Price_Of_Magic Wrote:
Grimmsistr wrote: Belle marries the man that keeps her as a pet – Mayor Fail
I strongly disagree with this. Rumple does not keep Belle as a pet. Yes he is lying to her at the moment but we don’t know what is going on in his head or his reasons for doing so after his year long experience of being enslaved by Zelena, forced to watch his son die, and being resurrected from the dead. Rumple loves Belle, and she is probably the only one he listens to and who’s opinions he takes into consideration. He may not always listen to Belle but he certainly doesn’t treat her or keep her as a pet.
I just don’t get why she loves him. To me it looks like a case of the Stockholm Syndrom.. she said that thing about loving all of him even his darkness ->STOCKHOLM SYNDROM!!! ….. but that’s just me. So Rumplestiltzkin is no baby snatcher on Once he is a bride capturer. lol ! just kidding 🙂
And I will admit being bias here because I am and have been disappointed with the Rumple character from the very beginning (not Carlyle’s acting which is Brilliant!!) but the way Rumple character is written… and because Belle is not my favorite either, to me she is a pretty wallflower.. sorry Belle fans, but we cant all like the same things.
Price_Of_Magic Wrote:
Also I disagree about Emma being a damsel in distress just because she needed Hook’s help to navigate the customs in the EF which Emma had no experience with. Had Hook been a woman helping Emma, would Emma still be classed as a damsel in distress? It’s common sense to ask someone who knows about the EF for help if you yourself do not know what you are expected to do but are expected to do it.
Its because of the way it comes across on the show. I agree with Myril who said we need woman empowering woman. At the least just one of the main characters- Emma Regina and Snow, or two of course in that instance. Right now we have all three main characters needing a man in their lives. To doo right, to be right with themselves and to have happy (for-the-time-being) endings. I would have no problem with Emma needing Hook in EF or Regina needing Robin’s love.. neither would I have problems with damsels in distress storylines on the show, if a story of strong independent woman who didn’t need guys to make their days work was also told on the show. It used to be told on the show.. in season one and two, so I hope its just a glitch.. they will be back full force in season four 😉
Jenna_B Wrote:
However, becoming a mother doesn’t make someone perfect. It certainly doesn’t mean that a woman isn’t going to act for selfish reasons. In a perfect world, maybe – but not reality. If you want reality, then Emma is a ‘real’ mother. She’s scared out of her ever loving mind and acting/reacting due to that fear. Being a mother is scary and hard and it changes you profoundly. But it definitely does not mean every decision you make – even in the name of your child – is going to be the right decision.
Exactly !
Jenna_B Wrote:
Product of True Love: I think this is one pickle A&E really need to define. Why is being the product of true love so special when it comes to Emma?
Also one of my bigger questions: This is actually reducing Emma to a product, it even spells it out that way for us, but still the show keeps telling the viewers that we are not defined at our birth- we make our own choices- Evil is not born it is made… then how come good is born when by true love? Or can true love babies also become evil?
….It is the statement that your biology defines you that’s the problem. Being the Savior and a true love product, is then Emma’s fate/destiny then what happens to her free choice?
Im not saying its not interesting and couldn’t work out in the end, but the show should address it atlest at some point and not just leave it hanging in the air.