What Aspects of the Series Didn't You Like?

[Andrew NDB]

At first? Maurice. But then he really began to win me over big. Then I couldn't imagine the show and the barge bits without him.

I really hated, and still hate, how literally the very next episode after Tessa died, Duncan is already having sex with another woman. I don't care if 2 weeks passed in the story or 2 years... it was the next damn episode. Seems very disrespectful to the character of Tessa, who was pretty near and dear to all by that point, and just rubbing salt in a fresh wound (as well as taking me out of the episode that was otherwise a great episode -- "Eye for an Eye").

[dubiousbystander]

I read a fanfiction where the reason Methos was out of contact during the AAA arc, was he and Cassandra were searching for the cave, and the remains of Timothy. Ahriman arranged to distract them by putting a little girl in their path. A little girl who was going to be immortal.

[dubiousbystander]

Oh! Mountain Men was easy for me to rationalize . The Watcher is one of the police officers or works as a national forest guard or something.

[Saber Dog]

I didn't like the foundlings part, but I was fine with most of the things listed here.

I think the Horsemen were not the ones of the Book of Revelations, but an inspiration for it. The not fighting mortals on Holy Ground part was something I figured would differ from immortal to immortal and only not fighting an immortal was an absolute. This allows for some interesting possibilities if a mortal thinks it is always true. If you are absorbing some of what the loser was, then dark quickenings are logical. Also, I think a pre-immortal can become immortal at any age, but those too young or old don't last long. I read a fanfiction somewhere in which an immortal takes the head of an infant he found in a car crash because he realized the baby had had its first death and would never grow up.

I have a theory on the Prize and Quickenings. For me, there is a incorporeal being which has splintered itself in order to learn about our world. The Game is its way of reassembling itself and the Prize is the result. "I know everything. I am everything."

[David McMurdo]

I liked the Watchers even though they contracted the monologue of immortals living undetected until the present. I'd think they'd either be started by a smart immortal or infiltrated more often than Methos in the 20th century.

That reminds me of another bugbear I have. Aside from what you said, I have a problem with how unlikely and inconsistent the escapades of The Watchers are. It's highly ironic that one of the flashbacks they decided to use in the episode "The Watchers" when Joe is explaining the organisation to Duncan is a flashback to Duncan's fight with Caleb. The whole premise of "Mountain Men" was that Duncan and Caleb were the only ones capable of making that epic trek because they were the only ones with the experience to do so. I don't buy that the Watchers are present in such scenarios and have never once been seen. At least they don't try to pretend that Joe made such a journey, but then does that mean that he has an entire team of guys under him that are responsible for watching Duncan? That would make the most sense, but it's never mentioned or suggested again.

Another problem is that The Watchers are as serious or unserious as the plot needs them to be. Some times they're presented as being infallible, and at other times they seem really incompetent. They know everything about almost every immortal... but there are times when they have gaps in their information because one of them has to attend a wedding (according to one episode). So they go back and forth from being the best intelligence agency in the history of the world to a bunch of guys with a hobby.

I'm also not sure what's up with their computers. An important element of the Kalas arc is that The Watchers aren't allowed to have a digital database of the immortals for security reasons. But then in "Indiscretions" Joe has just that kind of database and it's portrayed as being something normal for The Watchers. Methos knows about it so we know it isn't Joe just going against the rules or something.

[Nicholas Ward]

The regular interference of law enforcement. Didn't add anything to any story.

[dubiousbystander]

I didn't like the sexism.

1. I am perfectly fine with Immortals being foundlings. The mystery is why they seem to have no parents. No mothers. No corpses of mothers. Only the luck of who finds them,

2. For ME: The Dark Quickening: In 1872, Coltek took Duncan's rage, darkness and fury from him, enabling him to stop his mad pursuit of Kern for slaughtering Little Deer and everyone. Coltek's special power: the ability to take the evil and anger of others into himself and render it impotent, which was what he had used on mortals. In 1872, he took Duncan's into himself. But this that he did with mortals, evidently was not such a good idea with evil Immortals. (Yes, Duncan was not evil, but Coltek was going after evil ones.)

When Duncan took Coltec's head, he got back his own anger and evil that Coltek took on in 1872, and he had no resistance. Not being a psychic or gifted Immortal that we know of, his head could probably safely have been taken by whomever fancied it.

3. I'm with Haplo.

[Haplo]

1. I don't care for the foundlings thing either or that they're all sterile from birth. Maybe make it once their immortality is triggered.

2. I hate the Dark Quickening idea too though I really liked Evil Duncan. Morality is a daily decision and shouldn't be inherited (for lack of a better word) with quickenings. I don't like the idea of good and evil being weighed and measured as it gives the bad guys an excuse.

3. Not fighting on Holy Ground should be rooted in the tradition of a sanctuary instead of being enforced by threatening nebulous cosmic destruction.

4. I never liked Kenny but actually really liked the idea that immortality can be triggered at any age. I understand that it's a TV show and it's foolish for producers to expect a kid to pass as not aging for long. It's bad enough when Vampire shows do it. I mean, if memory serves, Connor was supposed to be 18 or early 20s at most but always looked older even in the first film and he aged a lot by the time of Endgame. They could have shown an elderly immortal. But with the exception of Ramirez, I don't think anyone was supposed to be over 30 when they died the first time.

5. I loved the Horsemen and having them be the inspiration for the Biblical tales instead of the other way around. But than I'm not Christian or even religious.

6. This one showed a lot of hypocrisy on Duncan's part. It made it seem his civilized demeanor was just a charade, that he was still the barbarian clansman. I don't mind the memories and feelings being absorbed in the quickening to a limited degree. I'd love to see someone understand something they didn't before or have new tastes develop.

7. I gave them credit for having an immortal with mental problems. It goes back to the age thing. There has to be the question asked..is immortality just a random genetic fluke or is it something bigger?

*adding a few of my own in here*

I don't like The Prize in general though I also don't like how the show abandoned The Gathering concept for an immortal of the week style.

I also don't like the no guns rule. If it's a fight to the death, I plan to stay alive even if it's not pretty or honorable. Same thing goes for fights just being one on one.

I liked the Watchers even though they contracted the monologue of immortals living undetected until the present. I'd think they'd either be started by a smart immortal or infiltrated more often than Methos in the 20th century.

I never understood why they only had I think one long term immortal couple. Instead they all marry mortals over and over and over. I know they show Duncan and Amanda being a long term on again off again thing but I mean a real lasting relationship. Who else can understand you better than another immortal?

[David McMurdo]

This could really be asked of the entire franchise of course, but I'm asking this question about the series specifically because it explored far more ideas. Everyone has those aspects that they really don't like whether it be an idea, a character, a particular episode, or what have you. These are my bugbears:

1: The Immortals as Foundlings. I really don't understand this. Most attributes of the immortals come about either so that their existence makes more sense or to get around obvious issues. So for example, they cant have children so that the writers never have to deal with them living alongside their bloodline down through the ages. But I cannot for the life of me figure out why they decided to make the immortals foundlings. I really don't like it. There's no reason they can't just have normal parents. I know it's implied, but is it ever explicitly stated that all immortals are foundlings? In my mind, Connor's mother in Endgame was his biological mother.

2: Dark Quickenings. I think that the problems with this one are fairly obvious. The idea allows for a different kind of story-arc, but I think it damages the mythology overall. Duncan was clearly possessed and ultimately not accountable for his actions during this period, so how do we know that other badguys aren't possessed in the same way? Maybe the Kurgan was a lovely guy but had just killed too many evil-doers. I think the Ahriman arc handled the issue of good and evil better, and I'm no fan of that either.

3: Holy Ground. The series established that immortals can't even hurt mortals on Holy Ground. I always thought that the sanctity of Holy Ground was tied in to the devastating effects of what would happen if a quickening occurred there, and this is strongly implied in the episode "Little Tin God" when Joe suggests that Vesuvius erupted because of a quickening. So I don't understand why immortals can't have a little scrap on Holy Ground or why they can't hurt mortals there. I think the films handle the idea of Holy Ground better. Connor and the Kurgan push each other around in the church. Connor and Katana push each other around in... that place. Connor and Kane have a full blown sword fight in the Buddhist shrine and Kane even stabs Connor's neck. And finally, Connor comes so close to beheading Kell on Holy Ground that he spills blood. If you say that the immortals can't fight at all on Holy Ground, well, define "fight". Imagine Connor grabbing the Kurgan's jacket in the Catholic chuch and accidentelly ushering in the apocalypse by doing so.

4: Kenny. Even back when I'd only ever seen the first film, I always kind of assumed that an immortal would have to be a certain age to come back to life after dying. Like with the Dark Quickening, the idea that someone can become immortal at any age kind of brings things to mind that I don't think should be part of the Highlander universe. I think that the writers didn't have one of the good guys kill Kenny off because they kind of knew that killing a kid wouldn't sit right with the audience no matter how sinister he was. But someone will have to do it sooner or later. I understand that writers want to try new ideas, but what I just mentioned is the kind of unnecessary dilemma that I think should be avoided by not introducing things like this.

5: The Four Horsemen. The episodes are fine, but I don't like those four characters being tied back to biblical material for the same reason I don't like magic or demons in the Highlander universe. And I say that as a Christian. I just think that these things belong in their own place. Highlander should remain exclusively about immortals, in my opinion.

6: The memories and emotions of the immortals. Okay, this one applies to the entire franchise, but I think it's weird. For example, In "Homeland", Duncan is still furious at the badguy for killing his father centuries earlier. But it's not like he targeted his father on purpose—he just happened to kill him during the course of warfare as was common at the time. In real life you have mortal people forgiving others who've intentionally murdered or maimed their loved ones, but Duncan can't be a bit more philosophical after four hundred years? This is one example of many of how the immortals don't really scale to normal people, if you know what I mean. Maybe they have REALLY exceptional memories and are REALLY sensitive.

7: Mickey. This is a bit more of an obscure one, but the conclusion of the episode "The Innocent" really bothers me. I just can't accept that Duncan and Richie are willing to behead a mentally impaired guy. It's not like he's evil or anything. He just can't help himself some times. I do always get a chuckle imagining Richie emerging from the tunnel now as impaired as Mickey was whenever I watch the episode though. Duncan's just like "oops, didn't know a quickening could do that." There's a fan-fiction waiting to happen.

Okay, those are mine! I was laughing a lot writing that. I think about Highlander too much to tell you the truth.