Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Are all Immortals foundlings?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • dubiousbystander
    replied
    Originally posted by Darth Reaper View Post


    Saying that Immortals are born to mortal parents doesn't really strip them of much of their mystery since it leaves a great many questions appropriately unanswered.
    If you try and apply it retroactively to the 1992 series, it's crippling. If they use it in a reboot, that's their prerogative.

    Leave a comment:


  • Darth Reaper
    replied

    Just remember this lesson:
    According to producer Bill Panzer, the idea of exploring the origins of the Immortals was a result of fans constantly asking about it after the 1986 original. “The question we were most asked by fans after the first film was, 'Where did the immortals come from?'” he told Video Watchdog. “It made sense to answer that question in the second film. What we didn't realize at the time was that the fans didn't really want to know their ... origins because then the romanticism and mystery of the story was stripped away." Good job, fans.
    Saying that Immortals are born to mortal parents doesn't really strip them of much of their mystery since it leaves a great many questions appropriately unanswered.

    Leave a comment:


  • dubiousbystander
    replied
    Originally posted by Darth Reaper View Post
    Connor Macleod won The Prize in the original movie and ended The Game. Then, they rewrote history for the TV series so that was no longer the case. They can do that again for a new series so that not all Immortals are foundlings.
    Yes. That would be a new series. One using the Highlander name to draw an audience, and hopefully giving quality.

    Then again, it could be interesting to tell the story of an Immortal who had siblings and watched his or her family line progress through several generations.
    Queen of the Damned, by Anne Rice. Lots of other stories.

    All of that is very good, and would work fine for a new series where they change the paradigm.

    Just remember this lesson:
    According to producer Bill Panzer, the idea of exploring the origins of the Immortals was a result of fans constantly asking about it after the 1986 original. “The question we were most asked by fans after the first film was, 'Where did the immortals come from?'” he told Video Watchdog. “It made sense to answer that question in the second film. What we didn't realize at the time was that the fans didn't really want to know their ... origins because then the romanticism and mystery of the story was stripped away." Good job, fans.

    Leave a comment:


  • Darth Reaper
    replied
    Originally posted by dubiousbystander View Post
    It's too heavily in the TV series that all Immortals are foundlings, no way to track the parents. Modern day, that would be nearly impossible. If the mothers die of their births, there would be trail of corpses. If they're just abandoned, since we know a few from Seacouver born during the 70s, they could have been tracked. It's a point of the series. A point written into their bible. No one knows where they come from. No one. That can only hold if there is no way to easily connect their biological parents.
    Connor Macleod won The Prize in the original movie and ended The Game. Then, they rewrote history for the TV series so that was no longer the case. They can do that again for a new series so that not all Immortals are foundlings.

    If They're just abandoned, since we know a few from Seacouver born during the 70's, they could have been tracked.
    I don't think it's always that easy. If somebody just leaves their baby on someone's doorstep and makes a run for it, how do you track them? And, the further back in time you go, the harder it would become.

    Furthermore, of course if they're born from mortal parents, there would be siblings. There would be siblings within the same age group. Of course, also, that leads to my running joke that Connor MacLeod and Jacob Kell are probably twin brothers.
    Not necessarily. Not all people have multiple children. Some choose to have only one child. And, some have a hard time having children period. Perhaps, the same circumstances that lead a woman to have a Pre-Immortal child also make it difficult for her to have more children.

    And, of course, if the pregnancy was unplanned and unwanted, that increases the odds that the parents wouldn't be in a hurry to have more kids.

    Then again, it could be interesting to tell the story of an Immortal who had siblings and watched his or her family line progress through several generations.


    Leave a comment:


  • dubiousbystander
    replied
    It's too heavily in the TV series that all Immortals are foundlings, no way to track the parents. Modern day, that would be nearly impossible. If the mothers die of their births, there would be trail of corpses. If they're just abandoned, since we know a few from Seacouver born during the 70s, they could have been tracked. It's a point of the series. A point written into their bible. No one knows where they come from. No one. That can only hold if there is no way to easily connect their biological parents. Furthermore, of course if they're born from mortal parents, there would be siblings. There would be siblings within the same age group. Of course, also, that leads to my running joke that Connor MacLeod and Jacob Kell are probably twin brothers.

    Leave a comment:


  • Darth Reaper
    replied
    Personally, I'm fine with the idea that Immortals are born to mortal parents just like everyone else. Some of those children are abandoned by their parents for one reason or another and some of them aren't. Connor Macleod was raised by his birth parents, while Duncan was abandoned. It's simple and I think it works.

    Sadly, I suspect that if you could look back at every single human being who has ever lived, you'd find A LOT of children being abandoned, particularly back in the earlier days of human history, when day to day life was harder.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ceridwen
    replied
    Originally posted by Darth Reaper View Post
    The idea might have been that all Immortals are foundlings, but personally I don't think it has to be that way. I think it would be perfectly acceptable to say that Immortals are born to human parents, and some mysterious twist of fate causes them to be born with latent immortality while most aren't.
    It did not seem to be the idea in the original movie, it only became a thing in the series. I've never seen the sense in the ALL foundling theory, Immortality can be likened to a genetic mutation. Just as some people are born with heterochromia, it's extremely rare, just so some people are born with latent immortality. It's just that easy, having them be alien or fairies changelings, or whatever adds a lever of silly that just doesn't need to be there. And before the creation of latex, of course there were loads of mysterious foundlings, every unmarried girl who got knocked up had to have a story as to where that kid came from.

    Leave a comment:


  • dubiousbystander
    replied
    Originally posted by Darth Reaper View Post
    Well, I figure there's no harm in responding to this. Hopefully, someone will notice.

    The idea might have been that all Immortals are foundlings, but personally I don't think it has to be that way. I think it would be perfectly acceptable to say that Immortals are born to human parents, and some mysterious twist of fate causes them to be born with latent immortality while most aren't.

    If anything, I think that keeps the concept a bit more down-to-earth, rather than just having them appear out of nowhere for someone to find.
    That would be fine for a new series trying to tie people to it by using the Highlander name, you know as BSG did. It would be no good to try and say (which some would) that it's actually what was going on in the original series. However, at the same time that's pretty much what was going on in Forever. That's what's going on in the book by James Gunn, The Immortals, and subsequent TV shows based off of it. The problem for me would be that it takes the concept down-to-earth, rather than "makes". It removes one of the unique points. Of course, they've been trying to remove Highlander's unique points, especially "There can be only one".

    Leave a comment:


  • Darth Reaper
    replied
    Well, I figure there's no harm in responding to this. Hopefully, someone will notice.

    The idea might have been that all Immortals are foundlings, but personally I don't think it has to be that way. I think it would be perfectly acceptable to say that Immortals are born to human parents, and some mysterious twist of fate causes them to be born with latent immortality while most aren't.

    If anything, I think that keeps the concept a bit more down-to-earth, rather than just having them appear out of nowhere for someone to find.

    Leave a comment:


  • johnnybear
    replied
    It's a plot point they never pursued in any of the films or TV series!
    JB

    Leave a comment:


  • dubiousbystander
    replied
    Originally posted by Andrew NDB View Post

    I think the idea is that there's a poof of light, a baby appears, and suitable parents are always there to "just happen" to notice it there (which makes me think the appearance of pre-Immortal babies is strategical by some higher power). So this must have happened for Connor's mom. She immediately claims its her real baby and that's that, and for 18-20 years kept to that story. Now they want her to say it was all a lie? She's like, "Hell no, that's my son. My real son. Go ahead and burn me like you were going to do anyway."
    Yes, and she would know that. How would THEY?

    Leave a comment:


  • Andrew NDB
    replied
    Originally posted by dubiousbystander View Post
    The problem there in Endgame was again a foolish confusion of dialogue choice. They wouldn't have been demanding that she admit Connor wasn't her son. They WOULD have demanded she admit that Satan was his father.
    I think the idea is that there's a poof of light, a baby appears, and suitable parents are always there to "just happen" to notice it there (which makes me think the appearance of pre-Immortal babies is strategical by some higher power). So this must have happened for Connor's mom. She immediately claims its her real baby and that's that, and for 18-20 years kept to that story. Now they want her to say it was all a lie? She's like, "Hell no, that's my son. My real son. Go ahead and burn me like you were going to do anyway."

    Leave a comment:


  • dubiousbystander
    replied
    The problem there in Endgame was again a foolish confusion of dialogue choice. They wouldn't have been demanding that she admit Connor wasn't her son. They WOULD have demanded she admit that Satan was his father.

    Leave a comment:


  • Andrew NDB
    replied
    Yes, all Immortals are foundlings. Even Connor. Though it does make his "mother"'s final words more endearing that she considered him so much her own son (but he couldn't have been, not genetically) that she was willing to die for that belief in "Endgame."

    Leave a comment:


  • johnnybear
    replied
    That's true isn't it, that supernatural is anything out of the ordinary and yet I've always felt a tang of mischief or evil with that word!
    JB

    Leave a comment:


  • dubiousbystander
    replied
    Originally posted by johnnybear View Post
    But with actors being human the ageng part is a definite! I mean how do you explain Connor Macleod's appearance in the later films and series compared to his original film introduction and even Adrian's eyebrows calm down in the first season despite the flashbacks in the later seasons!
    JB
    The same way they do in every show with vampires, or any other immortal characters. They usually don't bother. Of course also, most of those shows don't usually last long enough for the aging to be hugely obvious. In some cases, costuming or makeup makes it a moot point. These are not actually things that require explaining. How did shows like Married With Children or Roseanne explain that, for a while, completely different women played main characters? Answer: They didn't. There are things that don't need explaining. "Why does Connor MacLeod look older?" "Because Christopher Lambert is older." Or let's try actually another one. In the original Highlander movie, Immortals did not stop aging at 1st death, they just stopped aging whenever. In the second movie, Connor was restored to his prime. In the third movie, Connor had won the Prize in the first movie, so he had also aged. When the other Immortals escaped, he stopped aging. He's still in his prime, so did not suddenly become younger.

    Why is he so much older in Endgame? They didn't have quite the funds to really pull off what they wanted, and there was still an element of laziness to the making of that movie. Modern day Connor can easily be explained by having just spent ten years drugged senseless, strapped in a chair, and apparently with bolts driven into his skull.

    Well I've always thought of supernatural as evil rather than unexplainable and most of their powers although not understandable are well documented by the Watchers and us at home while watching TV!!!
    Ah, well that's not what the general world thinks supernatural is. To the general world, supernatural is anything that is not natural.

    Leave a comment:


  • johnnybear
    replied
    Originally posted by dubiousbystander View Post

    They do heal from every injury save a lost limb. The only scars that stay are from while they are latent, or from when they were nearly decapitated. They can get their brains smashed out and they'll come back, memory intact. They stop seeming to be aging after mortal injury. What's not supernatural about that?
    Well I've always thought of supernatural as evil rather than unexplainable and most of their powers although not understandable are well documented by the Watchers and us at home while watching TV!!!
    JB

    Leave a comment:


  • johnnybear
    replied
    But with actors being human the ageng part is a definite! I mean how do you explain Connor Macleod's appearance in the later films and series compared to his original film introduction and even Adrian's eyebrows calm down in the first season despite the flashbacks in the later seasons!
    JB

    Leave a comment:


  • dubiousbystander
    replied
    Originally posted by johnnybear View Post
    Why can't two mortal people beget an immortal child? The writers have really put the pepper in the salt shaker with their odd reasoning here! There is nothing that is really supernatural about the highlander immortals, more super human perhaps though...
    JB
    They do heal from every injury save a lost limb. The only scars that stay are from while they are latent, or from when they were nearly decapitated. They can get their brains smashed out and they'll come back, memory intact. They stop seeming to be aging after mortal injury. What's not supernatural about that?

    Leave a comment:


  • Nicholas Ward
    replied
    Originally posted by johnnybear View Post
    Why can't two mortal people beget an immortal child? The writers have really put the pepper in the salt shaker with their odd reasoning here! There is nothing that is really supernatural about the highlander immortals, more super human perhaps though...
    JB
    Let's suppose that they could.
    The fact remains that immortals have no known parents.
    So it leaves us with an extremely short gestation that would consume both parents?

    Leave a comment:


  • johnnybear
    replied
    Why can't two mortal people beget an immortal child? The writers have really put the pepper in the salt shaker with their odd reasoning here! There is nothing that is really supernatural about the highlander immortals, more super human perhaps though...
    JB

    Leave a comment:


  • dubiousbystander
    replied
    The writers weren't trying to make analogies, I think. This reminds me of Lambert, post HL2, saying that no one wanted to know where Immortals come from. That is a false statement, as made clear in every one of these discussions. The show decision to make that answer unknown, even to such an absolute degree as stating SEVERAL times that they have no known parents. They have no known children. They have no known anything. That was largely about exasperation. However, once they'd doubled down on that, it was a good thing. They friggin' doubled and tripled down on it with Duncan in Family Tree, even.

    If there's an answer like, say, when an Immortal is born their mother dies:
    1) That leaves a dead woman, who probably had family of her own, if not the father of the baby.
    2) It would take next to no time at all to find out where baby Immortals come from, probably within a decade if someone made a determined effort at ANY time. "Where do I come from?" "Ah, well, your mother died of your birth." "Well shoot." "Yeah."

    Highlander 2 did, actually, very well with it, and I will argue that one until the end of time. Hell, wilusa's variation is that Immortals are all Methos' descendants, that he lost his memory when a temporal disaster flung him back in time!! Also with the "All the poor mortal women die of their Immortal babies' births."
    Last edited by dubiousbystander; 08-05-2020, 08:06 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • MidnightBlue
    replied
    Yeah, this point bothered me a little too. It's sort of like sexual orientation, heterosexuals can have either heterosexual or homosexual babies. So in this analogy, the mortals are heterosexuals and the immortals are homosexuals. Again, just an analogy.

    Leave a comment:


  • johnnybear
    replied
    I've never understood why immortals are revealed to be foundlings or orphans of mysterious origins rather than just children of mortal men and women that have the gift or curse of immortality! I mean what does it prove except a supernatural angle that doesn't need to be there!
    JB

    Leave a comment:


  • TheWolfEmperor
    replied
    Originally posted by dubiousbystander View Post
    It wasn't the midwife who offered Duncan. "When the midwife looked into your eyes, for it was you the peasant brought in, she cringed back in fear... and said you were a changeling... left by the forest demons... and we should cast you out for the dogs!"
    Oh okay. It's been awhile since I watched Family Tree so I got it mixed up.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X