FK General Discussion: Why Nick?

[switchbladeeyes]

Forever Knight never explained what led up to that night in Paris in 1228 when Nick was turned into a vampire. We saw Janette seduce him and then introduce LaCroix into the mix to turn him into a vampire. But... why?

Janette certainly wanted him, but why as a vampire companion and not as a mortal plaything to be devoured?

Why did LaCroix agree to bring Nick across?

I assume LaCroix and Janette must have discussed it at some point because LaCroix was prepared to bring Nick across as soon as Janette prompted LaCroix to reveal himself. It was LaCroix who convinced Nick to become a vampire; we didn't see Janette say anything to Nick once LaCroix was on the scene. Janette was running the sexual seduction, LaCroix the immortal one, an approach that proved effective to lure Nick in.

Had Janette had her eye on Nick for a while? What about LaCroix?

Why Nick?

Theories?

(There was somewhat of an explanation in the script for "Night in Question" that didn't make it into the episode. I'll put scans of those pages in the comments because they're interesting.)

Comments

[switchbladeeyes]

My personal theory is that Janette chose Nick because it satisfied her on a deeply personal level to "corrupt" a Crusader as both a soldier and agent of the Church.

The Church and soldiers sure as shit didn't do her any favors when she was mortal. We saw a soldier attack and try to rape her, and he surely would have succeeded had LaCroix not intervened. We saw a priest who had the opportunity to help her when the soldier attacked, but didn't, casting her away and telling the soldier just to not do it in front of the nuns. We know revenge is something that resonates for Janette, so taking a soldier away from the Church could have scratched a vengeance itch for her. In that vein, I don't know that it had to be Nick specifically. He just happened to be in the right place at the right time to catch her eye as the "type" she wanted to bring into the vampire fold. Of course, there's no doubt that once he was a vampire, she cared for and emotionally connected with him.

Why did LaCroix do it? He did it for Janette. Perhaps she had tried herself to make vampires and kept failing. LaCroix and Janette were together for, what? Some 200-ish years. He had long cared about her. So when she wanted something that he was in a unique position to give her, he did so. I don't really see him having much of a role in selecting Nick. I see it pretty much as all Janette. LaCroix would have to agree to "do the deed," given Janette's ineptitude in that department, but I'm not sure he really cared who Janette brought to him. As I described it in one of my episode commentaries, I viewed Nick as "Janette's choice, not LaCroix's. That was more-or-less Janette saying, 'I want that guy' and LaCroix being like, 'Sure, no prob.'"

It struck me as interesting because LaCroix really seemed to deliberate over Janette before he turned her. When he introduced himself to her, he said something along the lines of having watched her for a long time, but we didn't see the same thing when it came to Nick. Nonetheless, he became strongly attached to Nick.

Canon almost went with more vis-a-vis LaCroix and the "why Nick?" question. I only know this from parts of the "Night in Question" script that didn't make it into the episode. As scripted, in one of the flashbacks, LaCroix expresses a belief that "fate" told him to bring Nick over. Further, LaCroix believes that he and Nick have some kind of shared destiny that has yet to reveal itself and that this destiny means that their lives are inextricably intertwined. I'm not just talking about the vampire psychic bond/link/connection/whatever that's all about, I'm talking about something bigger. Fate with a capital F.

I find this to be such an interesting take on LaCroix's psyche, and it does explain why he is uniquely obsessive about Nick and not any other vampire that he has made. That there is a risk that this "fate" or "destiny" might not be fulfilled troubles him (that risk occurred in the NiQ flashback when the soldier almost killed LaCroix, and in the present when Nick forgot who and what he was). LaCroix's radio monologue in the episode makes a lot more sense through this lens. (Also, if this were his view, there's not a snowball's chance in Hell he'd have staked Nick in "Last Knight.")

While I find all of that "Night in Question" script stuff very interesting, none of it's canon and, therefore, not dispositive. Also, I'm not sure I buy LaCroix believing in some sort of external force he labels as fate.

Here are the relevant script pages for your perusal:

[thefruitbat]

Uuuuhh, thanks for the scans! Such a pity that this scene didn't make it into the episode (not only because it makes my UF heart beat faster ;) ). It would all have made much mode sense and yes, with Fate in mind, I'm sure LC would never have staked Nick in LK.

So, WHY Nick? So many possibilities.

1. Like you said, Janette wants revenge and to corrupt a crusader. LC could agree because he finally wants to give her a companion that acts more like a lover (I've never really seen LC and Janette together, there are no romantic or sensual vibes between them imo.), since they've been together for so long, and she never seems to be able to "make" one on her own.

2. It was a chance encounter, they just both happened to be there. Janette might have been just hunting, saw Nick, as he was sitting there, finally free, but not really happy, and maybe it was just love at first sight. She seems quite smitten with him from the start.
Maybe LC then saw something more than just the disillusioned crusader in Nick and agreed to bring him across - as a lover for Janette and a son to carry on his legacy, since he never had another child besides Divia.

3. If LC says in the script that Fate made him bring Nick across, maybe some seer or something (maybe an Augur ;) ) made a prophecy when he was mortal, and he thought it refers to Nick. That would really explain part of his obsession with Nick. XD

On the other hand, LC seems so opposed to the thought of fate being a thing and expresses his disbelief for gods or anything preternatural (until Sons of Belial)... hmm.

Very interesting question indeed.

[switchbladeeyes]

I feel like I'm the only one who buys LaCroix/Janette lol. We saw very little of them 1:1 so it *is* hard to get a read. I certainly do not see a burning passion or anything, but that there could have been something there along the way (when? who knows), I could definitely see it.

Another thing I find kind of unbelievable about the script pages is Nick not knowing that vampire blood is particularly curative for an injured vampire. I think the only time we actually see that is in NiQ so maybe it only applies among "related" vampires (if so, what degree of relation?) Regardless, did it *really* never come up in the preceding 600 years?

[thefruitbat]

Yes, saddly, their relationship is not really explored, besides in the one episode and then only in showing how she came to be a vampire. My headcanon always was "well, it's unlikely that -nothing- happened in over a millennium, so maybe once in a blue moon when they were both in a mood for it - sure thing!"

Hmm, yep, Nick seemingly not knowing that vampire blood has restorative properties (more than human blood) seems very unlikely. But when did the show care for continuity or evaded plot holes? :D

[switchbladeeyes]

But when did the show care for continuity or evaded plot holes? :D

This is, of course, a 100% fair point lol.

[pj1228]

Thanks for providing the scans. I didn't know that they had planned something different. But the NC monologue about destiny makes much more sense following this scene. I agree with thefruitbat: Nice UFish tingling.
I also find it quite late in Nick's life to learn about the healing powers of vampire blood.

About Lacroix's statement that their fate is destined to be intertwined, I wouldn't ascribe this to any spiritual experience Lacroix may have had, but rather his attitude. If Lacroix wants their fates to be intertwined, then that precisely is Nick's destiny, because he says so. He wouldn't have it any other way. LOL

About why Nick:
Good question. There are other crusaders at the table besides Nick. Janette's revenge angle of bringing a crusader across is an interesting thought that hadn't occurred to me before.

I'm wondering about the time frame. We don't know exactly if Nick drinking at the table, being seduced by Janette and being brought across happens all in one night, or if Janette is meeting him over a couple of nights before introducing him to Lacroix. Her questions (How badly do you want me, etc) imply at least some conversation off-screen.
My impression is that Lacroix chose him, observed him for a while and then sent Janette to seduce him. Apparently she fell in love with him immediately. I suppose he saw an inner light despite his disillusionment after the crusade, which fascinated Lacroix.

[switchbladeeyes]

Good point about the duration of time that Janette pulled Nick in. It's not clear.

My impression is that Lacroix chose him, observed him for a while and then sent Janette to seduce him.

Innnnnteresting! I like it. Why did LaCroix choose him then do you think? What was it about Nick?

I suppose he saw an inner light despite his disillusionment after the crusade, which fascinated Lacroix.

Saw an inner light in who? In Janette? That would be so fascinating. Just as she saw darkness in him, he saw light in her?

[pj1228]

I meant that maybe Lacroix saw an inner light in Nick.
Or he saw the (for him amusing) potential to turn someone who can look so innocent into a killer.

[switchbladeeyes]

Got it! I mistook which "he" was being referred to.

I definitely can see LaCroix wanting to turn him for that reason.

[switchbladeeyes]

If Lacroix wants their fates to be intertwined, then that precisely is Nick's destiny, because he says so. He wouldn't have it any other way. LOL

Yeah, I likewise see it as his attitude. This was the attitude that I took being conveyed in the actual episode (vs. the script, which suggested something different to me.) He seems like a “you make your own destiny” kind of guy. But that falls short of letting Nick make his own destiny because part of LaCroix’s MO is for him and Nick to be linked together forever.

[calliope24]

Excellent question, and one I have to admit I had not contemplated all that much.

I love looking at these pieces of the scripts to see more of the intent, how they were written versus what we actually saw on the screen. This one is particularly intriguing. I have to say that I'm happy that they made the changes that they did. I think the passage about the vampire blood seems unlikely given the dating of the flashback. It would have been fine rolled into the many flashbacks in 1228, but at this point in the narrative of FK, it seems out of place.

I also struggle with the reference to fates. I agree with PJ that if their fates are intwined, it's because LaCroix wants them to be! The additions to the flashback do make some of the comments in the present day make a little more sense, but I think I like the version we saw better.

I think you make an excellent point about Janette having a grudge against both soldiers and the Catholic church--and she is a woman who fully embraces the desire for revenge, but that's not the vibe I feel here. Granted she must be a magnificent actress, so she could have been playing Nick, but even as he is waking up she seems as enthralled with him as he is with her.

So why him? As FruitBat and PJ have said, I don't think it was a snap decision. I think that Janette and Lacroix had been watching him and his companions for awhile before they made their choice. And I do feel it was a 'they' choice. I just don't see LaCroix bringing a contestant across just for Janette's pleasure--although that undoubtedly that was a huge factor. I think LaCroix saw something in Nick as well. I think there was an element of physical attraction for him as well, but that wouldn't be all.

Tell me if I'm incorrect, but I think the 'inner light' PJ was talking about was in Nick? I can see that as being intriguing to both of them--for different reasons. And I know Janette talks about the darkness in him--silly passage of dialogue there imho--but I suspect it may have been more about his light.

I also wonder how many times they had done this before they were successful with Nick? Absolutely nothing to base this on, but I suspect it was quite a few. I can see a lot of circumstances for failure here from Janette not finding someone a suitable bed companion, to candidates not responding well to the offer either out of fear, or religiosity, a desire to go home to a wife and family.

I also think that there's some biochemical response to coming across that can just go haywire at times. Yes, Nick makes a really bad vampire master, but is there more to it than that? It's occurred to me more than once that part of his objections to bringing Natalie across (but considered it with Tracy) is that he fears the same thing would happen with her as did with her brother, 'parenting' factors aside.

Great discussion! Thanks!

[switchbladeeyes]

Yes, you're correct about PJ's comment on inner light. I mistook who was seeing it in who lol.

Very interesting thought re biochemical response. Like some people are genetically pre-disposed in some way to be soooooo changed and out of control that they shouldn't be brought over? (Nick can really pick 'em lol.)

That does better explain Nick's hesitancy with Nat that he didn't have with Tracy. Like, aside from not generally wanting Nat to be a vampire, being a vampire will spiral her out of control, leading to her death just like with Richard. It would doom her. It does seem to fundamentally change some people, like the personality that made them "them" them dies. Happened with Richard. And also that plague doctor.

Maybe LaCroix has a better sense for these things than Nick. (Though, interestingly, LaCroix would have been fine with Nat coming across in the end, so maybe any risk Nick perceived of Nat turning out like Richard wasn't there... but by that point, Nick was already deep in his death wish, sigh).

Also, Nat not thinking about what vampirism did to her brother in LK vexes me.

[calliope24]

Maybe LaCroix has a better sense for these things than Nick. (Though, interestingly, LaCroix would have been fine with Nat coming across in the end, so maybe any risk Nick perceived of Nat turning out like Richard wasn't there.

Or Lacroix really didn't care how she turned out. Bye, Felicia! Don't get me wrong, I think LaCroix had a grudging respect and even affection for Natalie by the end. But his #1 goal in life was keeping Nick by his side. He'd do anything, including accepting Natalie to make that happen.

I think we are both haunted by Richard Lambert.

[switchbladeeyes]

Good points, good points. Once he arrives on the scene, he assumes Nick is coming with him. So "bring her over or let her die"... doesn't matter because either way, Nick will be with him.

Yes, agreed on Richard. FK had a way of dropping haunting characters on us. And almost never doing any follow-up. (Divia being an exception.)