what happened to prue???

[Esmeralda]

xcharmed1x said:

esmeralda said:

Yes, but he was also a husband and a soulmate. His stronger gut reaction would've been to heal his wife and soulmate.

And yet he chose to save soldiers in the field rather than help his best friends when he was a medic in the war. If he learned anything from that experience, it would be to save everyone and not just the people he cared about most.

Friends are not the same as wife and soulmate. If due to the time lag with Phoebe still down there and unable to say the spell, if he could only heal one, I'm sure it would be Piper. Yes, we don't know for sure, but I'm taking what they said at face value and saying he did. No one knows for sure since it wasn't shown. But it's what I believe. Am I right or wrong? Who knows? But to me, it's what makes sense.

[colehellsangel]

ljones said:

colehellsangel said:

I agree with this. We even see him using both hands to heal both the first time around and we are talking about the same injuries both times Leo was just in better range the first time. So what makes you think he would change his mind the second time?

How can you agree with something that was never confirmed on the show or in the scripts? When did Leo say that he had tried to heal them at the same time? Did they show this? So what if Leo had healed two people at the same time in the past? We STILL don't know if he had done the same with Piper and Prue after Shax's attack. So, why do you keep making this assumption, when you can't even prove what really happened?


Why can't anyone simply admit that we will never know what really happen, unless Kern, one of the writers or the actors let the cat out of the bag? What is it about the human psyche that it is incapable of accepting that some things will remain a mystery?

Once again we are using what IS shown to come up with reasonable explanations. If we were going by ONLY what was confirmed on the show this there would be no discussion to have here!

esmeralda said:

xcharmed1x said:

And yet he chose to save soldiers in the field rather than help his best friends when he was a medic in the war. If he learned anything from that experience, it would be to save everyone and not just the people he cared about most.

Friends are not the same as wife and soulmate.

In the case of the Lang brothers I would call it close, he grew up with them. Plus the pain and tears in his eyes when he told the story of passing them up for the soldiers in the field. He felt guilty for not staying with them until he met the people he saved that day what would not have made it to the reunion otherwise.

I do agree that forced to make a choice it would be Piper but I don't believe he was forced to make a choice here. It was easy for him to use both hands to try to heal both as he did the first time around he was just too late for Prue because it took him longer to get there the second time around.

[ljones]

I do agree that forced to make a choice it would be Piper but I don't believe he was forced to make a choice here. It was easy for him to use both hands to try to heal both as he did the first time around he was just too late for Prue because it took him longer to get there the second time around.

Just because it was easy for Leo to heal them both, does not mean that he actually tried to do so. You see, the thing is that we don't know. Why? Because we were never shown or told whether Leo tried to heal them both at the same time or tried to heal one first. We never were. And that is something I can state as a fact.

Once again we are using what IS shown to come up with reasonable explanations.

This does not sound like a reasonable explanation. This sounds like an assumption.

[hisangel523]

when i first watched those two episodes i was confused a little it would have been nice to see what happened but it is what it is and we should all be happy with it

[spiritsas]

This debate, though still interesting, is going off like a character analysis of Leo and a witch hunt (excuse the expression) of Phoebe. Please read my post of Feb 1st. Although everyone can believe what they want, I'm not sure it helps to make up things that didn't happen. In the real world, SD had to be written off the show, and this cliffhanger provided the perfect vehicle to do that. In the world of Charmed, we know Leo barely got there in time the first time and save them both and at the same time. Why would anyone suppose that he would try to do anything different the second time? The only difference is that he shows up a few seconds or minutes later and we have to presume Prue is already gone but Piper wasn't. Anything else is simply, to me, an insult and disrepectful to his character. But then again, it's just a character and no one really died there..

[pscharm]

i agree completly on this
cause there was an image of shannen with rose so it must of been at a charmed thing
but if alyssa wanted shannen to guest star brad kern would let that happen once
i think brad really didnt like her

No doubt she and Shannen made up later (I've heard their friends now), but there's no doubt that during Charmed Again she was happy that Shannen wasn't around. [/quote]

[pscharm]

i wish she cried like she did in long live the queen

colehellsangel said:

xcharmed1x said:

Alyssa's attempt at acting with grief was the most pathetic attempt at moarning I've ever seen. It wasn't even halfway believable. Especially when she "breaks down" in Charmed Again over the shirt she borrowed from Prue that Prue thought Piper did. She wasn't even actually crying.

And I've always agreed that Phoebe was the one to be blamed for Prue's death..or at least played the largest indirect hand in it. Well put Esmeralda.

Yeah I agree Piper's Grieving was phenomenal acting by Holly Marie Combs but when it came to Phoebe even her crying clip in the Funeral montage was very unbelievable. I did not feel her pain at all the way I so strongly felt Piper's. Holly Marie Combs in my opinion was the best crier of all the sisters, Shannon coming in second. I could always feel with her in all of her crying scenes. In Dead Man Dating at the end with Mark's funeral I even cried with her. But possibly her best emotional scene's in the entire series were Charmed Again and Hell Hath No Fury. She almost always had me crying with her.

Alyssa on the other hand is a very talented actress but crying is just not her thing with the one exception being the end of Long Live the Queen after they vanquished Cole. That was a very good crying scene for her I think, my throat actually stung then. But for Prue's death I just did not feel her like I did Holly.

[colehellsangel]

ljones said:

Just because it was easy for Leo to heal them both, does not mean that he actually tried to do so

spiritkas said:

In the world of Charmed, we know Leo barely got there in time the first time and save them both and at the same time. Why would anyone suppose that he would try to do anything different the second time? The only difference is that he shows up a few seconds or minutes later and we have to presume Prue is already gone but Piper wasn't.

You could be right ljones but Spiritkas here read my thoughts perfectly. He is clearly shown healing them both with both hands the first time around so it is an educated and evidence supported assumption that he did the same the second time around. Remember the first time he got there immediately because his sensing powers were not "Out of the service area". The second time not only was he in an area where he can't hear a charge call him but there was no one there to call him. So it took him an extra minute or two to get there which was all the time Prue needed to die with a severe head hemorrhage.

[ljones]

You could be right ljones but Spiritkas here read my thoughts perfectly. He is clearly shown healing them both with both hands the first time around so it is an educated and evidence supported assumption that he did the same the second time around.

Sorry, but it sounds like another assumption. It seems - well, to me that you're trying to convince yourself that this is the truth, instead of accepting that neither you, me or anyone else know the real truth.

Why is it so hard to consider the possibility that none of us know the real truth of what happened?

[whitelightertony]

Sorry, but it sounds like another assumption. It seems - well, to me that you're trying to convince yourself that this is the truth, instead of accepting that neither you, me or anyone else know the real truth.

Why is it so hard to consider the possibility that none of us know the real truth of what happened?

Because if Leo truly had ignored Prue and healed only Piper for selfish reasons, it would have been brought up in later episodes. Piper wouldn't have let him forget that. In fact, I'm not sure she would even have been able to ever forgive him.

[ljones]

Because if Leo truly had ignored Prue and healed only Piper for selfish reasons, it would have been brought up in later episodes. Piper wouldn't have let him forget that. In fact, I'm not sure she would even have been able to ever forgive him.

This is supposed to be proof?

I never said that Leo had healed Piper first. I never said that was a certainty. Two, considering the history of inconsistent writing on this show, I don't see why you would easily dismiss the idea that the writers never made it clear whether Leo had healed Piper first, had tried to heal Prue first, or tried to heal both of them at the same time.

The writers never made it clear. They . . . never . . . made . . . it . . . clear. That is why I refuse to accept that Leo tried to heal both of them at the same time. That is why I refuse to accept as certainty that Prue was already dead upon Leo's arrival. I even refuse to accept that Leo attempted to heal Piper first. Why? BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW. The writers had never made it clear. Why do people keeping insisting that they KNOW what really happened, when the show never bothered to show what had happened?

[Esmeralda]

The thing is that Phoebe thinks that Piper might think that it was Phoebe's fault, but then Paige turns it around and makes it Prue's. We never know for sure if Phoebe truly thinks it's hers or if Piper does. Knowing Miss Itsnevermyfault (Phoebe), I sincerely doubt if Phoebe ever did.

[colehellsangel]

esmeralda said:

The thing is that Phoebe thinks that Piper might think that it was Phoebe's fault, but then Paige turns it around and makes it Prue's. We never know for sure if Phoebe truly thinks it's hers or if Piper does. Knowing Miss Itsnevermyfault (Phoebe), I sincerely doubt if Phoebe ever did.

I don't think Paige made it *Prue's fault* just that she turned it around to blame her for Piper's unexpressed fury. I agree that Phoebe was not really blaming herself at least not of her own guilt but for wanting to do or say whatever was necessary to relieve her sister of her rage. What Paige opened Piper's eyes to was that Prue did not prepare Piper for the event that she was killed and she(Piper) would have to take over the lead.

Piper's unexpressed fury was that she felt abandoned and Paige having experienced loosing a loved one unexpectedly knew that it was Prue that "abandoned" her.

[Esmeralda]

colehellsangel said:

esmeralda said:

The thing is that Phoebe thinks that Piper might think that it was Phoebe's fault, but then Paige turns it around and makes it Prue's. We never know for sure if Phoebe truly thinks it's hers or if Piper does. Knowing Miss Itsnevermyfault (Phoebe), I sincerely doubt if Phoebe ever did.

I don't think Paige made it *Prue's fault* just that she turned it around to blame her for Piper's unexpressed fury. I agree that Phoebe was not really blaming herself at least not of her own guilt but for wanting to do or say whatever was necessary to relieve her sister of her rage. What Paige opened Piper's eyes to was that Prue did not prepare Piper for the event that she was killed and she(Piper) would have to take over the lead.

Piper's unexpressed fury was that she felt abandoned and Paige having experienced loosing a loved one unexpectedly knew that it was Prue that "abandoned" her.

For the simple reason that just because Piper was the next-oldest wasn't a good reason for her being the leader. Paige, as an assistant social worker and raised as an only child (which is much closer to being like the oldest as compared to the youngest) would've done a much better job. With Piper's inability to accept what is (she always wants what she can't have and then isn't happy once she gets is), she would never let Prue prepare her for this, because she would've never want to accept the fact that Prue could die. And *that* is probably what truly turned her into a Fury, much more than feeling like Prue abandoned her.

[colehellsangel]

That's an excellent point even if Prue had tried to prepare her she would have given her the "Talk to the hand". That's just how stubborn she is when needing to accept something that displeases her.

[whitelightertony]

This is supposed to be proof?

It's evidence.

I never said that Leo had healed Piper first. I never said that was a certainty. Two, considering the history of inconsistent writing on this show, I don't see why you would easily dismiss the idea that the writers never made it clear whether Leo had healed Piper first, had tried to heal Prue first, or tried to heal both of them at the same time.

Chalking everything up to "inconsistent writing" is a real cop-out, IMHO.

The writers never made it clear. They . . . never . . . made . . . it . . . clear. That is why I refuse to accept that Leo tried to heal both of them at the same time. That is why I refuse to accept as certainty that Prue was already dead upon Leo's arrival. I even refuse to accept that Leo attempted to heal Piper first. Why? BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW. The writers had never made it clear. Why do people keeping insisting that they KNOW what really happened, when the show never bothered to show what had happened?

None of us *know* 100% for certain, since it wasn't explicitly stated...but all of the evidence suggests that Leo tried to heal both of them at the same time, and Prue was already dead.

[Esmeralda]

whitelightertony said:

This is supposed to be proof?

It's evidence.



Chalking everything up to "inconsistent writing" is a real cop-out, IMHO.

The writers never made it clear. They . . . never . . . made . . . it . . . clear. That is why I refuse to accept that Leo tried to heal both of them at the same time. That is why I refuse to accept as certainty that Prue was already dead upon Leo's arrival. I even refuse to accept that Leo attempted to heal Piper first. Why? BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW. The writers had never made it clear. Why do people keeping insisting that they KNOW what really happened, when the show never bothered to show what had happened?

None of us *know* 100% for certain, since it wasn't explicitly stated...but all of the evidence suggests that Leo tried to heal both of them at the same time, and Prue was already dead.

And what evidence is that?? Why can't you believe what Piper told Leo--that he tried to heal the wrong sister--his wife--which allowed Prue to die? We've copied that conversation, but you say it's not true. So what makes your evidence true and ours isn't?

[colehellsangel]

Esmeralda that conversation is not necessarily proof, its evidence of one way to look at it, but as ljones has said we can't prove anything for sure. We can only use clues that are shown to create theories. Piper could have just said that because she was in deep shock and angry and grieving. What Whitelightertony might be trying to say is that Leo healing them both the first time supports him doing the same the second time. Why would he do it differently? Not to mention Leo is not like that, he even says in Apocalypse Not when he is trying to convince Piper and Phoebe not to help the horsemen that he loves Prue but there were more important things at stake. That proves that if he understands when there is a greater good and would not make a choice for personal gain as well as proving that he would not let Prue die when its common sense to use both hands to get her too.

Also I don't believe he was forced to make a choice here, it was very easy for him to try to heal both with both hands and thats exactly what he did the first time, also adding in the factor that we know it took him longer to get to them the second time because there was no one to call him and he could not be called where he was anyway. Also think about Prue's injury she cracked her head open.

I think that is what Tony is trying to say and I agree. I think you could be right too Es but I prefer to believe that he tried to heal both.

[ljones]

Esmeralda that conversation is not necessarily proof, its evidence of one way to look at it, but as ljones has said we can't prove anything for sure. We can only use clues that are shown to create theories.

Thank you! Finally . . . someone has admitted that we really don't know what happened.

[colehellsangel]

ljones said:

Esmeralda that conversation is not necessarily proof, its evidence of one way to look at it, but as ljones has said we can't prove anything for sure. We can only use clues that are shown to create theories.

Thank you! Finally . . . someone has admitted that we really don't know what happened.

You are welcome, I never denied you sorry if you felt otherwise; I just was trying to also make clear that no assumptions(not by me anyway) are being made just using what is given to create reasonable theories.