Discuss - Ep #0732

[Watching Project]

Robservations #732

[alwaysdavid]

Quentin doesn't seem to learn that the cottage is not the place to meet with his women.  It appears that he meets his second death there until we learn that its all Angelique's plot to get back Barnabas.   Her statement to Barnabas that she'd kill anyone for him should have been a lesson learned back in 1795.  We learn that Laura's life in is the urn so does this mean she isn't like the phoenix of the present day?

[Midnite]

KLS has developed the quirky acting tick of touching her hair.  I wonder where she got that from?   

Quentin doesn't seem to learn that the cottage is not the place to meet with his women.

LOL  He's so cute when he's plastered.

It appears that he meets his second death there until we learn that its all Angelique's plot to get back Barnabas.

And he flirted with death in Egypt, too!

Her statement to Barnabas that she'd kill anyone for him should have been a lesson learned back in 1795.

So true.

When Angelique and Barnabas had their 1897 reunion in the tower room, she told him that she cared about David as much as he did (though he didn't buy it, and neither did we), and here she rubs in Barnabas' face that if she doesn't get her way, David will die along with Quentin.  That is just nuts.

And while I understand Angelique's curiosity about Laura, I don't get why she'd want to get tangled in her affairs (literally?).

We learn that Laura's life in is the urn so does this mean she isn't like the phoenix of the present day?

I think it does.  The early setup for her was that a Murdoch would die by fire every 100 years-- 1767, 1867, and 1967, but only the modern Laura Murdoch married into the Collins family.  However, this generation gives us a Laura Murdoch Collins who died in the past year in Alexandria, and who [spoiler]by Barnabas' account, greatly resembles a Laura Stockbridge who married a Collins and died in 1785.[/spoiler] So the writers have clearly broken the rules, but by making her dependent on the flame, could it mean she's a different Laura, and thus a different Phoenix altogether?  This would let Roger off the hook for marrying his own grandmother.  Or maybe she requires the urn, and Ra's help, because she's not supposed to be there? 

Since Quentin learned about the urn through Angelique's powers, is this evidence that she was in the original timeline?  But whether she was or not, she wouldn't have had a reason to make Quentin's blood boil in a Barnabas-less 1897, so are we to assume that Quentin strangled Laura (perhaps somewhere other than the cottage, perhaps not) and... she simply didn't die?

[arashi]

The set up of Laura's character and the mythology behind the phoenix is just as, if not more, confusing than the time travel stuff.

[EmeraldRose]

Hey! I just got an idea! Maybe all the female Murdochs looked alike and were named Laura! So the Laura in 1897 was not the same Laura who "died" in 1767, 1867, and 1967... or the one Barnabas said died in 1785. They were all related, but not the same Phoenix.

I thought it was an amusing choice of words for Barnabas to ask Angelique to make Quentin "rise". Those words were used before, when she made Quentin "rise" and become a Zombie. I figured that she might do that again.  I was relieved when she didn't.

I thought Angelique made it up when she said she caused Quentin's distress and not Laura. It seemed like something a Phoenix would do. I thought Laura caused it until I saw the posts here, in fact. It really threw me for a loop.  But it isn't surprising at all, now that I think of it. I guess I got confused because I knew that Laura had some powers, too. 

----- Sally -----

[Pansity]

Hey! I just got an idea! Maybe all the female Murdochs looked alike and were named Laura! So the Laura in 1897 was not the same Laura who "died" in 1767, 1867, and 1967... or the one Barnabas said died in 1785. They were all related, but not the same Phoenix.

But they're COUSINS, identical cousins as you see..."     Reading that post the Patty Duke theme popped into my head and I just couldn't resist.  All kidding aside, it would explain the time and personality discrepancies. Why NOT a family of phoenix?

I thought it was an amusing choice of words for Barnabas to ask Angelique to make Quentin "rise". Those words were used before, when she made Quentin "rise" and become a Zombie. I figured that she might do that again.  I was relieved when she didn't.

Not to mention a heck of a double entendre, especially given Quentin's track record and interest in Angelique. You've got to wonder whether the writers intended it or not.  I know the Trek writers used to put in stuff specificially for the censors to find and take OUT so they could sneak other stuff by them.    At least the cast managed to play it straight and no one cracked up in the middle of the scene.

Jeannie

[Midnite]

Hey! I just got an idea! Maybe all the female Murdochs looked alike and were named Laura! So the Laura in 1897 was not the same Laura who "died" in 1767, 1867, and 1967... or the one Barnabas said died in 1785. They were all related, but not the same Phoenix.

Well, you'll soon see that at least two of those Lauras are more than simply related, and that not all the Lauras carried the Murdoch surname. 

[EmeraldRose]

Well, I know there was a Laura Murdoch Stockbridge and a Laura Murdoch Radcliffe. And there were some Laura Murdoch Collinses. All of these may or may not be the same person.

----- Sally -----

[EmeraldRose]

But they're COUSINS, identical cousins as you see..."     Reading that post the Patty Duke theme popped into my head and I just couldn't resist.

LOL, Jeannie!

----- Sally -----

[Midnite]

Well, I know there was a Laura Murdoch Stockbridge and a Laura Murdoch Radcliffe. And there were some Laura Murdoch Collinses. All of these may or may not be the same person.

I do think there's enough evidence to indicate that 3 of the Lauras you mentioned were the same Phoenix.  LMS, LMR, and the LMC who was David's mother are the 3 who died in precise 100-year intervals.

And this is getting ahead a bit, but you'll [spoiler]soon hear indisputable evidence tying the other two Lauras-- LSC (whom you didn't mention but as I said, this is getting just a little ahead of where you are in the WP) and the 1897 LMC.[/spoiler]

So are there 2 Phoenixes, with David carrying the genes of both?  Or is there just one?  But unless there are more of them that we don't know about (perish the thought!), there doesn't seem to have been more than 2 and there definitely weren't 4 or 5 that.....

were all related, but not the same Phoenix.

[EmeraldRose]

I agree that LMS, LMR, and LMC who was David's mother were all the same Phoenix, Midnite.
[spoiler]I forgot about LSC - I was remembering her as LMC. It's been a while since I saw this storyline. Once in a while, my memory's not that great.  I'm sure I'll comment about her when I post about the episode that mentions this. I presume that's shortly after Barnabas talks about meeting her when he was a boy.[/spoiler] I believe that there were 2 Phoenixes, with David carrying the genes of both.

My idea about "a family of Phoenixes who all looked alike and were named Laura" was my effort to explain that there was more than one Phoenix - namely two, that we know of. I previously had been having a hard time trying to figure out how the 1767/1867/1967 Laura and the 1785/1897 Laura could be the same Phoenix. Then I had an "aha moment" when I came up with the family theory. It takes me a while to figure things out sometimes.

----- Sally -----

[Midnite]

[spoiler]I forgot about LSC - I was remembering her as LMC. [/spoiler] It's been a while since I saw this storyline. Once in a while, my memory's not that great.

Not a problem.  I thought you might have read the spoiler in Reply #2. 

[Lydia]

Did the ancient Egyptians use base 10?  If they didn't, why would 100 years have any meaning to them?

It appears that he meets his second death there

If I loved Dark Shadows for no other reason, I would love it because it enables that us to say that sort of thing.

I was going to comment on how much I hate that two-tone (or is it three-tone?) green dress of Rachel's when I remembered that it's always the green clothes on Dark Shadows that get me - Naomi's cloak, Adam's sweater - so I'll just keep my mouth shut on the utter putridity of Rachel's dress.

Barnabas was a cad in this episode.  The decent thing would have been to say to Rachel, "Forget about me."  But instead he hints that Angelique won't be around for long.  Funny - back in 1795 he was hinting the very same thing to Josette.

The business of 1969 David's life being linked to 1897 Quentin's surprised me.  It just doesn't make any sense.  When 1897 Quentin was a zombie, was 1969 David a zombie too?

[Pansity]

The business of 1969 David's life being linked to 1897 Quentin's surprised me.  It just doesn't make any sense.  When 1897 Quentin was a zombie, was 1969 David a zombie too.

I LOVE IT.  The idea just screams to be turned into fanfiction.

 

Jeannie