FORKNI-L
Logfile LOG9606A Part 4
June 3, 1996
File: "FORKNI-L LOG9606A" Part 4
TOPICS:
Starlog Article
Blood Money (was Re: Name Questions)
Nat Pack Birthdays (2)
Morality and Vampires (3)
San Francisco in October? (2)
Bad Blood - a question... (4)
Funny stuff and vacation
*sigh*
Calling All Mercs!
Nick and the Unnameds (2)
ASSORTED TOPICS
for Western USA Sat FK/Weird Science
Last Act and DoN
LaCroix's Personality
SFC's Schulman; Outer Limits & GWD
Vampires and incest
Fred Mollin Interview
FK ratings on SciFi????
Hair, again
Signing Off
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 11:53:09 -0400
From: "M. Vrzoc" <vrzoc@s.......>
Subject: Re: Starlog Article
On Mon, 3 Jun 1996, Lisa Marvin wrote:
> Here's another thing that kills me. I obtained a copy of the August
> 1996 Starlog Yearbook, which has interviews with many actors from
> movies that have been released recently. Among these are 2 interviews
> from Forever Knight, one with Ger and the other with Catherine Disher.
> (Neither interview article mentions anything about the show's
> cancellation.) It was great to have the FK interviews right in there
> with the rest of them, but it bugged me that FK is good enough to be
> included in a magazine with the rest of them, but not good enough to
> continue into a 4th season.
Lisa, regarding the absence of the cancellation information in the
articles, if you read Ger's interview carefully you will note that he
discusses having recently directed Baby, Baby. These articles are NOT
current. Starlog interviewed these people at least a year ago. I'd be
surprised if they didn't just include Ger and Catherine as filler with
material they already had. The pictures are first season by the way (more
than 2 years old).
So, I really don't feel that the magazine considers them in particular
high regard, unfortunately.
By the way, the interviews with Kevin Sorbo, Lucy Lawless and Bruce
Boxleitner were also out of date.
M. Vrzoc (vrzoc@u.......) | Just a little off the top!
| -- A. Boleyn
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 09:48:44 -0700
From: Marg Rothschild <margr@a.......>
Subject: Re: Blood Money (was Re: Name Questions)
On Fri, 31 May 1996, John & Donna Spert wrote:
> Whoops. I got the names from the episode guide and misunderstood who was
> who. The vampire gardener was a neat character.
Mr. Walken is the name of the guy who put the pressure on Sean.
> But was he an involuntary embezzler? The sequence of events is:
Yes, I think he did it involuntarily because Walken told Sean that he
set him up to make it look like he killed his father - therefore, he was
forcing Sean to embezzle *all* of the money, including the DeBrabant
foundation. I believe this is the conversation that Nick 'listens' in on.
> I think the police got distracted by the murder and didn't realize that
> the pattern in which the money disappeared supports Sean being a
> voluntary embezzler.
Nah, remember that Schanke still kept trying to point the finger at Sean
whereas Nick was trying to prove his innocence.
> which the police didn't hear (like we did), he may well have been in on
> the murder as well. but the crook blew the blackmail end so that it
> looked like a frame-up instead of a threat to expose Sean's part in it.
Sean wasn't in on the murder - Walken set up the whole thing because Sean
owed him a large sum of money and Walken obviously knew that Sean was
connected to a lot of money via his father - remember Nick explains the
warning as something like "we killed your father; pay up or we'll kill you
too."
Marg Rothschild, Cousin/Dark Knightie/UF/FFFROGie: margr@i.......
AZ Crusaders of the Knight -
It's a private club, for VIPS and denizens of the night. - Nick Knight
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 12:48:17 -0400
From: "Susan M. Garrett" <susang@v.......>
Subject: Nat Pack Birthdays
May I announce that we are in the midst of Nat-Pack birthday months!
Sharon Himmanen's birthday is today (romana@i.......) and Jennie Hayes
birthday is tomorrow (Finabair@a.......). So wish them each a buen natal.
OBFK: In OTL, Nick wakes up on Nat's table on her birthday. The calendar on
the lab wall says JUNE. So why is it, when they finally get down to
continuity in the last couple eps (no spoilers please), that they get THIS
wrong?
Regards
susang@v....... -- http://www.vitinc.com/~susang
Faithful Ravenette, because somebody STILL has to.
"This is the Hour of Lead; Remembered, if outlived--
like Freezing persons recollects the snow--
first the chill--then stupor--and then the letting go."
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 09:54:08 -0700
From: Amy R. <akr@n.......>
Subject: Morality and Vampires
(Life on digest continues....)
Some people have turned to the violent aspects of vampire behavior to
justify what others have seen as the incestual aspect of what yet others
see as the erotic level of Nick and LC's relationship.
(How's that for treading carefully?)
IMHO, (and, I believe, Nick's NSHO, which is what makes this relevant)
that argument is flawed. One can't be justified by the other, because both
behaviors are immoral. Nick has rejected the normal behavior of other
vampires -- killing, drinking human blood -- because he believes them
immoral. And LC is Nick's master. Nick is of his blood, and he is in
Nick's mind in a profound way. If he were to actively presume upon that
bond, it would be, I believe, incestuous and immoral. However, I don't
believe he has ever used that bond in that way with his children, which is
why I don't believe his relationship with Nick has ever progressed in that
direction.
My point is that, in Nick's case, you can't justify one aspect of vampire
behavior with another, because he rejects them all. And you can't justify
vampire behavior to all listmembers, because some of us reject it all,
too. That's why I root for Nick. :-)
*** Amy, Lady of the Knight (akr@n.......) ***
** Knightie *** Light Cousin *** Fleur-Booster **
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 12:02:29 -0500
From: April Ruskin <aruskin@e.......>
Subject: Re: San Francisco in October?
Ron the Enforcer asked:
> Is there an FK Con in San Francisco in October????
> If so, when and where???
Yep, It's called Bridging the Knight. I'll be glad to send you or anyone
else who wants the information.
It's from Oct. 19-20, and guests include Nigel Bennett, P.N. Elrod, and
Gillian Horvath.
Yep, I'm going...
--
April Ruskin -- The NinjaBabe w/ an Attitude * aruskin@e.......
Cousin with tendencies to Knightiehood (HELP!!!!) and other factions *
SKLer * CSS * UFer * Cousin Mommy to the Cousin Kids * Follower of the X *
Empress of the Ellipses * Member of LK Denial Faction * We are the Forever
Knights who say 'NI!' Bring us a shrubbery! (As told by Ithildin)
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 13:11:10 -0400
From: Melissa Carothers <Khayman32@a.......>
Subject: Re: Bad Blood - a question...
Kathy,
Hi, the English inspector's name in the Bad Blood episode was O'Neil. I'm
not sure of the actor's name though.
~ Melissa
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 12:13:02 -0500
From: Sarah Welsh <welshkin@d.......>
Subject: Re: Nat Pack Birthdays
On Mon, 3 Jun 1996, Susan M. Garrett wrote:
> OBFK: In OTL, Nick wakes up on Nat's table on her birthday. The calendar on
> the lab wall says JUNE. So why is it, when they finally get down to
> continuity in the last couple eps (no spoilers please), that they get THIS
> wrong?
Four rationalizations to follow:
1) Um, cause it wasn't a current calendar, they just liked the picture so
they left it up. (Of course, I haven't rewatched OtL recently to even
know if the calendar *has* a picture -- probably not, huh?)
2) We know how crazy that there coroner's office gets. Maybe they just
forgot to change the calendar for ten months....
3) If it *was* April, we know how crazy that there coroner's office
gets. Maybe changing the calendar was an elaborate April Fool's joke on
one of the staff ("Hey, let's make Victor think he's crazy. We'll keep
acting like it's the first of June instead of the first of April.") and
they never got around to changing it back for a couple of weeks.
4) We know Nat was working on her birthday. Maybe her vacation started
in June, and she or Grace flipped ahead in the calendar to give her
something to look forward to.
I'm sure we can come up with more. How many mistakes have they made in
continuity so far that we've rationalized in one way or another?
Granted, we don't usually *agree* on one rationalization or another, but
we certainly have no problem coming up with possibilities.
That said, happy birthday, Sharon and Jennie!!!!
Sarah
welshkin@d.......
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 13:51:10 -0400
From: Melissa Carothers <Khayman32@a.......>
Subject: Re: Bad Blood - a question...
Whoops! I meant Irish, not English... Sorry...
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 11:11:41 -0700
From: Marg Rothschild <margr@a.......>
Subject: Funny stuff and vacation
Greetings, all!
I tuned into High Tide last night - that's the show with Rick Springfield
as a 'surfer dude.' Anyway, he plays a guy named Mick and this old childhood
friend pays him and his brother $1000 to watch her while she sleeps
because she thinks she's a werewolf. Funny, I thought to myself - he
shouldn't find this too odd since he was a vampire in another 'incarnation.'
Was a bit sappy of a show and didn't finish watching :P
ObFK: Did you see this cartoon in your newspaper? Advice for LC, maybe?
It's a "Crabby Road" cartoon with the lady sitting there, walkman on,
drink in hand, and her dog standing with a balloon. The caption says:
"If you're wearing a thong anywhere but on your feet, there's been a
terrible mistake.
Vacation:
I'll be flying out to New Orleans tomorrow for a one week vacation and
will be setting to 'nomail.' I'll miss you all! <already going through
net withdraws!>
TTFN,
Marg Rothschild, Cousin/Dark Knightie/UF/FFFROGie: margr@i.......
AZ Crusaders of the Knight -
It's a private club, for VIPS and denizens of the night. - Nick Knight
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 14:21:05 -0400
From: Melissa Taylor <cn1015@c.......>
Subject: *sigh*
This is just NOT my $%#@& week.
For those of you on the FKFIC list, I've just posted a story entitled "Leap
of Faith" for a friend. It's just dropped into my mailbox, and lo and
behold, the line length is completely screwed up. I have no idea what
happened, but I do apologize for the ungainly appearance. Please do not
snarl at Annie Reed, the talented author of the piece---she is not at fault
here. If you feel the need to snarl at someone, by all means, snarl at me
at cn1015@c........
Thanks,
Melissa Taylor
cn1015@c.......
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 11:30:18 -0700
From: Dianne Therese De Sha <maeve@g.......>
Subject: Calling All Mercs!
Now is the time for all good Mercs to come to the
aid of their Guild...
If you're a Merc and not on the official loop (i.e.
have not been getting mucho mail in the past few days--
we have bad addreses for some folks), let me know and
join up now.
We're currently in the middle of elections-- if you
already officially joined and just got loop-lost,
you've still got 36 hours to vote.
*Back to your regularly scheduled FK madness...*
Dianne
Candidate for Grand High Poohbah, Currently Running Unopposed
(be afraid... be very afraid! <veg>)
Dianne la Mercenaire... -*- <cat.goddess@p.......>
-*-"We must be powerful, beautiful, and without regret."-*-
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 11:40:22 -0700
From: Kira Chistiakoff <kira@a.......>
Subject: Re: Bad Blood - a question...
>Hi, the English inspector's name in the Bad Blood episode was O'Neil. I'm
>not sure of the actor's name though.
Wasn't that Cedric...Cath's husband?
wait, wait...lemme check ( ijust watched that ep for the first time last night)
yup...Cedric Smith
Kira- Member of The Cold Shower Sisterhood-<kira@a.......>
Vaquera--Merc
"Could it be you feel compelled to suspend disbelief?"--SoB
"You cannot deny..." You wanna bet?
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 15:07:16 -0500
From: Sandra Gray <TMP_HARKINS@d.......>
Subject: Re: Nick and the Unnameds
Amy R. writes:
>There is a certain underlying tension between them on that level, but
>it has been noted before that it comes almost entirely from LC. Nick
>is ostentatiously heterosexual.
Yes, I would also say that LC seems more erotically interested in Nick
than Nick seems to be in him. And I also agree that Nick is very
heterosexual.
However, given the depth of bonding between master and child that LC
and Nick have, and the nonverbal communication that appears to be
normal between them (LC often seems to be reading Nick's thoughts,
even if the reverse isn't true), it is possible that Nick does have
some erotic feelings for LC that he normally squelches because such
feelings seem wrong to him. I would expect that the physical aspects
of vampire bonding may act to make the master vampire have a certain
"allure" to his child. I have a feeling I'm explaining myself badly
here. A certain desire on LC's part might be felt on some level by
Nick, and it may be one of the reasons that Nick has been on some level
always resistant to LC--because he resists the idea of the two of them
being "together". There is a lot of basic sensuality and eroticism in
vampirism anyway.
>I believe that any emphasis on the erotic aspect of the relationship
>is unfair to Nick unless it is done from LC's pov.
But there are *two* people involved here. You really can't explore
LC's pov without discussing Nick. And shouldn't the issue of Nick's
possible unwilling attraction to LC be examined? That would impact
on the "erotic aspect of the relationship" as well, I would think.
I think the idea of such a relationship repulses Nick, but I don't
think Nick is unaware that LC has that sort of interest in him, even
if the two of them have never been "together". Although it could be
possible that forced "togetherness" added to Nick's hatred of LC for
so many years. But even if the two of them haven't been "together"
in the show's reality, the erotic aspects of their relationship *do*
have some impact on how they relate to each other.
Donna Albrecht writes:
>There are some (including me) who are not comfortable with the
>incestuous aspect of what you are promoting...if Nick had shown a
>romantic interest in Vachon, that would have been different because
>incest would not have been implied.
What then of Nick's relationship with his vampire "sister", Janette?
In Partners of the Month, Janette was leaving Nick after, in her
words, a *97 year* relationship. Many flashbacks (and even present
day encounters) show them kissing (or more) in a romantic/sexual
fashion. Other times they seem like "family" in their relations.
But if LC is viewed as Nick's "father", making their relationship
"incestuous" if they are "together", then shouldn't Nick and Janette's
sexual closeness over the centuries be considering equally "incestuous"
since she is his "sister"?
LC is not Nick's *biological* father so how can a relationship between
them of a sexual nature be viewed as incest? Equally important is
that FK vampires apparently can not "reproduce" in the normal fashion
(although they can still *function* in a normal sexual manner
apparently), so there could not be any "offspring" with genetic
defects due to close family ties. And certainly not if the two
involved are both the same sex.
But why would Nick in a relationship with Vachon be more acceptable?
Just because it would not be "incest"? Physically, Nick and LC are
not related. Emotionally, the father/son aspect is certainly there,
but it's not *all* of the relationship (despite TPTB's determination
to emphasize that that's all there is to their relationship). This
emphasis on father/son to the exclusion of other aspects in the
relationship was the major reason I hated second season's Father's
Day.
I started watching FK in first season, and I think first season has
more "erotic" leanings in it. LC was *dead* for most of first season
so it was Nick's flashbacks where we saw LC. So Nick must have been
aware of this erotic element in their relationship. I think when TPTB
decided to bring LC back to life, they feared emphasizing the erotic
aspects more (it's one thing to do it with a character who's *dead*
as people can perhaps look on that as more reason for Nick to have
wanted LC out of his life, quite another thing to include that aspect
too visibly between two living characters).
Diane Echelbarger writes:
>Nick is far too obviously still a product of his 13th century Catholic
>upbringing, and because of that it's very unlikely he'd view the
>possibility of a homosexual relationship with *anyone* as anything
>but horrifying.
I think this argument is too simple. Surely there were people who
were brought up Catholic in Nick's time who were homosexual. Nick's
religion may have played a *part* in his attitude being basically
against homosexual relationships. But Nick has also struck me as
being a sensual, passionate, *physical* person. And if LC, through
knowledge acquired through their vampire bond, was able to play on
those aspects in Nick's nature, he might find a way under Nick's
normal emotional or moral defenses. LC can be very good at manipulating
Nick, or at making Nick doubt himself. I think he has also done a
good deal to emotionally and physically abuse Nick. Sexual abuse
might also have been a part of this. I guess what I mean to say is
that if LC and Nick were "together", it would have been something
forced by LC most likely. Does that mean Nick would have hated it?
Probably. Does that mean Nick could have found it interesting?
Possibly, which would have given him something else to feel guilty
or damned about.
IOW, I think the erotic aspects are there in the relationship between
LC and Nick. I have commented in reviews of episodes on erotic tones
when I've perceived them being there. However, I don't know that I
necessarily think that such aspects are any kind of evidence that
LC and Nick have engaged in sex with each other or if they have, it
would be an expression of *love* between them. I think it is more
likely that they *haven't* had sex with each other. But the undertone
of interest from LC is there, and that *has* to impact in some way on
their relationship. I think LC has emotional problems and would have
trouble in *any* relationship. I also don't think he would feel very
comfortable opening his thoughts to Nick (or anyone) which would be a
feature of a close sexual relationship because it would open him up
to possible manipulation (and we all know how LC always wants to be in
*control*).
All of the above are just my opinions, of course.
--Sandra Gray, forever Knightie
--tmp_harkins@d.......
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 15:25:50 -0500
From: Sandra Gray <TMP_HARKINS@d.......>
Subject: ASSORTED TOPICS
RE: LC offering blood to Nick: Outside of Killer Instinct, the
flashback of Trophy Girl may be what the original questions was
referring to. This is where LC has been "sweetening" a girl for
eventual feeding with honey and wine and Nick kills her. LC slams
Nick up against the wall and some of her blood trickles out of Nick's
mouth, which LC removes with his finger and (I think) tastes. He then
says something like "Intoxicating, wasn't she?" Imo, this scene had
erotic undertones.
RE: the loft address: 101 Gateway Lane (as stated in first season's
Father Figure)
RE: Avenging Angel: Yes, there is such an episode.
RE: the English inspector in Bad Blood: He was Irish and I think his
name was Liam O'Neill.
RE: LaCroix's sword pin: For much of second season, LC wore high-
necked black shirts with a small sword pin through the collar (or
maybe holding the neck of the shirt closed).
RE: FK music questions: As far as I know, Fred Mollin did *all* the
music on FK.
RE: fighting for a cancelled show:
Eileen Salmas wrote:
>Two words -- STAR TREK
Great example. ST came back first as theatrical movies with the
original cast some ten years after the original cancellation of the
show. Let's hope FK doesn't take that long to be revived and that
it comes back to TV first (I don't think I want to see a theatrical
movie myself). But the ST films paved the way for TNG, DS9, and VOY.
Even though I haven't found the subsequent TV series as interesting
as the original, many other people *have* loved them and the new
shows probably added many new fans to the ranks as well. ST now has
become perhaps too much of a *commerical* franchise, but that doesn't
necessarily have to happen to a revived FK (I would hope not, anyway).
RE: Nick and Janette:
Katherine Queen writes:
>Yes, she actually threw him away...What was her excuse...she couldn't
>handle the depth of his affection for her.
But one should remember Janette's background was that of a prostitute.
Maybe she felt she didn't deserve much love. Also necessary to consider
is the thought sharing that goes on between vampires who share blood.
It might be difficult to have so much of your inner self visible to
another in such a long standing relationship. Such intimate knowledge
of another could give the other person insights on what buttons to push
to get you to do things the way that person wants you to do. I think
Janette's words were that she felt "smothered". Maybe her fear was
that she was losing any capacity for independent thought.
Or Nick might have been trying to "mold her" in ways she didn't want.
--Sandra Gray, forever Knightie
--tmp_harkins@d.......
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 08:25:03 PDT
From: "Leslie I.Plummer" <lplummer@i.......>
Subject: Re: for Western USA Sat FK/Weird Science
Donna wrote:
>I just watched a FK parody on tonight Weird Science on USA. I'm on the
>East coast, so maybe you out West can still catch it.
DID YOU TAPE IT??? Love to see it. Anyone?
That may be one for the FK fan archives! A parody from another show. Wow!
That's recognition of the show, it's status, & the fans! Who's next?
Saturday Night Live? MadTV? We must keep our eyes open for references
& parodies. It's a complement & acknowledgement to OUR fan strength!
Remember how they kidded all the "trekkies" for years. And, now there's
7 movies (theatre movies at that!), 4 shows, a million cons, etc.!
We ARE forever!
Leslie
***FOREVER MEANS... FOREVER!!***
N&NPacker/Knightie... Fiercely Optimisitic & stubborn since birth
An FK (anything, whatever it takes) sort of gal
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 15:33:15 -0500
From: Sandra Gray <TMP_HARKINS@d.......>
Subject: Re: Last Act and DoN
Amy R. writes:
>Wasn't the reality of ghosts (in FK) established with LA, or has that
>also been taken as a projection of Nick's guilt-ridden subconscious?
Well, speaking just for myself, I thought Erica was a real ghost,
just as I thought the DoN ghosts were real.
>And Nick and Erica's relationship made me wonder how many vampire
>couples we've seen. Have there been any, other than Nick and Janette
>in PotM, who really committed to each other over a long period?
I don't recall any, unless one wants to assume that Vachon and Urs
were a couple for a while. Of course, it's Nick's life we mostly
follow in FK, so who knows? Personally, I would think that a lot of
vampires wouldn't want to have longstanding relationships because of
the depth of thought sharing that would be involved. There would be
a possibility of having no secrets eventually.
>What happened to that?
LC was brought back to "life" in second season.
--Sandra Gray, forever Knightie
--tmp_harkins@d.......
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 12:44:31 -0700
From: Angie <alasher@e.......>
Subject: Re: LaCroix's Personality
>Cousin J writes:
>I would appreciate any input from anyone out there as to what they think
> are some things that LC would never, ever do
1. Sit at the monkey house watching them *frolic*
2. Comment on the state of socio-economic growth and the effect on the
vampiric community
3. Drink salty Margaretta's with Fernando
4. Ride a ten speed in spandex (too bad on this one!)
5. Hang ten off the Santa Monica Pier
~~~~~~~~~~~Lasher~~~~~~~~~~~
~Bunny~Unnamed Faction~ MOO~
~~~~~~Cousins of the Knight~~~~~~
^^http://home.earthlink.net/~alasher^^
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 12:48:37 -0700
From: Angie <alasher@e.......>
Subject: Re: San Francisco in October?
> Is there an FK Con in San Francisco in October????
> If so, when and where???
> If I can scrape up the $, I'd *love* to go!
If there is one, I would also like to go, and car pool from LA. Anyone
interested, please drop me a line.
~~~~~~~~~~~Lasher~~~~~~~~~~~
~Bunny~Unnamed Faction~ MOO~
~~~~~~Cousins of the Knight~~~~~~
^^http://home.earthlink.net/~alasher^^
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 16:09:26 -0400
From: Allison Percy <percy91@w.......>
Subject: SFC's Schulman; Outer Limits & GWD
De-lurking to pass on the following info:
Anyone who's written to the Sci-Fi Channel to thank them for picking up
FK, and to encourage them to continue to support and promote the program,
probably knows that Our Friend at the Sci-Fi Channel is Barry Schulman,
the Vice President for Programming. Well now is your chance to see a very
brief (and unfortunately non-FK related) interview with Schulman on this
week's "c|net central," which is a television show about computers, the
internet, etc. He talks about the Sci-Fi Channel's foray into interactive
television. In the full interview available at c|net's web site (the URL
for the interview is given later), he talks a bit more about the Sci-Fi
Channel's connection to the internet and its web site,
<http://www.scifi.com>.
The brief snippet of the interview with Barry Schulman, including
a chance to see what Our Friend at the Sci-Fi Channel looks like,
is about 7 minutes into the broadcast. The last chance to see this
week's c|net central seems to be Monday night/Tuesday morning (that's
tonight!) at 1:00am Eastern and Pacific (I guess they have multiple
satellite feeds; check your local listings). If you live anywhere near
Barrie, Ontario, you can also get c|net central on CKVR at 8:00pm
tonight (Monday night).
c|net central has a *very useful* web site at <http://www.cnet.com>.
It's worth your time to explore around this site to find some useful
hints on everything from buying the right computer to finding cool new
web sites.
You can link to the complete interview with Schulman at:
http://www.cnet.com/Content/Tv/Stories/Scifi/index.html
Write to Mr. Schulman to thank him for the prime-time slot given to FK
on the SFC:
Barry Schulman, Vice President of Programming
USA Networks - The Sci-Fi Channel
1230 Avenue of The Americas Fl. 18
New York, NY 10020-1513
BTW, Showtime Online has finally put up the June schedule for "Outer
Limits." The address is <http://showtimeonline.com/ORIG/OUTER.CGI>.
The good news: Ger's episode of Outer Limits, "Paradise," will be
broadcast on Showtime on June 16 at 10:00 PM and on June 18 at 9:30 PM.
If you get Showtime, set your VCR!
The bad news: the Showtime Online site's description of this episode
doesn't mention Ger at all, nor does it contain any pictures of Ger.
Polite inquiries about this oversight should be directed to:
<talk2@showtimeonline.com>. Maybe he just has a walk-on. :^(
--Allison (percy91@w.......)
--.sig currently under renovation; please excuse the inconvenience
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 13:30:10 -0700
From: Raissa Devereux <1595@e.......>
Subject: Re: Bad Blood - a question...
The name of the inspector in Bad Blood is Liam O'neil, played by CD's
significant other Cedric Smith.
Until next time,
Raissa Devereux
raissa@i.......
I've got places to go, people to dissect.- Natalie Lambert
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 16:13:43 -0400
From: Loose Cannon <LoosCanN@a.......>
Subject: Vampires and incest
Donna Albrecht writes:
<<There are some (including me) who are not comfortable with the incestuous
aspect of what you are promoting. <snip> but I think that
encouraging people to see an "erotic aspect" to the parent/child relationship
is a bit much.>>
First, I don't think the Unnamed Faction is "promoting" an incestuous, erotic
relationship. <g> We see (and also realize that not everyone does) an
erotic tension in some of LaCroix and Nick's interactions. If you don't see
it, you don't see it, and we're not going to try to *make* you see it. We do
feel, however, we have as much right to express our observations as anyone
else on the list, as long as we keep them in the bounds of courtesy.
Personally, I don't feel you can apply mortal standards to vampiric
relationships. I would imagine many vampires bring over mortals to whom they
are physically attracted. That might even be the reason *why* they bring
them over, because they are attracted to/love them. Do we then assume
because of the "parent/child" relationship that now exists between the new
vampire and their maker, that this relationship becomes chaste? I don't
think so. <g> LaCroix and Janette were probably lovers after he brought her
across. I think he brought her over so they could *be* lovers. Was that
incest? If she were only his "daughter" in the mortal meaning of that word,
it would be. But vampiric relationships aren't that simple.
Incest is a taboo created, among other reasons, to protect young children
from inappropriate parental sexual impulses. I just don't think the mortal
taboo applies to vampires. The situations are too different. Most vampires
are adults when they are brought over, and many of those are probably not
"innocent". There are no biological repercussions, the vampire "child" is
(usually) not an actual child, and their maker, in all probability, brought
them over with the idea of a long-term lover/companion type relationship in
mind. And if the mortal has any say in the matter, I would imagine that is
what most of them are expecting as well. The vampiric parent/child
relationship *begins* from a whole different premise than the mortal one.
So, IMO, this particular issue doesn't apply to vampires. It just isn't
relevant.
Leslie GS -- UF
(LoosCanN@a.......)
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 15:35:12 -0500
From: Margie Hammet <treeleaf@i.......>
Subject: Re: Nick and the Unnameds
At 03:07 PM 6/3/96 -0500, Sandra Gray wrote:
>Emotionally, the father/son aspect is certainly there,
>but it's not *all* of the relationship (despite TPTB's determination
>to emphasize that that's all there is to their relationship).
I'm curious. What did TPTB say or do? Which PTB are you talking about?
Margie (treeleaf@i.......)
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 17:56:59 -0300
From: Stapleton <d7ux@u.......>
Subject: Fred Mollin Interview
Today I posted the interview I had with Fred Mollin onto the FKSPOILR
list, in two parts. I did this because in the interview he talks a fair
bit about the last few episodes.
If you are not subbed to FKSPOILR but still want the interview, you can
request it from the listserv index for FKSPOILR. As I have other files in
my system, I cannot keep the interview in my files. Hopefully it will be
available on a Web Page soon.
If you have any questions, please ask, and I'll do my best to answer them.
Lynn Stapleton
d7ux@u.......
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 14:26:23 -0700
From: Raissa Devereux <1595@e.......>
Subject: FK ratings on SciFi????
Hi guys,
Does anyone know what the ratings have been for FK on the SciFi Channel so
far?
Until next time,
Raissa Devereux
raissa@i.......
I've got places to go, people to dissect.- Natalie Lambert
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 16:27:08 -0500
From: TippiNB <Tippinb@i.......>
Subject: Re: Morality and Vampires
Amy wrote:
>My point is that, in Nick's case, you can't justify one aspect of vampire
>behavior with another, because he rejects them all. And you can't justify
>vampire behavior to all listmembers, because some of us reject it all,
>too. That's why I root for Nick. :-)
Nick rejects all vampire behavior? I haven't seem him reject flying, or the
ability to hypnotize, or the drinking of blood (albeit cow's blood), or
superstrength, or keen hearing...
Wicked Cousin Tippi (Tippinb@i.......)
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 16:26:57 -0500
From: Sarah Welsh <welshkin@d.......>
Subject: Re: Morality and Vampires
On Mon, 3 Jun 1996, TippiNB wrote:
> Nick rejects all vampire behavior? I haven't seem him reject flying, or the
> ability to hypnotize, or the drinking of blood (albeit cow's blood), or
> superstrength, or keen hearing...
Well, not recently. There used to be much more of a moral quandary about
such issues back in first season. The exchange between him and Nat in DK
over how he couldn't have caught the bad guys without using his vampire
abilities (in which it is made clear that this is viewed by both as a
*bad thing* for their quest); a near-constant crusade by Nat to keep Nick
from drinking much blood, even cow blood; Nick's own rejection of
blood-drinking in FtB; and (most interesting) the whole problem with Nick
hearing what was going on before he should have been able to as a mortal
in that episode whose name escapes me about the gangster-guy and the
dominatrix-type. (Someone with a better memory for titles help me out?)
Anyway, I think it was very clear in first season that Nick wanted to
avoid using all vampire abilities, although he rarely succeeded.
Unfortunately for continuity, by third season, there had been almost a
complete about-face on the show about such things, with Nick showing no
zeal for any part of his quest, excluding a bit of lip-service toward
mortality, and Natalie implicitly encouraging the use of his superhuman
abilities. The focus of the show shifted away from Nick and his desire
to become mortal again sometime after the first season to focus more on
the "cop aspects" and surrounding characters. I still enjoyed it, but it
did change the dynamics of the show and our perception of the characters
entirely.
Sarah
welshkin@d.......
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 18:21:17 -0400
From: Carolyn Brown <Carolyn772@a.......>
Subject: Hair, again
What color is Ger's hair in Real Life? In the show it appears to be
everything from dark blonde to purple <g>, depending on the lighting.
Carolyn
=========================================================================
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 18:42:42 -0400
From: Marf Shopmyer <aa108460@d.......>
Subject: Signing Off
Dear Gang,
It's been SO much fun, but this server is closing me down. I'll have to
unsubscribe soon. I have another e-mail address, but it's a Work Thing
and 274 messages about a vampire show don't go over well.
This was a GREAT show. It was a fun list! Anyone who wants to keep me
posted about any further activism cam contact me at:
mls@a.......
I still have my tapes of this past season! Which is more than I can say
about Star Trek when they tried to take that away from me.
all my love,
marf
=========================================================================
Knight graphics and parchment background created by Melissa Snell and may be found at http://historymedren.about.com/
