she was telling him that capturing criminals and saving people with the >help of the vampire didn't count? Actually, the dialogue with Nat in that one is that she was trying to get him to avoid using his abilities because she felt his using them might interfere with a cure. She asks him something like, "and you couldn't have caught him without the vampire?" He responds "Who cares *how* I did it?" and she replies, "You do." And she's right there. >more than made up for 800 years of past misdeeds? So, how long would he >be trapped in purgatory while Nat went on to other lives? This kind of Nat has never felt that he needs to atone. Nick does. That's been a very basic concept in the show from the beginning. >Nick was true to form. You can be angry at him for killing Natalie, but Actually I'm not, but then I don't think she's dead. The way it worked, she was either turned (which makes the most sense to me 'cuz she was getting his memories) or she will die without help. She's not dead when the scene is cut because otherwise it would be impossible for Nick to bring her across. We simply *don't* know what happened next. It certainly is ambiguous enough that there's no reason to assume Nat's dead unless we want to. As for what most likely happened with LaCroix, LC does not believe that Nick is going on to something better if he kills him. I think it's most likely that he *didn't* kill Nick, although it's possible that he did. I think he'd most likely want to keep Nick around, because that's what's best for Nick. He might, for once, have done what Nick wanted. Hard to say on that score. As for Natalie, while many people don't even take the idea seriously, LC has good reason to Nat fascinating - she's the only person we've ever seen him misread on the show. (Fever) By the same token, he might view her as dangerous but I can't believe it's within LC's scope to think that a vampire so much younger than he could pose a serious threat to him. There is no reason why he might not want her brought across, and if that's the best way to ensure Nick won't try to do himself in as soon as LC goes elsewhere, assuming LC didn't kill Nick, then I'd assume that's what he'd do. Again, assuming Nick didn't already bring her across. And I really don't believe that just because LaCroix verbally agreed with Nick that that's what he's thinking. I've always maintained that some of what makes LaCroix so dangerous is that he's always got plans nobody knows about or guesses at. Which is partially because he *doesn't* always tell us what he's thinking. >the truth. To Nick, Lacroix is not the devil; he is Nick's closest friend. And yet, *this* is an ironic turnaround from 'Va au diable' or however that's spelled. I don't know French. >Guess that shoots the "Lacroix is 100% evil in Nick's eyes" theory in the Nick's opinions swing around like a pendulum throughout the series. There was a time when LaCroix *was* 100% evil in Nick's eyes. He just isn't right now. I think that LaCroix's ploy of playing Nick's game for awhile has actually gained him some ground, but it's still a short step back to where the show started out at. >and bringing Janette across at the end of Human Factor. Then again, he >wanted to bring Janette across. Yes, this is key. I think Nick is really convinced that if he brings Nat across, she will cease to *be* Nat. Everyone he's brought across has apparently changed drastically, although I suspect he simply didn't know them before he brought them across and the change brought out personality traits he *couldn't* have known about. Also, nobody he's brought across has had any idea of what was going to happen to them, so they had no idea what they needed to control and he doesn't stay with them until they learn control, he kills them when they lose control and rampage. So he really does think that if Nat is turned, he will *lose* her. That's how I see his viewpoint here, anyhow. OK, I've gone on *more* than long enough. I had best stop now, as I'd never intended to go on this long. I agree that this ending is ambiguous enough for *lots* of debate, which I was happy to see. Take care, Jennie finabair@aol.com From owner-forkni-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 23:38 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id XAA06820 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 23:38:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id CDFAFC11 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 23:38:54 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200338.XAA06820@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 23:38:13 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show Sender: Forever Knight TV show From: "Lisa P." Subject: Warm Fuzzies for Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FORKNI-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 277 Status: RO X-Status: 25 minutes and counting 'til Last Knight and my box of tissues. I just wanted to wish everyone warm fuzzies to those of us who have yet to see the final episode. I will be with all of you in spirit (and cyberspace). Long Live The Knight Lisa P. 20 minutes and counting... From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 23:42 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id XAA07359 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 23:42:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 4BF621F2 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 23:42:25 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200342.XAA07359@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 23:40:09 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Deborah Menikoff Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 3482 Status: RO X-Status: All of the below is, naturally, our opinion (Dianne is sitting here as well, so you'll have to take us as a pair today). You're welcome to disagree. In fact, go ahead:-) We'll make more. :-) Our motto is "If you don't laugh, you'll cry" so if you can't laugh at the pain this ep may cause you (and us --- really!) , then skip this post. *********************************** Ok, those dead, those alive: 1.) Tracy is dead. - why? - sheet over face. 2.) Nat isn't dead...yet.... First clue, LC says to Nick "You have a choice" (there was no further "draining" so presumably he still does have time. Second clue - her heartbeat was fading out but was still going. Third Clue - it *did* appear that the "wavy LC-cam" effect was Nat's POV. (whoever suggested this - we *like* it :-)))))) 3.) Nick - alive - why - did *you* see him die? Did *you* see him struck down by the Shillelagh of Death? We didn't, so he's not dead. 4.) Dawkins is dead so presumably he "doesn't have to go back". Back where ? Who knows. But he got what he wanted and he's pretty much the only one in the ep. Now - was this the *longest* night in Tornoto history? What *is* the timeline here? Next - there needs to be some serious evaluation of the way that Capt Reese runs his precinct. Hello? Can you say "handcuffs"? Apparently not. Bad captain - two thwacks with the Shillelagh of Death. :-) Next - having chased Dawkins through the longest and most complex maze of police hallways in Canada (the only set left one must assume since they made such thorough use of it), are we now to accept that Tracy is a "good cop" for following the armed, ranting and one presumes *dangerous* Delbert (Delbert?) into a dark locker room without telling anyone or going for help? I can't. Can you? LaCroix - could he stake? Yes. Would he stake? No. So what happened at the end? Glad you asked. We have a theory - several actually. We have Nat elegantly sprawled on the floor of Nick's spacious yet sparsely decorated loft. Nick kneels above. LC raises the Shillelagh of Death on high saying "Damn you Nicholas", and brings it down on Nick non fatally (staked or not - whatever works for you) -- *Then* goes on to repeat the rest of the monologues that we have seen throughout the ep. What then? Whatever you want - Nick goes with LC alone leaving Nat to die. Nick goes with LC after asking him to "finish" Nat off (You can't believe *HE*'s going to do it) 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. LC pins Nick down with the SofD and brings Nat across to use her to keep Nick around LC brings Nat across at Nick's request Nat could come across on her own after the duo (trio if you count the Shillelagh) leaves. After all, it's happened before. Nat could regain consciousness ever so briefly, whisper "Bring me across. I don't want to die." And being anxious to please, they do. It goes on and on.....and on and on... ************************************** Please don't think 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. Deb and Dianne Lo' though he raiseth the Shillelagh of Death up on high saying "Oh Nicholas, you *did* think this through...didn't you?", there was no staking, for the governor calleth with the repreive. menikoff@panix.com From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 00:11 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id AAA12148 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 00:11:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id E4F7465F ; Mon, 20 May 1996 0:08:10 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200411.AAA12148@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 00:01:28 +0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: John Folden Subject: Re: SPOILERS: LAST KNIGHT Rationalizations! Get your red-hot rationalizations here! :> To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 210 Status: RO X-Status: > From: "D Echelbarger" > with it, I'm gonna inflict all my rationalizations on y'all. I sent this (with Thanks! Gives me even more "improbable but positive" theories to chew on... :) From soulseek@sprynet.com Mon May 20 00:17 EDT 1996 Received: from m2.sprynet.com (m2.sprynet.com [165.121.1.99]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id AAA13301 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 00:17:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [199.174.135.78] (ad08-078.compuserve.com [199.174.135.78]) by m2.sprynet.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA26306; Sun, 19 May 1996 21:14:30 -0700 From: soulseek@sprynet.com Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 21:14:30 -0700 Message-Id: <199605200414.VAA26306@m2.sprynet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: N&N loop (Last Knight) To: asnelson@indiana.edu, acapozzi@wellesley.edu, AMORG@aol.com, egardner@facstaff.wisc.edu, CKrumtum@gnn.com, jclemens@world.std.com, bonney@interpath.com, Claudius@NETRIDE.COM, criss@marlboro.edu, fiorini@MARYWOOD1.MARYWOOD.EDU, dgthomas@ix.netcom.com, phase3@gate.net, dottir@wsii.com, efriedm1@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu, ILCzJules@aol.com, jasonl@cnwl.igs.net, shalott@chattanooga.net, dukarsja@udmercy.edu, RICHARD@iclnet.co.uk, jtfolden@erinet.com, Baigneuse@aol.com, lplummer@interlink.com, LoriArgyll@aol.com, lydiam@singnet.com.sg, d_Roberts@msn.com, moser@clark.net, catspaw@cruzio.com, rfulton@directnet.net, swells@phoenix.atticus.com, TGill10669@aol.com, valworth@aol.com X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.10.06.22 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Length: 1214 Status: RO X-Status: <---- Begin Forwarded Message ----> From: jtfolden@erinet.com Date: Sun, 19 May 96 23:43:37 +0500 To: soulseek@sprynet.com Subject: Re: N&N loop (Last Knight) > From: ILCzJules@aol.com > have permanent implications.> What I found odd was that it mentions neither, > Season nor Series Finale.-- Which leads me to whatI saw on FKSPOILR > 5-16-96.--This was apparently accurate, per Laurie, who says she's seen LK. I > read the entire Last Knight episode. we're talking word for word (12 printed > pages). If it IS shown as was written there.. it ends much more resembling a > cliffhanger than a wrap.--If that be, my dear souls, hope for resurrection is > TRULY an option. The fight MUST continue! Illinois Jules After watching the episode I also felt that it was more a cliff-hanger than a finale. The ending is, indeed, quite ambiguous when it comes to Nick&Nat. I wish I could say the same for Tracy...(of course, if you go by the theory that the whole episode was just a Knightmare that Nick had "Last Knight" (possible due to hallucinations brought on by his previous run-in with Divia's "Bad-Blood" then everybody is still safe-n-sound... ) John <---- End Forwarded Message ----> From soulseek@sprynet.com Mon May 20 00:18 EDT 1996 Received: from m2.sprynet.com (m2.sprynet.com [165.121.1.99]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id AAA13413 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 00:18:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [199.174.135.78] (ad08-078.compuserve.com [199.174.135.78]) by m2.sprynet.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA25821; Sun, 19 May 1996 21:11:09 -0700 From: soulseek@sprynet.com Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 21:11:09 -0700 Message-Id: <199605200411.VAA25821@m2.sprynet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: N&N Loop (Last Knight spoiler) To: asnelson@indiana.edu, acapozzi@wellesley.edu, AMORG@aol.com, egardner@facstaff.wisc.edu, CKrumtum@gnn.com, jclemens@world.std.com, bonney@interpath.com, Claudius@NETRIDE.COM, criss@marlboro.edu, fiorini@MARYWOOD1.MARYWOOD.EDU, dgthomas@ix.netcom.com, phase3@gate.net, dottir@wsii.com, efriedm1@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu, ILCzJules@aol.com, jasonl@cnwl.igs.net, shalott@chattanooga.net, dukarsja@udmercy.edu, RICHARD@iclnet.co.uk, jtfolden@erinet.com, Baigneuse@aol.com, lplummer@interlink.com, LoriArgyll@aol.com, lydiam@singnet.com.sg, d_Roberts@msn.com, moser@clark.net, catspaw@cruzio.com, rfulton@directnet.net, swells@phoenix.atticus.com, TGill10669@aol.com, valworth@aol.com X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.10.06.22 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Length: 771 Status: RO X-Status: <---- Begin Forwarded Message ----> From: Baigneuse@aol.com Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 13:49:14 -0400 To: soulseek@sprynet.com Subject: Last Knight spoiler I just finished watching the Last Knight episode and all I can say is NO. Maybe not. While I did enjoy the interaction between Nick and Nat I am left in a lurch with the ending. Yes maybe there is an opening for a movie or continuation but what if they don't do one? We will be left to wonder. I'm very depressed, that is all I can say. * * * * * * P.S.--This may be a very stupid question but if Vachon was killed in Ashes to Ashes then why was the actors name still in the opening credits? Just wondering. Thanks, Lauren <---- End Forwarded Message ----> From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 00:23 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id AAA14082 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 00:23:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 1436DB5E ; Mon, 20 May 1996 0:23:49 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200423.AAA14082@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 21:17:03 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: LC Fenster Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 3019 Status: RO X-Status: Cynthia and Jane wrote: >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. True enough, but I still must disagree with some of what you have said here and in earlier posts. There are certain times where you just have to say no, and this was one of those times for Nick. For Nick to take the attitude - heck, I've warned her of the dangers; she still wants it, okay, it's her funeral - is not acceptable, imo. Nick is not absolved of blame in this by virtue of "informed consent". Natalie is emotionally distraught: she's just lost a friend (Laura) and a colleague of long-standing (Tracy); she's seen Nick implicitly reject her again by being willing to bring Tracy across but not here (the AMPH flashback that they cut does make a difference in perspective here, but I choose to believe that's what she's thinking about even w/o the flashback). She's not entirely rational at the moment. She's questioning everything about her life. Yes, Nick is under enormous stress as well; he's just lost his second partner in less than a year, but that doesn't excuse his behavior. He knows better. He knows his limitations far better than Nat knows them. And he certainly knows better than to "try to make love" on an empty stomach, without first fortifying himself with plenty of human blood to reduce the compulsion to feed. If he truly loved Natalie, *truly* loved her, he would have said no, regardless of what she said or how she pleaded. It's that simple, imo. Of course, imo, the only reason he agreed to "make love" (which he then didn't do anyway) was his old bugaboo: guilt. Guilt that Nat had caught him ready to bring Tracy across when he wouldn't do the same for her. It isn't *faith* that's driving him: it's guilt. Plain and simple guilt. And when, as a result, it all goes wrong, he can't bring himself to bring her across because then he would have to admit to her either that (a) he didn't love her enough to become mortal, as Janette had or (b) he didn't love her enough to discipline himself to take only a little, so he was forced to make her a vampire. By letting her die instead, he is spared a world of awkward explanations and embarrassment. Then he asks LC to stake him, so he won't have to feel guilty about letting her die. It's all about guilt, as usual. Or you can take Sharon's position, that Nick knew LC would never stake him, but asks him, in order to *prove* his willingness to die, and atone for killing Natalie; and therefore, the fact that he does not die and atone can be conveniently blamed on LaCroix and he is absolved. 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. Just my two cents. Laurie Cousin M+B+D+T+K From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 01:03 EDT 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id BAA18557 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 01:03:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.A9F26E60@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; Mon, 20 May 1996 0:59:57 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200503.BAA18557@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 02:05:14 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Romina Campos Subject: Spoiler: Last Knight affiliations To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1072 Status: RO X-Status: >We inadvertently came up with a new game at Tami's last (k)night >in trying to find Cheesy Rationalization that could bring >Natalie back to life... >Don't know about you guys, but need the distraction! Well, I have another game: After all the is dead or not, I think new affiliation names are needed for: Those who think that no one died (innocents, disneys?) Those who think that LaCroix brought Nat across and that he didn't stake Nick Those who think that LaCroix brought Nat across and that he staked Nick (a valentine dream, isn't it?) Those who think that Nat is dead, but Nick isn't (more angst to our boy) Those who think that Nick and Nat died (masochists imho) Then we could add the new affiliation to our sigs, for example you could be a innocent knigthie or masochists Natpacker, etc. Any ideas for the Last Knight affiliations names? P.S: I'd like to add myself to the those who wouldn't mind at all if Nick came and whammied me into forgetting "Last Knight." Romina raven@adinet.com.uy NickNatpacker From owner-forkni-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 01:14 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id BAA20084 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 01:14:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 2C2A62AA ; Mon, 20 May 1996 1:14:35 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200514.BAA20084@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 00:12:57 PST Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show Sender: Forever Knight TV show From: "P. L. Montgomery" Subject: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FORKNI-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 783 Status: RO X-Status: Not meaning any spoilers, I must say that I just saw Last Knight. I simply don't accept it, so I'm not crying. And even were I to accept it, there are still so many, many avenues for continuance into a fourth season, so many "plot loopholes" interwoven into the tapestry of this episode, that I cannot despair. Rather I have hope that if we are vocal enough, if we make our wishes heard, we can yet make Forever Knight truly forever. Remember [the Alamo] Star Trek! Look what an active, vocal fandom did for its longevity and continued existence after its putative "death". Have hope, fellow fans of Forever Knight. "Forever Knight... Forever!" P.L. Montgomery plcm@juno.com (for messages, etc.) plcm@tracks.cpxl.com (for encoded files, etc.) From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 01:18 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id BAA20517 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 01:18:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id BCF06AA7 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 1:18:38 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200518.BAA20517@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 01:12:06 +0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: John Folden Subject: Re: SPOILERS: LAST KNIGHT Rationalizations! Get your red-hot rationalizations here! :> To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 366 Status: RO X-Status: > I'm with those who say that Tracy's death isn't final because we never saw > her die. Some strange things have been known to occur in FK hospitals. We saw the nurse cover Tracy's face with a sheet, and then her body was carted away...that seems pretty final to me...(assuming the whole episode wasn't simply a knightmare Nick had "Last Knight", of course) John From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 02:00 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id CAA24399 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 02:00:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 9EB09389 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 2:00:44 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200600.CAA24399@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 22:51:13 PST Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: June Russell Subject: Re: SPOILER: last knight: Natalie. X-To: Forever.Knight.TV.show.-.Spoiler.Topic.List@grendal.rain.com To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2266 Status: O X-Status: JMR wrote: :Last Knight diatribe follows. : :A :r :e :W :e :S :t :i :l :l :D :o :i :n :g :spoiler space? Well, better safe than sorry. :Nat has a life. But it's a life that, for six years, has had a vampire in :it. :Imagine the implications. No close friends, because she can't afford to :get too close; she's keeping too many secrets. I don't think that she has few friends because of Nick, but because of her job. Believe me, college (if you want to go to medical school), medical school and residency don't leave a lot of room for anything else but that one note: medicine. That is, if you want to look good for the PTB who will put in the good word for you for your medical school, residency program, first job. Some medical schools realize that it's all too easy to do as Nat used to (before Nick) and Lori did: give up your life for the job. I was very lucky in that from the first day at UoWashingtonMedSchool they harped on making sure that you don't do that. It looks as if Nat was not as lucky. :And slowly but surely over the course of :those years, Nick and his vampiric nature have taken over more and more of :her existence, of her thoughts, until there's no room left for anything :else. When Nick points out that she has a life now, she points out that it began 6 years ago, April 14, when she met him. I don't believe that it was the misogynistic "finally having a man in my life", but rather: "I have something in my life that forces me to do something besides my job and only my job. :{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{Hugs}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}} for the spoiler list. A hug to all of you out there on the list. Right now we are all hurting because we have seen the last new episode of the series. However, I think that there is hope. They changed the last scene to make it more ambiguous for a reason. I think it is so that we can have more FK in the form of miniseries or TV specials. JP is good at this. Look at how many Bionic specials there have been. It would be better in the long run for the actors. That way they can *enjoy* being in FK rather than seeing it as having to give up a lot (like NB in Avonlea) for FK. They can do more than one thing. Kat Kat ( June Russell ) pacifier.com!grendal!kat kat@grendal.rain.com Heu! Tintinnuntius meus Sonat! From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 02:03 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id CAA24614 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 02:03:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 079F552C ; Mon, 20 May 1996 2:03:40 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200603.CAA24614@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 02:00:58 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Sandra Gray Subject: SPOILERS: Last Knight (ep 22) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 3959 Status: O X-Status: I know this is probably a mistake to do and may not make much sense. But I watched Last Knight alone and I just need to say something. I am torn between feeling dead and feeling pain, by turns. Was this episode really necessary? Maybe once I've rewatched it--yes, I guess I must be a glutton for punishment, but I guess I feel the need to understand *why* this was made, *what purpose* it can possibly serve to end the show this way. I feel *betrayed* by TPTB and especially Michael Sadowski in particular. I don't understand why this was done. Can someone tell me why this was done? Anyone with any inside info? I rewatched the ending twice after watching the episode. It is supposed to come on another channel in about half an hour and maybe I'll watch it again, maybe not. I keep thinking of LC's line to Fleur, "That a cold, still heart could feel such pain." Well, I hope LC suffers a *hell* of a long time for what he did! I can't believe that after AtA LC would do such a thing. The episode was filmed and directed well for the most part. Kudos to Ger. It engaged me emotionally in several parts. When Tracy got shot, I felt sorry about her. But Nick didn't need more pain. When he was considering bringing Tracy over, I was actually saying, "No, Nick, don't do it" and crying. Then Nat...Nat...well, on the one hand I'm glad she stopped him, on the other hand, she just made things harder for Nick by asking him why he could bring Tracy over and not her (guess we know Nat wouldn't have minded being a vampire, huh?). And the scene between them in his apartment. Nat made a good speech, and although I'm not a Nick and Nat Packer (or whatever you folks call yourselves), I was hoping it would work. But Nick's been away from human blood too long, not to mention he's not been one to show much control in the past. Poor Nat (I didn't think I'd ever say that). She looked like she was afraid of the images she was getting from Nick (that was *cruel*, *cruel* in the extreme for a mortal to have to get such *crap* from the vampire who attacks them--where was the love, the good memories of the two of them, or do we just assume that Nick reverted to the animal--to the *beast*!). And then *LC* showed up! Silly me, I was telling Nick not to listen to LC, to bring Nat over before she died. It sure didn't help to have the sound of her heartbeat stop right there either! But of course Nick would never bring Nat over. I cry thinking about it. And then for Nick to want LC to... I guess we can assume Nick had forgiven LC by calling him his "closest friend". And I'm sure the rising sun was meant to symbolize that Nick and Nat had gone together to a better place. BAH! What it felt like to me was that Nick didn't want to deal with the pain anymore. And LC's poisonous words to make Nick doubt his faith even at the end!!!!!!!!!!! What a horrible thing to do to Nick!!!!! After three years of rooting for him to achieve mortality, *this* is the only mortality Nick gets?!?!?! Silly me filled out the Sony survey where they asked if Nick should become mortal or not in the last episode (I gave in to temptation, so sue me!). I wrote under "Why?" that if this was indeed the last episode of the show, then Nick deserved to get a shot at mortality. But if he achieved it, I didn't want to see him die right afterwards. Just goes to show how much attention they paid to my response, doesn't it? Ah, well, should have known it was a mistake to respond. Well, I guess if the show is to go on from here, there will have to be some *major* story rewriting to bring Nick back, huh? Then again, I guess we can always lobby for ***FOREVER LACROIX***!!! :P :P :P I'd love to see him rotting in hell!!! If anyone was offended by any of the above, I'll probably feel sorry about it later sometime. Right now though, I don't give a shit. --Sandra Gray, disenchanted and disgusted Knightie --tmp_harkins@dirac.physics.jmu.edu From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 02:30 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id CAA28063 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 02:30:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 3D0A4CB1 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 2:26:39 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200630.CAA28063@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 23:27:03 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Amy Rambow Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight affiliations To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <199605200513.WAA21966@montana.nwlink.com> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 867 Status: RO X-Status: > Any ideas for the Last Knight affiliations names? Ummm... if I'm overreacting, please chalk it up to still being in shock from LK. I watched it alone and unspoiled, and I haven't yet recovered. But this question calls to mind my well-intentioned statement of same regarding "The Human Factor," which, while I still bow to Torrey's brilliance in coining the name "Nevermore," led down a path I'm sure we don't want to retrace. We need to hang together for a while yet, realizing that whichever characters have died or survived in whatever fashion, we've all lost FK, and we're probably all hurting. We need each other's support too badly to factionalize this, I sincerely believe. Affectionately, *** Amy, Lady of the Knight (akr@mail.nwlink.com) *** "Now cracks a noble heart. Good night, sweet prince; And flights of angels sing thee to thy rest!" -- W.S. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 02:48 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id CAA29493 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 02:47:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 33196538 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 2:47:50 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200647.CAA29493@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 01:45:47 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Laura Ruggiero Subject: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1393 Status: RO X-Status: Okay, I just saw Last Knight, and still haven't read the folder full of spoiler digests, so excuse me if some of this repeats discussions. I watched it alone, and have no one else to talk to. I cannot believe how many characters they have killed off this season, Schanke, Cohen, Screed, Urs, Vachon, Tracy, and maybe Nat and Nick. The only recuring characters left (from all 3 seasons) are Cptn. Stonetree, Reese, Janette, and LaCroix. I am in shock. I guess there was enough ambiguity (sp?) in the ending of LK for Nat and Nick to have survived. Oh, gods, I can't believe they did this to us. There is still hope for a forth season or 2 hour movies. Why did they have to do this? I keep chanting at my TV "bring her across" though out the last act. I agree with LaCroix, Nick is a fool for choosing death. He could have had a long unlife with Nat, and maybe actually been happy for once. The only bright side to tonight is that Ch. 12 started out by showing the last 15 minutes of Ashes to Ashes, which they screwed up and did not show last week. What are we going to do in the Wars? Set them before or pretend that the last 2 eps never occurred? I am going to be a basket case at work tomorrow, I know I am going to stay up several hours catching up on spoiler digests and all the LK fiction that has come out this week. Laura Ruggiero (larug@siu.edu) Die-Hard in Shock From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 03:55 EDT 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id DAA04587 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 03:55:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.AD33C9D0@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; Mon, 20 May 1996 3:51:50 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200755.DAA04587@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 03:40:14 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Ray Heuer Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight affiliations To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 354 Status: O X-Status: Well, of course, one affiliation already exists, that which believes that LaCroix brought Nat across, and didn't stake Nick. Although, I suppose, the affiliation includes others (besides me) who think LC brought Nat across and are indifferent about the staking. -- Ray Nat Vamp Camp Rage! Rage! Against the dying of the Knight! From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 04:49 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id EAA08405 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 04:49:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 96713A13 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 3:55:02 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200849.EAA08405@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 00:30:45 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Karen Stortz Subject: Spoiler: LK (Lasting Knausea) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1530 Status: O X-Status: Why in the world do we leave spoiler space on a SPOILER LIST???? 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Okay, so now I've seen it. 1) What I'm willing to accept from fanfic: anyboby can be as alive or dead or undead as anyone wants. I can read it or not if I want. 2) What I want for series canon: LaCroix did it. They're dead, Jim. Let it die. I, for one, don't want to see TPTB get a chance to botch it up worse in a tv movie or any other forum, especially in view of the rumors early in the season that there was some question of whether they were going to sign CD or not (I don't know whether there was even a grain of truth in that, but still, one wonders). How easy it would be for them to bring Nick back; what a perfect excuse this would give them to kill off Natalie. I'd rather have seen it end with more grace, more dignity, more hope, and a decent script, but failing that, I'll accept it ending where it is. 3) Truly fine performances all around. 4) LaCroix's monologue, as I see it, is from Nick's POV, seen through Nick's tears, hence the distortion. Very nice directorial touch. 5) Ger's direction: overall, very nice. He moves the camera well. His biggest problem (all too evident in the morgue scene in this ep, and there are instances from his other eps as well) is knowing WHEN NOT to move it. (There was also that little coverage problem with Tracy getting shot, but on the schedule TV directors are forced to work on, it happens.) That's pretty much all that's left to say. Karen From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 07:52 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id HAA22815 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 07:52:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id BE638C47 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 7:52:23 -0400 Message-Id: <199605201152.HAA22815@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 07:38:56 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: cyndi knecht Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1401 Status: O X-Status: SPOILER SPACE - JUST IN CASE: S P O I L E R I've just re-subscribed to the spoiler list - so I don't have a clew as to what everyone is thinking - other than through the marvelous fan fiction that is the only thing keeping me from total depression. Talk about a dark episode...the only slight ray of hope is that we never actually *see* the very end. Hopefully, the actors had to keep their wardrobe from the last scene intact....just in case we get a movie or more. I feel very empty. Even Tracy's death was not nearly as satisfying as I had joked about half the season. (Although the friend that came to spend the night so I wouldn't have to watch LK alone was pretty happy about it.) Perhaps because Tracy was doing her classic routine of not getting back-up. Dying in the line of duty was cliche - it was especially cliche to have the transfer prisoner NOT in handcuffs - could you see what was coming a thousand miles off? Reese never got a drink from the water cooler. Let's see - Natalie says "Nick, make love to me" - and he just bites her. We didn't even get a "Dead of Night" style love scene. Of course, with all the loose ends they had to tie up in one short hour... Well, enough rambling....just needed to vent. Looking forward to others comments. Any way to get a digest or two of spoilers posted over the weekend? If so, please e-mail me - thanks. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 08:15 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id IAA26107 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 08:15:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id D162BE34 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 8:14:23 -0400 Message-Id: <199605201215.IAA26107@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 07:11:22 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: TippiNB Subject: Re: SPOILERS: Last Knight (ep 22) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1080 Status: O X-Status: Sandra wrote: > And LC's poisonous words to make >Nick doubt his faith even at the end!!!!!!!!!!! What a horrible thing >to do to Nick!!!!! Well, I'm peeved at LC for not just bapping Nick over the head with that staff and bringing him back to his senses. If one has faith, how can someone make one doubt it? What else is LC going to say? "Okie dokie, buddy."? I mean, his character in this ep was fairly consisten with the character we saw revealed in AtA, but he ain't gonna do a *complete* 180 and not try to convince Nick maybe dying is a *bad* idea. We're always upset about the lack of continuity, and then when we get it we don't like it. ;) Well you can't please all of the people all of the time, and after seeing LK I doubt anyone was pleased at ANYtime during this ep. But speficially which poisonous words are we talking about? Wicked Cousin Tippi, dollar bill wrangler of the Thong Throng! *Charter Member of the Unnamed Faction*Voyeur of the Menage LaCroix* Come, dip your chip in the Velveeta Glory of LaCroix. http://www.netcom.com/~tippinb/wicked.html From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 08:25 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id IAA28261 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 08:25:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 05DEA221 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 8:15:51 -0400 Message-Id: <199605201225.IAA28261@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 04:38:16 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Mary Wilkerson Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 305 Status: O X-Status: Spoilers (not really): What can I say that hasn't already been said? Technically lovely, well directed and acted. I hated it. I am not taping it. I am not watching it again. The PTB can rot for all I care (USA network especially). Sorry guys, it's Monday and I'm in a lousy mood. Mary W. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 08:25 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id IAA28374 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 08:25:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 6B281A64 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 8:18:41 -0400 Message-Id: <199605201225.IAA28374@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 06:58:08 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: TippiNB Subject: Re: SPOILERS: LAST KNIGHT Rationalizations! Get your red-hot rationalizations here! :> To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 669 Status: O X-Status: John wrote: >We saw the nurse cover Tracy's face with a sheet, and then her body was carted >away...that seems pretty final to me...(assuming the whole episode wasn't >simply a knightmare Nick had "Last Knight", of course) > >John Ah yes, but we saw Nick covered with a sheet, too, didn't we? In Night in Question? Maybe Vachon came back to life and brought Tracy across and now they're touring the continent in a rock n roll band. ;) Wicked Cousin Tippi, dollar bill wrangler of the Thong Throng! *Charter Member of the Unnamed Faction*Voyeur of the Menage LaCroix* Come, dip your chip in the Velveeta Glory of LaCroix. http://www.netcom.com/~tippinb/wicked.html From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 08:25 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id IAA28421 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 08:25:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id C47CBD54 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 8:21:11 -0400 Message-Id: <199605201225.IAA28421@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 07:48:44 EDT Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Lisa McDavid Subject: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1758 Status: O X-Status: As usual, I must be insane, because I like Last Knight and I don't think it's a tragic ending. 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 Nat to within an inch of her life." Without the later part where "he drinks until her breath is gone," the point is ambiguous. I agree with whoever pointed out that a mortal Nick wouldn't be able to hear whether Nat's still breathing shallowly or still has a heartbeat. 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. I've got strong ideas as to what I think happened next, but I'll save them for Fkfic-l. It's a pity about Tracy. I'm truly sorry for her fans. However, since I never got attached to her, it's not particularly bothering me. Unlike some I've spoken with, I *don't* blame Nick for refusing to bring Nat across. She never actually said, in Last Knight, "I want you to bring me across," or "I want to be a vampire." She just said she wasn't afraid to die, or to spend an eternity in darkness as long as she could spend it with Nick. In effect, she left the choice to him. She must have suspected that, in the end, he wouldn't bring her across and that he would choose to die with her. I even see a different take on his asking LaCroix to stake him. Nick might well have known that, when it came down to it, he might not have the courage to carry it through. 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. Cousin Lisa -- "That will be trouble." Lisa McDavid mcdavid-lisa@scarolina.edu From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 08:25 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id IAA28467 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 08:25:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 1FBE9455 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 8:23:44 -0400 Message-Id: <199605201225.IAA28467@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 07:33:19 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: TippiNB Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight affiliations To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 733 Status: O X-Status: Ray wrote: > Well, of course, one affiliation already exists, that which believes >that LaCroix brought Nat across, and didn't stake Nick. > > Although, I suppose, the affiliation includes others (besides me) who >think LC brought Nat across and are indifferent about the staking. Add another fraction, to which I have belonged for months: LC brought Nat across, didn't stake Nick, and now the three of them are touring the world together looking for good black suits. Welcome to the menage! Wicked Cousin Tippi, dollar bill wrangler of the Thong Throng! *Charter Member of the Unnamed Faction*Voyeur of the Menage LaCroix* Come, dip your chip in the Velveeta Glory of LaCroix. http://www.netcom.com/~tippinb/wicked.html From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 08:41 EDT 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id IAA00777 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 08:41:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.9F75B1A0@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; Mon, 20 May 1996 8:37:47 -0400 Message-Id: <199605201241.IAA00777@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 08:38:47 +30000 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Valerie Meachum Subject: SPOILERS: Last Knight X-cc: nat.pack@umich.edu, FKX List , alikhat@ix.netcom.com, cat.goddess@pobox.com, catheboo@cco.caltech.edu, choff@violet.berkeley.edu, D020214@UNIVSCVM.CSD.SCAROLINA.EDU, feden@mcs.com, finabair@aol.com, gryphon@execpc.com, h36a@unb.ca, janes@interlog.com, jennise@talarian.com, jtkirby@mcs.com, kingv@ucs.orst.edu, KWELSS@us.oracle.com, loreleif@ix.netcom.com, Maureen.Wynn@mailgw.uprod.music.umich.edu, menikoff@panix.com, romana@ix.netcom.com, sss44@aol.com, vqrw76a@prodigy.com, westonk@uwwvax.uww.edu To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2972 Status: O X-Status: This is not so much a proper spoiler post as a declaration of faith. I expect to do proper spoiler posts, probably *very* plural, at such time as I figure out who to even *begin* to communicate what I want to say in plain text. (Probably at such time as 99% of my brain capacity is no longer stuck in 1692, which will be another few weeks...) What I witnessed last night was one of the most stunning pieces of storytelling I have ever had the privilege of experiencing. What happens next, and indeed what happened *onscreen*, is wide open to a million possibilities, all of which make perfect sense. Whatever "real-world" information may tell us to the contrary, for that hour I saw virtually no intrusive evidence of any conflict or forcing in the process of telling the story. Not to say that everything about the story makes me *happy*, by any stretch of the imagination. But it is not in my nature to avoid the unpleasant, and all that happened (andlargely the way that it happened) was what *must* happen unless some other major changes had intervened (which was possible, but not by any means inevitable.) Tracy's death, LaCroix's sudden decision to move on, Nat's emotional turning point and ultimatum, Nick's stunned acceptance of all of the above...these things, while making a heck of a dent in my Kleenex box, did not feel to me as if they had been imposed, but grew naturally from the choices thiese people made, in keeping with who they are and where they have travelled over the past four years. (And the *brilliant* use of old-ep footage underscored that--I completely lost it at the "Last Act" scene, which remains my all time favourite.) Some of those choices were right, some wrong, most...who can really say for sure? And, true to what I have always valued at the heart of FK (or part of it, at any rate), each of those choices leads to several different places, sometimes at the same time, and every possibility exists simultaneously. I haven't read the discussion already going on. I probably won't be able to for a while, not just because of time but because I have no stomach for bitterness just now, and I'm sure it's unavoidable that quite a lot is there. We all have to see through our own eyes; what makes FK special is that it is uniquely suited to that. It all depends on what we believe. Like Natalie, I have faith that it is a beginning, not an ending, whether or not another tale of it is ever told. I lack the words right now to explain to you why, except to state my very basic belief that all changes are beginnings. I believe that the integrity of FK's distinctive brand of storytelling remains intact. That is all I have ever asked. Blessings, Valerie Lynn Meachum 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 From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 21:39 EDT 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id VAA18048 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 21:39:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.26E35190@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; 19 May 1996 21:35:51 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200139.VAA18048@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 20:00:52 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Margie Hammet Subject: Re: Spoiler: LK (long) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2536 Status: RO X-Status: At 01:53 PM 5/19/96 -0700, Antonia Spadafina wrote: >....Nat s heartbeat. It is my "cheesy rationalization" for why I believe >Nat is alive. Her heartbeat fades in volume, not strength, as if Nick has >let his awareness of it slide away. It doesn t falter or stop abruptly. I >believe she is only unconscious, though very weak. I'm glad somebody else thinks this too. It's my "cheesy rationalization" for not only why Nat is alive, but why she doesn't necessarily have to be brought across to survive. It also has to with the "blood knowledge" thing. Yeah, I like that blood knowledge idea, even though it does cause problems. Surely, they're not problems that we can't handle. (Though it's really up to TPTB to handle something as important as this. Right now, I'm not counting on TPTB to handle anything decently, though.) The Theory - (Otherwise known as The Cheesy Rationalization) - When Natalie was bitten by Nick, the first impressions she had seemed terribly violent to her. They were all those memories of the women Nick had killed, taking their blood, as he was now taking Natalie's. That happened because of both Natalie's and Nick's feelings right before he bit her. Natalie was frightened. It showed on her face. Rather than acceptance being something that automatically happens with blood sharing, acceptance is _necessary_ for the blood sharing to be a pleasant experience. It's an attitude that one must bring to the experience, not something that automatically happens. And despite what Natalie had said, she was afraid, not really accepting. Nick's attitude affected the situation also. He was still overcome with the guilt he felt about what happened to Tracy as well as lots of other pain and guilt. It shows clearly in his face. Usually, when we see Nick about to chomp down on some lovely being, he is a very happy fellow. Not this time. As a result, the first impressions Natalie had were of the memories that give Nick guilt and pain. Rather than accept the memories, Natalie tried to fight the memories. That only made it worse. Soon, she felt like she was going to die. That's what Nick felt (or tasted), and that's why he thought he had taken too much. Eventually Natalie, with her faith in Nick, realized that Nick was not going to kill her, and she stopped fighting, and just let the memories and impressions, good and bad, wash over her. She is weak and unconscious, but she is alive and will eventually regain consciousness. Margie (treeleaf@io.com) N&NPacker The Unnamed Faction From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 23:01 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id XAA00964 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 23:01:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 79112165 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 23:00:44 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200301.XAA00964@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 22:55:12 EDT Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "linda c. fried" <103213.3530@COMPUSERVE.COM> Subject: spoiler-lk To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 747 Status: RO X-Status: spoiler on last knight below: o.k., guys, my apologies to everyone at the denver party that were so upset over tracey- i'm glad she's gone! still! she gave blondes a bad name. i admit i clapped and laughed with glee. she can't even die right, that hokey head wound-a huge exit wound and no enterance wound. what bull! as to nick and nat, they're both still around-either as mortals, or as immortals(how did they make love fully dressed? i rather prefer to take my clothes off-or at least some of them). at any rate, my apologies to allin denver. hopefully a movie will be in the future and we can try again... regards, linda c. fried aboarts@vail.net check out our home page at http://www.colorado.net/aboarts From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 23:14 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id XAA02944 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 23:14:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 5E748AE3 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 23:14:18 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200314.XAA02944@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 22:07:54 -0600 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Crystal Guffey Subject: SPOILER: LK (My warped mind:)) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 776 Status: RO X-Status: A thought just occurred to me a few minutes ago, I wonder if all the scenes of LC doing his treatises on love, etc. could really have taken place after Nick handed him the stake? Think about the things he says, and how they would fit in so well at that juncture. He is asking Nick is he really ready to make this sacrifice, he's seen "him" smell the sea, look at the stars, etc. This could be a whole LC dialogue to Nick to talk him into reconsidering his ambiguous "death." There is much more, but it has been a little while since I have seen it. I'm sure some brilliant person will come along and point out something I have forgotten about that would make this impossible. But it does seem something interesting to ponder. Crystal, A Vaquera Guffeyc@ten-nash.ten.k12.tn.us From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 23:28 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id XAA05427 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 23:28:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 9985F70B ; Sun, 19 May 1996 23:23:07 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200328.XAA05427@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 22:31:14 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: TippiNB Subject: Re: SPOILER: LK (My warped mind:)) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 976 Status: RO X-Status: Crystal wrote: > He is asking Nick is >he really ready to make this sacrifice, he's seen "him" smell the sea, >look at the stars, etc. This could be a whole LC dialogue to Nick to talk >him into reconsidering his ambiguous "death." There is much more, but it Well, you found something I liked about this ep besides Tracy's last line. I liked all of LC's little monologues, although I did want to drop kick him for wasting precious time! I mean, I love a LC monologue as much as the next Cousin, but I mean, there is a time and a place for everything. NB's delivery of the monologues was excellent, the text well-written, etc. It tweaked my little UF heart. But I would've gladly traded all of them for this season to have ended with Ashes. Wicked Cousin Tippi, dollar bill wrangler of the Thong Throng! *Charter Member of the Unnamed Faction*Voyeur of the Menage LaCroix* Come, dip your chip in the Velveeta Glory of LaCroix. http://www.netcom.com/~tippinb/wicked.html From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 23:30 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id XAA05851 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 23:30:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 05AE82FF ; Sun, 19 May 1996 23:26:08 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200330.XAA05851@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 21:53:12 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Margie Hammet Subject: Re: (spoiler)LK: Love; ending... To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 677 Status: RO X-Status: At 05:35 PM 5/19/96 -0400, Margaret L. Carter wrote: >I hate "it was all a dream" solutions and will be furious if that >is the tack taken by any future TV movie. I think I could take it if the part from the moment Nick walked into the loft to find Natalie there was all some sort of LaCroix induced dream of Nick's, that LaCroix created to try to get Nick away from Natalie. OTOH, after this episode, I no longer trust what I used to think was the vision of the creative Powers That Be (i.e. Parriot or whomever), and I don't trust a future TV movie to be any more satisfying than this episode was. I hope I'm wrong. Margie (treeleaf@io.com) N&NPacker The Unnamed Faction From owner-fkfic-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 23:56 EDT 1996 Received: from allison.clark.net (allison.clark.net [168.143.0.3]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id XAA09095; Sun, 19 May 1996 23:56:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from allison (allison.clark.net [168.143.0.3]) by allison.clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) with SMTP id XAA22464; Sun, 19 May 1996 23:56:03 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200356.XAA22464@allison.clark.net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 20:54:26 -0700 Reply-To: Bonnela Sender: Forever Knight TV show stories From: Bonnela Subject: Fic: Missing scene from LK -- spoilers To: Multiple recipients of list FKFIC-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2282 Status: RO X-Status: Spoilers for 'Ashes to Ashes' and 'Last Knight' ~~~~~ S P O I L E R S P A C E ~~~~~ This is a scene I think was missing from Last Knight. The usual disclaimers apply. ~~~~~ Her Last Night by Bonnie Pardoe She had been lying there for hours. Her father had stayed until her mother had arrived -- they had fought about the same old things. It was his fault, she said, that her little girl had become a cop; it was his fault that her baby was lying in that hospital bed dying. And he knew these things were true. After he had gone, she blamed herself; if only she had been a more attentive mother, more supportive. She remembered the last time they had been together -- they had quarreled. She wept over the still form of her daughter. Her partner had arrived to keep his vigil. He had sent her mother to get some rest -- she had protested but he had been very persuasive. He ached inside. Another partner, and this time it was undeniably his fault. If he had only told her. He thought he was protecting her. Her last words had wounded him as if they had been a stake to his heart, "You could have trusted me." He should have; she had proven that she had been worthy of such trust. If only he had it to do all over again. It would not turn out this way. He would not allow it to. The periodic whoosh of the resperator, the almost steady blip of the heart monitor. These were the only sounds her visitors heard. But she did not even hear these things. There were no sounds where she was, there were no smells, only a close darkness, like being snuggled up under a big, warm quilt. She felt safe. She was alone but she was not lonely. There came a feeling that had always been there; it was deep inside her and yet it surrounded her. The quilt fell away and a voice buoyed her up. It was deep and warm, tender and caring. The voice filled her with a joy she had heretofore only dreamed of. "I love you." The voice was hers and it was his. The words and voices melted together; they were a part of their souls. "Tracy." "Vachon." ~~~~~~~~~ We wish you both luck. Bonnie visit the web pages of the recently dead http://users.lanminds.com/~callalily/ From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 00:08 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id AAA11568 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 00:08:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 105BDE54 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 0:02:14 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200408.AAA11568@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 23:56:02 +0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: John Folden Subject: Re: Spoiler LK: misogyny To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 584 Status: RO X-Status: > From: "Elizabeth Mosler" > Me: > Excellent observations. Although I wonder if Natalie meant that her life > was nothing without love in it? Not so much the "having a man" part, but > just the experience of love itself. I tend to agree with you on this one...There she is, in love with a man she's known for 6 years and yet they've never really showed commitment and love to each other in a full-fledged relationship. Nat also mentioned in a previous episode (My Boyfriend Is A Vampire) that sometimes you need to be told that you're loved. John From owner-forkni-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 00:34 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id AAA15194 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 00:33:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 7D0CC8B6 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 0:33:54 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200433.AAA15194@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 20:35:06 -2055 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show Sender: Forever Knight TV show From: "L. Katherine Queen" Subject: LK-no spoiler To: Multiple recipients of list FORKNI-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 550 Status: RO X-Status: Hi gang, Allright you guys I still don't get to watch Last Knight for two and one-half hours yet and I have 16 messages I can't read because they contain spoilers. This is torture! Is there a twelve step program out there for FK addiction. I sure need to enroll. We'll probably end up as guests on the Sally J. Raphael show. Abusive shows and the people who love them...next week on SJR! Sorry for ranting---off to pace now. Katherine, Knightie in distress...Wait a minute isn't that supposed to be damsel in distress? =( lqueen@polarnet.com From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 00:52 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id AAA17296 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 00:52:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 1E8BF77F ; Mon, 20 May 1996 0:38:25 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200452.AAA17296@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 00:41:16 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Jill Gillham Subject: Spoilers:(not really)LK:Not just de big river in Egypt To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 635 Status: RO X-Status: Yes, I am going through De Nile big time. As I sit typing, the vcr downstairs is furiously taping Last Knight. I don't know if I'll ever watch it. I just know that BAD THINGS are going to happen. Darn it, I've got too much of an emotional investment in these folks to let them go like that. I couldn't watch Ashes to Ashes either. Am I weird or just a Pollyanna? Gouda Prime never happened Last Knight Never Happened Tessa is alive and living as a vampire in southern France Schanke is an immie and revived as soon as they pieced him together Colonel Blake was on a different chopper Jill Marie the Revisionist jilkey@grfn.org From owner-forkni-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 01:11 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id BAA19640 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 01:11:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id AFBAF17E ; Mon, 20 May 1996 1:11:06 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200511.BAA19640@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 01:10:46 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show Sender: Forever Knight TV show From: "Lisa P." Subject: I Just Saw LK...SPOILERS To: Multiple recipients of list FORKNI-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 588 Status: RO X-Status: I don't think warm fuzzies is going to be enough. I think the powers that be must hate us. I cannot believe they would do this. They certainly wanted to make certain that FK would not return (as a movie), at least with the characters we have come to love. I can't believe that Nick wouldn't be able to stop with Natalie, and that Lacroix would kill his own son (at least that is how it was made to look). I am VERY depressed. Anyone out there? I'll be on-line for another half hour or so. E-mail me directly, I'm on digest. I'm so mad I could bite... Lisa P. LadysAVamp@aol.com From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 02:37 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id CAA28619 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 02:37:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id BB001284 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 2:37:19 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200637.CAA28619@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 01:35:52 CDT Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "OREL, SARA" Subject: spoiler: lk, Tracy To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: In reply to your message of Mon, 20 May 1996 01:00:46 CDT Content-Type: text Content-Length: 508 Status: RO X-Status: Just a note (I was rewatching LK tonight) -- They don't say that Trace got shot in the head, just that she took two bullets, in the abdomen... and a really bad head wound. I can see that she took two in the abdomen (although it looked like just one blood stain to me) and the head wound was caused by her being blown back against the wall. But it is late and I know I should not celebrate school being over by staying up too late... Sara Orel FA55%nemomus@academic.nemostate.edu From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 04:49 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id EAA08405 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 04:49:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 96713A13 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 3:55:02 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200849.EAA08405@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 00:30:45 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Karen Stortz Subject: Spoiler: LK (Lasting Knausea) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1530 Status: O X-Status: Why in the world do we leave spoiler space on a SPOILER LIST???? 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Okay, so now I've seen it. 1) What I'm willing to accept from fanfic: anyboby can be as alive or dead or undead as anyone wants. I can read it or not if I want. 2) What I want for series canon: LaCroix did it. They're dead, Jim. Let it die. I, for one, don't want to see TPTB get a chance to botch it up worse in a tv movie or any other forum, especially in view of the rumors early in the season that there was some question of whether they were going to sign CD or not (I don't know whether there was even a grain of truth in that, but still, one wonders). How easy it would be for them to bring Nick back; what a perfect excuse this would give them to kill off Natalie. I'd rather have seen it end with more grace, more dignity, more hope, and a decent script, but failing that, I'll accept it ending where it is. 3) Truly fine performances all around. 4) LaCroix's monologue, as I see it, is from Nick's POV, seen through Nick's tears, hence the distortion. Very nice directorial touch. 5) Ger's direction: overall, very nice. He moves the camera well. His biggest problem (all too evident in the morgue scene in this ep, and there are instances from his other eps as well) is knowing WHEN NOT to move it. (There was also that little coverage problem with Tracy getting shot, but on the schedule TV directors are forced to work on, it happens.) That's pretty much all that's left to say. Karen From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 05:46 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id FAA12612 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 05:46:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 30DB7B57 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 5:46:44 -0400 Message-Id: <199605200946.FAA12612@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 00:46:12 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Margie Hammet Subject: Re: SPOILER: LK Details from Laurie To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 388 Status: O X-Status: >What say we just chalk this whole last episode up to one of Nick's guilty >dreams? Or even LaCroix'? That's certainly one of my interpretations of it. At least the part starting with Nick coming back into the loft and finding Natalie there. More later, maybe, when I can stand it. If I can stand it. Sorry, Powers That Be, but you can do better than this. Margie (treeleaf@io.com) From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Thu May 16 09:00 EDT 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id JAA12653 for ; Thu, 16 May 1996 09:00:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.A704AEA0@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; Thu, 16 May 1996 8:57:03 -0400 Message-Id: <199605161300.JAA12653@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Thu, 16 May 1996 08:56:24 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Tammy Stephanie Davis Subject: Re: Forever Knight (fwd) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1313 Status: RO X-Status: The following is a conversation I've had with the Sci Fi Channel. I asked them if they were going to edit the first and second season episodes to put in more commericals. Here's my explaination of my question and their response. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 8 May 1996 16:43:49 -0400 (EDT) From: The Dominion Feedback To: Tammy Stephanie Davis Subject: Re: Forever Knight > What I'm saying is quite often when a show is picked up to be rerun in > syndication (or in this case on cable), additional minutes are removed > from each episode to allow more commericals to be shown (Star Trek, MASH, > Mission Impossible and dozens of others.) > > I'm asking if the SciFi channel plans to do this to Forever Knight? Oh, right, I understand. While just about every show seen in syndication (even recent shows, like THE SIMPSONS) has had minutes cut out to make room for extra commercial time, I don't believe we have any plans to cut our episodes of FK down any further. We don't have the rights to the uncut Canadian versions (and I'm not sure we would air them if we could, since we do need the extra commercial revenue). But the versions we plan to air are the same ones that aired in the U.S. in first-run syndication. I hope this clears things up. From owner-forkni-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Thu May 16 09:14 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id JAA15475 for ; Thu, 16 May 1996 09:14:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 8E9A2AF0 ; Thu, 16 May 1996 9:14:32 -0400 Message-Id: <199605161314.JAA15475@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Thu, 16 May 1996 08:59:53 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show Sender: Forever Knight TV show From: Tammy Stephanie Davis Subject: Re: Forever Knight (fwd) To: Multiple recipients of list FORKNI-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1314 Status: RO X-Status: The following is a conversation I've had with the Sci Fi Channel. I asked them if they were going to edit the first and second season episodes to put in more commericals. Here's my explaination of my question and their response. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 8 May 1996 16:43:49 -0400 (EDT) From: The Dominion Feedback To: Tammy Stephanie Davis Subject: Re: Forever Knight > What I'm saying is quite often when a show is picked up to be rerun in > syndication (or in this case on cable), additional minutes are removed > from each episode to allow more commericals to be shown (Star Trek, MASH, > Mission Impossible and dozens of others.) > > I'm asking if the SciFi channel plans to do this to Forever Knight? Oh, right, I understand. While just about every show seen in syndication (even recent shows, like THE SIMPSONS) has had minutes cut out to make room for extra commercial time, I don't believe we have any plans to cut our episodes of FK down any further. We don't have the rights to the uncut Canadian versions (and I'm not sure we would air them if we could, since we do need the extra commercial revenue). But the versions we plan to air are the same ones that aired in the U.S. in first-run syndication. I hope this clears things up. From owner-forkni-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sat May 18 19:38 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id TAA20681 for ; Sat, 18 May 1996 19:38:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 116FDD6B ; Sat, 18 May 1996 19:38:35 -0400 Message-Id: <199605182338.TAA20681@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sat, 18 May 1996 19:38:09 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show Sender: Forever Knight TV show From: "Meredith E. Pickering" Subject: Fwd: Forever Knight merchandise To: Multiple recipients of list FORKNI-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 894 Status: RO X-Status: In a message dated 96-05-18 15:36:20 EDT, TV_ShowStuff@prodigy.com (ANNE W MARION) writes: >Thanks for the note! FK requests are HUGE!! Above, a portion of the response I received when I e-mailed the TV_ShowStuff folks asking about FK merchandise. They also said they're working on it. Great job, all - anyone who has not asked for FK merchandise yet, e-mail them NOW!!! Meredith Natpacker, N&Npacker, Dracpacker --------------------- Forwarded message: From: TV_ShowStuff@prodigy.com (ANNE W MARION) To: Plan2@aol.com Date: 96-05-18 15:36:20 EDT HI! We are working on getting FK merchandise as I speak. I will keep your name on a mailing list and once we get confirmation I will email you. Thanks for your patience. The proper channels unfortunately take time... :-( Thanks for the note! FK requests are HUGE!! Anne-TV ShowStuff http://www.hiero.com/hiero/showstuff/showstuf.html From owner-forkni-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 16:00 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id QAA02811 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 16:00:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id A1D6053E ; Sun, 19 May 1996 15:59:32 -0400 Message-Id: <199605192000.QAA02811@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 14:43:42 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show Sender: Forever Knight TV show From: Brian Mitchell Subject: Forever Knight IRC information To: Multiple recipients of list FORKNI-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2569 Status: RO X-Status: Those of you who know me, please try to remain conscious. Yes this is really me posting. :) ======== Are you interested in a different and fun way of chatting with other fans of Forever Knight? You are welcome to join us on the #ForeverKnight IRC channels on both EFNet and UnderNet. EFNet EFNet's #ForeverKnight channel has been around for over a year. It is open nightly and is host to a good number of interesting and witty people. Of course, conversations range from Canadian moose chasing children on motorbikes to involved, thought provoking topics of Forever Knight. It keeps talk entertaining to say the least! For a list of EFNet IRC servers, point your web browser to: ftp://ftp.comco.com:/pub/irc/server-list-current or try one of these if you are anxious to start: irc.mo.net irc.cnde.iastat.edu irc.winternet.com irc.caltech.edu irc.froniernet.net irc.ais.net irc.blackened.com irc.cerf.net If you have questions or need more information, contact one of us at: ithildin@mbay.net (on IRC as Ithildin) dmd@aracnet.com (on IRC as Minx, EvilMinx, or some variant ) bamitchell@life.uams.edu (on IRC as Brian-M) ------------------------------ UnderNet UnderNet's #ForeverKnight channel has now been approved as a registered UnderNet IRC channel! Like it's EFNet counterpart, it is open nightly and is home to some really great people and great conversations. For a list of UnderNet IRC servers, point your web browser to: http://servers.undernet.org/server-list.html or try one of these if you are ready to jump in: irc.cic.com uirc.lm.com irc-undernet.gnn.com If you have questions or need more information, contact: mickey@cybercomm.net (on IRC as Mickey-) ------------------------------ * AOL users, for help on connecting to IRC contact: dpgile@novell.com (on IRC as So-Krates) * NetCom users, due to certain problems, few EFNet servers other than NetCom's own will allow access. A few still allowing access are: irc.blackened.com irc.best.com irc.winternet.com ------------------------------ For more information on IRC, check out: http://www.aracnet.com/~dmd/irc.html Hope to see you there! ======== OBFK: Can someone tell me if it is fact or conjecture as to whether SciFi will play all three seasons, and if so, when the will begin? Thanks. Brian Mitchell (Brian-M) bamitchell@life.uams.edu From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 09:15 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id JAA07039 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 09:15:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 53BFB5EC ; Mon, 20 May 1996 9:15:18 -0400 Message-Id: <199605201315.JAA07039@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 09:17:55 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Nancy Fralic Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: reply-to Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1005 Status: O X-Status: I haven't read any of the messages yet about LK and I'm sure this has already been said, but: I awoke with a start on Sunday morning - Sat. I was so blown away by the ending that it took until then for me to realize "Oh my God, Nick's tears were clear!" The cure worked (at what cost) but now, providing LaCroix does kill Nick, his soul would be saved and he and Nat can be together. After all, all a mortal need do is repent his sins to be saved, and Nick certainly had done that. If (I mean when!) there is a TV movie, there are great possibilities with this ending - would realizing there is a heartbeat - Nick's - stop LaCroix? The movie could even begin with a role reversal, Nat as the vamp, LC's child, and Nick the mortal. YKYBW... I saw "Damn Yankees" over the weekend and when the Devil (Jerry Lewis) and Lola are in limbo, they see famous love pairs there "Romeo and Juliet, Tristan and Isolde,..." I mentally added Nick and Nat! Nancy Fralic fralic@mother-goose.mccleary.pps.pgh.pa.us From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 09:37 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id JAA11837 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 09:37:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id F8FF6AB3 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 9:34:14 -0400 Message-Id: <199605201337.JAA11837@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 09:24:59 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Sandra Gray Subject: SPOILERS: Last Knight (ep 22) Tracy To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1017 Status: O X-Status: Although I'm not any sort of medical authority, is it possible that one of the bullets that hit Tracy in the stomach exited out her head? Or that the a bullet passed through Tracy's stomach, hit the wall, and a fragment (or the entire bullet) hit her in the head? 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). Nick wouldn't be concerned about being shot, but it certainly would have added to his distress for bullets meant to kill him to have killed Tracy. I thought Tracy's last words to Nick were to let him know that he could have trusted her with the knowledge that he was a vampire. I think he could have done that too. Rather than acted badly, I thought Lisa Ryder was wonderful in her death scene. I was saddened by her death. --Sandra Gray, forever Knightie --tmp_harkins@dirac.physics.jmu.edu From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 09:56 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id JAA15740 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 09:56:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 2ED6E1EE ; Mon, 20 May 1996 9:42:54 -0400 Message-Id: <199605201356.JAA15740@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 09:26:51 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Beth Washington Subject: Last Knight - Major Spoilers To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 3099 Status: O X-Status: OK.... I've been lurking for a while, enjoying greatly the last few show, especially Jane Doe and Ashes to Ashes. Then last night, bleary eyed at Midnight, I watched Last Knight....tears are still in my eyes. S P O I L E R S p A C E That should be enough..... He's dead! I can't believe he's dead! The show had me on the edge of my seat, and even though I was tired after a long day, I was wide awake with anticipation. LaCroix was amazing. His "speeches" so moving, so true, aimed directly at the heart, always hitting the right mark....they had me wishing for more. And though you will probably hear this many times over, let me add my voice to the masses. BRAVO Nigel, BRAVO!!! Tracy being shot, and at the same time discovering Nick's secret, then her plea that she could have been trusted with it, and Nick's reaction.... such pain! This is when the tears started. Then in the hospital, when Nick is contimplating bring Tracy across, and Nat walks in and says "How do you know this is what she would want. Why is it so easy to consider bringing her across, and so heartwrenchingly hard to consider bringing me?" Nat's plea is from the heart, though I was a little surprised that after all this time, she was actually willing to let Nick bring her across so they could be together. At the end, my heart started to race as Nat finally convinced him with her wonderful speech about faith, and how she has faith in him...and then his eyes changed. Oh I was excited. Though I lean towards being a Knightie, the Cousin that I am was excited the Nick was willing to accept who he is, and to allow himself a little happiness. Even our beloved LaCroix, though happy to see Nick finally being the vampire he wished him to be, he reminded Nick of the humanity he holds so dear. With Natalie there on the brink, he realizes he can not doom her to his dark life. The final kiss, and then Nick's final words to LaCroix "You are my best friend", then handed him the wooden stick....... The pain, the tears, the anguish..... how can he die? How noble is his faith to believe he will be with Nat in death, in an afterlife. And LaCroix's pain, giving Nick what he wants, even though he himself values life as a precious jewel. I am truely sad. Even though Nick and Nat are together, they are still dead, dead to us, and LaCroix is now truely alone. This is not a happy ending, or even a hopeful ending...it is just an ending. A final ending. So sad. -Biffer (wondering why they had to kill everyone. How can they bring them back for a fourth season. They can't. They ruined it!) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ This is good. Beth Washington This is real good! Quality Assurance Engineer -Tempus Avid Technology, Tewksbury, MA from Lois & Clark Beth_Washington@Avid.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------ From owner-forkni-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 10:57 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id KAA01185 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 10:57:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 2F582A14 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 10:54:30 -0400 Message-Id: <199605201457.KAA01185@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 09:50:10 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show Sender: Forever Knight TV show From: Jeff Standish Subject: NetRatings for Forever Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FORKNI-L In-Reply-To: <199605200623.BAA28200@obslave.ucs.indiana.edu> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 3749 Status: O X-Status: Notice: This is the last regular posting of voting summaries. A more-or-less final summary of all episodes will be posted in a few weeks after most people have seen all of the new episodes in syndication (for those of us lucky enough to have access to it that way). So cast your votes for the final episodes. After the final summary is posted, the current results will only be found on the web home page. Recent Episodes: #322, Last Knight #321, Ashes to Ashes #320, Francesca #319, Jane Doe Season 3 Episodes Rating Max Min StdDev # Votes ----------------------------------- ------ ----- ----- ------ ------- 301 The Black Buddha, Part 1 6.84 10.00 3.00 1.48 57 302 The Black Buddha, Part 2 6.96 10.00 3.00 1.45 52 303 Outside the Lines 5.57 9.00 1.00 1.90 44 304 Blackwing 7.68 10.00 3.00 1.62 51 305 Blind Faith 6.54 10.00 1.00 2.15 46 306 My Boyfriend is a Vampire 7.73 10.00 4.00 1.51 53 307 Hearts of Darkness 6.52 10.00 3.00 1.66 46 308 Trophy Girl 6.65 10.00 1.00 1.94 39 309 Let No Man Tear Asunder 7.26 10.00 3.00 1.69 45 310 Night in Question 9.33 10.00 2.00 1.34 65 311 Sons of Belial 9.21 10.00 6.00 1.02 54 312 Strings 6.92 10.00 3.00 1.65 30 313 Fever 9.35 10.00 4.00 1.19 36 314 Dead of Night 8.78 10.00 6.00 0.98 31 315 The Games Vampires Play 7.88 10.00 3.00 1.80 28 316 The Human Factor 8.06 10.00 2.00 2.21 31 317 Avenging Angel 6.27 8.00 1.00 1.83 13 318 Fallen Idol 7.36 10.00 5.00 1.39 14 319 Jane Doe 7.61 9.00 6.00 1.22 9 320 Francesca 321 Ashes to Ashes 322 Last Knight Number of Episodes: 22 Votes per Episode: 34.36 Average Rating: 7.73 Weighted Average: 7.59 Rating is the average rating from those gathered to date. Max is the highest rating received. Min is the lowest rating received. StdDev is the standard deviation of the collected ratings. # Votes is the total number of votes counted for that episode. How does it work? E-mail me (jestandi@cs.indiana.edu) your vote for a given episode, telling me the name of the episode and how you would rate it on a scale of 1 (lowest) to 10 (highest). If you don't know the name of an episode, you can check out the episode guide at: http://www.hu.mtu.edu/~gjwalli/FK/Episodes/episode_guide.html I accept votes for the current week's episode, along with all previous episodes (including those from previous seasons). A listing of all votes received for each episode is available from the main web page, listed by e-mail name (full e-mail addresses are withheld for validation purposes). The current ratings for Forever Knight are posted weekly to alt.tv.forever-knight and rec.arts.sf.tv, the Forever Knight mailing list, and can also be found over the web at the following address: http://www.cs.indiana.edu/hyplan/jestandi/fk-ratings.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jeff Standish The concept is simply jestandi@cs.indiana.edu staggering. Pointless, http://www.cs.indiana.edu/hyplan/jestandi.html but staggering. -Dr. Who ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 12:13 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id MAA20898 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 12:13:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 3144F184 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 12:13:18 -0400 Message-Id: <199605201613.MAA20898@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 12:12:05 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Larissa Field Subject: Re: SPOILER: Last Knight, Accepting It To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 815 Status: O X-Status: At 15:07 19/05/96 -0700, Amy wrote: >As yet, in my reading, no one has discussed what seemed obvious to me -- >that the whole episode was a flashback loop (ironic: Nick's own personal >Hell -- his memories). All of the commentary from LC was delivered to >Nick, as he lay on the floor of the loft with the stake through his heart. I too, saw it as a flashback loop, however the way I saw it LC didn't stake Nick. Rather I saw at as LC not being able to do it and is trying to talk some sense into him. The reason I don't think LC staked Nick is because of LC's last monologue scene--the one where we see Nick. He seemed fine there. But I do agree that LC's monologue scenes took place *after* the final scene. I'v posted all this already, so I won't get in to it all again. Larissa Field From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 12:46 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id MAA28110 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 12:46:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id C08B76C5 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 12:24:27 -0400 Message-Id: <199605201646.MAA28110@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 11:42:12 EST Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Ronni Katz Subject: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 906 Status: O X-Status: Stayed up until 2am to see this. This is *not* an ep to watch if you've had a bad week. I am in the camp that says Nick lives. LC probably knocked Nick out and carried him off. He *maY* have Embraced Natalie and made hera part of their entourage (LC Made a comment about adding Nat to their group in the episode) If they make a movie that has Nick/Nat/LC as the new trio of vamps, I could live with that They killed off all the season 3 new characters (except for Reece). Bummer. Some of us actually *liked* Vachon. Tracy...well, she was a bit annoying at times. Screed talked cool and Urs was never really given much of a chance. Oh, well... I'm writing to SciFi Channel in the hopes they (a) read their mail and (b) might actually take up the suggestion about making an FK movie! Ron the Enforcer Die-Hard From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 13:22 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id NAA07233 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 13:22:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 91F28332 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 12:44:38 -0400 Message-Id: <199605201722.NAA07233@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 10:42:44 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Margie Hammet Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight affiliations To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 417 Status: RO X-Status: >> Any ideas for the Last Knight affiliations names? Amy Rambow wrote: >We need to hang together for a while yet, realizing that whichever >characters have died or survived in whatever fashion, we've all lost FK, >and we're probably all hurting. We need each other's support too badly >to factionalize this, I sincerely believe. I agree with this. Let's not split up around Last Knight. Margie (treeleaf@io.com0 From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 13:25 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id NAA07869 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 13:25:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id BFF6B217 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 12:45:55 -0400 Message-Id: <199605201725.NAA07869@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 08:58:00 PST Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "Stroup, Judie" Subject: Last Knight - Major Spoilers To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2336 Status: RO X-Status: Delurking to eulogize Forever Knight... Thank you. Thank you to Nigel, Catherine and Ger. Fred and JP. Ben, Lisa, Deb and John. It's been a wild, angst-filled ride, full of joy and sorrow, pain and despair, guilt, folly, and death. But in the end, faith, hope and love. And through it all, we've been treated to brillant acting, inspired direction and blindingly beautiful music. It's changed us, moved us, inspired us. I wouldn't have missed this for the world. Once again, thank you. I'd also like to say that I'm probably one of the few who are grateful that we've reached closure in this last episode. I'm not saying that I liked the way things ended, but I'm pleased that TPTB were courageous enough to bring the struggles of Nick and Nat to an end. In regards to Last Knight, it feels somewhat disrespectful to pick apart this episode, but... First off, kudos to Ger's acting AND directing. Stunning! Nigel and Catherine were in top form too! I'm glad Tracy found out about Nick. It was a bittersweet moment and I'm sorry she didn't find out sooner. It would have been nice if she could've talked about Vachon with someone. The scene in the Raven. Did anybody else feel like the discussion between Nick and Lacroix was also directed to us, the fans? All that talk about the need to move on, that staying around would only bring compromise, that they had "come full circle in this life". Also, later, Lacroix states that "staying past our time is death", that "leaving is the purest form of love!" Lacroix and Nick in the loft. Redemption and reconcillation. "You are my closest friend." Powerful. But.... In the loft, Nat pleaded with Nick to "make love to her". But she (and the fans) were cheated out of this! She (and us) should have been treated to a intimate, passionate, experience, culminating in the ultimate act...Nick's feeding! Instead, all we got was a so-so kiss, a little nibble on the wrist, then Nick feeding. I wanted more! Of course, the look on Nick's face when he finally gave in to Nat's request and vamped out spoke volumes. Love, fear, hope. They were all there. Bravo Ger. I'm out of words. The wound's still to fresh. Nick and Nat - we'll miss you. I hope you found each other on the other side. judie - No factions...I loved them all stroup@ops195.lmsc.lockheed.com From soulseek@sprynet.com Mon May 20 13:45 EDT 1996 Received: from m2.sprynet.com (m2.sprynet.com [165.121.1.99]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id NAA12428 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 13:45:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [199.174.154.88] (dd12-088.compuserve.com [199.174.154.88]) by m2.sprynet.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA17529; Mon, 20 May 1996 10:42:13 -0700 From: soulseek@sprynet.com Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 10:42:13 -0700 Message-Id: <199605201742.KAA17529@m2.sprynet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: RE: N&N loop (Last Knight) To: asnelson@indiana.edu, acapozzi@wellesley.edu, AMORG@aol.com, egardner@facstaff.wisc.edu, CKrumtum@gnn.com, jclemens@world.std.com, bonney@interpath.com, Claudius@NETRIDE.COM, criss@marlboro.edu, fiorini@MARYWOOD1.MARYWOOD.EDU, dgthomas@ix.netcom.com, phase3@gate.net, dottir@wsii.com, efriedm1@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu, ILCzJules@aol.com, jasonl@cnwl.igs.net, shalott@chattanooga.net, dukarsja@udmercy.edu, RICHARD@iclnet.co.uk, jtfolden@erinet.com, Baigneuse@aol.com, lplummer@interlink.com, LoriArgyll@aol.com, lydiam@singnet.com.sg, d_Roberts@msn.com, moser@clark.net, catspaw@cruzio.com, rfulton@directnet.net, swells@phoenix.atticus.com, TGill10669@aol.com, valworth@aol.com X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.10.06.22 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Length: 1578 Status: O X-Status: <---- Begin Forwarded Message ----> From: jtfolden@erinet.com Date: Sun, 19 May 96 23:43:37 +0500 To: soulseek@sprynet.com Subject: Re: N&N loop (Last Knight) > From: ILCzJules@aol.com > have permanent implications.> What I found odd was that it mentions neither, > Season nor Series Finale.-- Which leads me to whatI saw on FKSPOILR > 5-16-96.--This was apparently accurate, per Laurie, who says she's seen LK. I > read the entire Last Knight episode. we're talking word for word (12 printed > pages). If it IS shown as was written there.. it ends much more resembling a > cliffhanger than a wrap.--If that be, my dear souls, hope for resurrection is > TRULY an option. The fight MUST continue! Illinois Jules After watching the episode I also felt that it was more a cliff-hanger than a finale. The ending is, indeed, quite ambiguous when it comes to Nick&Nat. I wish I could say the same for Tracy...(of course, if you go by the theory that the whole episode was just a Knightmare that Nick had "Last Knight" (possible due to hallucinations brought on by his previous run-in with Divia's "Bad-Blood" then everybody is still safe-n-sound... ) John <---- End Forwarded Message ----> I TRULY HOPE THEY (THE PRODUCERS) DO GIVE FOREVER KNIGHT A MORE SOLID FINISH; I MEAN EVERYONE LOVES A CLIFFHANGER, BUT USUALLY ONLY WHEN YOU KNOW YOU'LL EVENTUALLY FIND OUT WHAT HAPPENED. I AM NOT HOPEFUL THAT WE'LL EVER REALLY KNOW. AS THE MAN SAID "MOST THINGS END BADLY, OTHERWISE THEY WOULDN'T END AT ALL". JAYSON <---- End Forwarded Message ----> From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 13:55 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id NAA14669 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 13:55:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 9559F8E8 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 13:49:09 -0400 Message-Id: <199605201755.NAA14669@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 13:44:21 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Carol Lynn Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1991 Status: RO X-Status: >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@aol.com -- "I will listen to any hypothesis on but one condition-- that you show me a method by which it can be tested." From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 13:58 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id NAA15364 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 13:58:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id E0ADD884 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 13:51:15 -0400 Message-Id: <199605201758.NAA15364@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 10:44:39 PST Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "P. L. Montgomery" Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight affiliations To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1357 Status: RO X-Status: From: plcm Full-Name: P. L. Montgomery To: FKSPOILR@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight affiliations References: <199605200755.DAA03767@x2.boston.juno.com> X-Status: New X-Mailer: Juno 1.00 > Ray Heuer writes: > Well, of course, one affiliation already exists, that which > believes that LaCroix brought Nat across, and didn't stake Nick. > Although, I suppose, the affiliation includes others (besides me) > who think LC brought Nat across and are indifferent about the > staking. > Rage! Rage! Against the dying of the Knight! Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 00:12:57 PST I just saw Last Knight. I simply don't accept it, so I'm not crying. And even were I to accept it, there are still so many, many avenues for continuance into a fourth season, so many "plot loopholes" interwoven into the tapestry of this episode, that I cannot despair. Rather I have hope that if we are vocal enough, if we make our wishes heard, we can yet make Forever Knight truly forever. Remember [the Alamo] Star Trek! Look what an active, vocal fandom did for its longevity and continued existence after its putative "death". Have hope, fellow fans of Forever Knight. "Forever Knight... Forever!" P.L. Montgomery plcm@juno.com (for messages, etc.) plcm@tracks.cpxl.com (for encoded files, etc.) From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 14:08 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id OAA17776 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 14:08:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 4483796D ; Mon, 20 May 1996 13:54:03 -0400 Message-Id: <199605201808.OAA17776@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 09:52:22 PDT Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "Leslie I.Plummer" Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1047 Status: O X-Status: 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?) From soulseek@sprynet.com Mon May 20 14:10 EDT 1996 Received: from m2.sprynet.com (m2.sprynet.com [165.121.1.99]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id OAA18262 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 14:10:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [199.174.154.88] (dd12-088.compuserve.com [199.174.154.88]) by m2.sprynet.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA19506; Mon, 20 May 1996 10:54:03 -0700 From: soulseek@sprynet.com Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 10:54:03 -0700 Message-Id: <199605201754.KAA19506@m2.sprynet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: N&N Loop (Last Knight spoiler) To: asnelson@indiana.edu, acapozzi@wellesley.edu, AMORG@aol.com, egardner@facstaff.wisc.edu, CKrumtum@gnn.com, jclemens@world.std.com, bonney@interpath.com, Claudius@NETRIDE.COM, criss@marlboro.edu, fiorini@MARYWOOD1.MARYWOOD.EDU, dgthomas@ix.netcom.com, phase3@gate.net, dottir@wsii.com, efriedm1@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu, ILCzJules@aol.com, jasonl@cnwl.igs.net, shalott@chattanooga.net, dukarsja@udmercy.edu, RICHARD@iclnet.co.uk, jtfolden@erinet.com, Baigneuse@aol.com, lplummer@interlink.com, LoriArgyll@aol.com, lydiam@singnet.com.sg, d_Roberts@msn.com, moser@clark.net, catspaw@cruzio.com, rfulton@directnet.net, swells@phoenix.atticus.com, TGill10669@aol.com, valworth@aol.com X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.10.06.22 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Length: 893 Status: RO X-Status: <---- Begin Forwarded Message ----> Date: Mon, 20 May 96 06:32:05 PDT To: soulseek@sprynet.com From: "Leslie I.Plummer" Subject: Re: N&N Loop (Last Knight spoiler) At 09:11 PM 5/19/96 -0700, you wrote: >From: Baigneuse@aol.com >Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 13:49:14 -0400 > I just finished watching the Last Knight episode and all I can say is NO. >Maybe not. Ah, but love conquers all! Have Natalie'd faith & Nick's love! >why was the actors name still in the opening credits? a) probably in his contract for the season that his name is in the credit b) cheaper to keep the same opening than to re-edit for just one episide c) seasonal actors are usually credited in all eps whether or not they appear. Leslie ***FOREVER MEANS...FOREVER!!!*** N&NPacker...Wildly Romantic & Fiercely Optimistic A Fourth Season sort of gal <---- End Forwarded Message ----> From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 14:17 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id OAA19826 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 14:17:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 4CA066F4 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 14:01:26 -0400 Message-Id: <199605201817.OAA19826@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 12:49:31 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Sharon Scott Subject: Re: SPOILERS: Last Knight X-To: valerie@louis.cac.psu.edu X-cc: nat.pack@umich.edu, albrecht@chaph.usc.edu, alikhat@ix.netcom.com, cat.goddess@pobox.com, catheboo@cco.caltech.edu, choff@violet.berkeley.edu, D020214@univscvm.csd.scarolina.edu, feden@mcs.com, Finabair@aol.com, gryphon@execpc.com, h36a@unb.ca To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1045 Status: RO X-Status: 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@aol.com From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 09:58 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id JAA16201 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 09:58:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 8FEFB146 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 9:52:46 -0400 Message-Id: <199605201358.JAA16201@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 13:47:32 GMT Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Jamie Melody Randell Subject: Spoiler: LK: Forevermores To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1007 Status: RO X-Status: S P O I L E R S P A C E should be used for LK spoilers until later tonight... It occurs to me that the 'ambiguity' of the LK ending is equivalent with the ending of Human Factor. I seem to remember certain forces becoming deeply distressed and offended by the fact that some people just insisted, in fact seemed to take a positive joy in the fact that Janette "must" be dead. Oh, the anguish provoked by those darned 'Nevermores' on that .0002% of the population... Oh, wait a minute. Isn't that the same .0002% that's dancing in the streets because "Natalie is dead"? Well, that must make this an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT situation, riiiiiiiight? Right. Hey, I got this bridge in downtown Manhattan I'd like to sell you... Natalie is as dead as Janette. That's all there is to it. Jamie M.R. - Proud "Forevermore" While I'm Away: The Smoking Natpacker, ConvCoS, NDNEDnik Illustrated Webgoddess & Keeper of Warm Fuzzies The Truth Is Out There. Just maybe not in our jurisdiction. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 10:57 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id KAA01229 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 10:57:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 9C43E25F ; Mon, 20 May 1996 10:57:33 -0400 Message-Id: <199605201457.KAA01229@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 09:51:40 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Hilary Doda Organization: Faculty of Education, University of Toronto Subject: Re: Spoiler: LK: Forevermores To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 109 Status: O X-Status: Natalie is as dead as Janette. That's all there is to it. Nicely put. very nicely put. Thank you! Katya. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 11:02 EDT 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id LAA02440 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 11:02:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.45F3A1F0@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; Mon, 20 May 1996 10:58:27 -0400 Message-Id: <199605201502.LAA02440@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 10:57:45 EDT Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Lynne Levine Subject: Spoilers: LK - cheesy rationalisations :-) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1352 Status: O X-Status: I've just been playing catch-up on a TON of LK spoilers...and I see that great minds think alike. ;-) Immediately after watching LK, I told my companions the same rationalization that I've now seen many times on this list: LaCroix stakes Nick (deliberately missing his heart) to immobilize him long enough for him to bring Nat across, which will bring plenty of new conflict to these three characters WHEN we get our show back. (Nat would feel betrayed by Nick, Nick would have angst, etc. Definitely not a happily-ever-after scenario) Cheesy rationalization #2, of course, would be the old tired "it was just a dream" scenario in which, just as Nick was being staked, he would wake up, terrified and covered in a blood sweat. He would soon realize that none of it had happened, Trace was still alive, and he would call Natalie, all upset. She'd come over and they'd have a heart-to-heart talk which would make the Nick-and-Natpackers happy. Poor ol' anxst-ridden Nick. Will someone PLEASE find him a good therapist? I kind of liked the scenario someone wrote in which it's all Nat's dream. Hmmm...interesting possibility there too. In my opinion, that "ending" gave no closure whatsoever. It felt more like they'd just run out of tape. :-( Lynne Levine llevine@mit.edu Revisionist Ravenette (guess that makes me a Cleopatra, huh? ) From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 11:22 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id LAA07573 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 11:22:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id B815CF4E ; Mon, 20 May 1996 11:12:38 -0400 Message-Id: <199605201522.LAA07573@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 11:09:41 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Catherine A Siemann Subject: Re: Spoiler: LK: Forevermores To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <199605201457.KAA07485@mailrelay1.cc.columbia.edu> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 699 Status: O X-Status: On Mon, 20 May 1996, Hilary Doda wrote: > Natalie is as dead as Janette. That's all there is to it. > > Nicely put. very nicely put. Thank you! > Katya. Why does this have to become an opposition, guys? I was one of the people who cared intensely about Janette's fate, and that doesn't mean I want Nat dead. And it does not seem like interpretations of "Last Knight" are breaking down along factional lines, at least not from what I've read. 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. Catherine cas47@columbia.edu Admitted Raven From owner-forkni-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 15:24 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id PAA06726 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 15:24:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id D5402432 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 15:24:00 -0400 Message-Id: <199605201924.PAA06726@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 12:20:52 EDT Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show Sender: Forever Knight TV show From: *Booga* <102425.1537@COMPUSERVE.COM> Subject: Re: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FORKNI-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 900 Status: O X-Status: All I have to say is this; I rarely repeat my self, but in this case I make an exception. It's not over. It's never over unless we want it to be. all of these wonderful alternate endings, add-on endings, and such are proof of that. and moreover, I have given up looking for a fourth season, it's not going to happen. that doesnt matter any more. If they wrote the fourth season as they wrote th latter half of 3rd, I wouldn't want it. what I will fight for, is a movie. there have been talks about a movie deal, and if we put the same tenacity into it as we did for the other seasons, we stand a good chance. I am so thankfull for those of you who never said die, and brought us a third season, I hope you'll keep the dream alive. -- Ian Curtis Malkavian Monitor of Toronto "Two weeks ago I was dead. Things have been pretty much downhill ever since" From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 15:30 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id PAA08627 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 15:30:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id A7B2C472 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 15:29:53 -0400 Message-Id: <199605201930.PAA08627@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 10:37:41 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Idalia Kakesako Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight (Tracy) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 640 Status: O X-Status: 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 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" From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 16:16 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id QAA21522 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 16:16:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 1E181950 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 16:16:08 -0400 Message-Id: <199605202016.QAA21522@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 14:33:23 EDT Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Tanya Smith Subject: Last Night-oh, er--I mean, Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 398 Status: O X-Status: 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. From soulseek@sprynet.com Mon May 20 16:18 EDT 1996 Received: from m2.sprynet.com (m2.sprynet.com [165.121.1.99]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id QAA22096 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 16:18:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [199.174.135.117] (ad08-117.compuserve.com [199.174.135.117]) by m2.sprynet.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA11268; Mon, 20 May 1996 12:58:08 -0700 From: soulseek@sprynet.com Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 12:58:08 -0700 Message-Id: <199605201958.MAA11268@m2.sprynet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: N&N Loop (Last Knight Spoiler) To: asnelson@indiana.edu, acapozzi@wellesley.edu, AMORG@aol.com, egardner@facstaff.wisc.edu, CKrumtum@gnn.com, jclemens@world.std.com, bonney@interpath.com, Claudius@NETRIDE.COM, criss@marlboro.edu, fiorini@MARYWOOD1.MARYWOOD.EDU, dgthomas@ix.netcom.com, phase3@gate.net, dottir@wsii.com, efriedm1@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu, ILCzJules@aol.com, jasonl@cnwl.igs.net, shalott@chattanooga.net, dukarsja@udmercy.edu, RICHARD@iclnet.co.uk, jtfolden@erinet.com, Baigneuse@aol.com, lplummer@interlink.com, LoriArgyll@aol.com, lydiam@singnet.com.sg, d_Roberts@msn.com, moser@clark.net, catspaw@cruzio.com, rfulton@directnet.net, swells@phoenix.atticus.com, TGill10669@aol.com, valworth@aol.com X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.10.06.22 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Length: 2513 Status: RO X-Status: <---- Begin Forwarded Message ----> From: TGill10669@aol.com Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 15:17:12 -0400 To: soulseek@sprynet.com, asnelson@indiana.edu, acapozzi@wellesley.edu, AMORG@aol.com, egardner@facstaff.wisc.edu, CKrumtum@gnn.com, jclemens@world.std.com, bonney@interpath.com, Claudius@netride.com, criss@marlboro.edu, fiorini@marywood1.marywood.edu, dgthomas@ix.netcom.com Subject: Re: N&N Loop (Spoiler) I watched Last Knight, last knight at 11 pm. I was happy with the ending. Even if they are not able to do a movie or continue the series. It is resolved for me. Here is what I think happened. For those of you that do not know more I am an incurable ROMANTIC. Here it goes: Lacroix did not kill Nick but took him away and called 911 for Natalie. He took Nick to an unknown place and hid him out. He wanted to really see if Nick really loved Natalie. In the meantime, Natalie was saved and resumed her life but was very unhappy because she did not understand what happened. Her heart ached for him, as did his for her. She was miserable. One year later: Nick is sitting on the beach watching the stars in the sky, thinking about what he always thinks about, Natalie. Today was the one year anniversary of when he left Toronto. He never could go back as a vampire and there was no cure for him. Lacroix approached Nick with a small glass vile in his hand. He told Nick that he had never seen someone so in love with another person and because it was true love he could now give him what he so greatly deserved - the cure. He had it all along but would not share with him until he knew that it was what Nick really wanted. Nick was upset. Lacroix explained that he had to wait one year after the confessed love of a mortal to a vampire or the medicine would not work. He told him to drink it and go find her. He found her playing softball in the part at the county picnic. She was running outfield when she saw him. She did a double take and fainted. It could not be. He was gone and never to return. That was what the note said that was in her jewelry box. She came to and began to sob. He cradled her in his arms and explained what happened. They were married two weeks later and lived happily ever after with their three kids, white picket fence. Well you get the picture. Vicky I guess i am a nick and nat packer no doubt <---- End Forwarded Message ----> From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 16:46 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id QAA29101 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 16:46:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id AF8FAEC6 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 16:34:31 -0400 Message-Id: <199605202046.QAA29101@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 12:03:35 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "Toni C. Holm" Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1226 Status: RO X-Status: 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 From owner-forkni-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 17:26 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id RAA09597 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 17:26:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 2E5785A2 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 17:21:01 -0400 Message-Id: <199605202126.RAA09597@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 13:28:40 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show Sender: Forever Knight TV show From: Mad Hatter Subject: Re: Warm Fuzzies for Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FORKNI-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 578 Status: RO X-Status: At 11:38 PM 5/19/96 -0400, you wrote: >25 minutes and counting 'til Last Knight and my box of tissues. I just >wanted to wish everyone warm fuzzies to those of us who have yet to see the >final episode. > >I will be with all of you in spirit (and cyberspace). > >Lisa P. hmm...my roommate in WI forgot to tape it for me, and i'm stranded in MN sans a last ep! anyone out there tape it and who's willing to copy on my tape? OR anyone in WI know when channel 47 is going to do the rerun? i think roommate told me it would be in late august or september..... :(_-_-_-_- -madhat From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 17:38 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id RAA12611 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 17:38:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 8A591416 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 17:37:54 -0400 Message-Id: <199605202138.RAA12611@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 15:47:19 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "Margaret L. Carter" Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight(Tracy) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 392 Status: O X-Status: 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. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 18:27 EDT 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id SAA23215 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 18:27:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.6E76D7D0@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; Mon, 20 May 1996 18:23:24 -0400 Message-Id: <199605202227.SAA23215@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 13:00:35 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "Val A. Wirth" Subject: Spoiler. Last Knight. To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1597 Status: O X-Status: 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@aol.com The Truth is Out There But it's so much more fun making it up as you go. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 19:34 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id TAA07623 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 19:34:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id EC94067E ; Mon, 20 May 1996 19:20:52 -0400 Message-Id: <199605202334.TAA07623@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 17:02:48 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Comments: Resent-From: mmartin@BIOMED.MED.YALE.EDU Comments: Originally-From: TMP_HARKINS@DIRAC.PHYSICS.JMU.EDU From: "[M A Martin]" Subject: Fwd. Re: SPOILERS: Last Knight (ep 22) Tracy To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1224 Status: O X-Status: 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@biomed.med.yale.edu) "Failure is not an option. It is just a nagging possibility that helps me stay focused." Yeah, right... From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 19:51 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id TAA11358 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 19:51:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 3584B18C ; Mon, 20 May 1996 19:51:32 -0400 Message-Id: <199605202351.TAA11358@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 18:00:55 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Yolanda Rivera Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1201 Status: O X-Status: 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!! From owner-forkni-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 19:56 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id TAA12272 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 19:56:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id EF5343CE ; Mon, 20 May 1996 19:56:44 -0400 Message-Id: <199605202356.TAA12272@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 15:16:29 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show Sender: Forever Knight TV show From: "Marisa SorBello: mas@cvsd.cv.com" Subject: Last Knight X-To: fk@cvsd.cv.com To: Multiple recipients of list FORKNI-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 389 Status: O X-Status: >hmm...my roommate in WI forgot to tape it for me, and i'm >stranded in MN sans a last ep! anyone out there tape it and >who's willing to copy on my tape? OR >anyone in WI know when channel 47 is going to do the >rerun? i think roommate told me it would be in late august >or september..... The Sci-Fi channel airs it twice tonight -- 8 pm and midnight EDT, 5 pm and 9 pm PDT. -- Marisa From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 20:06 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id UAA14098 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 20:06:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 1886EAFE ; Mon, 20 May 1996 20:05:03 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210006.UAA14098@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 20:03:37 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Mary Dutterer Subject: SPOILERS: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2233 Status: O X-Status: *Absolve, Domine, animas omnium fidelium defunctorum ab omni vinculo delictorum.* I have watched this episode several times now. *Et gratia tua illis succurrente, mereantur evadere judicium ultinonis.* I have watched the show since Season One. I remember seeing it with someone I was quite enamored with at the time. Someone who taught me a great deal about life. *Et lucis aeternae beautitudine perfrui.* I have watched that relationship, along with others, fade and die. One constant thing was Forever Knight. It was a sort of touchstone when all around was dark and grey. *In Paradisum deducant te Angeli.* I do so wish that the show is brought back. It has come back in the past. But, then again, it has never ended like this. *In memoria aeterna erit justus: ab auditione mala non timebit.* This episode was a shining example of how great this show was, is, and will always be. It is, in my opinion, the best television show of all time. *Dominus vobiscum.* I shall miss this show a great deal. The only other show I watch had its last episode on this weekend. Needless to say, this has been an exceedingly unpleasant and sobering weekend. *Libera me, Domine, de morte aeterna, in die illa tremenda: Quando caeli movendi sunt et terra: Dum veneris judicare saeculum per ignem. Tremens factus sum ego, et timeo, dum discussio venerit, atque ventura ira. Quando caeli movendi sunt et terra. Dies illa, dies irae, calamitatis et miseriae; dies magna et amara valde. Dum veneris judicare saeculum per ignem. Requiem aeternam dona eis. Domine: et lux perpetua luceat eis. Libera me Domine de morte aerterna in die illa tremenda: quando caeli mo vendi sunt et terra: Dum veneris judicare saeculum per ignem.* Thanks to everyone that ever had a hand in producing this show. EVERYONE. You did an exceedingly good job. *Kyrie, eleison. Christe, eleison. Kyrie, eleison.* I wish you all the best of luck in the future, all of you. *Requiescat in pace.* There will never be another show like this, and of this caliber. *Requiem aeternam dona eis, Domine.* I think that the wobbly camera shots were Nat's POV. *Et lux perpetua luceat eis.* "...in his endless Forever Knight." Vulkurt@aol.com From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 15:58 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id PAA16984 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 15:58:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 89058AFA ; Mon, 20 May 1996 15:57:39 -0400 Message-Id: <199605201958.PAA16984@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 14:16:49 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Diane Shea Subject: LK spoilers: Cousinly praise To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2263 Status: O X-Status: 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 From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 16:45 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id QAA28734 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 16:45:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 7BE21EDA ; Mon, 20 May 1996 16:25:55 -0400 Message-Id: <199605202045.QAA28734@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 18:46:41 GMT Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Jamie Melody Randell Subject: Re: FKSPOILR Digest - LK spoilers To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 905 Status: RO X-Status: 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. -:-:-:-:- Asst. Listowner, The Smoking Natpacker, ConvCoS, NDNEDnik -->>> Illustrated Webgoddess & Keeper of Warm Fuzzies <<<-- ** List Rules ** The Truth Is Out There. Just maybe not in our jurisdiction. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 18:24 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id SAA22690 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 18:24:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 0AE37259 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 18:24:27 -0400 Message-Id: <199605202224.SAA22690@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 13:07:04 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Raissa Devereux Subject: Spoiler: LK To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1665 Status: RO X-Status: 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@imap2.asu.edu The soul IS immortal PS I forgot to mention that Adric and all the Doctor's other dead companions are floating around the TARDIS. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 19:49 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id TAA11009 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 19:49:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id F569B487 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 19:49:45 -0400 Message-Id: <199605202349.TAA11009@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 16:27:03 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Margie Hammet Subject: Re: Spoiler: LK: Forevermores To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2121 Status: O X-Status: 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@io.com) From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 20:19 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id UAA16823 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 20:18:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 0452EC7F ; Mon, 20 May 1996 20:18:48 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210018.UAA16823@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 15:25:13 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Amy Rambow Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight, Echoes To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2336 Status: RO X-Status: "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... 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@mail.nwlink.com) *** "Now cracks a noble heart. Good night, sweet prince; And flights of angels sing thee to thy rest!" -- W.S. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 20:46 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id UAA22929 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 20:46:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id DCE80218 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 20:46:20 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210046.UAA22929@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 17:40:34 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: John & Donna Spert Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <199605202037.PAA19397@deliverator.io.com> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2622 Status: RO X-Status: 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 From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 21:16 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id VAA29992 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 21:16:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id F0DEB677 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 21:15:31 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210116.VAA29992@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 19:03:52 EDT Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "Maria E. Orive, Ph.D." Subject: Re: SPOILER: Last Knight, Echoes To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1077 Status: RO X-Status: 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@bscr.uga.edu From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 21:17 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id VAA00042 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 21:17:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id F940CA2F ; Mon, 20 May 1996 21:15:45 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210117.VAA00042@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 18:02:40 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "Stormsinger/J.S. Levin" Subject: Spoiler: Last Knight -- Tears To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1098 Status: RO X-Status: 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 . No other source that I know of *prior* to her stories mentions it. Just MNSHO. Storm wabbit@execpc.com (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... From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 21:32 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id VAA02934 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 21:32:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 43F1A778 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 21:32:10 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210132.VAA02934@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 19:19:37 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Susan Honig Subject: Spoiler -Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2069 Status: RO X-Status: 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@aol.com From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 23:13 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id XAA23182 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 23:13:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 53FDC2DB ; Mon, 20 May 1996 23:12:49 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210313.XAA23182@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 22:59:27 +0000 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Laura W. Petix" Subject: Re: Last Knight: Blurred images explanation To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2482 Status: RO X-Status: Spoiler space . . . . . . . . . . Perhaps I am being heartless to say so, but I cannot understand why so many people are feeling miserable and bitter about Nick's supposed death. As both Chana Rossman and Larissa Field have already pointed out, it's perfectly clear on a second viewing that LaCroix does *not* stake Nick, and that Natalie is not completely dead. One need only rewatch LaCroix's three monologue scenes for the evidence. As Chana said: > Throughout the episode we see blurred images of LaCroix's oratory to > Nick. We don't know what quite to make of them because of (1) their > dreamlike quality and (2) the perspective from which they are shot. > We are not looking at LaCroix from Nick's perspective. In fact, we > see Nick in some of the shots. Indeed, we see Nick in the very last monologue sequence, and he is perfectly alive. The circular nature of LaCroix's speech indicates that it in fact starts at the end of the episode and continues, looped back around, showing us what happens *after* LaCroix raises the stake at the end. The evidence: * The monologues are filmed in the loft. (Wouldn't we normally expect LaCroix's words "out of nowhere" to show the Raven in the background? One does not associate LaCroix with Nick's loft. The only reason that makes sense for them to be filmed there is that that is where he physically is when he is speaking them.) * Nick is shown kneeling on the floor in front of LaCroix, in the same position he is in when LC raises the stake. (Indeed, why else would Nick be in this position? Why show Nick at all?) * As Chana said, the odd perspective that we are getting is Natalie's. >The shots are all sort of shot at an upward angle. She is >semi-unconscious (at least) which would explained the blurred, >dream-like quality. The monologues aren't there just to be weird. "Last Knight" is a work of art, and things do not exist for no reason in a work of art. If you watch all three monologues again, you will see that LaCroix is talking Nick out of dying. The last thing he says is, "Leaving is the purest form of love." He is trying to convince Nick to let Natalie die and move on, with him. We *don't know* what happens after that. Maybe Nick does leave with LaCroix and let Natalie die; maybe not. That part is left to us--to our imaginations and fan fiction. I think it's a brilliant episode. Laura WP lpetix@dpcc.com "Last Knight" waves: http://www.dpcc.com/dpcc/assoc/lpetix/waves/ From soulseek@sprynet.com Mon May 20 23:41 EDT 1996 Received: from m2.sprynet.com (m2.sprynet.com [165.121.1.99]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id XAA28408 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 23:41:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [199.174.136.120] (ad09-120.compuserve.com [199.174.136.120]) by m2.sprynet.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA29260; Mon, 20 May 1996 20:36:08 -0700 From: soulseek@sprynet.com Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 20:36:08 -0700 Message-Id: <199605210336.UAA29260@m2.sprynet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: N&N Loop (Last Knight Spoiler) To: asnelson@indiana.edu, acapozzi@wellesley.edu, AMORG@aol.com, egardner@facstaff.wisc.edu, CKrumtum@gnn.com, jclemens@world.std.com, bonney@interpath.com, Claudius@NETRIDE.COM, criss@marlboro.edu, fiorini@MARYWOOD1.MARYWOOD.EDU, dgthomas@ix.netcom.com, phase3@gate.net, dottir@wsii.com, efriedm1@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu, ILCzJules@aol.com, jasonl@cnwl.igs.net, shalott@chattanooga.net, dukarsja@udmercy.edu, RICHARD@iclnet.co.uk, jtfolden@erinet.com, Baigneuse@aol.com, lplummer@interlink.com, LoriArgyll@aol.com, lydiam@singnet.com.sg, d_Roberts@msn.com, moser@clark.net, catspaw@cruzio.com, rfulton@directnet.net, swells@phoenix.atticus.com, TGill10669@aol.com, valworth@aol.com X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.10.06.22 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Length: 865 Status: RO X-Status: <---- Begin Forwarded Message ----> Date: Mon, 20 May 96 14:01:39 PDT To: soulseek@sprynet.com From: "Leslie I.Plummer" Subject: Re: N&N Loop (Last Knight Spoiler) >Vicky >I guess i am a nick and nat packer no doubt TTTTTT H H A N N K K S ! T H H A A NN N K K S S ! T HHHHHHH AAAAA N N N KKK S ! T H H A A N N N K K SSSS ! T H H A A N NN K K S ! T H H A A N N K K S S T H H A A N N K K S * You made my week & healed my heart w/your vision! Leslie ***FOREVER MEANS..FOREVER!!!*** N&NPacker...Wildly Romantic & Fiercely Optimistic An FK Movie sort of gal <---- End Forwarded Message ----> From soulseek@sprynet.com Mon May 20 23:43 EDT 1996 Received: from m2.sprynet.com (m2.sprynet.com [165.121.1.99]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id XAA28912 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 23:43:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [199.174.136.120] (ad09-120.compuserve.com [199.174.136.120]) by m2.sprynet.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA29445; Mon, 20 May 1996 20:37:26 -0700 From: soulseek@sprynet.com Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 20:37:26 -0700 Message-Id: <199605210337.UAA29445@m2.sprynet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: RE: N&N loop (Last Knight) To: asnelson@indiana.edu, acapozzi@wellesley.edu, AMORG@aol.com, egardner@facstaff.wisc.edu, CKrumtum@gnn.com, jclemens@world.std.com, bonney@interpath.com, Claudius@NETRIDE.COM, criss@marlboro.edu, fiorini@MARYWOOD1.MARYWOOD.EDU, dgthomas@ix.netcom.com, phase3@gate.net, dottir@wsii.com, efriedm1@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu, ILCzJules@aol.com, jasonl@cnwl.igs.net, shalott@chattanooga.net, dukarsja@udmercy.edu, RICHARD@iclnet.co.uk, jtfolden@erinet.com, Baigneuse@aol.com, lplummer@interlink.com, LoriArgyll@aol.com, lydiam@singnet.com.sg, d_Roberts@msn.com, moser@clark.net, catspaw@cruzio.com, rfulton@directnet.net, swells@phoenix.atticus.com, TGill10669@aol.com, valworth@aol.com X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.10.06.22 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Length: 685 Status: RO X-Status: <---- Begin Forwarded Message ----> From: "Rachel Fulton" To: soulseek@sprynet.com Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 15:32:53 +0000 Subject: RE: N&N loop (Last Knight) I am in a state of shock! I do not know if I can handle the ending of LK...... I mean, they seemed to have killed of most of the main characters from the 2nd and 3rd seasons..... what's up with this? I know it's the end, =( (I hope not!) but they don't have to be morbid about it.... I mean I like facing the bleaker parts of life with FK, but it used to contain hope.... I don't know what to say, except that I am in mourning...... Love Forever, Jeanette <---- End Forwarded Message ----> From soulseek@sprynet.com Mon May 20 23:46 EDT 1996 Received: from m2.sprynet.com (m2.sprynet.com [165.121.1.99]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id XAA29800 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 23:46:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [199.174.136.120] (ad09-120.compuserve.com [199.174.136.120]) by m2.sprynet.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA00150; Mon, 20 May 1996 20:40:36 -0700 From: soulseek@sprynet.com Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 20:40:36 -0700 Message-Id: <199605210340.UAA00150@m2.sprynet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: N&N Loop (Last Knight Spoiler) To: asnelson@indiana.edu, acapozzi@wellesley.edu, AMORG@aol.com, egardner@facstaff.wisc.edu, CKrumtum@gnn.com, jclemens@world.std.com, bonney@interpath.com, Claudius@NETRIDE.COM, criss@marlboro.edu, fiorini@MARYWOOD1.MARYWOOD.EDU, dgthomas@ix.netcom.com, phase3@gate.net, dottir@wsii.com, efriedm1@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu, ILCzJules@aol.com, jasonl@cnwl.igs.net, shalott@chattanooga.net, dukarsja@udmercy.edu, RICHARD@iclnet.co.uk, jtfolden@erinet.com, Baigneuse@aol.com, lplummer@interlink.com, LoriArgyll@aol.com, lydiam@singnet.com.sg, d_Roberts@msn.com, moser@clark.net, catspaw@cruzio.com, rfulton@directnet.net, swells@phoenix.atticus.com, TGill10669@aol.com, valworth@aol.com X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.10.06.22 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Length: 346 Status: RO X-Status: <---- Begin Forwarded Message ----> From: Baigneuse@aol.com Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 17:14:25 -0400 To: soulseek@sprynet.com Subject: Re: N&N Loop (Last Knight Spoiler) to Vicky, That was a very interesting take on what could have happened. It put a smile on my face. Thanks alot. <---- End Forwarded Message ----> From soulseek@sprynet.com Mon May 20 23:48 EDT 1996 Received: from m2.sprynet.com (m2.sprynet.com [165.121.1.99]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id XAA00388 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 23:48:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [199.174.136.120] (ad09-120.compuserve.com [199.174.136.120]) by m2.sprynet.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA00412; Mon, 20 May 1996 20:42:48 -0700 From: soulseek@sprynet.com Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 20:42:48 -0700 Message-Id: <199605210342.UAA00412@m2.sprynet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: N&N loop (Last Knight --spoilers!] To: asnelson@indiana.edu, acapozzi@wellesley.edu, AMORG@aol.com, egardner@facstaff.wisc.edu, CKrumtum@gnn.com, jclemens@world.std.com, bonney@interpath.com, Claudius@NETRIDE.COM, criss@marlboro.edu, fiorini@MARYWOOD1.MARYWOOD.EDU, dgthomas@ix.netcom.com, phase3@gate.net, dottir@wsii.com, efriedm1@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu, ILCzJules@aol.com, jasonl@cnwl.igs.net, shalott@chattanooga.net, dukarsja@udmercy.edu, RICHARD@iclnet.co.uk, jtfolden@erinet.com, Baigneuse@aol.com, lplummer@interlink.com, LoriArgyll@aol.com, lydiam@singnet.com.sg, d_Roberts@msn.com, moser@clark.net, catspaw@cruzio.com, rfulton@directnet.net, swells@phoenix.atticus.com, TGill10669@aol.com, valworth@aol.com X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.10.06.22 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Length: 2043 Status: RO X-Status: <---- Begin Forwarded Message ----> Date: Mon, 20 May 96 15:38:21 PDT To: soulseek@sprynet.com From: "Leslie I.Plummer" Subject: Re: N&N loop (Last Knight --spoilers!] >and why the hell did nick take too much? i >couldn't stop? bs! he loves nat- he would've been more careful. My favorite two were clearly each/both having a real BAD day! Both had sudden deaths which stunned them into react/ultimatum mode. Both had pressing declarations/decisions/committments to make resulting from these shocks. Neither of them were thinking too clearly. Come on N&Ns, Nick has been dieting on cows' blood for a while. The "sugar" rush alone would have upped his animal side! And, if Nat had had her head screwed on right that day, she would have (perhaps) suggested he have a few cowsblood cocktails to fill him up (to help curb his appetite!). (No NPack slams here, pls. I'm just trying to explain what I saw -- the only way I can make sense of it...) So, our two favs were not thinking clearly, felt pressed for time in a major way, & were FINALLY getting into it (this is not a situation in which you can call back the next day). When the "cry of love" is presented, you stand up & get counted or else you die! So, it had to be a tragic scene in drama terms. The title told it all. It's like the writers & actors (& Ger as dir) had 60 minutes to do the very best to find completion for us all...and the clock was running! This ep has bowled me over. I'm reacting in ways I never expected & I *have* a life! I KNOW it's "just TV". But, the extreme themes presented in LK mirror some of my most passionate choices & losses in my life, for which I am still paying, praying, and living. I empathized for Nick & Nat. I was there. I FELT it (not just studied/apopreciated/viewed it); just so MUCH piled into one day! Ya gotta admit, the writers/actors/Ger did something powerful here, whether or not you can live how it came out. Leslie bone weary & looking for rest... <---- End Forwarded Message ----> From owner-fkfic-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 00:11 EDT 1996 Received: from allison.clark.net (allison.clark.net [168.143.0.3]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id AAA04479; Tue, 21 May 1996 00:11:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from allison (allison.clark.net [168.143.0.3]) by allison.clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) with SMTP id AAA15843; Tue, 21 May 1996 00:11:46 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210411.AAA15843@allison.clark.net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 21:19:14 -0400 Reply-To: TP81Kilo@AOL.COM Sender: Forever Knight TV show stories From: "N. W. Bonilla" Subject: Letting Go... (Spoiler for Last Knight) X-cc: MlleCinzia@aol.com To: Multiple recipients of list FKFIC-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 10171 Status: RO X-Status: This is not my story. I am just posting it for the author. Please address all comments to her. Standard Disclaimers apply. Forever Knight characters are the property of James Parriott and Barney Cohen, even though they don't deserve them (that was MY opinion, not the writer's!). No copyright infringement is intended. LETTING GO with apologies for knowing nothing about scriptwriting comments to MlleCinzia@aol.com Nick Knight knelt over the body of his beloved Natalie. She was even more beautiful in death, her skin white, marred only by two tiny puncture wounds on her throat. She had died for him...because of him... Nick seemed to be waiting. He showed no fear. LaCroix lifted the stake. Lucinda held her breath. They cut to closing credits. "No, no, no!" Lucinda cried, as the familiar music played and she stared at the sunset that heralded the end of the Last Knight, the end of "Forever Knight," her favorite television show which, after three too-brief seasons, was taking its final bow. Tears streamed down her face. In her mind's eye she saw the stake coming down, piercing the tender heart of Nicholas de Brabant, the vampire with a human soul. She felt it as if LaCroix had pierced her own heart, her own mortal, fragile heart...for now, it was indeed broken. She knew it was an act of mercy, an act of love, and still she refused to accept it. It just couldn't end this way. Nick and Nat deserved better. She buried her face in her pillow and sobbed, alone in the darkness. When she had calmed, when the flow of tears slowed to a trickle, Lucinda rolled over and wiped her eyes. Determination flooded into her and she sat up. It didn't have to end this way! She rose from the bed and walked to the desk, flipping the switch on her computer. It wouldn't end this way. She would write her own ending, and to hell with it! She clicked her way into Word Perfect and began. FINAL SHOT: LaCroix holds the stake above his head for several long moments. Close up of his face. A single tear slides from one of his crystal blue eyes. The shot cuts to Nick, kneeling over Natalie, waiting. His blond head is bowed. Cut back to LaCroix. He slowly lowers the stake and lets it fall from his hand. Nick turns his head at the clatter, looking dismayed. LACROIX: I can't do it, Nicholas. NICK: What? LACROIX: I can't do it. I'm sorry. He turns away, guilty, unable to look Nick in the eye. Nick rises to his feet. He puts his hand on LaCroix's shoulder. A close-up of his hand. NICK: Please. LaCroix's face. He turns around. His eyes are blazing, his fangs extended. Cut back, for a full shot of them both. He pushes Nick away. LACROIX: How can you ask this of me? Nick, in turn, begins to get angry. NICK: How can you deny me? You knew it would come to this someday. You knew it eight hundred years ago when you made me...what...I...am... Nick picks up the stake and hold it menacingly. The threat is clear. If LaCroix won't kill Nick... LACROIX: Yes, Nicholas. I made you, and I will not let you go until I am ready. Nick advances towards LaCroix with the stake, but he is not nearly as angry as anguished. LaCroix pushes him and he falls to the floor. The stake skitters across the floor, out of his reach. The camera follows it, then goes to LaCroix, moving in a flash towards Natalie Lambert's still form. Gently he lifts her into his arms, looking defiantly at Nick. At once Nick is on his feet moving towards them. NICK: LaCroix, don't! It is too late. They are gone. Nick looks around, unsure how they got out. LACROIX'S VOICE: Find me, Nicholas, if you want her back. She's one of us, now. We hear LaCroix's gentle, mocking laughter. Cut to Nick, looking stunned. Roll end credits. Lucinda smirked at the screen. So there. With that ending, they could easily send the characters to some other city...they could find new occupations, new lives...and the series could go on. "Forever Knight: the Next Generation." She saved the file and brought up a new blank screen. She was getting fired up now, ready to write a whole series of scripts. Let's see, there would have to be new mortals...perhaps a love interest for Nick, to bring back the wonderful tension that had existed between Nick, Nat and Janette. Only this time, Nat would be the vampire, filling Janette's shoes. Janette! Lucinda had nearly forgotten Janette, Nick's vampire lover...they had killed her off earlier in the season, damn the writers to hell. She had become mortal, and... Lucinda couldn't think of any consistent way to bring Janette back without making her a vampire again. A new woman, then. Someone Nick met at a new job. He and Nat would take new jobs in another police department and morgue, so Nat could continue trying to find a cure. Let's see, they could all move to...here! To Boston. Why not set the new series in her own home town? And why not call Nick's new partner Lucinda? Lucinda grinned at her screen and began to type furiously. She glanced at the clock. It was one a.m., but she wasn't tired. She had so many ideas for the new season. It could go on infinitely. It could go on for years! It could really be Forever-- She felt a cold hand on her shoulder. Lucinda opened her mouth to scream, but before she could, the owner of the hand swivelled her chair around so fast it knocked the breath out her. Trembling, her heart racing, she slowly brought her eyes up the form of the man she was facing, the man who was standing over her, until she could look him in the eye. If she had any air in her lungs, she would have gasped. As it was she could only stared until she was forced to inhale or lose consciousness. "Geraint Wyn Davies," she said at last. A slight shake of the head. "My name is Nick Knight, your new partner, Detective," he said. "I'm looking for Dr. Lambert. Have you seen her?" Lucinda's jaw dropped. "Nick..." He smiled at her somewhat patronizingly, nodding. "Nick Knight. What, didn't the Captain tell you you were getting a new partner?" "I...I...I...uh, no..." Lucinda babbled. Nick Knight was in her bedroom. He was in her bedroom, and he thought he was in the police station. "Not anymore. It's nice to meet you," he said, taking her hand and shaking it. "I'll leave you to your work. We can talk later. Can you direct me to the morgue?" Lucinda turned and looked at her computer screen, at what she had just typed. LUCINDA: A new partner? I don't need a new partner...Detective Knight. I work alone. NICK: Not anymore. It's nice to meet you. I'll leave you to your work. We can talk later. Can you direct me to the morgue? Well, at least he had gotten HIS lines right. This was strange. Too strange. She glanced back at Nick. He was waiting expectantly. Thinking quickly, she typed: LUCINDA'S BEDROOM: NICK, LUCINDA, ad lib. She turned back around. Nick was looking around her room, seeming a little uncomfortable. "I shouldn't be here," he said. "I'm seeing Nat--Dr. Lambert. And...I love her...very much..." Lucinda smiled. "I know," she said. She still wasn't sure how this had happened, and she didn't care. It seemed so real...she wanted it to be real...and so she accepted it as real. Nick Knight, the beautiful vampire, was here in her bedroom. She didn't want to write the script any more. Lucinda sat down on her bed, drawing Nick down beside her. Gently, she kissed him on the mouth, knowing that this might be her only chance. His lips were slightly chilled, but felt as...real...as any man she had ever kissed. He put his arms around her and for a moment she allowed herself to melt into the fantasy, to let the lines between television and reality blend together into a heady mix. Finally, she broke the kiss. Nick looked at her with wanting, his blue eyes blazing. His lips parted in a snarl of desire and she saw the long, sharp fangs. She felt a frisson within, a delicious tangle of fear and desire. But it wasn't real. He wasn't real. "I have to show you something," she said. "Yes?" Nick hissed. Calmly, Lucinda reached for the remote control. She flicked on the television and the VCR, rewound the tape, hit play. Nick looked at the television, his brow furrowed. He looked to her and then back to the screen. He blinked once, twice, and the light went out of his eyes. The fangs retracted. "I don't understand," he said. "Just watch," Lucinda said. She leaned against him, waiting for him to dissolve in a puff of logic. She closed her eyes and drifted. Tears on her face, and then, his mouth on her tears. Lucinda opened her eyes. The closing credits were rolling...and he was still there. "Why are you crying?" he whispered. "You saw--" she choked out. "But LaCroix could not do it," he said. "And damn him for it." "No, don't," she said. She got up from the bed, extended her hand, and pulled Nick up after her. She led him to the computer, seated him in her chair, and retrieved the scene she had written. Nick read the file and looked up at her seriously. "I made it up," she said. "Does that make it any less real?" he asked. "If you make it up, if someone else makes it up...what's the difference? You saved me." "But you didn't want to be saved," she said. He was silent for a long moment. "No," he agreed at last. "I didn't. But now it's too late." Lucinda knew what she had to do. "It's not too late," she said. She motioned for him to get out of the chair. Before she sat down, she kissed him again, knowing she would always treasure the gift of these few, precious moments. Then, taking a deep breath, she reached over to the computer keyboard and deleted the file, and the script she had written. "I'll always remember you, Nick Knight," she whispered. "We'll always have reruns." She didn't have to turn around to know that he was gone. And somewhere in the darkness, Lucinda imagined she heard the gentle, mocking sound of LaCroix's laughter. THE END From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 21:15 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id VAA29250 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 21:14:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id C28DFD67 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 21:14:14 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210114.VAA29250@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 18:11:58 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Abby Subject: LK comments To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1206 Status: RO X-Status: Yup, I'm jumping in with my $0.05... Hit delete now if you must... My comments are varied, so be forewarned. 1) Did anyone (besides my mom ;) notice the bleeped up scale in the morgue? It was very empty, yet it said something weighed over 4 lbs. Is Toronto air that smoggy? It gives a whole new meaning to the line "You cut cut through the tension in the air with a knife." 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! 3) Thanks to who ever made the crack about the neverending hallway! I was giggling through the whole scene. 4) Nat Is Not Dead! All of LaCroix's monologues were seen from the pov of someone laying down. (I leaned in the appropriate position and the image made a lot more sense.) It couldn't be Nick because you can see him in one of the monologues... 5) Umm, I forgot... Oh, well. Stop laughing D + D! Until later... abby -- Mercenary of the Knight albrecht@chaph.usc.edu Down the hall lThe first Merc Knightie eponymous2@aol.com Turn right! lDDEB3, Duchovniks, NLEB, and more http://www-scf.usc.edu/~albrecht From KerrRaven@aol.com Mon May 20 22:01 EDT 1996 Received: from sun1.clark.net (sun1.clark.net [198.17.243.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id WAA07053 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 22:01:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from emout09.mail.aol.com (emout09.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.24]) by sun1.clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id WAA26035 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 22:01:44 -0400 Received: by emout09.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id VAA02482 for moser@clark.net; Mon, 20 May 1996 21:58:48 -0400 From: KerrRaven@aol.com Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 21:58:48 -0400 Message-ID: <960520215847_200676118@emout09.mail.aol.com> To: moser@clark.net Subject: Re: Spoiler LK: Comments Content-Type: text Content-Length: 578 Status: RO X-Status: You wrote; >>As another person that really liked this episode, I agree! Seeing the episode last Thursday, I was beginning to think I was insane for being the only on that liked it thus far. My opinion pretty much coincides with yours.<< There are a few of us, but we seem to be rare don't we? I'm not willing to hate the last episode of a series that I have enjoyed and will work to find even more positive things to say about it. :) >>Hugs, Mel Moser N&NPacker, moser@clark.net<< Hugs right back at you! We all need them at this time. --Cousin Diane Eternal Seducer From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 22:12 EDT 1996 Received: from sun1.clark.net (sun1.clark.net [198.17.243.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id WAA08956 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 22:12:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by sun1.clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id WAA26928 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 22:12:04 -0400 Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 6D5C4A71 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 22:09:07 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210212.WAA26928@sun1.clark.net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 19:43:54 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Diane Shea Subject: Spoilers LK: Distorted views To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2521 Status: RO X-Status: 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. 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 From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 23:13 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id XAA23292 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 23:13:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 5A7CD090 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 23:13:00 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210313.XAA23292@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 23:08:03 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Cassie Carter Subject: Re: SPOILER: LK - Nat To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <199605210223.WAA19998@bgnet0.bgsu.edu> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1023 Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 20 May 1996, Lisa P. wrote: > S > P > O > I > L > E > R > > > S > E > C > T > I > O > N > > > > > > > While Nick was drinking Nat's blood, Nat was seeing Nick's life. In > "Franchesca", Nick spoke of how by drinking the blood, all was learned of > that person - there fears, loves, death, etc. How is it that Nat could see > Nick's life just by his drinking her blood? Nick *also* said that the person being drained learns all about the vampire, too. By the way, hi guys! I'm back! In case anyone missed me, I've been no mail for about two months. After LN, I definitely needed to return to the "community" for moral support . . . Cassie Carter |----------------------------------------| English Department | Visit THE JIM CARROLL HOME PAGE | Bowling Green State University |http://www.bgsu.edu/~ccarter/carroll.htm| Bowling Green, OH 43403 |*Everything you want to know about JC!* | ccarter@bgnet.bgsu.edu |----------------------------------------| From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 23:20 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id XAA24559 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 23:20:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 53A7A979 ; Mon, 20 May 1996 23:19:58 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210320.XAA24559@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 18:47:15 PST Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "P. L. Montgomery" Subject: Re: Spoiler: LK: Forevermores To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 922 Status: RO X-Status: From: Jamie Melody Randell Spoiler... Spoiler... Spoiler... Spoiler... Spoiler... Spoiler... Spoiler... Spoiler... Spoiler... Spoiler... Spoiler... Spoiler... Spoiler... Spoiler... Spoiler... Spoiler... Spoiler... > should be used for LK spoilers until later tonight... > Natalie is as dead as Janette. That's all there is to it. > Jamie M.R. - Proud "Forevermore" > While I'm Away: Amen, sister! From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 00:34 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id AAA08621 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 00:34:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id E4EDCFC9 ; Tue, 21 May 1996 0:14:09 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210434.AAA08621@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 21:34:32 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Deborah Menikoff Subject: Re: LK comments To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2700 Status: O X-Status: Meanwhile back in NYC, the Dianne FK tour continues from Club Deb ***************************************************** Abby writes: >Yup, I'm jumping in with my $0.05... Hit delete now if you must... Hey wait just a cotton picken' minute! How come *you* get $0.05? If you get 5, then we (Dianne and I) get 10! :-pppppppppppppp >1) Did anyone (besides my mom ;) notice the bleeped up scale in the >morgue? It was very empty, yet it said something weighed over 4 lbs. Is [Yes! Yes! I did!... (but they shouted me down with some sort of _rational_ explanation :( --Dianne] Give that *BACK*! Thank you...as I was saying - the "underweight" was to account for the bowl holding whatever specimen is in there. You don't just toss livers in there higgldy piggldy you know :-) >Toronto air that smoggy? It gives a whole new meaning to the line "You cut >cut through the tension in the air with a knife." Or a shillelagh. [Thought we were over that, didn't you? ;-)You would be very, very wrong. Deb's been thinking up shillelagh theme songs all day... be afraid *Be very afraid!* -- Dianne] >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. >3) Thanks to who ever made the crack about the neverending hallway! I was >giggling through the whole scene. [That would be us. I'm convinced the Magic of the Shillelagh caused the Endless Precinct Hall Effect(TM) --Dianne] >4) Nat Is Not Dead! All of LaCroix's monologues were seen from the pov of >someone laying down. (I leaned in the appropriate position and the image >made a lot more sense.) It couldn't be Nick because you can see him in one >of the monologues... You leaned? Interactive FK? I feel so...non participatory. I should have leaned. I should have thrown socks. I should have taken my dramamine. *Why* was the swinging pendulum effect necessary? Very distracting. [Well they apparently sold off Ger's little wheeled cart. He had to have *something* to play with... --Dianne] >5) Umm, I forgot... Oh, well. Stop laughing D + D! Huh? Us? *NEVER* Bwhahahahahahahahaha..... ******************************************** Deb and Dianne Lo' we depart soon for other lands, we taketh with us the protection of the Shillelagh which -- though not technically a harbinger of death (He's not dead), must at least be considered a Shillelagh of Great Pain -- so don't mess with us! menikoff@panix.com From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 00:40 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id AAA09848 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 00:40:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 84297E94 ; Tue, 21 May 1996 0:40:04 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210440.AAA09848@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 22:19:37 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "Lisa P." Subject: SPOILER: LK - Nat To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1089 Status: RO X-Status: S P O I L E R S E C T I O N I have been staying away from the spoiler list so I don't know if this has been mentioned yet. First, I agree with those who feel cheated out on the "love scene" between Nick and Nat. I know that there was alot to cover to achieve closure, but 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. While Nick was drinking Nat's blood, Nat was seeing Nick's life. In "Franchesca", Nick spoke of how by drinking the blood, all was learned of that person - there fears, loves, death, etc. How is it that Nat could see Nick's life just by his drinking her blood? Shouldn't it be the other way around? I know in AtA Vachon was seeing Divia's life after she bit him. But I thought this was something between vampires. Any thoughts? Lisa P. p.s. The very last scene of the sun rising instead of descending was, I felt, a glimmer of hope. Anyone feel that this could have a special significance, or am I reading too much into it? From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 01:33 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id BAA16478 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 01:33:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 94680C99 ; Tue, 21 May 1996 1:23:28 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210533.BAA16478@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 22:57:34 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Stuart Drucker Subject: Re: FKSPOILR Digest - LK spoilers To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1054 Status: O X-Status: Listmom wrote (I'm doing this on AOL, so I'm not as handy with the line copy thing): >>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? Well, short of doing a regression analysis to check the R-Square of how well this "fits" the outcome, I can't say, but assuming that high B is a "good" outcome, and knowing our favorite Brick: B= R-CK Somehow, I think that his involvement is negatively related to a "good" outcome, not just a proportional effect. At least, Raleigh from Blind Faith might agree. . From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 01:34 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id BAA16581 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 01:33:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id B00FE7CF ; Tue, 21 May 1996 1:31:24 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210533.BAA16581@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 20:13:28 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Amy Rambow Subject: SPOILER: LK (HF), Distorted views To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <199605210218.TAA18491@montana.nwlink.com> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 4210 Status: O X-Status: First, let me echo Diane's plea for any decisive information. I spent months convinced Janette was dead through the omission of forty seconds of footage that I didn't realize had been omitted, and I'd hate for that to happen to anyone with LK. (Luckily, I'm away from that syndie now. ) Sci-Fi has shown LK once, so I think we may now dispense with spoiler space, but just in case -- "Last Knight" spoilers ahead! Diane writes: > 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. Unfortunately, seeing Nick isn't reason enough to discount the possibility that it's all from Nick's point of view. First of all, Nick appears in his own flashbacks and dream sequences on a regular basis. Secondly, at the time we see Nick, we are going into the BMV flashback, which may belong to LC. Goodness knows, this would be an appropriate time for Nick to recall the decision he made for his sister, and why, but I'm not sure why LC would want to risk recalling for him the revenge he promised he would one day have -- "I will deprive you of the mortal you love, or I will deprive her of you. Either way, your promise will be fulfilled" (BMV). 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. But I digress. LC's speech creates a loop, linking the end of the episode to the beginning. It seems to me that the only thing that is actually happening in the episode is LC's speech to Nick; everything else is flashbacks, which is why the things we recognize as flashbacks begin in black and white, as they never have before -- they are flashbacks within flashbacks (bear with me -- this is the guy who had a flashback during his own "guilt trip to Wonderland," after all). The reason that Nick's view of LC is distorted as this speech is delivered is because he's been staked, and he's looking up through a haze of tears and impending death. Through the heart or not, Nick would easily survive long enough for LC to sermonize on the value of life while Nick endures wrenching physical pain. LC expects Nick to come to his senses and ask to have the stake removed. I have been happy with this interpretation. Unfortunately, it has a problem. The problem is, the speech at the beginning comes, at the end, before both "You are my closest friend" and "Damn you, Nicholas," which are not repeated in the loop. If LC began his speech after staking Nick, or even if he delivered it *instead* of staking Nick, there must be a key to the loop -- the loose thread that indicates where we came into the circle. And I can't find it! Can you? Moving on to another aspect of LK, I think I need to explain why I believe that LC would not only stake Nick, but would allow his son to die afterward if Nick so chooses. It's the same rationale that falsely led me to find Janette's death in HF. Then (and remember, I was missing a scene) I could not believe that Nick would go against against Janette's all-too-explicitly stated desire to die as a mortal. I couldn't accept that he would deprive her of what he wanted so much for himself. Now, and perhaps it is the same part of me that declares her views as a Light Cousin and Fleur-Booster, I cannot imagine but that LC will give Nick what he asked for, now that he believes he's found what he's sought so long. In that line, Tippi recently posted a thoughtful -- and, surprisingly, serious -- story, which contains a particularly striking insight: Nick forgave LC. "You... are my closest friend." In that declaration, and in all that was behind it, Nick was telling LC that he forgave him -- everything. That's something that could never have been predicted from DK. *** Amy, Lady of the Knight (akr@mail.nwlink.com) *** "Now cracks a noble heart. Good night, sweet prince; And flights of angels sing thee to thy rest!" -- W.S. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 02:18 EDT 1996 Received: from sun1.clark.net (sun1.clark.net [198.17.243.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id CAA20836 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 02:18:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by sun1.clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id CAA00687 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 02:18:29 -0400 Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 325A4B19 ; Tue, 21 May 1996 1:56:31 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210618.CAA00687@sun1.clark.net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 21:20:45 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Robbi Egersdorf Subject: SPOILER: LK To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 3266 Status: O X-Status: -- [ From: Robbi Egersdorf * EMC.Ver #2.5.02 ] -- Please indulge me in my lamentation. I finally got to watch it and now I can start reading the list digests that I have piled up because I didn't want to get spoiled (after what happened with ATA) and still I was spoiled by what I thought was an innocent fkfic post. I was devastated by Lacroix's opening dialog (and could tell that it was being delivered in Nick's loft) even before the show really got started. When the crazy guy grabbed the gun, my heart nearly stopped (and I do mean that literally! Don't worry. I do not have a heart condition.) I knew what was going to happen. Part of the way through, I couldn't believe what Natalie was saying and it hit me like a bad piece of fanfic where the characters just aren't plausible . I kept repeating to myself, "This has to be a dream, It can't be real." Maybe it was just my sense of denial kicking in, but it went on from there to be less plausible. I can't see the motivating factors that were given to be sufficient to move our beloved FK characters to act in this way! Would I miss this marvelous journey of self discovery in order to avoid this most exquiste pain? I have to answer no. no, I would not. I agonize, I suffocate, I dispair. The pain. Make the pain go away. I cannot, I must not. There is so much that will be missed. I must ask why? Why do I subject myself to this? Why is this important? It's just a tv show. Why does it move me so? Nothing can compare with the exquite agony I feel for these characters I have grown to love over the past 6 months. How can it be? It can't be. Oh please, don't let this be true. There is nothing I can do to stop this. I am helpless as are you. This play of sympathies must be accepted as it is, but how is it. I do not know. All I know is that I hurt and the pain will not go away. I have lost my son and my mother through personal chocies that I could not control this week. How am I to deal with my grief? My life has become so sweet become of this, this that can only be termed as a television show. Do not fear for me. I understand the difference between reality and fantasy . How then does this touch me on such a level as nothing before has ever done before nor will it ever again. I am sorry to subject all of you to this, but I must say this to someone or I must die. I have noone who understands and would not ridicule the depths of my passion or the pain of my sorrow. I feel safe in baring this to you. Believe me I have tortured myself through this not once, but twice. The second time being even harder than the first because I knew what would happen. I swore to myself that I would not watch. Then it was I would turn it off if it got difficult. When it got difficult I could not. I was a helpless captive and could do no less than follow it to it's tragic conculsion. I will be all right. I have sworn off the tears that I can only shed in make believe. I could not cry for my son, I could not cry for my mother. All is the same and comes together in the agony of the Last Knight. I have no power to resist. I have no choice in the matter. It is as it is and no less and no more. Robbi Long Live the Knight egersdor@magiclink.com From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 03:04 EDT 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id DAA26458 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 03:04:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.92B405F0@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; Tue, 21 May 1996 2:45:29 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210704.DAA26458@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 01:35:34 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Gehirn Karies Subject: Re: LK comments To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1451 Status: O X-Status: Abby remarked: >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! Deb and Dianne replied. >> 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. I reckoned he hadn't re-opened since Divia's private party. But, then again how does time travel in FK land? A>*Why* was the swinging pendulum effect necessary? Very distracting. D & D>>[Well they apparently sold off Ger's little wheeled cart. He had to have >>*something* to play with... --Dianne] I really like the Ger-Cam. The whole suicide, Nick and Nat on the brink of total dispair thing is soooo heavy, the Ger-Cam kinda mixes it up, gives you that Virtigo feeling. I *needed* a distraction. Lisa P: >First, I agree with those who feel cheated out on the "love scene" between >Nick and Nat. I know that there was alot to cover to achieve closure, but >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. Too bad the set didn't have a shorter hallway. Would've been more time and tape left to film foreplay. My $0.00 worth Gehirn Karies "The Shillelagh of Death v/sThe Ger-Cam".... The sequel to "Ricochet, The Tracy 'Button' Vetter Story." another CluelesSA pictures original. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 03:15 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id DAA27664 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 03:14:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id D8F22BB1 ; Tue, 21 May 1996 2:29:49 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210714.DAA27664@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 00:22:53 +0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: John Folden Subject: Re: Spoiler: LK: Forevermores To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 405 Status: O X-Status: > From: "Hilary Doda" > Natalie is as dead as Janette. That's all there is to it. > > Nicely put. very nicely put. Thank you! > Katya. I missed the original post...You do realize that Janette is not dead, don't you? //---------------------------------------- // John T. Folden, a demented victorian // lost in the DARK SHADOWS of an endless // FOREVER KNIGHT... From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 03:20 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id DAA28222 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 03:20:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id EB92F96A ; Tue, 21 May 1996 2:30:20 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210720.DAA28222@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 21:34:30 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "Robert A. Rosenberg" Subject: Re: Spoiler: LK (long) X-To: Antonia Spadafina To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 947 Status: O X-Status: At 13:53 -0700 5/19/96, Antonia Spadafina wrote: >I ve watched the scene 6 times now. I still cannot tell how Tracy was shot in >the back of the head. Gut, yes. Head, no. Where did the bullet ricochet >from? >(Someone asked that question last week in a spoiler.) I can t figure it. The >angles were all wrong. Also, he only got off ONE shot in her direction (I think it was aimed at Nick and passed though him to hit her). All the other shots were aimed at the ground or hit Dawkins. >Okay, wait a minute, you say. Was Tracy actually shot in the head? The >paramedic says she has a really bad head wound. Does this imply gunshot? >Perhaps the force of the bullet to her gut knocked her backward with enough >force to fracture her skull. - I know, there was blood. How else to >explain it? Any medical people out there who can justify that amount of blood >from blunt trauma to the occipital? I think the paramedic said TWO Shots. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 03:22 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id DAA28571 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 03:22:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 4B475103 ; Tue, 21 May 1996 2:47:20 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210722.DAA28571@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 01:13:42 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Robin Carroll-Mann Subject: Re: SPOILER: LK Details To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 427 Status: O X-Status: Melanie Moser said: > The impression > left here is how lonely Nat has always been. The one thing that > changed that was when Nick entered her life. (Come on, she > remembers the exact date!). Well, it *was* her 28th birthday. I'd remember that kind of birthday present pretty clearly. :-) -- Harper *** Robin Carroll-Mann harper@tribeca.ios.com OR rcmann@delphi.com "Mostly Harmless" -- Douglas Adams From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 03:23 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id DAA28803 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 03:23:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 9907DE56 ; Tue, 21 May 1996 2:49:30 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210723.DAA28803@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 00:44:30 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Margie Hammet Subject: Re: SPOILER: LK - Nat To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 736 Status: O X-Status: 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@io.com) N&NPacker The Unnamed Faction From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 03:24 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id DAA28989 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 03:24:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id C8BF6D41 ; Tue, 21 May 1996 3:05:09 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210724.DAA28989@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 00:01:10 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Robbi Egersdorf Subject: LK Request To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 216 Status: O X-Status: -- [ From: Robbi Egersdorf * EMC.Ver #2.5.02 ] -- 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@magiclink.com From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 07:40 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id HAA25471 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 07:40:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 44C3D439 ; Tue, 21 May 1996 7:40:38 -0400 Message-Id: <199605211140.HAA25471@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 06:48:10 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: TippiNB Subject: Revelations (LK and AtA spoilers) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 641 Status: RO X-Status: 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 From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 01:09 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id BAA13588 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 01:09:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 8E43F888 ; Tue, 21 May 1996 1:08:59 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210509.BAA13588@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 22:13:04 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: MS CHRISTINA L KAMNIKAR Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight Math To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 3740 Status: RO X-Status: Our esteemed Listmommy gave us the equation; now it's just a matter of plug'n'chug. Easy! [Hey, I'm an engineer, I can do anything... and I'm in a very, very weird mood] *Warning! Algebra Ahead! Skip if you don't like math humor!* B = R(1/C) + K where B is the outcome R is the will of the person involved C is Nick's involvement in the outcome and K is random factors we don't know about Start with the unknown, go to the known. We can approximate. R = will of person involved = Natalie's will; lets set this at 1000. (Hey, do you think you can talk her out of this? Be my guest) C = Nick's involvement in the outcome = Deep personal interest, angst, guilt, sorrow; unfortunately, this is also 1000. Unfortunate, because this is inverted in our equation. (Anything Nick tries, inevitably gets screwy) So, R(1/C) = 1000(1/1000) = 1. Which gives us B = 1 + K with the outcome dependent on random factors, and a slight positive inclination. Now, if K > -1, we end up with a positive outcome. If K = -1, then B = 0, and we have a stalemate for all eternity... and Nick and Natalie and Lacroix remain frozen in suspended animation until the TV movie. If K < -1, then B < 0, and we have a negative outcome. What are the Random Factors? (or, K = X ) Outcome is Random Factor dependent. Let's set Lacroix as -1, equal to Natalie and Nick's effect on the outcome combined. If all the Random Factors are Lacroix, we end up in Stalemate Land. [ B = 1 + -1 = 0 ] If there other Random Factors outside of Lacroix? Such as? Well, let's write an equation. X = K = L + R + E + J + T + S + V + MPD Random factors = Lacroix + Reese + Enforcers + Janette + Tracy + Schanke + Vachon + Metro PD + Y Lacroix = -1, to balance Natalie and Nick Reese = (1/WC) = or, the inverse of the watercooler, which always wins, so we can discount this. Enforcers = - (0.0001(Fate)) = or, a negative ten-thousandth of the force of Fate. Fate would really, really have to want Nick & Nat's outcome to be positive for this to be a factor. Highly unlikely, since Fate = TPTB, The Powers That Be, so we can discount this. Janette = (0.01C)/D = one-tenth of Janette's concern divided by distance. Again, way too small. Blow it off. Janette probably will. Tracy = 0, unless you can prove she's undead or a ghost, and has a clue what to do. Schanke = +(F) = The likelihood that Schank's ghost will show up and talk Natalie and/or Nick into a different course of action. Unknown. And we don't have an equation! We must discount at this time. Vachon = 0. Even if he's not dead, he has other problems. MPD = Metro PD paging factor, since they have such wonderful timing. Unknown; can only be proven in the field. We'll check on it during the test run. Y = Anything we don't know about, including Nielson numbers, Kay Koplovitz's salary negotiations, and the sales on the Forever Knight CD. Also letters to TPTB, new terms of the actors contracts, and the cost of rebuilding the sets. Not to mention the actual power of True Love, which has never been well-defined. In short (well, okay, too late for that): B = 1 + (-1 + (MPD) + Y) = 0 + MPD + Y = MPD + Y So it all depends on really random factors and the Metro paging system. :) Notice that the definition of a positive outcome is never circumscribed, since this is dependent on the viewer's position in time and space, re Einstein's Theory and Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle. {Or, good and positive are in the eyes of the beholder} This was brought to you by the letters Y and C, and the number 2 to the 16th power. Christina, doing the geek thing in cyberspace vqrw76a@prodigy.com From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 01:11 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id BAA13948 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 01:11:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id D747ABC8 ; Tue, 21 May 1996 1:11:02 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210511.BAA13948@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 22:30:29 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: The Phoenix Subject: Re: SPOILER: LAST KNIGHT-- WATCH THOSE SUBJECT LINES! X-To: gryphon@execpc.com X-cc: catheboo@cco.caltech.edu, immajer@pipeline.com To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <199605191229.HAA24361@mail.execpc.com> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 634 Status: O X-Status: On Sun, 19 May 1996 gryphon@execpc.com wrote: [ A very bitchy note re: spoilers. ] Boooooooy, are you kids glad I was away from the terminal this weekend. I woulda said the same exact things. Only I wouldn't've been quite so nice about them. *evil smile* Red, Yer Listowner. Not quite on vacation, so watch it. /-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/- The Tastiest Crayon, Her Royal Redness, Jaye the First, the Phoenix. jap8@cac.psu.edu // http://cac.psu.edu/~jap8/ MIAWOL. /-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/- From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 01:54 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id BAA18906 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 01:54:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id CA91CF3C ; Tue, 21 May 1996 1:53:37 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210554.BAA18906@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 23:29:43 +0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: John Folden Subject: Re: Last Knight: Blurred images explanation To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 556 Status: RO X-Status: > From: "Chana Rossman" > > What if we are viewing all of this from Natalie's perspective? She > is laying on the floor. The shots are all sort of shot at an upward > angle. She is semi-unconcious (at least) which would explained the > blurred, dream-like quality. I love this theory! I'd have to agree that judging by the angle it would appear to be coming from Nat's perspective. //---------------------------------------- // John T. Folden, a demented victorian // lost in the DARK SHADOWS of an endless // FOREVER KNIGHT... From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 03:04 EDT 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id DAA26487 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 03:04:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.A5235810@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; Tue, 21 May 1996 3:00:19 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210704.DAA26487@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 02:31:11 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Ray Heuer Subject: SPOILERS: Last Knight (also AtA) - Think a moment .... To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 7386 Status: O X-Status: 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! From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 03:20 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id DAA28245 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 03:20:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id EEBF7B8B ; Tue, 21 May 1996 2:30:26 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210720.DAA28245@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 23:29:03 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "Robert A. Rosenberg" Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight X-To: Cynthia Hoffman To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 772 Status: O X-Status: At 11:10 -0700 5/19/96, Cynthia Hoffman 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. Oh, and as for "how can you do >this for Tracy and not for me", Tracy was DYING. Nat was still alive and >healthy. Figure it out! Also, making her a Vampire (even if she would not have chosen this step if she were still awake but was still going to die) is perfectly OK in my opinion since Tracy could suicide if she wanted (just like Urs could have after she was made one due to a misunderstanding) after waking up a Vampire. She would thus be given the ability to choose for herself (something that not vamping her would deny her). From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 03:21 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id DAA28340 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 03:21:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 9BEC7B02 ; Tue, 21 May 1996 2:35:16 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210721.DAA28340@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 00:25:41 +0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: John Folden Subject: Re: Last Knight - Major Spoilers To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1721 Status: O X-Status: > From: "Beth Washington" > > S > > P > > O > > I > > L > > E > > R > > > > > > S > > p > > A > > C > > E > > I am truely sad. Even though Nick and Nat are together, they are still > dead, dead to us, and LaCroix is now truely alone. This is not a happy > ending, or even a hopeful ending...it is just an ending. A final > ending. So sad. Call me a brick, but I don't believe they are dead. The ending was too ambiguous, too open. If they were truly dead, we'd have seen it. We would have seen Nick take that "second drink" from Nat and finish her off. We would have seen Lacroix stake Nick through the heart and watched him die. As it stands now, I feel each and everyone of us can draw our own conclusions from what little closure we were left with... Personally, I don't believe Lacroix would ever stake Nick. It's not in character, even after the new insights we've seen in the last two episodes. If I were in a position to film an ending to LK, I would have shown lacroix jab the stake into the floor(or knock Nick unconscious with it) and then use Natalie as a weapon to control Nick(either by bringing her accross or simply by making sure she survived, if only to make sure Nick didn't carry out any other suicidal thoughts). > (wondering why they had to kill everyone. How can they bring them back > for a fourth season. They can't. They ruined it!) IMHO, the only one who can't come back from LK is Tracy. Unless of course the entire last episode was simply Nick's Knightmare brought about because of Divia's "bad Blood". //---------------------------------------- // John T. Folden, a demented victorian // lost in the DARK SHADOWS of an endless // FOREVER KNIGHT... From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 03:23 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id DAA28610 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 03:23:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 61F4C624 ; Tue, 21 May 1996 2:47:58 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210723.DAA28610@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 22:27:28 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Sherri Subject: Re: SPOILER: Last Knight Math To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <199605210511.WAA24995@empnet.com> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 523 Status: O X-Status: On Mon, 20 May 1996, MS CHRISTINA L KAMNIKAR wrote: >Our esteemed Listmommy gave us the equation; now it's just a matter of >plug'n'chug. Easy! [Hey, I'm an engineer, I can do anything... and I'm in a >very, very weird mood] > >*Warning! Algebra Ahead! Skip if you don't like math humor!* Yeah, but what is this in English ????????? PS. ROTFLMAO.... Sherri sherric@empnet.com Founding Member, SFKS Save FK: http://members.aol.com/CuznJamiMR/SaveForeverKnight.html From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 03:25 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id DAA29093 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 03:25:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 6345FC09 ; Tue, 21 May 1996 3:09:29 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210725.DAA29093@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 00:08:56 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Amy Rambow Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <199605210641.XAA14817@montana.nwlink.com> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1673 Status: O X-Status: > 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@mail.nwlink.com) *** "Now cracks a noble heart. Good night, sweet prince; And flights of angels sing thee to thy rest!" -- W.S. From owner-forkni-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 03:25 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id DAA29105 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 03:25:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id AA85AB3B ; Tue, 21 May 1996 3:11:28 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210725.DAA29105@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 23:13:05 -2055 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show Sender: Forever Knight TV show From: "L. Katherine Queen" Subject: Last Knight-no spoilers To: Multiple recipients of list FORKNI-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 649 Status: O X-Status: Hi gang, I would like to make a general comment about the ending of the season. To those of you who have seen Last Knight and also for those of you who have not. Has any one thought that in all this, perhaps the largest test of faith is being asked of us...the fans of Forever Knight. The one thing that we all seem to love about FK is the fact that it inspires our imaginations and causes us to think...and it is still doing just that. Comments? Thoughts? Katherine lqueen@polarnet.com "There are things that are worse that death, you must believe me." Does anyone recognize this quote? I can't for the life of me remember where I heard it. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 04:17 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id EAA04328 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 04:17:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id D33F27B6 ; Tue, 21 May 1996 4:17:02 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210817.EAA04328@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 04:15:45 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Deborah Bender Subject: SPOILERS: Last Knight parallels to an English ballad To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1626 Status: O X-Status: 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@aol.com The Witches Trine, a magazine beyond Wicca 101. Email me for details. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 08:03 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id IAA28176 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 08:03:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id C2D69015 ; Tue, 21 May 1996 7:51:19 -0400 Message-Id: <199605211203.IAA28176@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 06:46:00 CDT Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Jill Kirby Subject: SPOILERS: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1789 Status: RO X-Status: 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 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 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@mcs.com - 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 From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 09:27 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id JAA13528 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 09:27:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 3005E5F0 ; Tue, 21 May 1996 9:27:26 -0400 Message-Id: <199605211327.JAA13528@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 09:24:36 EDT Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Lisa McDavid Subject: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 460 Status: RO X-Status: 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@scarolina.edu From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 10:03 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id KAA22305 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 10:03:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id A0711DA3 ; Tue, 21 May 1996 9:59:12 -0400 Message-Id: <199605211403.KAA22305@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 09:09:52 EDT Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Lisa McDavid Subject: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1572 Status: RO X-Status: 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 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@scarolina.edu From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 10:57 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id KAA06167 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 10:57:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 799ADAE2 ; Tue, 21 May 1996 10:48:14 -0400 Message-Id: <199605211457.KAA06167@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 08:44:54 -0600 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Deb Subject: Re: Last Knight - Major Spoilers To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1197 Status: RO X-Status: 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 From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 11:01 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id LAA07045 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 11:00:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 0E8C5E43 ; Tue, 21 May 1996 10:52:24 -0400 Message-Id: <199605211500.LAA07045@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 09:51:58 +30000 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Valerie Meachum Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight X-To: FKX List , alikhat@ix.netcom.com, cat.goddess@pobox.com, catheboo@cco.caltech.edu, choff@violet.berkeley.edu, D020214@UNIVSCVM.CSD.SCAROLINA.EDU, feden@mcs.com, finabair@aol.com, gryphon@execpc.com, h36a@unb.ca, janes@interlog.com, jennise@talarian.com, jtkirby@mcs.com, kingv@ucs.orst.edu, KWELSS@us.oracle.com, loreleif@ix.netcom.com, Maureen.Wynn@mailgw.uprod.music.umich.edu, menikoff@panix.com, romana@ix.netcom.com, sss44@aol.com, vqrw76a@prodigy.com, westonk@uwwvax.uww.edu To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <199605211319.JAA13299@louis.cac.psu.edu> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1447 Status: RO X-Status: 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 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 From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 11:44 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id LAA18688 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 11:44:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 5211A7E6 ; Tue, 21 May 1996 11:44:23 -0400 Message-Id: <199605211544.LAA18688@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 10:39:29 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Carrie Krumtum Subject: Re: SPOILER: Last Knight Math X-To: VQRW76A@PRODIGY.COM To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 376 Status: O X-Status: >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@gnn.com It's hard to judge someone when you're blinded by your love for them. --Mother Teresa From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 11:46 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id LAA19251 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 11:46:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id A26F801E ; Tue, 21 May 1996 11:46:38 -0400 Message-Id: <199605211546.LAA19251@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 08:44:25 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Amy Rambow Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <199605211337.GAA06101@montana.nwlink.com> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1420 Status: O X-Status: 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@mail.nwlink.com) *** "Now cracks a noble heart. Good night, sweet prince; And flights of angels sing thee to thy rest!" -- W.S. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 11:48 EDT 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id LAA19630 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 11:48:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.DC98B120@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; Tue, 21 May 1996 11:44:25 -0400 Message-Id: <199605211548.LAA19630@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 07:42:57 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Cynthia Hoffman Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <199605210708.AAA14032@violet.berkeley.edu> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 4059 Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 21 May 1996, Amy Rambow 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@violet.berkeley.edu Raven ** IB ** MBDtK We cater to the occasional fetishist From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 13:21 EDT 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id NAA12124 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 13:21:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.E0F2A980@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; Tue, 21 May 1996 13:17:36 -0400 Message-Id: <199605211721.NAA12124@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 09:08:00 PT Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Tami Lafrank Subject: Re: Last Knight spoilers To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1826 Status: O X-Status: 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@AOL.COM or TCL20@AMAIL.AMDAHL.COM 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" From soulseek@sprynet.com Tue May 21 13:40 EDT 1996 Received: from m2.sprynet.com (m2.sprynet.com [165.121.1.99]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id NAA16296 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 13:39:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [199.174.140.42] (ad13-042.compuserve.com [199.174.140.42]) by m2.sprynet.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA06943; Tue, 21 May 1996 10:37:16 -0700 From: soulseek@sprynet.com Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 10:37:16 -0700 Message-Id: <199605211737.KAA06943@m2.sprynet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: N&N loop (Last Knight) To: asnelson@indiana.edu, acapozzi@wellesley.edu, AMORG@aol.com, egardner@facstaff.wisc.edu, CKrumtum@gnn.com, jclemens@world.std.com, bonney@interpath.com, Claudius@NETRIDE.COM, criss@marlboro.edu, fiorini@MARYWOOD1.MARYWOOD.EDU, dgthomas@ix.netcom.com, phase3@gate.net, dottir@wsii.com, efriedm1@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu, gmccree@cms.cc.wayne.edu, ILCzJules@aol.com, jasonl@cnwl.igs.net, shalott@chattanooga.net, dukarsja@udmercy.edu, RICHARD@iclnet.co.uk, jtfolden@erinet.com, Baigneuse@aol.com, lplummer@interlink.com, LoriArgyll@aol.com, lydiam@singnet.com.sg, d_Roberts@msn.com, moser@clark.net, catspaw@cruzio.com, rfulton@directnet.net, swells@phoenix.atticus.com, TGill10669@aol.com, valworth@aol.com X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.10.06.22 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Length: 459 Status: RO X-Status: <---- Begin Forwarded Message ----> From: "Rachel Fulton" To: soulseek@sprynet.com Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 09:25:57 +0000 Subject: Re: N&N loop (Last Knight) If any N and N packers are also fans of Star Trek, they know that the end is never the end if the fans don't like it!! Especially in a supernatural show like FK..... If Spock came back, so can Nick..... Keep the hope alive! Jeanette <---- End Forwarded Message ----> From soulseek@sprynet.com Tue May 21 13:41 EDT 1996 Received: from m2.sprynet.com (m2.sprynet.com [165.121.1.99]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id NAA16763 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 13:41:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [199.174.140.42] (ad13-042.compuserve.com [199.174.140.42]) by m2.sprynet.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA06867; Tue, 21 May 1996 10:36:30 -0700 From: soulseek@sprynet.com Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 10:36:30 -0700 Message-Id: <199605211736.KAA06867@m2.sprynet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: N&N loop (Last Knight --spoilers!] To: asnelson@indiana.edu, acapozzi@wellesley.edu, AMORG@aol.com, egardner@facstaff.wisc.edu, CKrumtum@gnn.com, jclemens@world.std.com, bonney@interpath.com, Claudius@NETRIDE.COM, criss@marlboro.edu, fiorini@MARYWOOD1.MARYWOOD.EDU, dgthomas@ix.netcom.com, phase3@gate.net, dottir@wsii.com, efriedm1@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu, gmccree@cms.cc.wayne.edu, ILCzJules@aol.com, jasonl@cnwl.igs.net, shalott@chattanooga.net, dukarsja@udmercy.edu, RICHARD@iclnet.co.uk, jtfolden@erinet.com, Baigneuse@aol.com, lplummer@interlink.com, LoriArgyll@aol.com, lydiam@singnet.com.sg, d_Roberts@msn.com, moser@clark.net, catspaw@cruzio.com, rfulton@directnet.net, swells@phoenix.atticus.com, TGill10669@aol.com, valworth@aol.com X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.10.06.22 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Length: 250 Status: RO X-Status: Hey Guys! Do not be so depressed! There are always reruns and hey we all have each other and the internet sites. Be Thankful! Enjoy Life! The ending was depressing but it had a ray of hope - LOVE! Vicky <---- End Forwarded Message ----> From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 15:59 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id PAA19604 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 15:59:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id BF6A3F6C ; Tue, 21 May 1996 15:43:40 -0400 Message-Id: <199605211959.PAA19604@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 11:14:54 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Margie Hammet Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 898 Status: RO X-Status: 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@io.com) From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 16:06 EDT 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id QAA21299 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 16:06:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.F67F34A0@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; Tue, 21 May 1996 16:02:51 -0400 Message-Id: <199605212006.QAA21299@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 10:26:46 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Amy Rambow Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <199605211558.IAA19018@montana.nwlink.com> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1486 Status: O X-Status: (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@mail.nwlink.com) *** "Now cracks a noble heart. Good night, sweet prince; And flights of angels sing thee to thy rest!" -- W.S. From soulseek@sprynet.com Tue May 21 13:36 EDT 1996 Received: from m2.sprynet.com (m2.sprynet.com [165.121.1.99]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id NAA15632 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 13:36:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [199.174.140.42] (ad13-042.compuserve.com [199.174.140.42]) by m2.sprynet.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA06632; Tue, 21 May 1996 10:34:04 -0700 From: soulseek@sprynet.com Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 10:34:04 -0700 Message-Id: <199605211734.KAA06632@m2.sprynet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: N&N (minor SPOILER) To: asnelson@indiana.edu, acapozzi@wellesley.edu, AMORG@aol.com, egardner@facstaff.wisc.edu, CKrumtum@gnn.com, jclemens@world.std.com, bonney@interpath.com, Claudius@NETRIDE.COM, criss@marlboro.edu, fiorini@MARYWOOD1.MARYWOOD.EDU, dgthomas@ix.netcom.com, phase3@gate.net, dottir@wsii.com, efriedm1@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu, gmccree@cms.cc.wayne.edu, ILCzJules@aol.com, jasonl@cnwl.igs.net, shalott@chattanooga.net, dukarsja@udmercy.edu, RICHARD@iclnet.co.uk, jtfolden@erinet.com, Baigneuse@aol.com, lplummer@interlink.com, LoriArgyll@aol.com, lydiam@singnet.com.sg, d_Roberts@msn.com, moser@clark.net, catspaw@cruzio.com, rfulton@directnet.net, swells@phoenix.atticus.com, TGill10669@aol.com, valworth@aol.com X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.10.06.22 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Length: 629 Status: O X-Status: > > <---- Begin Forwarded Message ----> > Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 16:52:28 -0400 > To: soulseek@sprynet.com > From: bonney@interpath.com (Chana Rossman) > Subject: Re: N&N (minor SPOILER) > > Hi all > > I've read several posts on the spoiler list which maintain > that Nick didn't actually love Natalie. Can we let this > opinion reign? I think not! > > Let's mount a defense, shall we? > Chana DEFINATLY NOT! There is no question that Nick loves Nat, or he wouldn't have behaved as he did....... As a devote N and N packer, I must express my horror at such a sugestion! Jeanette <---- End Forwarded Message ----> From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 11:36 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id LAA16827 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 11:36:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 265939A8 ; Tue, 21 May 1996 11:28:51 -0400 Message-Id: <199605211536.LAA16827@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 06:58:12 PST Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: June Russell Subject: Re: LK and AtA comments X-To: Forever.Knight.TV.show.-.Spoiler.Topic.List@grendal.rain.com To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 949 Status: O X-Status: 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@grendal.rain.com Heu! Tintinnuntius meus Sonat! From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 11:37 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id LAA16893 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 11:37:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 5A530DA6 ; Tue, 21 May 1996 11:30:18 -0400 Message-Id: <199605211537.LAA16893@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 07:24:53 PST Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: June Russell Subject: Re: SPOILER: LK (HF), Distorted views X-To: Forever.Knight.TV.show.-.Spoiler.Topic.List@grendal.rain.com To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 629 Status: O X-Status: 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@grendal.rain.com Heu! Tintinnuntius meus Sonat! From soulseek@sprynet.com Tue May 21 13:42 EDT 1996 Received: from m2.sprynet.com (m2.sprynet.com [165.121.1.99]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id NAA16868 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 13:42:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [199.174.140.42] (ad13-042.compuserve.com [199.174.140.42]) by m2.sprynet.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA07105; Tue, 21 May 1996 10:38:36 -0700 From: soulseek@sprynet.com Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 10:38:36 -0700 Message-Id: <199605211738.KAA07105@m2.sprynet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: N&N Loop (Spoiler) To: asnelson@indiana.edu, acapozzi@wellesley.edu, AMORG@aol.com, egardner@facstaff.wisc.edu, CKrumtum@gnn.com, jclemens@world.std.com, bonney@interpath.com, Claudius@NETRIDE.COM, criss@marlboro.edu, fiorini@MARYWOOD1.MARYWOOD.EDU, dgthomas@ix.netcom.com, phase3@gate.net, dottir@wsii.com, efriedm1@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu, gmccree@cms.cc.wayne.edu, ILCzJules@aol.com, jasonl@cnwl.igs.net, shalott@chattanooga.net, dukarsja@udmercy.edu, RICHARD@iclnet.co.uk, jtfolden@erinet.com, Baigneuse@aol.com, lplummer@interlink.com, LoriArgyll@aol.com, lydiam@singnet.com.sg, d_Roberts@msn.com, moser@clark.net, catspaw@cruzio.com, rfulton@directnet.net, swells@phoenix.atticus.com, TGill10669@aol.com, valworth@aol.com X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.10.06.22 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Length: 770 Status: RO X-Status: <---- Begin Forwarded Message ----> From: jtfolden@erinet.com Date: Tue, 21 May 96 00:48:41 +0500 To: soulseek@sprynet.com Subject: Re: N&N Loop (Spoiler) > From: "Leslie I.Plummer" > > >Yeah, Perky people do tend to have a lot of "bouncy" energy...:) > >I also wondered about the stake but then I thought perhaps it was > >there for protection from other attacking vampires...? > > Notice that Nick had a stake in his house, too... like humans would > have a gun for defense? > Well, glad to know I'm not the only one to believe my own theory... :) //---------------------------------------- // John T. Folden, a demented victorian // lost in the DARK SHADOWS of an endless // FOREVER KNIGHT... <---- End Forwarded Message ----> From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Sun May 19 04:44 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id EAA01017 for ; Sun, 19 May 1996 04:44:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 553C39A4 ; Sun, 19 May 1996 4:44:31 -0400 Message-Id: <199605190844.EAA01017@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 01:43:53 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Angie Subject: Why Nat isn't dead To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1077 Status: RO X-Status: Well, just this thought -=20 If Nat was dead, why did Nick still hear her heartbeating AFTER he had withdrawn his fangs from her neck? SO what happened after we pulled away and LC said "Damn you Nicholas"??? LC rendered Nick unconsious (which was easy to do, since he is now mortal again - yes those were *clear* tears he was crying). He brought Nat over whilest our boy Nicky was down on the ground. When Nat wakes up, her love for Nick will change her back somehow, and even if she doesn't revert naturally, they can find the antivirus in Nick's blood and grow it for Nat. How cares if this is wrong, this is the way I am going to think about it from now on. And I will never buy another Sony product till the day the first FK movie shows up on the Sci Fi channel, nor will I ever pay to see a movie that either they or TriStar put out. Lasher - wishes the PTB would all drop dead. =3D[=DE=BB=A3=BB=E1=BB=F0=BB=FD=BB=A3=BB=E0=BBs=BBh=BB=EA=BBr=BB=BB =20 @-->-'- http://home.earthlink.net/~alasher http://www.geocities.com/hollywood/5069 --<-'-@ From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 20:06 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id UAA16266 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 20:06:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 93213840 ; Tue, 21 May 1996 19:31:30 -0400 Message-Id: <199605220006.UAA16266@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 16:42:16 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: John & Donna Spert Subject: Spoiler: Last Knight (a "top 10" list) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <199605211327.IAA05729@deliverator.io.com> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 680 Status: RO X-Status: Hi, In trying not to be depressed about LK, I came up with the following. I hope it engenders a few chuckles. John Ten things LaCroix didn't say as he held the stake: 10) Better you than me. 9) Tis a far better thing I do than I have ever done before. 8) Does this mean you're definitely not moving with me? 7) Ten bucks says I get the heart first try. 6) Give in to the Dark Side. It is your destiny. 5) I get double points if the stake hits Natalie too. 4) Am I in your will? 3) My horoscope said this would be a bad Knight. 2) Is it too late to audition for Kindred? And the number one thing LaCroix didn't say as he held the stake: 1) There can be only one! From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 19:23 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id TAA07105 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 19:23:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 70947704 ; Tue, 21 May 1996 19:09:03 -0400 Message-Id: <199605212323.TAA07105@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 16:41:51 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: TippiNB Subject: A new theory! (LK spoilers) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1692 Status: RO X-Status: Hey all... S P O I L E R S P A C E Okie if you haven't averted your eyes by now, tough luck!! At first, after watching LK, I went into denial mode. But, as Cousin Cherri pointed out, we have to deal with reality. Okay. I can do that. Especially if I can alter reality! Ashes to Ashes felt more like a series finale to me than LK does. A lot of people agree, so I'm not just whacko here. Anyway, so I'm going to think of LK as the 1st ep of the 4th season that we just haven't gotten yet. Yes? Evidence! I have evidence! To coin Apache's trademark: I have a Cheesy Rationalization (tm)!! Remember Black Buddha, the 1st ep of the 3rd season? Let's compare notes on the similarities: LK: Partner (Tracy) dies. BB: Partner (Schanke) dies. (Or so they say. I know for a fact he's living in Phoenix, AZ! Muaha!) LK: Nick blames himself for partner's demise. BB: Nick blames himself for partner's demise. LK: The owner of the Raven, LC, is leaving. BB: The owner of the Raven, Janette, has just left. LK: Nat shows up in Nick's loft just as he's deciding whether or not it's time to move on. BB: Ditto. I'm sure there are more but I don't have LK on tape just yet so I can't say. I don't *care* how cheesy my rationalization is. Put it on a cracker and call in an hors d'ouerve! (ooh, I may have even spelled that right!!) She of dairy product explanations, 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 From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 20:07 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id UAA16574 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 20:07:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 90589804 ; Tue, 21 May 1996 19:38:35 -0400 Message-Id: <199605220007.UAA16574@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 15:51:22 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Robbi Egersdorf Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1425 Status: RO X-Status: -- [ From: Robbi Egersdorf * EMC.Ver #2.5.02 ] -- I have now watched Last Knight 5 times. It took me 4 times to realize that Nick Killed Dawkins by throwing him up against the wall. I am still working through my spoiler digests so I don't know if anyone has brought out this point. Here goes. In Feeding the Beast Nick tried to give up blood and it sent him on a spree (Just from what I understand having never seen the episode myself) We know that Nick has denied his nature by not drinking human blood (although there are exceptions) and does not drink blood from people (there are exceptions here. Wouldn't his urges be a little harder to control since he is not committing these acts on a regular basis. When we see him sip from a neck it was only in flashbacks from a period in his life when he was doing all that is in the nature of a vampire to do. Another factor that needs to be considered is how long has it been since the poor boy has had sex! Only once in this whole season (if you consider bringing Janette back across, having vampire sex with her) Otherwise Nick has been celibate this whole year. No wonder he couldn't control himself and there was no foreplay (which I would have loved to see ) Other than kissing Natalie's wrist. No telling what might have happened if he got himself real excited. See. I can be coherent after Last Knight. Robbi Long Live the Knight egersdor@magiclink.com From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 17:38 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id RAA14461 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 17:38:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 2FF7BD61 ; Tue, 21 May 1996 17:27:02 -0400 Message-Id: <199605212138.RAA14461@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 15:07:11 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "C. Monique Solis" Subject: Last Knight thoughts To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1519 Status: RO X-Status: 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! goodbye sweet knight. Monique Forever and ever Knightie!! cmsolis@aol.com From owner-forkni-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 18:19 EDT 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id SAA23803 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 18:19:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.8494EF20@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; Tue, 21 May 1996 18:15:40 -0400 Message-Id: <199605212219.SAA23803@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 15:27:01 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show Sender: Forever Knight TV show From: Kayla Clark Organization: Wrytt - Write SF/F puzzles, Tape SF/F, Tutor Subject: Gilliane, Lisa Luksus, Last Knight, Plea for Fanfic Recommendation To: Multiple recipients of list FORKNI-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1190 Status: RO X-Status: Hiya! I've been nomail for the longest time (just can't keep up), but have been on the Info Loop. I read about Gilliane's pix site and DL'd practically all of those marvelous pictures! Thank you Gilliane!! Also, in updating my e-mail program, I lost Lisa Luksus' address. Please contact me, Lisa. No spoilers, but I think "Last Knight" well . . . bites. As I'm also nomail from the fic list, would some kind soul recommend fanfic that has a different ending or a continuation of the story different from what "LK" leads us to believe happened? Also, I'm running a very small e-mail loop for the discussion of all SF/F [Titled, oddly enough, No Off-topic Science-fiction/Fantasy E-mail Rountable And Thinktank Unplugged, or NOSFERATU - it just happened to fit :-)]. We're seeking members with opinions on all kinds of SF/F. Please privately e-mail me at the address in my sig about any of the above or anything else you feel like -- Kayla, Cousin, LO for NOSFERATU, All-Around SF/F Fan, katygale@intersurf.com DFWI: Head Flag Waver for DDG's BB "You'd better pray that I can." - Julian to Caitlin, *Kindred:TE* "You didn't trust me." - Tracy to Nick, "Last Knight" :-( From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 18:45 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id SAA29076 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 18:45:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id EFBA3A24 ; Tue, 21 May 1996 18:36:49 -0400 Message-Id: <199605212245.SAA29076@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 16:37:17 EDT Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Tanya Smith Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 469 Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 05/21/96 16:06 From: Tanya Smith, Secretary for Product Assurance, Preload and Mobile Value Products. 1-919-543-8657. T/L 441-8657 F/X 1-919-543-4036 F/X T/L 441-4036. 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. From mickey@raven.cybercomm.net Tue May 21 19:17 EDT 1996 Received: from raven.cybercomm.net (root@raven.cybercomm.net [199.171.196.3]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id TAA05849 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 19:17:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from my computer.cybercomm.net (sl-021.sl.cybercomm.net [199.171.196.149]) by raven.cybercomm.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA16094; Tue, 21 May 1996 18:58:01 -0400 Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19960522001116.006b70f8@raven.cybercomm.net> X-Sender: mickey@raven.cybercomm.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 19:11:16 -0500 To: mac218@psu.edu, macleod@ritz.mordor.com, magdalen@eworld.com, makeever@pipeline.com, manziemarylou@msn.com, Marajsky@snip.net, mariavg@seattleu.edu, maryshap@mail.utexas.edu, mcardle@ozemail.com.au, meredith@ab.edu, messing@asel.udel.edu, michele.iseri@airtouch.com, mikic@aros.net, MillerNa@smtpgw2.musc.edu, mitchell@mail.utep.edu, mjopp@xnet.com, mooch@cncnet.com, mopalins@localnet.com, moser@clark.net, mrm@televar.com, MTETREAU@smaug.devry.ca From: mickey@cybercomm.net Subject: Last Knight, spoilers Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Length: 4426 Status: RO X-Status: The following is my opinion and mine only..don't even bother to flame me, I've already heard on the IRC that I am "grasping at straws" or that I should "get a life" for thinking that any of this is feasible, but that same person also thought that I was taking it all too seriously, which, in fact, I'm not. Its just a TV show, I happen to enjoy it immensely, but we can't lose sightof the fact that their are people's lives and careers at stake and many people were involved ( I believe) in the decision process that led to this last episode. Keep an open mind and read the following. I am not in anyway proposing "shower scenes" or dream sequences, I think that all of this is feasible, but as I said thats me. I didn't have a problem with LK,granted, I'm a Cousin and ole LaCroix was still standing, but I think it could have been a lot worse. Maybe I'm one of those, the glass is "half full" people, but they left enough decent loopholes in this that I could foresee future episodes or a mini movie. I didn't get the nickname Spock for nothin', so I will try to logically explain what I mean. Right now, future episodes and a mini movie are not slated for the near future, so the producers, I'm sure will have to wonder whether or not they will have accessibility to the actors at a time when this would become feasible. After all, the last time it took 18 months. A loophole was left to cover them either way. In the case of Vachon, Ben Bass could go on to become the next Mel Gibson and not have the least bit of desire to come back and reprise his role as Vachon, if thats the case, then Vachon is dead and buried (thats if they don't choose to recast) Now, if they did choose to recast, then we already know that JP operates basically off the Anne Rice interpretation of vamps. Anne's vamps go into the ground to "die" and then recuperate, so if Vachon were to be coming back, he will simply recover from that nasty illness that Divia laid on him and recover during his time in the ground. IF, they had intended for them to never return...they would have been burned, as was Divia. In Divia's case, the actress was getting a bit old to be playing a 12 year old and they pushed the envelope a bit this time. Anyway, back to Vachon. With the loophole that was left, he could either be dead, or recast or Ben could return as Vachon. On to Tracy, if you go with the Vachon returns scenario, then Vachon could have been watching over her, yet he felt that Tracy was better off without him, so he didn't tell her that he had recovered, but he couldn't bring himself to leave her, but he's there and manages to bring her across. That flatline could be interpretated in many ways, remember, Nick said she had a fighting chance and we all know how darn perky Tracy is, but what if she had awoken and seen Vachon standing over her bed and she missed him so terribly, her heart was breaking, now she *might* die and lose him yet again! She makes a choice, to live with Vachon, as he is. If they really wanted to make Tracy dead, with no way around it, then she would have died right there in the locker room, done,fini, no way out of it. They didn't. Next victim: Natalie..or was she? Did she die? Who knows, its another open ender that leaves the same opportunities as the character of Vachon. If Catherine wants to come back, then Nick could still stop LC and bring her over or LC could bring her over. Or she was only half drained. Next: Nick...we never saw LC stake him, for all we know he hit him in the head and jumped over him and brought Nat across. Or he smacked him in the head and stuffed him in the trunk and took him with him or...I think you get the picture. I just think that we have to remember that there are a lot of variables at play here and in no way do I feel that anyone connected with the show tried to "screw the fans" as others have stated. Its a TV show to us, to these people, its their careers. I think the writer (s) did the best they could with what they were given and left it open for the pendulum to swing either way. Annmarie FOREVER KNIGHT: Now showing on the SciFi Channel Mondays, 8pm, 12am EST FOREVER KNIGHT SOS/FK: http://members.aol.com/CuznJamiMR/SaveForeverKnight.html *Cousin* *Vachon Ogler* *MPPB* *MPEB* *XPhile* *DMC* *PWFC* *MFW Cavalry* *AA* ***The Mother of Invention *had* to have been a single mother!*** From owner-forkni-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 19:23 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id TAA06988 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 19:23:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 93F8BDD4 ; Tue, 21 May 1996 19:02:53 -0400 Message-Id: <199605212323.TAA06988@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 15:27:45 -0600 Reply-To: dpgiles@novell.com Sender: Forever Knight TV show From: Dirk Giles Organization: Novell, Inc. Subject: Blooper Script for Last Knight (no spoilers) To: Multiple recipients of list FORKNI-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 272 Status: O X-Status: There have been a few posts about a script that was read during one of the LK parties. Could someone send me some information about getting a copy of that? I sure would like to see it! Thanks. Socrates - Faithful Raven Still Flossing (Dirk Giles - dpgiles@novell.com) From owner-forkni-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 00:47 EDT 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id AAA10873 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 00:47:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.AC9CD420@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; Wed, 22 May 1996 0:43:20 -0400 Message-Id: <199605220447.AAA10873@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 21:18:52 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show Sender: Forever Knight TV show From: Tim Grew Subject: Re: Last Knight-no spoilers To: Multiple recipients of list FORKNI-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 574 Status: RO X-Status: Hello. I found out about this list (and FKFIC-L) just AFTER Last Knight (I'm on the Highlander lists). Are there any kind, generous souls out there who archive posts from this list (and, hopefully, the FKFIC list &/or the SPOILR-L, too) who'd be willing to negotiate via PRIVATE e-mail re: my obtaining the posts for the past few days (since LK aired)? I'd really like to see other people's reactions to this episode. And especially any epilogs/alternative endings. Sorry to take up bandwidth. Tim Grew WMEBSW@AOL.COM (it's my office's address) Thanks, either way! From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 01:10 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id BAA14515 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 01:10:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 3845C0AA ; Tue, 21 May 1996 23:39:30 -0400 Message-Id: <199605220510.BAA14515@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 19:22:35 PST Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: June Russell Subject: Re: Last Knight thoughts X-To: Forever.Knight.TV.show.-.Spoiler.Topic.List@grendal.rain.com To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 986 Status: RO X-Status: Monique wrote: :Two: Poor Nat! :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. After watching it *again* I realized there *was* more to that part of the scene than I had realized: Nick pulls back from Natalie, gazes into her eyes for quite a while (making love to her with his eyes it seemed) before he plunged into her neck. Natalie knew he was going to go for her neck *soon* but didn't suggest they go to the couch, lay down, go upstairs or anything more. I don't think she was hypnotized. I think she felt she was ready and didn't *try* to ask him for more "foreplay". (But that doesn't mean I didn't think we were cheated a bit. We certainly saw Janette do a lot more with Robert and JP evidently said that FK vampire sex was more than just above the neck.) Kat Kat ( June Russell ) pacifier.com!grendal!kat kat@grendal.rain.com Heu! Tintinnuntius meus Sonat! From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 01:11 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id BAA14783 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 01:11:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id C42E933C ; Tue, 21 May 1996 23:43:25 -0400 Message-Id: <199605220511.BAA14783@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 19:50:14 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "Margaret L. Carter" Subject: Re: Last Knight (bloody tears, Nat) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 730 Status: RO X-Status: Okay, maybe vampires cry bloody tears when they have fed heavily and/or recently, but not the rest of the time. Why didn't it occur to Nick, while Nat lingered on the brink, to fly her to a hospital and get a massive blood transfusion? He could have hypnotized the staff so they wouldn't wonder how she lost all that blood. Nope, too simple, and would require him to think about her welfare instead of his own guilt. (But I still love him.) Some think this episode is out of character for Nat. I can easily see her losing perspective, after all the recent events; she is probably suffering from depression, which destroys all sense of perspective -- no solutions seem possible, and illogical, extreme acts seem appropriate. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 01:19 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id BAA15964 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 01:19:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 32A3B7FF ; Tue, 21 May 1996 23:46:30 -0400 Message-Id: <199605220519.BAA15964@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 16:54:13 U Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "Talkovic, Jeannine" Subject: Re: SPOILERS: Last Knight (also AtA) - Think a moment .... To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 316 Status: O X-Status: Ray wrote: > 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. Hmmm...we don't see his burial, though. Would Tracy bury Vachon with the stake still in his heart? Jeannine, Vaquera talkjm1@accgwx.ghc.org From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 01:19 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id BAA15991 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 01:19:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 4492EA7A ; Tue, 21 May 1996 23:47:00 -0400 Message-Id: <199605220519.BAA15991@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 21:57:09 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: John & Donna Spert Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight (Top Ten for Nick) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <199605212344.SAA16344@deliverator.io.com> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 882 Status: O X-Status: Hi again, As a gesture of protest against his portrayal in Last Knight, here's Nick's Last Knight Top Ten: John Ten Things Nick didn't think after draining Natalie: 10) I wonder if that's what Nat meant by "making love"? 9) If I were gentle and sensitive, the other vampires would make fun of me. 8) This is going to make Captain Reese's day. 7) Wham, Bam, Thank'ya Ma'am! 6) Gee, that wasn't at all like doing it with Janette... 5) Why do I feel a kinship with Perry? [Both tried to bring a loved one across and both are sons of b*****s.] 4) Life is like a box of chocolates; stuff yourself until they're all gone. 3) If you love something set it free. If it won't go, suck it dry. 2) Now LaCroix will have a guilt trip too. And the number one thing Nick didn't think: 1) (That's right. He *didn't think*!) From owner-forkni-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 01:49 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id BAA20386 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 01:49:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id D8CC7952 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 0:55:34 -0400 Message-Id: <199605220549.BAA20386@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 20:08:26 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show Sender: Forever Knight TV show From: Jacqueline Kiffe Subject: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FORKNI-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 291 Status: RO X-Status: No spoilers here; don't worry. *But*, did anyone else think that the ending was open to multiple interpretations? What was said and unsaid, shown and unshown? Or am I reading too much into it? Careful--no spoilers in any replies. Cousine Jacqueline loyal follower of Uncle till the end From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 02:05 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id CAA23037 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 02:05:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 98E47EBD ; Wed, 22 May 1996 2:05:22 -0400 Message-Id: <199605220605.CAA23037@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 01:45:20 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Apache Subject: Re: Last Knight ( Nat) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <199605220347.XAA02752@cais.cais.com> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1187 Status: RO X-Status: On Tue, 21 May 1996, Margaret L. Carter wrote: > Some think this episode is out of character for Nat. I can easily see her > losing perspective, after all the recent events; she is probably suffering > from depression, which destroys all sense of perspective -- no solutions seem > possible, and illogical, extreme acts seem appropriate. > No kidding. Doesn't this all happen in one night -- the night of Laura Haines' suicide? It's sort of notorious among psychologists, therapists, analysts and people in 12 step programs that suicide is "contagious" -- people close to a suicide are at greater risk of suicide themselves, particularly immediately afterward (and for families, the heightened risk is *forever*). In 800 years, Nick hasn't figured this out? He couldn't just stall Natalie for a day, a week? He couldn't say, Nat, your reasoning is not at its tiptop form just now? And the department let Nat autopsy her friend, unaccompanied? All of this struck me as odd, and poorly thought through. We're told three story proposals were rejected before this one was accepted, and this script went through multiple rewrites. Bah. Humbug. Ap. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 02:05 EDT 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id CAA23052 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 02:05:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.9D1F85F0@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; Wed, 22 May 1996 2:01:39 -0400 Message-Id: <199605220605.CAA23052@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 01:47:20 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Apache Subject: Re: SPOILERS: Last Knight (also AtA) - Think a moment .... To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <199605220348.XAA02915@cais.cais.com> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 451 Status: O X-Status: > Ray wrote: > > > 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. > But not when, a few minutes later, Tracy was doing her weeping Pieta scene over him. The cheesy rationalization has to do with vampires being able to recover if a stake is removed (e.g., Lacroix in "Night in Question"). Cheers, Ap. author of Vachon's C.R. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 03:02 EDT 1996 Received: from sun1.clark.net (sun1.clark.net [198.17.243.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id DAA29621 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 03:02:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by sun1.clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id DAA16168 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 03:02:27 -0400 Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 5EC14289 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 3:01:00 -0400 Message-Id: <199605220702.DAA16168@sun1.clark.net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 02:57:52 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Amy Potter Subject: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1603 Status: O X-Status: Well I finally watched my tape last night, and had to delurk to through in my $.02 worth... I thought it fit the series, but I have to admit I was lucky I was alone when I watched it, I'm sure my family would wondered at the shouts of "NO! They can't *DO* that"! I was hoping Nick would bring Nat across, I always liked that idea more than him becoming mortal. I really liked the way the writers set up the true conflict of the epidose, and indeed the series: 1. The ultimate expression of nat's love for nick is her willingness to join him in "eternal darkness". 2. The ultimate expression of Nick's love for nat is to refuse under any circumstances to bring her across. And finally, before I go back under my rock, here's my theory on how to resurrect the series: LC does stake Nick. However, as he stands over the two dead(?) lovers, he realizes that his life is looking very lonely indeed. He then brings Nat across, and together they resurrect Nick (we know vampires can survive being staked, LC did it once, if not twice). Having LC bring nat across sidesteps the whole issue of Nick's conscience, and focuses any resentment nat has about it on LC and not Nick, freeing Nick and Nat to have a undying (pardon the pun) relationship. They move, (maybe Paris, a la Highlander) and the new episodes focus on their realationship and Nat learnign to be a vampire. Tracy stays dead, I'm kind of indifferent on whether Vachon comes back. Returning to lurk mode, --amy Email: APotter@gnn.com Home Page: http://members.gnn.com/APotter/page1.htm You're almost 800 years old . . . what's an egg? From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 06:22 EDT 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id GAA15387 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 06:21:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.72413580@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; Wed, 22 May 1996 6:18:09 -0400 Message-Id: <199605221021.GAA15387@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 06:20:06 +30000 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Valerie Meachum Subject: SPOILERS: Last Knight X-cc: FKX List , alikhat@ix.netcom.com, cat.goddess@pobox.com, catheboo@cco.caltech.edu, choff@violet.berkeley.edu, D020214@UNIVSCVM.CSD.SCAROLINA.EDU, feden@mcs.com, gryphon@execpc.com, h36a@unb.ca, janes@interlog.com, jennise@talarian.com, kingv@ucs.orst.edu, KWELSS@us.oracle.com, loreleif@ix.netcom.com, menikoff@panix.com, sss44@aol.com, vqrw76a@prodigy.com, westonk@uwwvax.uww.edu, nat.pack@umich.edu To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 5989 Status: O X-Status: Okay, I've decided my best strategy in the detailed posts is to be an example to Nick and take a little at a time. ;-) And just 'cause I'm ornery, I work more or less backwards and take on that very subject first. I was disappointed--not in the story but in Nick. (Yes, I know he did what the story told him to, but from my own way of working I don't think that necessarily means it's what the *writer* told him to. I can't force characters to do anything they don't want to do if my life depends on it. Yes, I know how crazy that sounds, but I trust you folks to understand it.) And, for that matter, *for* Nick. My only reaction on the story level--which I had *after* I reacted on the Nick's-actions level, my personal gauge of whether something was in character, your mileage may vary--was to compare it to the R & J model called up as soon as LC quoted the "kill our joys with love" line. And, of course, to find it wanting--come on, even *they* got one night away from the unfairness before the rest of all hell broke loose! The thing that bothers me most, though, is that I think I understood almost immediately why Nick did what he did. And it came down to what has stood in the way all along: he couldn't believe himself worthy of Natalie's trust and faith in him. Oh, sure, I was hollering at the screen (well, more like hissing; it *was* 1:30 in the morning and there *are* school-age kids next door) when he was whimpering about taking too much, "Wel, what did you *expect* from six years' worth of repressed desire?!?!? Good MORNING, Nicholas!" (But be proud of me, Knighties--I made it all the way to Tuesday afternoon without calling him a brick!) But what's so sad is that's *exactly* what he expected; and I think the much-lamented (by me as much as anyone, don't get me wrong) lack of intimacy was his attempt to prevent that, by gambling that without it one or both of them might retain the presence of mind to stop him in time. It was a double-or-nothing gamble, and they lost. There was presence of mind, all right (or at least as much as when they started, which is admittedly very debatable); and Nat used it to stand against her own fear and pain, unmitigated as it was by any real comfort from him. And you can't get much more in keeping than that--once again, the sheer stubbornness that is one of her greatest strengths also proves her undoing. To stop him would have been to admit defeat, even though this was *not* what she had asked of him; she knew that he'd probably never so much as *look* at her again if she did. She was acutely aware of how terrified he was of hurting her even while he *was*. And she thought it was worth it, had decided that the risk of ending up a vampire was an acceptable one. I'm not so convinced that the risk of dying was acceptable--she was a little too insistently ceratin that wouldn't happen, and while I *do* believe her faith in him was sincere, I also think there was a little voice somewhere in her head sayin "but what if he lets me die?" and she was shutting it up pretty forcefully. Not wise. But something I understand *very* well, being someone who plays with swords, and likes high places and balancing on narrow things, and would jump out of airplanes if I had the money. (to which Jack keeps saying "And if she had even more money she'd take a parachute." Living proof that love is utterly impractical; poor guy's probably lost as many years off his life as he's been with me, and you don't *choose* something like that!) I take what I consider reasonable precautions to avoid getting skewered or going splat, but I don't think much about these things actually *happening.* Nat's safety net, such as it was, was her acceptance of the possibility of being brought across. Which I've never thought she wants in and of itself, and don't now; but it has become an acceptable price for what she *does* want. A lot more intense, but rather like Jack choosing to live with the woman who coined the phrase "self-preservation impaired." :-) (I think that's a big part of why I can't buy into this situation as yet another example of TV telling us a woman is not complete without a man--in my life and the way I have always seen FK, people fall in love and after that point do not feel complete without *each other*. Any inequity here, IMHO, is because Nick is so used to feeling incomplete and believes it's what he deserves. Even with all that she's changed, Nat still believes she deserves better, and that he does too. I don't know whether I'm up for a debate about this just now; maybe. I just think women hurt ourselves more sometimes by seeing enemies in the wrong places.) The most awful thing is that it remains an accomplishment--though a bitter one indeed, for in many ways this is worse--that he didn't take her in outright violence. ANd what makes me wnat to cry even now is that if he *had* had the faith in himself to make love with her properly, I believe *that* would have allowed him to stop at the right time where fear and attempted forcible control did not. Or, barring that, perhaps he would have at least had less fear that to bring her across would be to destroy who she is, as Jennie has pointed out. None of us believe that, but he seems *certain* of it, which makes it easier to understand his insistence on not doing so. (I shouldn't say *none* of us believe that, but I think it's more ore less the prevailing opinion. Please correct me if I'm wrong." Whew. I warned you guys there would be very plural spoiler posts. Hope I haven't put everyone to sleep with my babbling... --Tigger, slightly manic-depressive NatPacker in mourning (but not because I think she's dead!) %-} Valerie Lynn Meachum 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 From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 07:37 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id HAA23021 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 07:37:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id F7352B5C ; Wed, 22 May 1996 7:37:17 -0400 Message-Id: <199605221137.HAA23021@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 07:30:43 EDT Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Tanya Smith Subject: Last Knight (Nat) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 456 Status: RO X-Status: Apache, you are correct, suicide is "contagious" according to therapists. Just look at the Kurt Cobain phenomenon. Often people identify too much with the individual; hence, they kill themselves. I believe a similar incident just occured with the death of FK. TO let her autopsy her friend's body was a poor choice on the writer's part. As a doctor, Nat would have known better than to do that. Hence, Nat is very out of character in this episode. Tanya From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 07:42 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id HAA23718 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 07:42:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id A853E40A ; Wed, 22 May 1996 7:42:14 -0400 Message-Id: <199605221142.HAA23718@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 06:50:23 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: TippiNB Subject: Re: Last Knight (bloody tears, Nat) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1113 Status: RO X-Status: At 07:50 PM 5/21/96 -0400, you wrote: >Okay, maybe vampires cry bloody tears when they have fed heavily and/or >recently, but not the rest of the time. Well I haven't seen all of the 1st season eps, but of the eps I recall, I don't recall seeing any vampires cry blood tears. Anybody else know for sure? >Some think this episode is out of character for Nat. I can easily see her >losing perspective, after all the recent events; she is probably suffering >from depression, which destroys all sense of perspective -- no solutions seem >possible, and illogical, extreme acts seem appropriate. I thought this episode was out of character for just about everyone. Reese was insensitive about Tracy at the hospital, Nick caved in after *six* years, LaCroix didn't slap Nick silly... You get my point. ;) 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." "I'm not in denial. I'm in a state of creative readjustment!" http://www.netcom.com/~tippinb/wicked.html From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 08:11 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id IAA27901 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 08:11:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id BE6114D6 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 8:11:29 -0400 Message-Id: <199605221211.IAA27901@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 05:07:18 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Roxanne Piccen Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight: Blurred images explanation, etc To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2720 Status: RO X-Status: Hurrah to Chana for coming up with the following: >What if we are viewing all of this from Natalie's perspective? >She is laying on the floor. The shots are all sort of shot at >an upward angle. She is semi-unconscious (at least) which >would explain the blurred, dream-like quality. Good answer. Good answer. I'd also like to point out that no one checked her vital signs. I know. Nick's a vampire, he can hear the heartbeat, but he was a *little* panicky at that moment. At least take her pulse before declaring her dead. Can everyone endure another comment on the camera work in the morgue scene? It started to make *me* dizzy, and I watch all those cop shows that use shaky camera movements and quick cutaway shots. My eyes started rolling around in my sockets. Foreplay? We don't need no stinking foreplay. Oh, yes, we do. :-p Or else that must have been one heckuva kiss Nick planted on her wrist. I thought this scene was a rip-off for Nick and Nat fans. Certainly the air was thick with tension and we could feel the emotion in their words and expressions, but some kind of physical action would have been nice. (Could they kiss more than once, please?) I didn't expect them to tear each other's clothes off and do it atop the piano, but there was more physical closeness in NiQ and BMV. (Ah, the image of Nick licking and kissing Nat's neck with such relish. Now where did I put my BMV tape?) This was the last episode. They could have thrown us a bone, or something. (No. Down, Perri, down. I don't really have a bone. Here. Here's a nice juicy bag of blood. Good boy.) Ray Heuer wrote: >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? LOL! LC does have a habit of showing up to critique Nick's choice of who he's bringing across or his method of doing so. Maybe that's why Nick can never successfully bring someone across -- he's paranoid that LC is looking over his shoulder grading him. ("No, you took too much, Nicholas. That's an F for works and plays well with others.") Ooh, that could also explain LC's eyebrows. Hasn't everyone heard as a child "if you keep making that face, your face will freeze that way"? LaCroix's been peering is so many windows watching all these intimate moments over the centuries, that his eyebrows got higher and higher until they froze that way. Roxanne --> Lichen-Clinging Cleopatra RoxanneP@aol.com (Home) // CHIRMP@AM.DAMES.COM (Work) Save Forever Knight! // Save American Gothic! Check out: http://members.aol.com/CuznJamiMR/SaveForeverKnight.html http://www.best.com/~owls for The Trinity Guardian From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 08:15 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id IAA28528 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 08:15:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 56EA23BC ; Wed, 22 May 1996 8:15:45 -0400 Message-Id: <199605221215.IAA28528@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 07:23:59 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: TippiNB Subject: The LC angles (LK spoilers) -- HA! To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1913 Status: RO X-Status: (No spoiler space because it's after Tuesday, so avert your eyes, you little peekers you!) Some comments have been made about the angle at which LC is shown and that the only explanation for this is that it is from Nick's POV *after* being staked. Sorry folks, I don't get it. I'm no Nick and Natpacker, so I'm not bringing up these arguments because I want these two characters to go traipsing off together happily ever after. Phooey. I hate cheery romances. First off, the angle is off. If you're lying on the floor looking up at someone, you're going to see straight up that person's nostrils. "My what lovely sinuses you have, LaCroix!" The angle is more from a kneeling person's POV. In fact! They even at one point swing the camera around a bit and show Nick kneeling in front of LC as he's delivering a piece of the monologue -- same basic angle. I think ol' Nick's just peeking over his shoulder. You know how sometimes things look all wavery in the periphery of your vision -- blammo! Explanation for the blurry LC image! Besides THAT, how can it be from Nick's POV if Nick is lying FACE-DOWN on the floor? EH?? You get staked thru the back, you fall face-down on the floor. He can't be lying on his back if there's a STAKE IN IT! Simple! PLUS, if Nick had already been staked, then why would LC be asking him if he was sure that this was what he wanted? I mean, it'd be a little late, wouldn't it? I am NOT in denial here. I'm trying to find scraps of continuity. My explanation makes sense to me. Still, though, I feel cheated by TPTW. No question about that, dearies. 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." "I'm not in denial. I'm in a state of creative readjustment!" http://www.netcom.com/~tippinb/wicked.html From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Tue May 21 19:20 EDT 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id TAA06453 for ; Tue, 21 May 1996 19:20:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.05840230@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; Tue, 21 May 1996 19:16:32 -0400 Message-Id: <199605212320.TAA06453@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 17:51:45 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Allison Percy Subject: SPOILERS: LK & the Perky One To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 3045 Status: O X-Status: I'm feeling particularly caffeinated right now, which is creating an artificial sense of courage, so I'm going to venture a post on "Last Knight." First off, I am enjoying the diversity of opinion about what the heck happened in "Last Knight." I have my own opinions, but there was enough ambiguity in the episode to allow for many other opinions, even without resorting to "it was all a dream." (Which is also a reasonable possibility, I think, given the ephemeral quality of the direction.) Thanks to whoever is responsible for the ambiguity. GWD? The mysterious phone call at 2am? Whoever you are, one and all, thanks. Not to bore you too much with my own opinion, here's the quick rundown: Tracy: dead (sob!) Reese: still thirsty Nat: coma? just resting??? pining for the fjords???? Most likely she's a vampire now, I think. Nick: mortal (that's how I interpret the tears; yes I know it's not the only way to interpret them, it's just the way I *want* to interpret them, thank you very much); may or may not be half-staked by LC at the end (but not killed; LC wouldn't kill his boy) LC: pissed off Agree? Disagree? Both? Good. No one has to toe the line on this episode, IMO. OK, now on to my point: out of loyalty to the Perkulators, I feel I have to come up with some way to bring Tracy back. But looking at the episode, I can't think of a way to bring her back as a mortal. Yet if she is brought across (by whoever), she is going to have to give up drinking coffee, and so she'll go through one heck of a caffeine withdrawal phase. Or she's going to have to start haunting alleys near coffee shops for her victims. ;^) A perky vampire would sure shake things up for LC and the rest. ObBabysitting Stuff: When posting to the FKSPOILR list, be sure to put SPOILER: in the subject line of your message. This makes it a lot easier for people to sort their mail and avoid spoilers for episodes they've missed. Also, spoiler space is *no longer necessary* for Last Knight on the FKSPOILR list, according to the info I was given. But do put spoiler space in any fiction posts to FKFIC-L if the story includes spoilers for any of the last few episodes. And label your FKFIC-L postings carefully, noting which episodes if any your story contains spoilers for. Double-check your message headers before sending your mail to make sure spoilers go to the proper list. If you're replying to a message that contains spoilers, be sure the original message was sent to the correct list. A few spoiler posts have snuck onto FORKNI-L lately and we'd like to keep that to a minimum. Thanks. --- Allison Percy (percy91@wharton.upenn.edu -or- AlliePercy@aol.com) --- ------- List Babysitter (FORKNI-L, FKSPOILR, FKFIC-L) for a week --------- -- *Free* copy of list rules! http://cac.psu.edu/~jap8/FK/FKRules.html --- --------------------------- Rule #1: BE NICE! --------------------------- ------------ "Does your mommy know you're reading this stuff?" ----------- From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 01:20 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id BAA16086 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 01:20:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 790FD9A2 ; Tue, 21 May 1996 23:48:28 -0400 Message-Id: <199605220520.BAA16086@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 19:50:58 PDT Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "Leslie I.Plummer" Subject: LK Spoiler-Humorous & short To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1400 Status: RO X-Status: Driving home tonight I heard something on the radio which sent me laughing & back into the office to send this message (way too late on a "school" night): Not really much of a spoiler... but just in case... F O R E V E R K N I G H T F O R E V E R ! ! ! Remember, in LK, where Nick is driving from the Raven back to his place & he's finding the worst (yet most appropriate) stuff on the radio for his mood? Well, imagine, if you will, that as Nat drove from the morgue to Nick's, what would have been playing on HER radio. "Midnight Train to Georgia" by Gladys Knight & the Pips!!! ^ (there's THAT name again!) Lyric samplers to prove my point... "He needs to go back to the life he once knew... to a simpler place & time..." "I'd rather be in his world, than without him in mine..." "His world, my world, our world..." "Gonna be on that MIDNIGHT train to Georgia.." "His love, my love, our love..." Repeated over & over (w/other words which presently excape me), and at the end... a crescendo of: "I GOT TO GO! I GOT TO GO! I GOT TO GO! Hey, hey!" ...hmm, just a thought anyway. Heck, even the train timing & title accommodate a vampire's schedule! No wonder Nat thought it was fated! Leslie ***FOREVER MEANS...FOREVER!!!*** From owner-forkni-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 01:52 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id BAA21003 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 01:52:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 79832861 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 1:21:32 -0400 Message-Id: <199605220552.BAA21003@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 04:32:09 GMT Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show Sender: Forever Knight TV show From: Karen Parker Subject: AtA, LK, Janette spoiler stuff To: Multiple recipients of list FORKNI-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2629 Status: O X-Status: There's gonna be spoiler stuff so those who dont like spoiler stuff STOP READING NOW!!! Ok, if you are still reading I assume you dont mind spoilers and wont be filling my mailbox with flames as I dont have much time left between horse shows to read Forkni AND flames....I prefer only Forkni... Anyhow!! Janette...there have been posts about her NOT being dead and about her being BACK across....I only recently came into this show 3rd season and saw a show about the ex-vampire and her husband who I THOUGHT was Janette...at the end she dies in a fire..Nick asked her about beilng brought across.."I can save you" but she refuses it and says she WANTED to die. Did I miss something, did Nick go against her wishes and bring her back across???? Is it a Canadian version that has him bringing her back? I like the idea of it all being a dream from Divia's bad blood. It would make sense. Especially since Vachon was freaking out from the bite and Nick gets into a tiff with Divia and in five minutes hes at the Raven saving LaCroix.....not even so much as a headache or broken nail from his encounter in the loft. I'd be willing to sit thru a really pathetically lame episode of "gee, it was all a dream etc." if they brought the show back for another season. I personally think LaCroix is leaving because he had his butt whipped by a girl and the whole vampire community knows it. Here he is for X amount of years ruling the Toronto vampire community with all the bells and whistles, everyones respect....then comes Divia who tosses his butt around his own bar like a rag doll busting up his turntables and windows.....he knew even though she was dead, that no one was going to give him the respect he had before. Since he had that "I'm god" attitude (prob. from being a General) he couldnt handle waiting around to hear the snickering/giggling that wouldve been starting. well, thats about it I guess. I gotta go...have to get ready for another show......Usually got enought free time to watch one show on tv, which was Forever Knight. But since its been cancelled Ive been getting xtra sleep since Im not staying up so late!!! So, maybe thats a "good" thing??? Hey! I think I invented a new game! Everyone try to come up with a "good" thing about FK only being in syndication...for the moment anyway! for example: mine is not having to stay up really late to watch it. (in my area it came on at 2:00 am...on sci-fi reruns will be on a 8pm) ok, maybe its stupid....but if you can come up with at least one good aspect for every bad thing that happens you can usually feel a little less sad. just try it Ceirdwyn From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 01:55 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id BAA21681 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 01:55:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 17982F22 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 1:54:35 -0400 Message-Id: <199605220555.BAA21681@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 20:10:00 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Sandra Gray Subject: SPOILERS: AtA and LK "Cuts" and "Intent" To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 14099 Status: O X-Status: I've been reading the spoilers that have been posted about Last Knight and while I won't go into specific quoting in this letter, there are some points that have been raised that I want to address, as well as some comments of my own that I want to make. As the subject line indicates, a major focus of this post is going to be on the filming of episodes and how cutting a scene or filming it differently does not in itself (imo, anyway) change the emotional and story content of a scene. I have watched LK four times through now and so far, I see the same thing that I saw on my first viewing of it: Nat and Nick are dead. Tracy is too, but, although I felt more in her "death scene" (even though she wasn't technically "dead" when she was shot, that's what that scene felt like to me) than I did for Vachon in AtA, her death doesn't have so devastating an effect because she hasn't been around since the beginning. Anyway, in order to illustrate my point in part, I want to reference first scenes from AtA. Much criticism of Nick was raised for him asking LC to hypnotize Tracy into forgetting what happened with Vachon, but to leave her with the memory that vampires existed. This speech of Nick's looks bad because of how we saw Vachon essentially commit suicide by running upon the stake Tracy held (or possibly, it could also be viewed as an accident--that Vachon had Divia's evil overtake him and he was actually trying to attack Tracy before he got impaled on the stake she held). But I believe it was Laurie Fenster who posted that the *script* had Tracy actually *killing* Vachon with the stake. Obviously when it came to filming, someone (the director, Lisa Ryder, Ben Bass, *whoever*) decided that they didn't want to go with the scene between Tracy and Vachon as originally written (Tracy kills Vachon) and we saw a different scene instead. BUT, changing that one scene about how Vachon dies, makes the scene at the end with Nick asking LC to hypnotize Tracy then *not make as much sense*. It's my feeling that Nick's request was *still couched in the same lines that were in the original script*. If Tracy *had* killed Vachon, Nick's words to LC about how Tracy should be hypnotized out of the memory of what happened, make *much* more sense. Does anyone think that Tracy would want to remember having purposely *killed* Vachon? Anyway, my point is that I think Nick's lines in that final scene over Divia's body (and of course LC's lines) are the same lines from the script where Tracy *does* kill Vachon. They changed the scene with Tracy and Vachon from the original, but *didn't think to look at how that change affected any other scenes in the script*. I won't get into the argument about whether it was wrong or right for Nick to have asked LC to hypnotize Tracy, but I do think that Nick's lines make a bit more sense if looked at in context of the *original* script where Tracy kills Vachon (fwiw, I think the change to Tracy *not* purposely killing Vachon was a good one, btw). Now, on to LK. To me, making "cuts" so that we don't "see" LC stake Nick, or we can't completely "tell" whether Nick bit again to "finish her off" *doesn't* change the *emotional* and *story* content of the script. People say that Nat isn't dead. Then why after Nick bends down to "kiss" her a second time, does LC say, "Wise decision. We may even have time for a burial."? *Those lines* carry the emotional content that *Nat **is** dead*. And Nick's reactions after that also point to the *same* conclusion to me. Much has been made about the "LC distortions"--that they're Nat's viewpoint, for example. I see no reason why this should be so. LC appears to be looking at and *directly addressing* someone and why would he be saying what he is saying to *Nat*? In my view, his lines seem to be directed to Nick and he is speaking *to Nick*. At one point in one of the distortions, he says something like "all that's happened tonight should tell you this" and *looks down and to the side*, which I interpret as him looking at Nat's body on the floor. IOW, I agree with Amy Rambow when she says these "distortions" are from *Nick's viewpoint* as he is lying on the floor after being staked. I think there is a reason for the last part (before LC raises the stake) to be clear rather than distorted. It's the final clarity before Nick's final death, as a lot of the preceding moments of clarity (the bulk of the rest of the episode) is Nick flashing back to the prior events of the evening. There is, imo, no other way to explain the "LC distortions" dialogue any other way than him addressing Nick as Nick lies staked. Others have said LC would never kill Nick. I believe he did, that he had no other option. I believe this for one major reason. LC makes his speeches, pulling out every past trick he's used to bend Nick to his will *to no effect*, then says to Nick something on the order of, "So to you, I'm the devil." (Why would LC make such a statement after Nick just saved his life in AtA? LC is not stupid; if Nick did indeed think LC the devil, why would he have saved LC from Divia in the first place?) LC was trying with that line his last ditch attempt to get Nick to *put the blame for his failures on LC again*. But Nick was too far beyond that. When Nick says, "You're my closest friend," LC understood what he said as he meant it: "Kill me, I beg you." We have seen in Sons of Belial that the one thing LC cannot resist is *Nick begging him*. And LC says, "Damn you, Nicholas" and complies with Nick's request because he knows he's lost Nick, that Nick cannot and will not go on as he has anymore. Nick, with his words, has said that he understands LC's need and love for him and that he depends on LC's love for him to outweigh LC's selfish need of Nick. LC is defeated; he no longer has a way to "hold" Nick by "force". I hope LC saw in that moment how responsible he has been for Nick's agony over the centuries, how much his selfishishness contributed to Nick's wish not to go on anymore. I hope LC spends a millenium of suffering without Nick and when LC experiences his own true death, he will *rot in hell*. Understanding of LC's viewpoint, his need for Nick, his love of Nick, *does not* im my mind excuse the way he treated Nick for so many centuries. LC bears a great deal of the responsibility for the disastrous end of this final episode. Why disastrous? Well, let's discuss more of the emotional content of this story. It opens with a suicide. Dawkins also wants to commit suicide, because *he can't go back*. I think the parallel with Nick is clearly there with Dawkins, that Nick feels that *he can't go back* to being the type of vampire LC would like him to be. But Nick feels he can't go *forward* either. Look at the symbolism Ger has added to the episode. Many scenes are filmed through *bars*--the barred windows of Nick's loft, the "bars" of vertical blinds, the bars of the gate to Janette's private quarters (where LC has packed his trunk) are behind Nick as he *paces* (like a *caged animal*) back and forth while talking to LC. The whole effect is that Nick feels *trapped* in his current existence with *no way out* of it. This is also borne out by the events of not just this episode, but past episodes (not just the ones in the flashbacks of this either). Consider. Nick was backsliding toward the end of second season, culminating with him turning to Janette for *vampire* comfort in Crazy Love. There was the failure of the cure in The Fix, Nick's loss of memory due to a bullet wound in Night in Question, the possession by a demon in Sons of Belial, the fever in Fever, Divia's attack in Ashes to Ashes. Then the disasters of Janette leaving, Schanke and Cohen dying, not daring to be with Nat (especially after Be My Valentine) and the problems that had arisen in their relationship because of Nick's fear of harming her. Janette returns mortal and rather than letting her die, Nick brings her back across and she leaves him *again*. Then this episode Nat's old friend suicides and she decides it's time to issue an ultimatum to Nick. Tracy gets shot--Tracy, whom Nick has probably looked on as something like a sister--and of course if was *his fault* that she got shot. I saw his desire to bring Tracy over as Nick reacting to *pain*--pain that had built to extreme levels by the time of this episode. He's about to be investigated on his job (his one *secure mortal haven*) for killing Dawkins. And then when he turns to LC for help, he finds that LC is leaving town. His *vampire security* was also deserting him. Nat has made him fear she'll commit suicide if he leaves. Tracy dies and he is pushed by all of what's happened into deciding to leave town. Then Nat wants him to try Janette's cure. I've always thought it was a mistake to have indicated a romance between Nick and Nat since I always thought it would have to end it disaster (as it *did*, imo). Nat asks Nick about faith. Is it an accident that he remembers Joan of Arc? I don't think so. But that flashback had only a "glimmer" of hope that Nick could regain his faith. Nick still had doubts there so we can only assume that it's supposed to reflect that he *still* has the same doubts. But he *wants* to believe, so he allows himself to be convinced by Nat to try the cure. But the doubts that it will work have already been laid in previous scenes and flashbacks. Nick is not able to control himself enough due to many things: his previous limited blood diet, not being used to human blood, not being used to *fresh* human blood, but most of all, *emotional turmoil*. It was the *wrong time* to try such a thing. Nat was willing to leave with him, if he was leaving. Nat, in a state of emotional turmoil herself, wasn't thinking clearly. She should have tried to prepare Nick beforehand instead of depending solely on "love" (especially when it seems from the flashbacks that, although Nick cares for her, his "love" may not be the same as hers). And then comes the worst part of this episode--Nick *fails* once again. He's taken too much--Nat will have to die or be brought over. But the whole emotional tone of the previous parts of the episode is that Nick can't cope with it anymore. That the *pain* of trying to live mortal while a vampire has built beyond his endurance. Rather than any sort of *hope*, what happens with Nat is just the *final straw* (much like Sylvaine was the straw that made him swear off feeding on humans). The *bars*, the *suicide plot elements*, come together to make Nick decide that he just can't go on. And, of course, instead of *supporting* Nick, LC falls back on all the lines and arguments he's used to hold Nick in the past, tearing down the slim, fragile hope that if he dies, Nick will find peace. Nick's tears are not just for what's happened to Nat, but the outward manifestation of the *extreme pain* Nick is in from his *whole existence* to that point. He has reached the point of not being able to take it any more. So he begs LC to kill him. And LC complies. No amount of "film editing" or "cutting" to me can alter the thrust of the story and the emotional content of it. Nat and Nick are dead. If FK comes back in some form (movie or whatever) the story would have to be *exceptional* to make me believe that Nick survived. Whether I'll feel this way after ten, twenty, however many viewings, I don't know. But it *didn't need* to end in such a fashion. I still feel *betrayed* by TPTB. Nick didn't necessarily need to become mortal in the end or live happily ever after with Nat. I don't object to tragic endings. I was one of the few people who wouldn't have minded if Spock, my favorite character on Star Trek, had been left dead after "The Wrath of Khan"--because his death was *good* and *noble*. What I *cannot* forgive TPTB for in this is the suggestion that Nick's death achieved *nothing*, that he *didn't* find any redemption or forgiveness. A sun rising through dark clouds? Why not a sun rising in a clear blue sky at least? The images we see when Nick bites Nat are all mostly *vampire* images. No goodness, no hope. The dialogue with LC afterwards is an attempt to tear down any hope that Nick's death will lead to any sort of *peace* for Nick. I didn't necessarily want the glowing door from Near Death, but there was *not*, imo, *any* indication that God (or whatever benevolent deity appeals to you) accepted Nick, *no* indication that Nick expected God to forgive him. Essentially TPTB seemed to indicate that all Nick's past good deeds were for nothing!! Vampires are unredeemable! Nick's only fate is *damnation*! Nick's death is a *defeatist* death, a **senseless** tragedy. I've never done this with any other show I've enjoyed, but Last Knight has made me come very close to *never* wanting to watch *any* FK again. When Quantum Leap ended the way it did (with the statement that Sam Beckett never returned home), my husband was so angered that he hasn't watched the show since. With LK, I've come to understand better why he did that. In fact, Bruce has decided he doesn't want to watch LK after hearing about my reaction to it and reading some of the spoilers about it for fear that he'll hate JP as much as he hated Bellasario for ending Quantum Leap the way it was ended. Anyway, I can't buy the "rationalizations" people have come up with for Nat and Nick surviving after LK. To my mind, a few "scene cuts" doesn't remove the "intent" of the story. The "intent" is that they are *dead*, and worse, for what seems an almost "vindictive" reason. Nat's death didn't affect me that much, but being a Knightie, *Nick's* death did. As the center of the story, he deserved a *better* death-- one with *hope*, one with *meaning*. I will grant that it is a powerful episode, with good acting, and mostly good filming and direction. It's just *wrong.* My apologies if anything I've posted about LK has offended any listmembers. --Sandra Gray, forever Knightie --tmp_harkins@dirac.physics.jmu.edu From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 02:44 EDT 1996 Received: from sun1.clark.net (sun1.clark.net [198.17.243.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id CAA28364 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 02:44:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by sun1.clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id CAA15492 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 02:44:35 -0400 Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.DFEC4120@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; Wed, 22 May 1996 2:39:18 -0400 Message-Id: <199605220644.CAA15492@sun1.clark.net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 02:41:45 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Apache Subject: Re: SPOILERS: AtA and LK "Cuts" and "Intent" To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <199605220555.BAA15060@cais.cais.com> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 681 Status: O X-Status: About the change in script vs. produced scene of Tracy staking Vachon and Nick's request to Lacroix in "Ashes": Either way, Nick didn't know what he was asking Lacroix to remove from Tracy's memory. Nick wasn't present at the scene where Vachon wound up impaled (either by Tracy's intent, as in the script, or by Vachon's intent, as in the produced scene). Nick showed up when Tracy was talking to the corpse. Presumably there was a hole visible in his chest, so Nick had some idea of what happened, but he can't have know specifics. Whether or not LC went through with staking Nick... was purposely left to our imagination in the final version. Ap. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 04:11 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id EAA06099 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 04:11:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id E946BCA9 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 3:26:21 -0400 Message-Id: <199605220811.EAA06099@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 20:21:08 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Marcia Tucker Subject: Re "Final Farewell" / SPOILERS: LK To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 3232 Status: RO X-Status: Spoiler space if still needed because I want to be a good listperson: s p o i l e r In regards to: (posted originally to FKFIC-L) >>LC Fenster Subject: A Final Farewell (1/1) (contains LK spoilers)<< This is a personal message, but more than that as I try to express to *all* of you how I'm trying to deal with LK: Laurie, I LOVE this story! It mirrors a little what I tried to do with "Second Chances", namely that cooler heads needed to prevail to prevent the senseless tragedy and that Nat had to let Nick go. YES, YES, YES! I'm still hurting inside - the Nick of my fiction (in particular my Black Velvet Nick) has been trying to console me, to get me beyond the single interpretation of the end of the show - that the show vision is only ONE of many, and that my own visions of FK (in the nearly completed "Transitions" and certainly in "A Taste of Black Velvet) are just as real and valid. Nick is alive to me - visible from the screen version and alive in another way through my writing. The ache I feel from LK is as sharp as if I'd lost a family member the same way - uselessly, senselessly. But this, I have to keep telling myself over and over, is not the definitive FK. FK is what I make of it for myself in my own mind. And in that universe, Nick is very alive, closer to LC than ever before (I do have to thank TPTB for letting us see that beautiful resolution), and learning to live without the crushing guilt with which he has burdened himself for far too long. But it's still hard. I've written 3 post-LK pieces now, and I don't think I'm done. Although I'm not one to see Nat as a vampire, I can accept it far, far better than seeing her dead from Nick's inability to control himself. Of course I'm an Immortal Beloved and want Janette to find her way back to the family and to Nick. But I find I mind Nat in Nick's life a little less - I just want to see my Nick free from pain. He hurts, I hurt. So, I return to my writing. Big time. Finishing the last half of the last chapter of "Transitions" - returning to work on the sequel to "A Taste of Black Velvet", titled "House of Cross", working on the fun FK/Kindred crossover I'm writing for the Kindred list, and maybe even get back to the post-Human Factor story I started back then. Yeah, I watched Kindred, too, and enjoyed it, but there is no way it can ever get inside me to the degree that FK can. I can't imagine any television show EVER topping this. Nick is eternal. I comfort myself imagining his wonderful smile, his incredibly beautiful voice, his essential goodness, his love of life which I think every bit matches LaCroix's. That is the Nick of my stories, the Nick who teaches me about appreciating life and love, who walks with me in my mind, sharing my pain as he's allowed me to share his. Thanks, again, Laurie, for "A Final Farewell", for writing a Natalie that I can recognize. FOREVER KNIGHT IS FAR MORE THAN A TELEVISION SHOW!!! It is all of us and our collective visions, too! Marcia Tucker / scfimarci@aol.com Dark Knightie first and foremost / Unnamed / Immortal Beloved Committing FK fan fiction furiously - Tanya, can we pick our own mental institution? Any ideas? From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 04:11 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id EAA06232 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 04:11:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id F66A5D65 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 4:02:31 -0400 Message-Id: <199605220811.EAA06232@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 01:00:45 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Amy Rambow Subject: SPOILER: LK, Downloading Nick's Brain To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 3938 Status: RO X-Status: I've just watched LK for the third time, and this one took over three hours. I think I'm almost ready to contribute some serious analysis, but tonight I wanted to run through the last of my more trivial impressions. To begin with, there is the sequence of flashback images poor Nat is receiving as Nick drains her. I like to think that if LK had been a novel, we would have read about what memories of Nat's Nick received. In any case, I have a list, in order, of the images. Unfortunately, it is flawed, both because I haven't yet seen all the early episodes, and because I recorded LK on SP, which prevents my VCR from giving me a clear still image. So any corrections or additions would be appreciated: 1. biting a woman in white, from flashback 2. draining Sylvaine, from LYTD flashback 3. draining Lisette, from TG flashback 4. draining Alissa, from DoN flashback 5. jumping the fire, from FIHS present 6. flying, from present 7. being vamped out, first season present 8. un-staking LC, from NiQ flashback 9. restrained on table, from "The Fix" flashback? Or LNMTA flashback? 10. being stabbed, second-season flashback 11. being held while unconscious, from present 12. draining Amalia, from CL flashback 13. riding as a mortal, from QoH flashback 14. LC attacking, from DK present 15. reaching for the cross, from FIHS flashback 16. staking LC, from DK present 17. kissing Janette just after coming across, from ND flashback Talley: 5 memories of biting women, 7 memories of vampire behavior, 6 memories of killing people, 5 memories of being in mortal danger, 1 memory of mortality, 1 memory of faith, 1 memory of saving a life, and 1 memory of being liplocked with Janette while under the influence of first hunger In other trivia: 1. What is reflected in the faucet in the opening sequence? Ceiling fan? 2. The blood in the tub, and Tracy's blood -- remember how Nick used to react to blood at crime scenes? I think he's come a long way. 3. Did Tracy *flinch*, or did she *shrug*, at Dr. Haynes's body? if it was a shrug, then she overcame her problem with squeamishness. 4. Nat tells Nick he's considered suicide himself, but isn't that selective memory? I'm told Nick said he'd never die by his own hand. 5. Poor Tracy died with the flu. 6. "I'm asking for an end" -- did Nat sound like Urs to you? 7. Three cheers for the Ger-cam! :) I actually liked the morgue work. 8. S'pose Dawkins could represent JP? "I won't go back!" 9. 23:45 -- 11:45 pm -- Tracy is given lidocane. The longest night in the history of the world, and there's the half-way point. 10. CERK doesn't know *anything* about marketing. 11. Do ya think the new manager of the Raven gets the bust of LC and the portrait of Janette? If LC doesn't leave the Raven functioning, Janette will be very displeased with him. 12. Another bad hair ep, for everyone but Nat. The flashbacks really rub it in; someone out there does not interpret hair the way I do. 15. The locker room was red until Tracy was shot, and then it turned blue! 16. "I've... seen too much." (Thank you, NB, for expertly delivering that line like the stubborn lie we all know it to be!!!) 17. NB's eyes were wet, as well as GWD's, in the final moments. I'm a Light Cousin -- I was looking. So the tears aren't enough for Nick to be mortal. 18. Whatever happened, LC's stuck in the loft till sunset. And, finally, the loop is imperfect. I will analyze the ramifications of this some other time, but for now, note a few of the many differences: "a ripe peach" vs "the freshest peach" "unless, of course, you have faith" vs "or do you have faith" "where you stand" vs "where you are" "the rising sun" vs "the morning sun" "is that sound you're hearing" vs "are the sounds you hear" **** Amy, Lady of the Knight (akr@nwlink.com) **** "I could not risk condemning to the void one who so surely deserves a Heaven." -- LaCroix, by TippiNB From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 08:15 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id IAA28528 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 08:15:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 56EA23BC ; Wed, 22 May 1996 8:15:45 -0400 Message-Id: <199605221215.IAA28528@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 07:23:59 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: TippiNB Subject: The LC angles (LK spoilers) -- HA! To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1913 Status: RO X-Status: (No spoiler space because it's after Tuesday, so avert your eyes, you little peekers you!) Some comments have been made about the angle at which LC is shown and that the only explanation for this is that it is from Nick's POV *after* being staked. Sorry folks, I don't get it. I'm no Nick and Natpacker, so I'm not bringing up these arguments because I want these two characters to go traipsing off together happily ever after. Phooey. I hate cheery romances. First off, the angle is off. If you're lying on the floor looking up at someone, you're going to see straight up that person's nostrils. "My what lovely sinuses you have, LaCroix!" The angle is more from a kneeling person's POV. In fact! They even at one point swing the camera around a bit and show Nick kneeling in front of LC as he's delivering a piece of the monologue -- same basic angle. I think ol' Nick's just peeking over his shoulder. You know how sometimes things look all wavery in the periphery of your vision -- blammo! Explanation for the blurry LC image! Besides THAT, how can it be from Nick's POV if Nick is lying FACE-DOWN on the floor? EH?? You get staked thru the back, you fall face-down on the floor. He can't be lying on his back if there's a STAKE IN IT! Simple! PLUS, if Nick had already been staked, then why would LC be asking him if he was sure that this was what he wanted? I mean, it'd be a little late, wouldn't it? I am NOT in denial here. I'm trying to find scraps of continuity. My explanation makes sense to me. Still, though, I feel cheated by TPTW. No question about that, dearies. 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." "I'm not in denial. I'm in a state of creative readjustment!" http://www.netcom.com/~tippinb/wicked.html From owner-forkni-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Mon May 20 20:49 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id UAA23407 for ; Mon, 20 May 1996 20:49:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 40E8704B ; Mon, 20 May 1996 20:49:08 -0400 Message-Id: <199605210049.UAA23407@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 16:01:11 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show Sender: Forever Knight TV show From: Amy Rambow Subject: Only the Lonely To: Multiple recipients of list FORKNI-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1182 Status: RO X-Status: (This is pointed at something which was brought up on fkspoilr. I'm still on digest over here, so if this has been addressed recently, I apologize.) Six years ago, on her birthday -- which we always took to be in June -- Nat had to work. This probably didn't make her very happy, but it changed her life, because they wheeled in the oddest body for her to examine. She was told that the man had been killed by an exploding pipe bomb, and that it wouldn't be so bad, because at least there wasn't much face to look at. Unzipping the bag, she noticed that the body, and especially the face, was far more intact than she had been led to believe. "Not bad. Not bad at all," she commented. Now, we all know that the body proved to be Nick's, and that, in time, Nat came to find Nick extremely attractive. However, while you can make something of her comments if you like, there is no *need* to interpret them as anything beyond a reaction to finding a whole body in place of the mangled pieces she'd been expecting. *** Amy, Lady of the Knight (akr@mail.nwlink.com) *** "Now cracks a noble heart. Good night, sweet prince; And flights of angels sing thee to thy rest!" -- W.S. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 08:22 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id IAA29557 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 08:22:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 2CEA6F34 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 8:21:44 -0400 Message-Id: <199605221222.IAA29557@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 08:16:41 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Carrie Krumtum Subject: Re: SPOILER: LK X-To: akr@NWLINK.COM To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 673 Status: RO X-Status: >Three cheers for the Ger-cam! :) I actually liked the morgue work. I did too. The whole scene, IMHO, was wonderful. The movement of the camera seemed to relate the absence of balance for Nick. What Nat was telling him, she loved him, she needed him to love her, she felt her life needed closure, etc. etc. was making him feel unbalanced, emotionally. It was a lot for him to take in all at once. I thought the camera movements were wonderfully appropriate. An enhancement to the mood of the scene, not a distraction. Carrie, Slovenly Knightie AKA Carrie the Cruel CKrumtum@gnn.com It's hard to judge someone when you're blinded by your love for them. --Mother Teresa From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 08:25 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id IAA29948 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 08:25:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id B7EE542B ; Wed, 22 May 1996 8:25:37 -0400 Message-Id: <199605221225.IAA29948@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 08:23:24 EDT Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Tanya Smith Subject: Re: SPOILER: LK To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 379 Status: RO X-Status: To: Forever Knight TV *** Reply to note of 05/22/96 08:22 From: Tanya Smith, Secretary for Product Assurance, Preload and Mobile Value Products. 1-919-543-8657. T/L 441-8657 F/X 1-919-543-4036 F/X T/L 441-4036. Subject: Re: SPOILER: LK .ddn PSUVM.PSU.EDU(FKSPOILR) Ger's cam work mimicked Copolla's "The Doors". Check it out. Talk about camera work! From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 08:36 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id IAA01612 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 08:36:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 41E38140 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 8:36:38 -0400 Message-Id: <199605221236.IAA01612@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 08:34:55 +0000 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Laura W. Petix" Subject: Re: The LC angles (LK spoilers) -- HA! To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 949 Status: RO X-Status: Tippi asks: > Besides THAT, how can it be from Nick's POV if Nick is lying FACE-DOWN on > the floor? EH?? You get staked thru the back, you fall face-down on the > floor. He can't be lying on his back if there's a STAKE IN IT! Simple! Because LaCroix *didn't* stake him, Tippi. You didn't actually see him do it, did you? I certainly didn't. Raising a stake does not have to equal plunging it down. > PLUS, if Nick had already been staked, then why would LC be asking > him if he was sure that this was what he wanted? I mean, it'd be a > little late, wouldn't it? He wouldn't. The theory only makes sense if you believe that LaCroix did *not* go through with staking Nick, and that he is talking him down. The dialogue makes perfect sense that way. Not only that, but, in my opinion, anything else would be out of character for LaCroix. He wouldn't stake Nick. Laura WP lpetix@dpcc.com http://www.dpcc.com/dpcc/assoc/lpetix/waves/ From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 10:05 EDT 1996 Received: from allison.clark.net (allison.clark.net [168.143.0.3]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id KAA00339 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 10:05:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by allison.clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) with ESMTP id KAA17776 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 10:04:49 -0400 Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 27FD95EC ; Wed, 22 May 1996 10:01:49 -0400 Message-Id: <199605221404.KAA17776@allison.clark.net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 06:54:36 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: lucienlc Subject: Re: SPOILERS: AtA and LK "Cuts" and "Intent" To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 5683 Status: O X-Status: Netcom ate this reply the first time, so I've had to start from scratch. Grrrr. I hate that! Sandra wrote: >As the subject line indicates, a major focus of this post is going to >be on the filming of episodes and how cutting a scene or filming it >differently does not in itself (imo, anyway) change the emotional and >story content of a scene. Imo, that's not true. Cutting or changing a scene is a way of editing and revising that scene, not very different from changing the words in a script. Or would you suggest that the script on February 16 is the one that should be looked to for the meaning of LK, even though it was revised significantly on February 20? >I have watched LK four times through now >and so far, I see the same thing that I saw on my first viewing of it: >Nat and Nick are dead. That is a perfectly valid interpretation. Not, however, imv, the only interpretation. >I won't get into the argument about whether it was wrong or right for >Nick to have asked LC to hypnotize Tracy, but I do think that Nick's >lines make a bit more sense if looked at in context of the *original* >script where Tracy kills Vachon (fwiw, I think the change to Tracy You make a valid point, but for one thing: I think it may make more sense to the audience, but it doesn't change one's view of Nick's conduct: Nick didn't know that Tracy had finished off Vachon, even in the script. He assumed Vachon had died as a result of Divia's attack. Still, I agree that those lines were probably there in the first place because she had *killed* Vachon. >Now, on to LK. To me, making "cuts" so that we don't "see" LC stake >Nick, or we can't completely "tell" whether Nick bit again to "finish >her off" *doesn't* change the *emotional* and *story* content of the >script. Even in the original, very worst of the scripts, we don't *see* LC finish off Nick. They were *very* specific about that: "NOTE: Which we do not see go through him"). What we see is Nick reacting to the staking. Which could, of course, be non-life-threatening, under those circumstances. In fact, I could have very easily envisioned LC staking Nick in non-lethal fashion to buy time for Nick to get over his suicidal bent and keep him from walking into the sun. >People say that Nat isn't dead. Then why after Nick bends >down to "kiss" her a second time, does LC say, "Wise decision. We >may even have time for a burial."? *Those lines* carry the emotional >content that *Nat **is** dead*. Very true, but Nick has been wrong before (cf Alexandra). And for you of all people, Sandra, to be taking LC's word about anything ... >Much has been made about the "LC distortions"--that they're Nat's >viewpoint, for example. I see no reason why this should be so. > In my view, his lines seem to >be directed to Nick and he is speaking *to Nick*. It's very clear in the script that he is talking to Nick. >At one point in one of the distortions, he says something like "all that's >happened tonight should tell you this" and *looks down and to the side*, which >I interpret as him looking at Nat's body on the floor. Based on the script notes, you are very correct. I believe the same. >IOW, I agree with Amy Rambow when she says these "distortions" are from *Nick's >viewpoint* as he is lying on the floor after being staked. >There is, imo, no other way to explain the "LC distortions" dialogue >any other way than him addressing Nick as Nick lies staked. Ah - but here's where you're wrong! :-) If you go by the SCRIPT, as you are suggesting we should do, the script makes it very clear that the LC speeches all take place at the point where Nick says "I have that faith" and just before LC says "Don't be a fool, Nicholas. Life is a gift." The way the script presents it, the monologues at the beginning of each segment are the long, unedited version of what LC says to Nick when he's trying to talk him out of it. The speech in the tag is merely an edited version of what LC actually says, because to have him make the entire speech at that time would totally disrupt the flow of the episode (and bore the heck out of the audience). This is a not uncommon literary device, and is made VERY CLEAR in the script notes, which suggest editing the speech and maybe not even using it in the tag. **"But we'll say that this is where it all connects."** Right after Nick says "I have that faith." So - the speech occurs when LC is trying to change Nick's mind, trying to talk him out of suicide. Before the staking, if there is a staking. As for the distortion, that was Ger's directoral choice. Why attribute deeper meaning to it than the fact that he's trying to convey an ominous situation where nothing and nobody is quite in focus? Ger likes to play around with the camera when he directs. This is the same man who made most of us seasick during the Morgue scene. There is NO distortion called for in the script. All the script calls for is a tight shot on LC, so we can't see who he's talking to or what he's talking about, obviously done in order to preserve the suspense until the final scene ("where it all connects"). (Yes, the script does call for the pullback of the camera during the "leaving is the purest form of love" monologue, so we can see it is Nick he is talking to, but that's all.) Hopefully, the above will be of some comfort. I won't debate the LC stuff with you. Suffice it to say that I disagree completely . >I will grant that it is a powerful episode, with good acting, and >mostly good filming and direction. It's just *wrong.* Yes, it is. I think there is virtual unanimity of opinion on that. Laurie Cousin M+B+D+T+K From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 11:05 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id LAA15660 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 11:05:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 5030EC9F ; Wed, 22 May 1996 10:45:53 -0400 Message-Id: <199605221505.LAA15660@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 07:07:01 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: lucienlc Subject: Re: SPOILER: LK, Downloading Nick's Brain To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 701 Status: RO X-Status: >And, finally, the loop is imperfect. I will analyze the ramifications of >this some other time, but for now, note a few of the many differences: >"a ripe peach" vs "the freshest peach" >"where you stand" vs "where you are" >"the rising sun" vs "the morning sun" (Sorry for the extra line) Not sure I made this clear enough in my answer to Sandra. This was apparently quite deliberate. Let me quote the entire bit from the script: **NICK: I have that faith, too. ON LACROIX - stunned - and roughly matching the first speech in the Teaser. We can take license here (dialogue edits) and we may not even use this. But we'll say that this is where it all connects.** Laurie Cousin M+B+D+T+K From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 13:39 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id NAA23036 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 13:39:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 19405934 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 12:53:12 -0400 Message-Id: <199605221739.NAA23036@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 12:35:22 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Sandra Gray Subject: Re: The LC angles (LK spoilers) -- HA! To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 496 Status: RO X-Status: In response to Tippi's comments about the LC distortions, it's possible that Nick was kneeling instead of lying on the floor at some points. Nick might have tried to keep from falling down on Nat. I don't think that just because Nick is staked means he then has to have *no* control of his body. LC lingered in NiQ (and didn't fall down on the soldier when staked either, but rose up and struggled some before falling back). --Sandra Gray, forever Knightie --tmp_harkins@dirac.physics.jmu.edu From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 14:28 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id OAA05060 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 14:28:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 375E946D ; Wed, 22 May 1996 14:19:56 -0400 Message-Id: <199605221828.OAA05060@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 13:52:09 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Gehirn Karies Subject: Re: SPOILER: LK To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1467 Status: O X-Status: Robbi lamented: >Do not fear for me. I understand the difference between reality and fantasy >. How then does this touch me on such a level as nothing before has ever >done before nor will it ever again. I would hope the majority of us do. There are a lot of intelligent articulate people lamenting the same question. On the four a.m. drive home from watching LK, Shell the lurker and I discussed this, we're pretty baffled by our own involvement. My point is, many of our lives are surronded by cascading despair. Suicides, senseless murders; phone calls at all hours from friends, family, the ER; nowhere jobs, Cops in the family, abuse, the list is endless. Those of us who are the rocks, the GFI's grounding all this pain electric have to find escapism, entertainment. The people involved in making television know it is escapism. The FK people know they have dedicated fans. You guys made your presence so well known that even the likes of me updated thier computers and got on line just to join your ranks. (and rankle your joints) It was very wrong for TBTB to heap such an overwhelming dose of hopeless despair onto our favorite form of entertainment. PTB, I *know* that you're out there, and I know no one can turn back the clock. But you people were wrong. We have seen you leave looser. FK deserved looser. The actors, among the best on television, cable included, deserve better. You people should take more responsibility for your product. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 16:02 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id QAA01788 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 16:02:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 819C4600 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 15:40:45 -0400 Message-Id: <199605222002.QAA01788@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 15:19:44 -0400 Reply-To: "Kathryn A. Kraus" Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "Kathryn A. Kraus" Subject: Re: SPOILERS: AtA and LK "Cuts" and "Intent" To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2908 Status: RO X-Status: Sandra wonders: >[LC] says to Nick something on the order of, "So to you, I'm >the devil." (Why would LC make such a statement after Nick just >saved his life in AtA? LC is not stupid; if Nick did indeed >think LC the devil, why would he have saved LC from Divia [snip] Actually, I saw two levels of significance in this line. First, acknowledgment of idea that, for a long time now (up until recent events, at least), Nick has regarded LC as his own personal devil, hounding him to give in, etc. No surprise there, of course. Second (and this is a bit farther out there), he's making a biblical/literary reference to the part he's playing in their little drama at that very moment. Nick is proclaiming his "faith," and LC is "tempting" him to lose it. That *is* the Devil's role. I think he's just making the observation that "hey, I've cast myself as Lucifer in this little dialogue, haven't I?" Now, where are the horns and red spandex when you need them? Amy detailed the flashbacks during Nick's (Lame Excuse for) lovemaking: >7. being vamped out, first season present from Dark Knight (part II, I think). >9. restrained on table, from "The Fix" flashback? Or LNMTA LNMTA, the "electro-shock" therapy bit. >10. being stabbed, second-season flashback Blood Money More of Amy's trivia: >4. Nat tells Nick he's considered suicide himself, but isn't >that selective memory? I'm told Nick said he'd never die by his >own hand. He did say that, at the *end* of Last Act. But he was toying with the idea earlier. My own personal take on this ep, even though you didn't ask.... First, the most important stuff. 1) everyone's hair looked good. 2) LC's eyebrows looked good. Now, on to more trivial matters... ;-) "Tragedy. [...] It is not a word that I *like*." I *liked* the camera swings in the morgue! I loved Nick & Nat's discussion of faith - very moving. Nick's expression when she told him he was the most mortal man she'd ever known. Whew! I also like the ambiguity. It keeps everyone abuzz! So many varied yet justifiable positions, most of them rational! Just for the record, my thoughts on the situation (possibly unsubstantiated, but there nevertheless): -LC won't kill Nick (he may stake him, but not fatally). -Nat's still alive (those shots of LC & Nick are her POV), and she's probably still human. I keep getting a Pythonesque image when thinking about this. "She's dead." "I'm not quite dead!" "But you're dying." "I think I'm getting better...." -Nick is possibly becoming mortal - I'm about 50/50 on this. (He took her blood + he thinks she died -> the HF cure! Eh, it could happen. Ok, he *is* cured, unless we get a movie.) So there you go. Hey, instead of (or in addition to) MBDtK, can we use N.D.N.E.D. as a sig thing? ----------------------------------------- kak6@po.cwru.edu The lake is 51 degrees! Let's go skiing! From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 18:52 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id SAA10227 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 18:52:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 44094A92 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 18:30:50 -0400 Message-Id: <199605222252.SAA10227@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 16:29:39 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: TippiNB Subject: Re: The LC angles (LK spoilers) -- HA! To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 783 Status: RO X-Status: Laura Petix wrote: >He wouldn't. The theory only makes sense if you believe that >LaCroix did *not* go through with staking Nick, and that he is talking >him down. The dialogue makes perfect sense that way. Not only that, >but, in my opinion, anything else would be out of character for LaCroix. I agree wholeheartedly with you there. I mean, there's inconsistency then there's full out 180 degree one-day-I'm-wicked-the-next-day-I'm-the-easter-bunny kind of stuff. ;) 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." "I'm not in denial. I'm in a state of creative readjustment!" http://www.netcom.com/~tippinb/wicked.html From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 19:12 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id TAA14139 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 19:12:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 19732239 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 18:43:58 -0400 Message-Id: <199605222312.TAA14139@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 17:45:52 -0400 Reply-To: Amy Volpert Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Amy Volpert Subject: Spoiler: LK To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 536 Status: RO X-Status: I favor the scenario that LaCroix temporarily disabled Nick and brought Natalie across. LaCroix obviously doesn't approve of suicide and his misguided, destructive love for Nick won't let him part with his son. Bringing Nat across would give Nick an irrefutable reason to continue living, even as a vampire. LaCroix would rather indulge Nick's love for Nat and his search for redemption than lose him forever. It would be the ultimate controlling, dominating, grasping act, forcing Nick to live the life he can no longer bear. Amy From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 20:02 EDT 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id UAA24531 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 20:02:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.21EA3500@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; Wed, 22 May 1996 19:59:06 -0400 Message-Id: <199605230002.UAA24531@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 17:57:43 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Margie Hammet Subject: Re: SPOILER: LK, Downloading Nick's Brain To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 552 Status: RO X-Status: >....the loop is imperfect. ....note a few of the many differences: >"a ripe peach" vs "the freshest peach"; "unless, of course, you have >faith" vs "or do you have faith"; "where you stand" vs "where you are" >"the rising sun" vs "the morning sun"; I don't think the slight differences matter. One was what Natalie heard while semiconscious; one was what Nick heard. In her state, Natalie could have heard things slightly different from the way they really were. Margie (treeleaf@io.com) N&NPacker The Unnamed Faction From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 21:08 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id VAA09220 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 21:08:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 75F86555 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 21:02:33 -0400 Message-Id: <199605230108.VAA09220@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 21:00:15 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Diane Shea Subject: Spoilers:LK,AtA; LaCroix To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1731 Status: RO X-Status: Spoilers for AtA and LK... Sorry everyone if there's a lot more that has been said on this previously. My modem has finally allowed me to sign on again so all that has come before this, I haven't read yet...anyway, Sandra wrote; >>...no one seems to think that LC learned nothing about himself that would allow him to understand Nick's pain enough to let him go by killing him.<< I'm one of those that happens to think this actually. Now, is the question that has been disputed one of "How could LaCroix possibly kill Nick now, after all this time?!" I believe it is quite possible that he could. Simply because of this new dimension that has been revealed in his character. It would be the last thing he'd want to do, but he has faced his own pain recently, he has seen Nick offer him support during this pain, and he (being the recently made decent guy that he is) would not deny Nick's heartfelt request. Especially not after "You're my closest friend." >>LC was packing and getting ready to leave Toronto. Was it because he didn't want to be reminded of Divia's death? In short, was he running away from his own pain?<< My answer; Yes. If we are to understand that LK and AtA happened shortly after one another, then that is a very reasonable explanation. Divia returning seeking revenge and LaCroix finally explaining to Nick an important part of his life, and the pain he has lived with for centuries, is probably one of the most traumatic things this ancient vampire has had to go through in a long time. He wouldn't want to think about it any more than he has to. When vampires are disturbed by something, they leave that something (or try to at least:) --Cousin Diane the positive cousin Eternal Seducer From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 21:57 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id VAA18745 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 21:57:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 1DD87172 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 21:57:21 -0400 Message-Id: <199605230157.VAA18745@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 18:52:58 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Bonnie F Rutledge Subject: LK Spoiler-What about... To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 726 Status: RO X-Status: If you haven't seen Last Knight yet, and don't want it spoiled-read no further.... It occurred to me that *if* Nat is *really* deceased, what will become of Sidney? Not only has he had to deal with bare cupboards, Mummy being away at nights and smelling of formaldyhyde and alcohol, but now he's been abandoned forever! Let us hope Sidney isn't consigned to the animal shelter ( but at least he'd be fed regularly )! ************************************************************************ Bonnie Rutledge br1035@ix.netcom.com Quaffing LaCroix bottled water..."LaCroix, the essence of pure" Yes! The bottle REALLY says that ! ************************************************************************ From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 22:16 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id WAA22725 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 22:16:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id AD42F9DD ; Wed, 22 May 1996 22:01:22 -0400 Message-Id: <199605230216.WAA22725@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 21:56:44 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "Lisa P." Subject: (LK Spoilers...sort of) Love Making Rules for Vampires/Mortals To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1738 Status: RO X-Status: On the OMNI chat last night I started a RULES FOR MAKING LOVE TO VAMPIRES/MORTALS topic. Well, let's just say some of the suggestions were very interesting. ;) There are some vague references to LK, so to be safe, I'm putting it on the FKSPOILR list. It would seem some of my brain cells, the ones that deal with memory, fled during the night. I can only remember a few of them. Here are some of the ones I do remember, plus a few a just thought up. Some of the ones I remember belong to other people, but unfortunately I don't remember who said what, and I don't want to misquote anyone so you won't find them here. Though I will be misquoting myself seeing that I can't remember verbatim what I said!! Ain't growing old a b**ch! RULES FOR MAKING LOVE TO A VAMPIRE ------------------------------------------------------------------ #1. Make sure it isn't Nick! #2. If Rule #1 is ignored, make sure Lacroix is on hand to clean up the mess #3. If Rule #2 is followed, pray as fast and as hard as you can #3. DON'T PANIC! Increase in heartbeats will only make you look tastier #4. If you change your mind, keep bible handy...works better than a cold shower #5. THERE ARE NO RULES! RULES FOR MAKING LOVE TO A MORTAL ---------------------------------------------------------------- #1. There are more pleasant things to s**k on than the neck := (figures that would be the first one I can think of from last night ;) ) #2. Learn the difference between "foreplay" and "forearm" (Sheesh!) #3. Don't drink and fly (MADD - Mortals Against Drunken Dead) #4. Don't release thoughts of previous loves with your mouth full #5. THERE ARE NO RULES! Lisa P. (Please brain cells, come home to mama soon. I need you!) From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 22:35 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id WAA26653 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 22:35:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 663B2803 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 22:35:10 -0400 Message-Id: <199605230235.WAA26653@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 19:29:33 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Amy Rambow Subject: SPOILER: LK -- What about Sydney? To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <199605230207.TAA14651@montana.nwlink.com> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1040 Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 22 May 1996, Bonnie F Rutledge wrote: > It occurred to me that *if* Nat is *really* deceased, what will become > of Sidney? If Nat really is gone, there will be people (and cats) to mourn her, which someone should have reminded her of when she was talking about having an empty life. (Yes, Nick, hero-o-mine, I'm talking about you.) We haven't seen Grace in a loooong time, but does that mean she's gone? What about Nat's sister-in-law Sara and niece Amy? What about Myra and Jenny, for that matter? Nat's life isn't *all* in fanfic, is it? I vote that Sydney goes to Grace. And I finally think I've figured out why -- artistically -- we never got to see Schanke in any flashbacks in LK. Almost any moment with Skank would have completely undermined the premise of this blasted episode. IMHO. (I'm still having subscription trouble -- my apologies if this misposts.) **** Amy, Lady of the Knight (akr@nwlink.com) **** "I could not risk condemning to the void one who so surely deserves a Heaven." -- LaCroix, by TippiNB From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 22:55 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id WAA00154 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 22:55:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 47F1B491 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 22:55:48 -0400 Message-Id: <199605230255.WAA00154@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 21:57:58 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: TippiNB Subject: Re: SPOILER: LK -- What about Sydney? To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 950 Status: O X-Status: Amy wrote: >And I finally think I've figured out why -- artistically -- we never got >to see Schanke in any flashbacks in LK. Almost any moment with Skank >would have completely undermined the premise of this blasted episode. IMHO. Artistically, that sounds like a good reason to me. I mean, Nick isn't *that* big of a brick to not recall one of his best friends, is he? Nah. Even I -- I who think you could put windows in the boy and call him a brick house -- don't think he's that bad. I wonder if there were legal or technical reasons? Contractual glitches? Like why didn't they show any Janette flashbacks frm 1st and 2nd seasons? Wicked Cousin Tippi, dollar bill wrangler of the Thong Throng! *Founding Member of the Unnamed Faction*Voyeur of the Menage LaCroix* "TV shows, like vampires, have a way of coming back from the dead." "I'm not in denial. I'm in a state of creative readjustment!" http://www.netcom.com/~tippinb/wicked.html From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 23:27 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id XAA05415 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 23:27:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id A07A32B2 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 23:26:54 -0400 Message-Id: <199605230327.XAA05415@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 20:17:19 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Idalia Kakesako Subject: Re: Spoilers:LK,AtA; LaCroix To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1154 Status: O X-Status: Cousin Diane, the positive cousin & Eternal Seducer wrote: >"How could LaCroix possibly kill Nick now, after all this time?!" I believe it >is quite possible that he could. Simply because of this new dimension that has >been revealed in his character. Thank you, Diane, and Sandra, too, for posting this. I've been trying to think of ways to express the same ideas, but you've both already covered it well. I don't necessarily think that LC *did* stake Nick fatally, but I do think he was quite *capable* of doing so, and that he might've done so out of his love for Nick. LC was moved, upset, teary-eyed (!) while talking to Nicky-boy there at the end, which I interpreted as him finally being able to let go of Nick, as much as he would hate to. But that's just me. I've only seen the episode once, and my opinion after that 2 a.m. viewing was that both Nick and Nat were dead. As I've said before, that's not how I *wanted* to see it, but that's what I saw. Just dropping in my own two cents, Idalia Kakesako Light Cousin, NatPacker, N&NPacker; TTwF "I blame you for the moonlit skies and the dream that died ..." From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 23:32 EDT 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id XAA06406 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 23:32:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.6DF66A00@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; Wed, 22 May 1996 23:28:49 -0400 Message-Id: <199605230332.XAA06406@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 23:23:24 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Siona Subject: Re: SPOILER: LK -- What about Sydney? To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <199605230235.WAA28297@access.netaxs.com> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 602 Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 22 May 1996, Amy Rambow wrote: > On Wed, 22 May 1996, Bonnie F Rutledge wrote: > > It occurred to me that *if* Nat is *really* deceased, what will become > > of Sidney? > > If Nat really is gone, there will be people (and cats) to mourn her, which > someone should have reminded her of when she was talking about having an Pat Swann has already written a fanfic piece called "Sydney Lambert's Final Lament". Written from Sydney's perspective it gives a good answer to what could become of Sydney, Siona@netaxs.com Dark Knightie! Help save Forever Knight! see http://www.netaxs.com/~siona/ From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 10:55 EDT 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id KAA13179 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 10:55:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.9B30D5B0@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; Wed, 22 May 1996 10:51:18 -0400 Message-Id: <199605221455.KAA13179@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 10:07:47 EDT Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Lisa McDavid Subject: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 530 Status: RO X-Status: H'mm, now that they've arbtrarily given Nat April 14th as a birthday (although I really think they'd forgotten that Nick was brought in on her birthday), it might be interesting to cast her horoscope for April 14, 1962 and see what comes out. We don't have a time, so it would have to be one of the generic systems for use when the birth time is unknown. We don't have a place, but it's probably safe to assume Toronto or somewhere in the vicinity. Cousin Lisa -- "That will be trouble." Lisa McDavid mcdavid-lisa@scarolina.edu From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 11:03 EDT 1996 Received: from wnt.dc.lsoft.com (wnt.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.7]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id LAA15193 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 11:03:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by wnt.dc.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Windows NT v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.D1FDCE80@wnt.dc.lsoft.com>; Wed, 22 May 1996 11:00:00 -0400 Message-Id: <199605221503.LAA15193@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 08:34:00 -0600 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Deb Subject: Re: SPOILER: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 853 Status: RO X-Status: >-- [ From: Robbi Egersdorf * EMC.Ver #2.5.02 ] -- >Another factor that needs to be considered is how long has it been since the >poor boy has had sex! Only once in this whole season (if you consider >bringing Janette back across, having vampire sex with her) Otherwise Nick >has been celibate this whole year. If you remember in Blackwing Nick is shown rebuttoning his shirt while Marion lies asleep in bed. I always took this to mean that he and she had been "together". Since she had taken the killer out of him , he was safe to have sex (and why didn't he run to Nat? HUH? No, I'm not a Natpacker but that little one night stand was too much for even this Knightie!). 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 From owner-fkfic-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 11:36 EDT 1996 Received: from allison.clark.net (allison.clark.net [168.143.0.3]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id LAA23749; Wed, 22 May 1996 11:36:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from allison (allison.clark.net [168.143.0.3]) by allison.clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) with SMTP id LAA28591; Wed, 22 May 1996 11:36:31 -0400 Message-Id: <199605221536.LAA28591@allison.clark.net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 11:08:20 -0400 Reply-To: Maddog Sender: Forever Knight TV show stories From: Maddog Subject: The Sound of Whacking (spoiler for last knight) X-cc: Nerida Bridgeford To: Multiple recipients of list FKFIC-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2644 Status: RO X-Status: factoids: last knight spoiler contained herein these characters ain't ours these thighs ain't ours these brain cells ain't ours either S P O I L E R S P A C E The Sound of Whacking by The Lurkers ************************************************************** "Damn you, Nicholas!" LaCroix lifted the stake over his son's bowed head, then soundly whacked him unconscious with it. The wooden stake made a satisfying thump as it connected with Nick's wooden head. LaCoix sighed. "If you want something done right, do it yourself," he mumbled as he knelt down next to Natalie. **** Nick fuzzily blinked his way back to consciousness. His head hurt and he couldn't move. When he finally managed to force his eyes open he discovered why. LaCroix had tied him to a chair. Very tightly and he couldn't break the ropes. There was a similar chair sitting next to the one he was in, but it was empty. In front of him was a large screen TV. He contemplated it with growing terror, wondering what hideous torture LaCroix was planning to inflict on him. /Speak of the Devil and in he walks/ thought Nick as the vampire strolled into the room. Nick strained against the ropes as he saw who was following LaCroix. Natalie! He'd gone and brought her across! "Don't bother," said LaCroix, watching Nick struggle to break free, "there's titanium thread running through them. You'll only hurt yourself." "You bastard!" Nick growled, "let me go!" "Not until you promise to be a good boy and listen to your Daddy. And I've finally thougt of a way to persuade you to do just that." "Natalie!" cried Nick, "I'm sorry!" "So you should be," she replied. "I give you every chance, but do you bring me across? Nooooo. You'd rather see me die. I'm just lucky LaCroix was around." She smiled at the master vampire as he walked over to the laser disc player and hit play. "And I didn't even have to persuade her!" added LaCroix, smiling at his newest family member and indicating the empty chair next to Nick. "She's quite happy to hang around here with me." "Just so long as we can do this every Saturday night!" enthused Natalie, taking a seat on the couch and indicating that LaCroix should join her. "Whatever you like, my dear." LaCroix took his seat and settled back, one arm around Natalie. He picked up the remote and turned up the volume. As the music swelled out of the surround sound system, Nick started screaming as he realised what was about to happen to him. "The hills are alive, with the sound of music..." ******************************************************************************** From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 11:59 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id LAA29991 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 11:59:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id D048C30E ; Wed, 22 May 1996 11:53:54 -0400 Message-Id: <199605221559.LAA29991@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 11:26:06 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: MS CHRISTINA L KAMNIKAR Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight; Nick's impulses To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1865 Status: RO X-Status: Darn you, Valerie Meachum. :) S P O I L E R ? W H Y N O T I was hoping no one would catch this reason for Nick's lack of foreplay until AFTER I'd written my fanfic response explaining it. But I think you're right---Nick was trying to preserve Natalie's life by not getting too, umm "excited" over biting her. I think he would have done better to feed like a pig first, like Vachon did in Apache's story "Best Laid Plans", rather than go into the situation hungry. So to speak. Why do I think this? History. There is actually a lot of continuity to support this idea. Richard and Elizabeth were both brought across by a somewhat uninvolved Nick, who was biting each of them as a last resort and as a reason to cure them of illness. Both became vampires. Alissa, Amalia, and Alexandra (man, he goes in for those A names, doesn't he?) were all drained dry when Nick was EXTREMELY interested in the proceedings. Alexandra was later brought across by Lacroix because Nicky boy was too distracted to realize there was some life left in her. The only anomaly is Serena, who was brought across after a passionate interlude with Nick. Of course, he wasn't in love with her, he was (again) doing her a "favor" by making her a vampire (well, that's what he thought, anyway). So Nick has some reason to suspect that if he let things get passionate with Natalie that he'd end up taking WAY too much. Which doesn't mean I was happy about the situation. After those kisses in Night in Question, and all the times we've seen Nick get romantic with variuous necks-of-the-week, I was really hoping for something more interesting than an intense look, a wrist slurp, and one kiss. But I have the feeling that the episode was running out of time, too. Toooo bad. Christina vqrw76a@prodigy.com Merc FoFoD Cleopatra Night DJ, CERK "Death can not stop True Love" From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 12:00 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id LAA00100 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 11:59:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 0D7824E0 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 11:55:36 -0400 Message-Id: <199605221559.LAA00100@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 10:37:59 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: michael wayne jackson Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 266 Status: RO X-Status: At 10:07 AM 5/22/96 EDT, Lisa McDavid wrote: >H'mm, now that they've arbtrarily given Nat April 14th as a birthday It's more than just that. In the wee hours of April 14 of this year began the Saturday Knight Live mini-loop. michael wayne jackson -- mjay@nwu.edu From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 14:28 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id OAA05074 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 14:28:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 394BA0A3 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 14:20:00 -0400 Message-Id: <199605221828.OAA05074@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 12:53:55 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Joni Latham Subject: Last Knight-Nigel To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1565 Status: RO X-Status: I have been sitting hear quitely and reading your comments with great interest. I watched the show up until about November, then I became very disillusioned with the way that the characters and the plots were going. Nick to me was becoming wishy washy, although I realized that many women had a crush on him, I did not care much for the charcter anymore. I thought that LaCroix was much more interesting and should have been more developed. I felt that he was totally misunderstood. I kept imagining what I would do with the stories and characters, if I wrote the show. Someone told me to write it down and before I knew it, I had written my 1st novel and the only thing Forever Kightish that remained was that the main male hero looks liked Nigel in my mind. It is at the agents right now. I had stopped watching the shows because I was afraid that they would influence my characters and I did not like the plots, but kept up with the plots through the NET so I know the storylines. Against my better judgement I watched the last episode and as usual I was disappointed and wanted to rewrite it. I had known all along though that LaCroix and Nick had a special bond, otherwise why would he always help Nick and why would Nick always go to him for help. The answer in TV land always seems to be "kill'em off" (such as Chris in Silk Stalkings) or kill them in such a way that it could have all been a dream (Dallas). As you can probably tell, I was disechanted through most of the last season. Joni Latham jlatham@gte-tx-nm.com 102113.1053@compuserve.com From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 14:53 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id OAA11535 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 14:53:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 241EA2A9 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 14:48:02 -0400 Message-Id: <199605221853.OAA11535@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 13:25:12 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Margie Hammet Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 3515 Status: O X-Status: Thank you to everyone who said to go back and look at the timing of the monologue. Thank you to everyone who said the monologue might be being seen from the POV of someone lying on the floor. Thank you to everyone for just being here. I watched the parts with the monologue and the ending again. Nick is not dead. What happens to Natalie is an open question, so as far as I am concerned, she is not dead. We hear the monologue all through the episode. It isn't taking place in real time. The first section, which we hear during the opening scene, begins with "Life is a gift...." and goes on to "And is your faith really that strong?" Then there's a pause in the dialog, then the first section continues with, "I understand the need to move on," and continues through, "But consider what you have in your hands before you give it up. Don't trade a treasure for an empty box." That's the end of the opening scene. When we hear the same dialog near the end of the episode in real time, it begins at the same point it began in the opening scene, and only goes as far as, "And is your faith really that strong?" After that, Nick gives LaCroix the stake and implies that he wants LaCroix to kill him, LaCroix says "Damn you, Nicholas!," and raises the stake. Thus, in real time, everything else in the monologue must occur after LaCroix raises the stake. There are several clues that Nick is not dead, but I won't go into all of them. One of them is that in one section of the monologue, LaCroix says, "Haven't you tired of this incessant guilt? ... And it must stop. This and all else that has happened here tonight should make that clear to you." This statement implies continuation. It's not the sort of thing that would be said to somebody dying; it's the sort of thing that would be said to somebody that is going to go on. When I first saw the episode, I thought that LaCroix had actually done what Nick asked him to. If that were true, it would mean that LaCroix, in some sense at least, would be accepting this idea of walking happily off into Heaven. Everything else he had said about life wouldn't matter. There would only be one voice heard in this episode. And that bothered me terribly. I like Forever Knight to ask questions, not necessarily to answer them, and certainly not to give the sort of answer I originally thought it was giving in this episode. But LaCroix did not kill Nick, and so LaCroix does become the other voice in this episode. Forever Knight did remain true to itself, after all, and I am relieved. It does appear that the monologue is being scene from the POV of someone on the floor. If Natalie is semiconscious, she may sense where LaCroix' voice is coming from, and be seeing him in her mind. She also might be catching slight real glimpses of him, if her eyes are not really completely closed. If she is hearing what he is saying so clearly, she may not be as close to death as Nick thinks. It's impossible to tell what happens to Natalie. She may die, she may be brought across, or she may revive. Since she didn't necessariy have to die in this episode, as far as I am concerned, she is alive. And if they make a 2-hour movie, and imply that Natalie died, then I am just going to say that that movie does not exist, and the real Forever Knight is the three seasons that have already been shown. And if one of TPTB says that Natalie did die, I am just going to say that that PTB does not exist. Margie (treeleaf@io.com) N&NPacker The Unnamed Faction From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 16:34 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id QAA11095 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 16:34:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id B7892615 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 16:18:03 -0400 Message-Id: <199605222034.QAA11095@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 16:16:41 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Stephanie Babbitt Subject: Re: SPOILERS: Last Knight (also AtA) - Think a moment .... To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2636 Status: O X-Status: Ray wrote: >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. I have to rise to Tracy's defense here. Somebody mentioned that the locker room looked red until the shooting, at which point it looked blue. There was a reason for that! Remember the perp did something evil to the fuse box and killed all the lights? Well, the reddish light was supposed to convey to us that the lights in the locker room were *out*. Presumably, the place was cast in heavy shadow (if not outright darkness). Tracy, knowing the lay of the place, is creeping up on the perp, who is stumbling along in the dark. Nick, of course, has no trouble seeing in the dark and finds the perp without difficulty. He's working on hypnotizing the perp and is about to succeed. Tracy, knowing the perp is armed, steps into the shadow behind Nick with weapon raised to shoot if the perp suddenly points the gun at Nick. The perp can't see her, and she's covering her partner, like she's supposed to. Now, all of a sudden, the lights come back on, startling everybody. The room is cast in blue, bright light. The perp can now see Tracy clearly, panics, and fires before she can react. And yes, she looks surprised because the bullet went straight through Nick, then through her abdomen and liver, off the wall behind her, and into her skull. You'd look surprised, too, if you suddenly began hemorrhaging into your brain stem. Why the heck do you think she doesn't shoot back? I really felt for Tracy in this ep. Here she is, absolutely miserable over the death of Vachon and unable to tell anyone, anywhere why (it's clear to me that LC hadn't gotten to her yet). She's so unhappy she's feeling sick to her stomach. Yet, when the emergency arises, she takes out her gun with quiet professionalism and goes to work with the most focused look I've ever seen on her face. Way to go, Lisa! The fault for her death isn't hers. It isn't Nick's. It's Reece's, for allowing an hysterical convict to be in the precint unfettered and for allowing the lights to be cut back on without knowing exactly what was taking place in the locker room. When you're a cop, you use the environment to advantage. Changing that environment quickly and without warning puts your people in mortal danger. Oh, well, soapbox off. Back to work. And yes, I'm still mad about this whole LK shenanigans (what? you can tell?) . Stephanie B., Vaquera now and always From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 16:37 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id QAA11954 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 16:37:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 2E226B46 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 16:28:32 -0400 Message-Id: <199605222037.QAA11954@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 16:03:04 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Nancy Fralic Subject: Re: Spoiler: Last Knight affiliations To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: <9605201229.AB18345@mother-goose.mccleary.pps.pgh.pa.us> Content-Type: text Content-Length: 839 Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 20 May 1996, TippiNB wrote: > Add another fraction, to which I have belonged for months: LC brought Nat > across, didn't stake Nick, and now the three of them are touring the world > together looking for good black suits. Welcome to the menage! But what about Janette? Wouldn't the emotional trauma Nick was going through (let alone getting staked permanently or not, or becoming mortal or not) have brought her running - or flying as the case might be. I cannot see her being indifferent to what Nick was feeling no matter how she might feel about him bringing her across. LaCroix was stuck in the loft with some permutation of bodies, vampires and mortals for the day. The following evening could be another traumatic one if Janette shows up, no matter what the scenario. Nancy fralic@mother-goose.mccleary.pps.pgh.pa.us From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 16:59 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id QAA16832 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 16:59:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id C2E9C670 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 16:54:10 -0400 Message-Id: <199605222059.QAA16832@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 11:27:09 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Jennise Hall Subject: Spoiler: Last Knight X-To: Valerie Meachum , FKX List , alikhat@ix.netcom.com, cat.goddess@pobox.com, catheboo@cco.caltech.edu, choff@violet.berkeley.edu, D020214@univscvm.csd.scarolina.edu, feden@mcs.com, finabair@aol.com, gryphon@execpc.com, h36a@unb.ca, janes@interlog.com, jtkirby@mcs.com, kingv@ucs.orst.edu, KWELSS@us.oracle.com, loreleif@ix.netcom.com, Maureen.Wynn@mailgw.uprod.music.umich.edu, menikoff@panix.com, romana@ix.netcom.com, sss44@aol.com, vqrw76a@prodigy.com, westonk@uwwvax.uww.edu To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR In-Reply-To: Valerie Meachum "Re: Spoiler: Last Knight" (May 21, 9:51am) Content-Type: text Content-Length: 5660 Status: RO X-Status: Hi all! Back from my fantastic weekend in LA and meeting with a CBS executive who just happened to have worked on Forever Knight when it was at CBS. (WOW!) But I'll go into that more under another subject line. Jinkies, I just noticed a CC to fkspoiler. I believe this account is no-mail so I shouldn't bounce. Also, I haven't read everyone elses posts yet so forgive any duplications or the fact that you'll probably see many replies from me as the day goes on. So my Last Knight post! Well, basically, I've been quite pragmatic about the whole cancellation. That's the way it goes. I accepted it a long time ago and was done with it. I did staunchly avoid the spoilers. Completely. And I honestly thought throughout the ep that they were gonna pull the dream thing. I enjoyed the ep (for the most part) but did note some problems. The only thing that got an emotional rise out of me. Tracy dying. I didn't expect it and was shocked by it. I've been a Tracy fan from the begining. And I think Tracy had the best death scene of the season (and there have been quite a few). "You could have trusted me." Wow! Karin and I rewatched it last night. And I realized that Tracy has done exactlly what she was supposed to do. She's been learning from her more experienced partner. The stupid move of sneaking off without telling anyone....Hey, htis is a Nick move. She's always approached her work recklessly; just like her partner. Unfortunately, the one piece of info that she didn't have was that her partner could afford to be reckless....he lives through bullet wounds. I don't know if I should explain my ability to have the kind of major problems with an ep of FK and still enjoy it. (It's also part of the reason that I give the show a simple pass/fail scoring system.) I honestly don't think the show is terrifically written. The number of mostly solid eps is really low (IMHO). So I have always approached it in a 'lets just enjoy it' attitude. If I scream at the screen or get angry - which Karin has witnessed on a *very* few occasions - then the ep gets a fail. So basically, I enjoyed the ep yet found some serious character problems. Particularly with Natalie. I didn't buy her motivation for asking Nick to bring her across for one second. Natalie has always been the type of character that would get angry with a friend who commited suicide. She would *not* consider herself to be on that road. "There but for the grace..." maybe but not that's gonna be me if I don't do something. Then with Nick... his winging and guilt after Tracy got shot fine; his considering bringing her across...fine...she was dying and he knew it. I do not under any circumstances by his taking the chance with Nat. No way. Uh huh. Nada! This next may be more with the Ger's direction than anything else but it stopped me cold when I was watching. (Mind you this was 1 am in LA and I was exhausted...) That being the biting scene. There are two occasions where a vampire bites...eating and sex. (Yes, I know this is FK and the word canon doesn't exist, but I've never seen any other occasion of biting.) The whole point of this scene was that Nat and Nick would have sex and see if the act could make him mortal. WELL, WHEN THE HELL DID THEY HAVE SEX!! That was just down right damn wrong. Nick fed off her. He wasn't even trying. I would have been able to believe the "I couldn't stop myself" excuse if Nick had been in the throes of passion when he drained her but he wasn't. (And come on guys....don't you think Natalie deserved at least that much?) One other thing I had a problem with was Nick's complete depression when Tracy died. (my only true regret) I know he'd be upset but it was like his character took a great leap back in time. He has changed over the course of the show. Grown and grown closer to his humanity (I think that's part of why he was able to be so magnamious to LaCroix in Ashes to Ashes). I think he understands more and I think he's backed off of some of his need to make himself completely guilty for everything that happens in the world. All right if he was trying to make himself guilty but I think the Nick of the last 20 episodes would have seen the truth in Reese's words; that it wasn't his fault and gotten over it. I loved the ambiguity of the final scene. They left themselves the opening for an (ack) resurrection. :-) Also, Judith asked me if I thougt the bullets that hit Tracy went through Nick. After watching again, I still say no. There were a few shots fired after Nick grabbed the shooter. His arm was free of Nick. And it looked like Tracy didn't get hit til after Nick started playing witht he rag doll. But hey, Tracy stepped out in the open after Nick had she situation under control. She knew the guy was very unstable and she should have, at the very least waited til Nick had the gun and preferably waited for him to get the cuffs on the guy. So in short the only thing that angered me was the fact that Natalie didn't get her some before she "died" (the implication is that she definately _not_ too far gone for *something* to be done and Nick's decision is to *let* her die.). Other than that....No, I don't feel betrayed or angry. I thought it was a fitting way to end the show. (Although, my personal preference would be for Nick to realize a few things about how far he's come. I didn't vote for him to become mortal. My vote is that he accept a few things about himself; become okay with who and what he is. In my mind that doesn't mean he has to give up his quest tho.) So that's mine. On to reading other posts. And I'll probably post a restrspective post (like Karin's) in a bit. -- Jennise From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 17:13 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id RAA20136 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 17:13:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id BC1A0AB8 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 17:08:18 -0400 Message-Id: <199605222113.RAA20136@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 16:28:31 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Sandra Gray Subject: SPOILERS: Last Knight (ep 22) LaCroix To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 849 Status: RO X-Status: I was in the middle of writing a private message to someone when I realized that what I was writing might be of interest to the list, to wit: What is strange to me is that people accepted all the "insight" into LC's character (with the drastic change in how he's viewed) in AtA, but yet no one seems to think that LC learned nothing about himself that would allow him to understand Nick's pain enough to let him go by killing him. No one seems to consider any possibility that what happened with Divia in AtA had its own emotional effect on LC so that *his* judgment might have been "off" for emotional reasons. LC was packing and getting ready to leave Toronto. Was it because he didn't want to be reminded of Divia's death? In short, was he running away from his own pain? --Sandra Gray, forever Knightie --tmp_harkins@dirac.physics.jmu.edu From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 17:44 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id RAA26631 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 17:44:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 3CA295B3 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 17:40:31 -0400 Message-Id: <199605222144.RAA26631@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 16:35:24 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Sandra Gray Subject: Re: SPOILERS: Last Knight (ep 22) LaCroix READ THIS FIRST To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 392 Status: RO X-Status: I realized after I had posted my post, "SPOILERS: Last Knight (ep 22) LaCroix" that I had referenced Ashes to Ashes in it without mentioning there were spoilers for AtA in the subject line. Sorry about that. If you haven't seen AtA and don't want to read spoilers about it, don't read the post with the above named title. --Sandra Gray, forever Knightie --tmp_harkins@dirac.physics.jmu.edu From soulseek@sprynet.com Wed May 22 17:48 EDT 1996 Received: from m2.sprynet.com (m2.sprynet.com [165.121.1.99]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id RAA27528 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 17:48:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [199.174.144.59] (dd02-059.compuserve.com [199.174.144.59]) by m2.sprynet.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA16408; Wed, 22 May 1996 14:45:59 -0700 From: soulseek@sprynet.com Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 14:45:59 -0700 Message-Id: <199605222145.OAA16408@m2.sprynet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: N&N Loop (Last Knight Spoiler) To: asnelson@indiana.edu, acapozzi@wellesley.edu, AMORG@aol.com, egardner@facstaff.wisc.edu, CKrumtum@gnn.com, jclemens@world.std.com, bonney@interpath.com, Claudius@NETRIDE.COM, criss@marlboro.edu, fiorini@MARYWOOD1.MARYWOOD.EDU, dgthomas@ix.netcom.com, phase3@gate.net, dottir@wsii.com, efriedm1@mailhost.tcs.tulane.edu, gmccree@cms.cc.wayne.edu, ILCzJules@aol.com, jasonl@cnwl.igs.net, shalott@chattanooga.net, dukarsja@udmercy.edu, RICHARD@iclnet.co.uk, jtfolden@erinet.com, Baigneuse@aol.com, lplummer@interlink.com, LoriArgyll@aol.com, lydiam@singnet.com.sg, d_Roberts@msn.com, moser@clark.net, catspaw@cruzio.com, rfulton@directnet.net, swells@phoenix.atticus.com, TGill10669@aol.com, valworth@aol.com X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.10.06.22 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Length: 479 Status: RO X-Status: <---- Begin Forwarded Message ----> From: "Rachel Fulton" To: soulseek@sprynet.com Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 10:57:12 +0000 Subject: Re: N&N Loop (Last Knight Spoiler) Vicky and other N and N's, Thank you for your solution to the ending of LK..... I feel much better already! Phew! I don't think that I could have handled it otherwise=) To all of you, thank you for your outlook and support!! Sincerely, Jeanette <---- End Forwarded Message ----> From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 17:50 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id RAA28095 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 17:50:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id AD495B15 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 17:50:50 -0400 Message-Id: <199605222150.RAA28095@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 15:22:39 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: John & Donna Spert Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight (Natalie's Top Ten) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 706 Status: RO X-Status: By request, here's Nat's chance at a Last Knight Top Ten: John Ten Things Natalie might think after Nick was done: 10) Did anyone get the license number of that truck? 9) Eww, gross. His breath smells like a dead cow. 8) Maybe that chemical cure wasn't so bad after all. 7) Damn it, Nick. I'm a doctor, not a fast food joint. 6) I never suspected Nick suffered from premature exsanguination. 5) So Nick, was it good for you? 4) Roger Jameson... Nick Knight... Boyfriends to die for. 3) No more boyfriends. I'm gonna buy me a dog. 2) Hand me that stake, LaCroix. I've got dibs. And the number one thing Nat might think after Nick was done: 1) Why am I so *hungry* all of a sudden? From kpi@Access.Mountain.Net Wed May 22 19:14 EDT 1996 Received: from Access.Mountain.Net (kpi@Access.Mountain.Net [198.77.1.3]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with SMTP id TAA14506 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 19:14:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from kpi@localhost) by Access.Mountain.Net (8.6.12/8.6.9) id TAA25546; Wed, 22 May 1996 19:14:08 -0400 Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 19:14:08 -0400 (EDT) From: "Jennifer L. Gosley" To: Melanie Moser Subject: Re: FK Last Knight Chat Log 5/18 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Length: 42 Status: RO X-Status: Thanks. The Chat Log made it fine. Jen From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 20:48 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id UAA05073 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 20:48:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 85118BC6 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 20:48:40 -0400 Message-Id: <199605230048.UAA05073@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 18:06:44 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Robbi Egersdorf Subject: SPOILER:Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 681 Status: RO X-Status: -- [ From: Robbi Egersdorf * EMC.Ver #2.5.02 ] -- Since we are talking about symbolism and I have not seen this mentioned,yet. In the morgue scene, Nick and Nat are saying some pretty intimate, personal things to each other. It hits me as strange that they stood with death between them the whole time. Neither crossed over to the other's side, nor could they. I have never witnessed a scene in all of Forever Knight where the characters didn't change their location in relation to the others and change frequently. I've seen it 7 times now and counting. Still can't get through it without breaking up at the end. Robbi Knightie Long Live the Knight egersdor@magiclink.com From owner-forkni-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 22:42 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id WAA27868 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 22:42:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 62EF4969 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 22:42:14 -0400 Message-Id: <199605230242.WAA27868@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 22:23:14 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show Sender: Forever Knight TV show From: Melanie Moser Subject: "Last Knight" Fan Fiction WWW Page To: Multiple recipients of list FORKNI-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 777 Status: RO X-Status: Whew! With a spurt of insanity and devotion, I've added a Web page for all of the "Last Knight"-related stories that I've received from FKFIC-L up to this point in time (I hope). Oh yeah, all of these stories can automatically be assumed to contain spoilers for Last Knight, and some of the other 3rd Season episodes as well. This page can be found off of my FK Fan Fiction site, URL listed in my sig below. I did this in a hurry, so please pass along any corrections, suggestions, questions, comments, flames, and dedications (look on the page for this) to me via email. Thanks! Off to take a long needed Diet Coke break (where's Lucky?), Mel Moser N&NPacker, moser@clark.net Check out my Forever Knight Fan Fiction page at: http://www.clark.net/pub/moser/fkfanfic.htm From owner-forkni-l@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 23:42 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id XAA08192 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 23:42:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id A9507041 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 23:41:28 -0400 Message-Id: <199605230342.XAA08192@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 23:31:27 EDT Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show Sender: Forever Knight TV show From: Ian Curtis <102425.1537@COMPUSERVE.COM> Subject: Re: the dead...*SPOILER* To: Multiple recipients of list FORKNI-L Content-Type: text Content-Length: 606 Status: RO X-Status: S P O I L E R S P A C E The thing is, they still haven't finalized a deal for the movie yet, which most likely means that one of the ingenious ways of continuing where LK left off will be used. the way that they ended it off, they intentionally left a LOOOOT of loose ends, because of the movie. for all we know, Nat might have been brought across, Nick might be human, LaCroix's eyebrows might have become normal, who knows? -- Ian Curtis Malkavian Monitor of Toronto, with slight merc leanings (heh..) "Truth? What the heck is that, something you eat?" From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Thu May 23 03:51 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id DAA02742 for ; Thu, 23 May 1996 03:51:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 9F6E908D ; Thu, 23 May 1996 3:51:44 -0400 Message-Id: <199605230751.DAA02742@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 03:46:45 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Diane Shea Subject: Spoiler:LK;Damned? Not IMO To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 3341 Status: RO X-Status: Finally getting around to reading the digests. Ah well, I knew a Cousin and a Knightie could never agree for long:) Sandra writes in regards to LaCroix's possible staking of Nick; >>I hope LC saw in that moment how responsible he has been for Nick's agony over the centuries, how much his selfishness contributed to Nick's wish not to go on anymore. I hope LC spends a millenium of suffering without Nick and when LC experiences his own true death, he will *rot in hell*.<< Sheesh! Methinks you have not learned the lessons that have been given us in this whole story. Forgiveness! LaCroix had a lot to be personally responsible for. Nick forgave LaCroix. Nick had a lot to be personally responsible for, (just take the basement scene in Fallen Idol.) I like to think that Nick's God forgave Nick after his attoneing period. >>Understanding of LC's viewpoint, his need for Nick, his love of Nick, *does not* im my mind excuse the way he treated Nick for so many centuries.<< Well to me it does excuse him to some degree. One grain of light shinning in the evil sands can sometimes make a great difference, perhaps more of a triumph on the side of love and kindness than a whole desert full of goodness. But hey, what do I really care. I love Nick. I love him in the way LaCroix loved him. If not for his quest then for his passionate emotions. If you take it that Nick is dead by LaCroix's hand then to me LaCroix made the ultimate sacrifice. He's on the road to understanding, and perhaps redemption, (not that he would care,) just like Nick began along that road after he killed the dancer, after he realized that killing whores was a sin too. Well if Sandra's fears are actually realized and Nick was never forgiven by any higher power as FK sometimes implies, if Vachon, Screed (see you in hell sailors), Urs (another doomed to damnation vampire), and of course someday LaCroix (because he sure isn't going to be redeemed with just two episodes nosiree!) then there must one *hell* of a hot party going on in Hell at the moment and I wouldn't mind being there. To bad for Nat, Tracy, Schanke, etc, all those doomed to a boring life in heaven eh? Just one agnostic's take on the whole damned problem. >>My apologies if anything I've posted about LK has offended any listmembers.<< My apologies if I will voice my offense, instead of forgiving you for being emotional. :)) It's two a.m. and I'm as pissed at the moment as everyone else is, but for the opposite reasons. Of course now that Laurie has explained what was indended in the script as far as the Distorted scenes, I suppose I am no longer confused. My only bit of happiness has been squashed for good, but that's ok. Cousinly mode on:(and at it's strongest, most arrogant setting) I have tried to be fair, to be hopeful, to be forgiving, but I'm just too tired at the moment. The only thing that I can be sure of in the end of LK is that LaCroix is alive! Ha ha! hahaha. *And* Janette is still out there somewhere too. So...the Knighties, NandNpackers, Perkulators, Vaqueras, ec set ter ra, can fight out the ending amongst themselves. The Cousins, Light Cousins, and Seducers will just rejoice and be happy. It's our night to shine. --Cousin Diane LaCroix is alive, there is hope for everyone if you believe in it. The Truly Eternal Seducer From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Thu May 23 07:14 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id HAA18248 for ; Thu, 23 May 1996 07:14:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id B7421DA0 ; Thu, 23 May 1996 7:12:50 -0400 Message-Id: <199605231114.HAA18248@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 06:56:19 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Janette Z Subject: Re: Spoilers:LK,AtA; LaCroix To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1123 Status: RO X-Status: In a message dated 96-05-22 21:03:20 EDT, you write: >When vampires are disturbed by something, they leave that something (or try >to at least:) With the possible exception of Nick, of course!!! (Sorry, I've just been so quiet lately I'm starting to feel like a Lurker and I simply HAD to make SOME pointless post, and this was it!!!) Let's see if I can find SOME point to make.... hmm.... um..... a point, huh...... I wish this episode had never happened!!! I didn't watch it till 2 days after I taped it, and I regretted it! It's a good ep, (hey it has to be Natalie dies!!!) but I rather wish it had come at the end of a 4th, 5th, or 6th season. (Though I'm sure I'd be JUST as upset then, at least I'd have more to re-watch) Which reminds me, (Look at all these points I'm coming up with!) what ep was that scene from when Nick woke up on the bed and did that really chessy "something very different than you" scene. (Why am I glad I missed that episode :-) Seducer, Cousin, Ravenette, Immortal Beloved (ish), Un- named Faction, CO-CFW for Evil MacLeod and Evil Tessa, Richie Reservist -- Janette92@aol.com From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Thu May 23 08:55 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id IAA02722 for ; Thu, 23 May 1996 08:55:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id FAAD3D18 ; Thu, 23 May 1996 8:54:56 -0400 Message-Id: <199605231255.IAA02722@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 05:05:49 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: LG Soward Subject: Re: SPOILER: Last Knight - (One night or more?) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1058 Status: RO X-Status: At 01:45 AM 5/22/96 -0400, Apache wrote: > No kidding. Doesn't this all happen in one night -- the night of >Laura Haines' suicide? Actually, no it doesn't. I think that it's one night, up to the point where Tracy is shot. If you watch, you'll notice that up to that point Nick is wearing a shirt with buttons. In the next scene, with Nick and Tracy at the hospital, his shirt had changed. So it would be safe to assume that at least a day has passed. Besides, if Tracy received her lidocane at 11:45pm (Re: Amy Rambow), then is it possible for the following to have happened in the six hours before dawn? Even allowing for the possibility that Tracy had the world's fastest surgeons on call that night. 1.) Paramedics to get Tracy to the hospital 2.) Tracy has surgery on TWO major wounds (head and abdominal) 3.) Nick attempts to bring Tracy across and is stopped by Natalie 4.) Nick goes to see LaCroix 5.) Nick is driving and realizes that the Nightcrawler show is not on anymore 6.) Nick goes back to the loft. Lana lgs@Ix.netcom.com From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Thu May 23 09:13 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id JAA06559 for ; Thu, 23 May 1996 09:12:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 7DFC602B ; Thu, 23 May 1996 9:12:55 -0400 Message-Id: <199605231312.JAA06559@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 06:10:17 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Bonnie F Rutledge Subject: LK spoiler- why Lacroix... To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 3124 Status: RO X-Status: If the following is a repeat of anyone's ideas- sorry, I've been nomail. Just sit back and have a Tracy deja-vu stupor. Stuff about Last Knight follows... If you haven't seen it yet and don't want to be spoiled, don't PEEK! I saw a reference to a post concerning how Lacroix could kill/stake Nick at the end of Last Knight . I agree that the kinder, gentler, "I have guilt too" Lacroix that's been developing ever since BMV could have done it as an act of kindness, to spare Nick the grief and guilt over being responsible for Nat's death. After all, it's been reinterated how tormenting Lacroix has found losing Fleur... But I don't like thinking about any of those tender, mushy reasons. I squealed with glee at the flashback to the Joan of Arc eps. This was always one of my favorites because of the scenes of naughty Nick. When I first saw it, the thought became ingrained in my mind that this is the Nick Lacroix wanted at his side: the Nick who taunts saints, mocks their mortal idea of faith, and sneers at God. Of course, the flashbacks also have that reaching for the cross scene, a portent of angst to come. The idea of Lacroix only being satisfied with naughty Nick as a companion has persisted in my mind. We've been inundated with images of Nick regretting his actions, being guilty,sneering at Lacroix's behavior for three seasons, and Last Knight is no exception (except there wasn't much sneering going on). But Nick is guilt-ridden over Tracy, and exhibits the brickiest behavior to date towards Nat. He's totally J. Alfred Prufrock, he wants to be with Nat, but he can't risk feeding from her and he won't bring her across. After a couple of merry-go-rounds with Nat I was screaming "Just make a decision!!!! And stick to it!!!" But the point I'm working up to with these ramblings is why Lacroix staked Nick. At the end Nick tells Lacroix " You are my closest friend." LaCroix's won! He finally has Nick back at his side! But he hasn't won, really. Nick doesn't choose to be with Lacroix, he simply has nothing else left. Lacroix had to force the issue of leaving; when he informed Nick that he'd be at the loft later, he almost sounded threatening. I think that these images flashed through Lacroix's mind before he uttered "Damn you, Nicholas". This locale in their eternity may be ended, but there will be others, other disappointments, other guilts, just somewhere else. Lacroix has two choices: put up with the irritation Nick's conscience has provided for centuries for the rest of eternity, or make an executive decision and end it. Frankly, I could imagine Lacroix finally being fed up. So was the staking an act of anger or an act of love, or both? I don't know. This is just my muddled interpretation. I don't have to know what I'm talking about.( Do I?) ************************************************************************ Bonnie Rutledge br1035@ix.netcom.com " Sure, men make fools of women, women make fools of men, but 9 times out of 10 men make fools of themselves." - my Dad ************************************************************************ From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Thu May 23 09:26 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id JAA09272 for ; Thu, 23 May 1996 09:26:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 2C41B9FA ; Thu, 23 May 1996 9:24:57 -0400 Message-Id: <199605231326.JAA09272@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 09:22:16 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Lisa Prince Subject: Re: (LK Spoilers...sort of) Love Making Rules for Vampires/Mortals To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1935 Status: RO X-Status: The Other Lisa P. wrote: (Do you guys ever get the feeling that there are far to many Lisas around here :)): >On the OMNI chat last night I started a RULES FOR MAKING LOVE TO >VAMPIRES/MORTALS topic. Well, let's just say some of the >suggestions were very interesting. ;) I recalled a few additional ones so . . . so, here goes Top 10 Things To Remember For Mortals About to Be *Made Love* To (yeah, right :P) By A Vampire ------------------------------------------------------------------ #10 Remember to bring a stylish muzzle. #9 Fang Corks could come in very handy. #8 A quick slobber on the wrist does not equal foreplay. (800 years old and he hasn't learned yet, it truly boggles the mind) #7 Remind vampire (especially if named Nick) that foreplay is called foreplay because it's supposed to come *before* everything else! ;) #6 Force feed him lots of cow blood before hand. #5 Be prepared to be very pissed off because of the overwhelming flashbacks of previous lovers, wives, girlfriends, boyfriends, masters, victims, etc. etc. etc. #4 Steel collars are wonderful in preventing premature exsanguination. #3 Never, ever, ever, trust a vampire that hasn't had a *real good time* in over a year. #2 Explain that a bedroom and a bed is much preferable and more stylish than a living room and the floor, especially if one is wearing a very nice white pants suit. #1 If the guy's name is Nick -- be afraid, be *very* afraid. As the other Lisa mentioned, there was a group of about 13 of us coming up with these. I remember everyone who was there, but not who said what. Sorry :( We actually came up with a lot more of these, but I can't remember them at this moment. Lisa Mercenary**Cousin**Valentine**Vachon-ogler**QoE**MBDtK The Forgotten L -- Third over to the right -- Deserter of the Ls From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Thu May 23 22:23 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id WAA06962 for ; Thu, 23 May 1996 22:23:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 03EFADB5 ; Thu, 23 May 1996 22:09:46 -0400 Message-Id: <199605240223.WAA06962@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 15:39:57 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Robbi Egersdorf Subject: SPOILER: Last Knight To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2334 Status: RO X-Status: -- [ From: Robbi Egersdorf * EMC.Ver #2.5.02 ] -- I don't believe that I have ever seen an ep of FK that was so complicated (C&C is the closest) as Last Knight. I have never *consumed* any other piece of "entertainment" as this one. (Can we call it entertainment. To me it is so much more and the word falls far short of explaining what it is.) Follows if an observation: Last Knight is focused on and pervaded by death from the moment that we see the water running in the bath. There are four separate and distinct parts to this story: First - Life, speaking of how precious it is in the face of loss of that life. We see someone who has been in so much pain, that the only answer for them is death. Natalie's friend, Dr. Laura Haynes commits suicide and draws her into taking a close look at her own life and what is important to her. Second - Love, she faces that the great love of her life is Nicholas and how unattainable he is to her from where she stands. She makes a rash decision to force Nick to take their relationship to the next plane. Third - Guilt, Tracy is shot and will die soon. Nick sees himself as the cause. He carries the guilt of the death of many that he has been close to in the past and the depth of pain is difficult for another to imagine. Fourth - Moving on, Lacroix convinces Nick that the best solution is moving on. Moving had meant starting another life and leaving this one behind. Nick was unable at this point to accept and then decided maybe it would be best for all concerned if he did. With the fact that Natalie sacrificed herself, he could no longer live with the guilt of his life and decided the best way to move on would be for him to die. Now I want to focus on the scene where Natalie convinces Nick to try Janette's cure. Nick is brought to the point where he is no longer able to deny Natalie her request. It is very obvious to me that Natalie is terrified during the whole process, even before the fangs breach her flesh. Nick is terrified that he will take her life and so, fulfills his worst nightmare and takes to much. In this situation, IMHO there is no room for foreplay with the utter fear that was between the two lovers. (I've watched it 10 times now. Am I a glutton for punishment or what?) Robbi Knightie Long Live the Knight egersdor@magiclink.com From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Wed May 22 23:49 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id XAA09494 for ; Wed, 22 May 1996 23:49:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id A4D31B31 ; Wed, 22 May 1996 23:48:30 -0400 Message-Id: <199605230349.XAA09494@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 23:41:36 -0400 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Marcia Tucker Subject: LK SPOILERS / LOVE RULES from OMNI FK CHAT To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 3090 Status: RO X-Status: Additional warning besides the spoilers - ah, somewhat ADULT in content! Do we still need spoiler space?? The chatters who attended the Tuesday night OMNI Magazine Online Horror Chat in which the featured topic was "Forever Knight" ended up compiling quite a list of lovemaking rules that mortals and vampires might want to follow. Some of these might seem sacriligeous or like they're making fun/light of what we had to watch in "Last Knight", but I think this was a healthy way of working through our frustration and grief. Here we go! RULES FOR VAMPIRES PLANNING TO MAKE LOVE TO A MORTAL: 1. Don't kill 2. don't make major life changes when you're still dealing with other issues 3. Making love does not mean chow down before kissing 4. Run! (or rather fly in the opposite direction!) 5. hitting the bedroom instead of the floor. 6. clothing optional. 7. You better not be in love with them 8. THERE ARE NO RULES!!!! 9. hit the sheets, not the dirt! 10, No biting below the garter belt? ;) Actually, it should be, no biting ABOVE the garter belt. 11. There are nicer things to suck on than the neck... .I can't believe I said this 12. Think about baseball. 13. Urge becomes too great...the Bible is better than a cold shower 14. If you mess up, call your Uncle! (Well, gee, Nick does always seem to run to daddy for help..) In fact, whether you need help or not, let Uncle go first :) 15. If your name is Nick Knight, you'd better go back to rule 1 or stop now. 16. Tab "A" should . . . (you get the idea, right? :)) 17. And even if you don't need help, call Uncle anyway! 18. If you love something let it go. (forget the rest) *Before* draining it dry 19. Make sure you don't think about your former vampire lovers. (Especially if you plan on actually bringing the new love of your life across, otherwise you don't want to spend the first century apologizing for it and buying her gifts, but what the heck, if your name is Nick Knight you can afford that, right?) 20. And if you think of former vamp lovers, think quickly of SCHANKE IN A TUTU!!" If you're Nick...the above rules will self destruct in 5 seconds.... RULES FOR MORTALS PLANNING TO MAKE LOVE TO A VAMPIRE: 1. Make sure you get what you want before you let him near your neck 2. Be afraid, be very afraid. 3. If it goes for the wrist, it ain't going no further. 4. bring protection, a stake. 5. (paraphrase) Make him start at the big toe and work up, not the neck 6. Make sure it isn't Nick. 7. Make sure a medical swat team is standing by with lots of salsa picante 8. And if Uncle isn't there, time to panic! 9. Don't panic! Increase in heartbeats will only add to your dilemna 10. Flashbacks don't help. Rules edited a little and reorganized for numbering purposes. Thanks for contributions to the above from: CleopatraK, JudithF955, LadysAVamp, LisaLCroix, Penchk68, REGENTIC, TXMMC, VAL WORTH (and of course mine are in there, too!) Marcia Tucker ScFiMarci@aol.com Dark Knightie / Immortal Beloved / Unnamed "Their canon met my imagination and was outgunned." - (J.S.Levin/Stormsinger) From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Thu May 23 00:53 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id AAA03162 for ; Thu, 23 May 1996 00:52:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 805C02E6 ; Thu, 23 May 1996 0:51:55 -0400 Message-Id: <199605230452.AAA03162@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 23:03:02 -0700 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Lisa Marvin Subject: Re: spoiler-lk To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1094 Status: RO X-Status: linda c. fried wrote: my apologies to everyone at the denver party that were so > upset over tracey- i'm glad she's gone! still! she gave blondes a bad > name. i admit i clapped and laughed with glee. she can't even die > right, that hokey head wound-a huge exit wound and no enterance wound. > what bull! Hi Linda! No need to apologize - the party was a lot of fun and we had a good time, in spite of being together to watch the "dying of the (k)night" ! Crummy reason for a party - let's do another get together over the summer and watch our favorite old episodes where everybody is still alive! I thought Tracy did a good job of dying in her scene, in spite of the head wound thing that no one can exactly figure out. I'm a Nick&NatPacker myself, so my only thought about Tracy is that I wish she could have found out about Nick being a vampire _before_ she bit the dust. There would have been some interesting story material in that. I'm still trying to decide what I think about the end. Can't comment until I have time to watch it again. Thanks for coming to the party! Lisa M. From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Thu May 23 13:24 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id NAA08613 for ; Thu, 23 May 1996 13:24:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id BB9E48A9 ; Thu, 23 May 1996 12:06:27 -0400 Message-Id: <199605231724.NAA08613@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 08:40:57 PDT Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: "Leslie I.Plummer" Subject: A new theory! (LK spoilers) To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 854 Status: RO X-Status: S P O I L E R S P A C E Tippy wrote about a new theory... >Anyway, so I'm going to think of LK as the 1st ep of the 4th season >that we just haven't gotten yet. YO, TIPPI!! I LIKE this explanation, and all of us will have BB1 & BB2 to watch in the coming weeks to add to your already-wonderful list! I'd even suggest a new faction/reality for this! It makes such good sense! We didn't see the end of the show & third season. Those who love us (in the PTB & there was at least ONE who made a call @2am), love us SOOOOOO much that they snuck in the first ep of the next season/movie/etc for our viewing delight! YES!!!!! (my sig DOES warn that I'm fiercely optimistic, right?) Yours in cheesiness... Leslie ***FOREVER MEANS...FOREVER!!!*** N&NPacker/eternal Knightie... Wildly Romantic & Fiercely Optimistic An FK Movie(s) sort of gal From owner-fkspoilr@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Thu May 23 18:11 EDT 1996 Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by mail.Clark.Net (8.7.3/8.6.5) with ESMTP id SAA17480 for ; Thu, 23 May 1996 18:11:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 6C743EBF ; Thu, 23 May 1996 18:02:09 -0400 Message-Id: <199605232211.SAA17480@mail.Clark.Net> Date: Thu, 23 May 1996 16:25:46 -0500 Reply-To: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List Sender: Forever Knight TV show - Spoiler Topic List From: Margie Hammet Subject: Re: SPOILER: LK, AtA, Downloading Nick's Brain To: Multiple recipients of list FKSPOILR Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2758 Status: RO X-Status: lucienlc wrote: >The way the script presents it ... The speech in the tag >is merely an edited version of what LC actually says, >**NICK: I have that faith, too. >