Search Results for 'emma'

[Keb]

Flashbacks prior to Emma & Gang’s arrival in Camelot are now in place. Need sleep. Will start the Camelot flashbacks tomorrow.

[hjbau]

“At great fault” from whose perspective? For whom? The morality of this show at this point is so off its rocker that I honestly can’t tell whose perspective you are currently speaking from. Regina and Cora might say that that skill was very useful for them throughout the years. Emma might agree (Violet’s heart). Snow might too (saving Charming). We’ve already established that DO!Rumple is a Machiavellian type character. In the initial six months (or so) post curse, he’s vengeful and sort of drunk on his power. He’s someone who has been oppressed all his life. This isn’t about “cowardice.” Sorry, none of Rumple’s character is really about “cowardice.” It’s about class and privilege. It’s about the idea that “underclass” people are inherently dangerous, and if given power, will do bad things with it (RG, feel free to chase me off my soapbox). Until he became the DO, any “uprising” from someone like Rumple would simply have landed him dead. After the initial “revolutionary” violence, Rumple settled into pragmatic Machiavellanism, i.e. the ends justify the means. That’s the kind of villain he is, and on that, the show has been actually very consistent. Teaching Cora and Regina to take hearts fulfilled specific goals.

At the perspective of it is not alright to teach people how to do something specifically so that they will go out and murder people.

I definitely think that Rumpel is a coward. The base level is Bae wants to go and fight to try and stop the ogres and Rumpel ran from the battle. I completely understand the circumstances as to why he made that choice, but Rumpel on the show thinks it is the wrong choice. That Rumpel let go of Bae’s hand instead of jumping through the portal and losing his power. He let Regina make him believe that Belle was working with her for just that moment and Belle was locked up for 30 years. Even in the last episode, Rumpel taking the dark one power back instead of just living with Belle as a man. He continues in these big moments to make choices out of fear. He makes choices that hurt the people he loves. I understand not liking the word coward, but i do think that Rumpel makes wrong choices in these moments.

[nevermore]

I also very much think that Rumpel is at great fault for teaching Cora and Regina how to pull hearts, knowing the sort of people they would be. Rumpel can see the future. He taught Cora to pull hearts so she would murder the king, and Regina so that she would eventually do the curse.

“At great fault” from whose perspective? For whom? The morality of this show at this point is so off its rocker that I honestly can’t tell whose perspective you are currently speaking from. Regina and Cora might say that that skill was very useful for them throughout the years. Emma might agree (Violet’s heart). Snow might too (saving Charming).

We’ve already established that DO!Rumple is a Machiavellian type character. In the initial six months (or so) post curse, he’s vengeful and sort of drunk on his power. He’s someone who has been oppressed all his life. This isn’t about “cowardice.” Sorry, none of Rumple’s character is really about “cowardice.” It’s about class and privilege. It’s about the idea that “underclass” people are inherently dangerous, and if given power, will do bad things with it (RG, feel free to chase me off my soapbox). Until he became the DO, any “uprising” from someone like Rumple would simply have landed him dead. After the initial “revolutionary” violence, Rumple settled into pragmatic Machiavellanism, i.e. the ends justify the means. That’s the kind of villain he is, and on that, the show has been actually very consistent. Teaching Cora and Regina to take hearts fulfilled specific goals.

 

[Bar Farer]

I hate season 3B, they killed off an interesting character and assassinated the personality of every character on the show for that ridiculous finale. I hate it, I hate it, I hate it.

Even the moments that led to the time travel didn’t make sense! Emma tells everyone she wants to take Henry back to NYC and leaves the diner, and Hook is the one to follow her? Out of all the people there, her stalker is the best man to reason with her why she needs to stay? NO. The one that needed to go after her was Regina and tell her “You are not taking my son away from me” like a good S2 Regina would, but I guess she needed to spend more time with Robin instead of making sure her son stays in Storybrooke. Whatever A&E, you betrayed your story and your characters and your fans by selling out and do this “epic wish fulfillment” followed by Disney cash grab.

"All your questions are pointless"

[Slurpeez]

They did? Seriously?

They did! They flat out said the S3 finale was “epic wish fulfillment” — so something doesn’t add up.

THR: Lastly, how would you describe the final two hours of the season?
Horowitz: Wish fulfillment.
Kitsis: Epic wish fulfillment.

I thought this was a thing that fans came up. I’m so confused. Whose wish, what was its fulfillment, and what, for the love of everything that is holy, was epic about it? Is this a direct reference to CS? Seriously, this confuses me.

While it wasn’t a direct reference to CS, what else could it be? It’s not as though many fans were wishing for a time-travel episode, but many vocal CS fans were wishing to see Emma dressed as a princess, dancing with Hook in the Enchanted Forest. And that is exactly what they got.

"That’s how you know you’ve really got a home. When you leave it, there’s this feeling that you can’t shake. You just miss it." Neal Cassidy

[WickedRegal]

nevermore wrote:

Is that a more or less fair assessment?

Yup. A and E don’t like criticism. They don’t like being confronted with the knowledge that there are swaths of people who are genuinely unhappy and, more to the point, disturbed by their show. And people who don’t claim these things are “true fans” and A and E respond to them instead of any thoughtful but also respectful conversation. And by contrast the people who are disturb and want to have these kind of frank conversations are haters, bitter, judgmental, and need to either stop watching or just go with the ride. In a way, it’s understandable. No one wants to be told that they are coming across as racist/misogynistic/homophobic/ageist, ect. It’s an uncomfortable thing to hear and our natural reaction is to balk at that. But A and E don’t even stop to hear the problems; to get the other perspective. There’s a great example of Arrow on the CW. There was a lot of dissent in the fandom during S3 because of Ray (the A.T.O.M) and how he was pursuing Felicity. The show runner heard some of this and tweeted something about how “that {meaning Ray’s stalking and possessive qualities} were how romantic comedies go.” As you can imagine, this did not go over well with many in the fandom. So, realizing this, the showrunner told the fans to explain it to him. Someone wrote a very long explanation of *why* Ray made them so uncomfortable. I don’t know if he saw it or if it informed anything for Arrow through the rest of S3 or even into Legends of Tomorrow. But at least he was willing to listen.

Quote

THIS!

RumplesGirl wrote:

But what I loved more than the chuckle was what he had to say: “I worry that people might fail to write good books because they think these warnings are real rules. There are no real rules. Tell good stories and tell them well and don’t leave the reader feeling cheated at the end.”

Lol, that picture is possibly the best thing ever. But isn’t that the problem with OUAT? That a portion of the audience is actually very vocally content with the kinds of stories the show is telling, as long as their ship sails into the sunset? And are actively and aggressively trying to silence dissent, criticism, or alternative interpretations along the lines of “this is misogyny/racism/sexism/classism” etc? In other words, it sounds like part of the fandom is attempting to enforce their own very narrow experience of OUAT as the only normal and legitimate one. And Kistowitz are encouraging that part of the fandom, essentially giving them the authority to act as a thought police, thus outsourcing the labor of actually telling a good story to essentially a group that acts like trolls, and brow beats everyone else into agreement, silence, or “safe places” (or, really, minority enclaves) like this forum? Is that a more or less fair assessment?

Quote

AND THIS!

"If you go as far as you can see...you will then see enough to go even further." - Finn Balor

[Slurpeez]

I don’t exclude the possibility that this tension is deliberate, but whether it is or not, I think if we take a reception studies approach, and look at how the audience is divided, then you just have to assume that’s what the show does, pragmatically. It’s peddling 2 mutually exclusive messages at the same time.

I tend to think this dichotomy is deliberate, or at the very least, the byproduct of the writers hitting a reset button. As Eddy and Adam said about S3b in a telling interview:

ASSIGNMENT X: You’d already done one huge reset at the end of Season 1, with everyone getting their memories back. What made you feel like you wanted to do another reset so soon?

ADAM HOROWITZ: It’s hard to answer that in a lot of ways without you seeing the second half [of Season 3], but for us, I think that there was a certain sense of, we wanted to kind of end one chapter and start another.

EDWARD KITSIS: Yeah, we wanted to keep the show moving forward and the challenge is to make the show feel like the same show, but different and exciting in a new way, and that’s what we’re endeavoring to do.

HOROWITZ: And we had an idea that we loved for the second half, and we just went for it. To us, usually, the scary decisions are the ones that either you’re going to fall flat on your face or you’re going to hit a home run. Like we ended the curse Season 1, and people were like, “What the hell?” So …

KITSIS: And one of our goals was, we knew the first half of the season was going to be primarily set in Neverland, and we wanted to do a second half of the season that was radically different.

HOROWITZ: Really like two different seasons.

KITSIS: Right. And so when you see what we have in store for the second half, the vibe, the feel, the storytelling and the tone is very different. Same characters, same show and all that, but we’re attacking it from a completely different direction.

Straight from the horses’ mouths. Same characters, same show, but different direction starting in S3b after the reset button was hit. The problem is that the old paradigm keeps cropping up, and the writers actually keep calling back to it, especially in certain episodes like Dreamcather.

Though they thought they were taking the show in a great new direction by appealing to the CS fan-base (what they called “epic wish fulfillment”), they also knew hitting the s3 reset button was a major risk.  As Adam said:

Horowitz: To us, usually, the scary decisions are the ones that either you’re going to fall flat on your face or you’re going to hit a home run. Like we ended the curse Season 1, and people were like, “What the hell?”

I think the writers are also aware of the issues with their characterization and plots. They just don’t want to call a spade a spade, because they like to play both sides. That is why Regina and Zelena usually call Hook a myriad of derisive nicknames while the CS fan-base get lots of seemingly sugarcoated things, but yet which have a darker side like the pink flowers of doom signaling betrayal. The writers know what a divisive character Hook can be, and they play up that villain angle a lot like making Hook the dark one and giving him the fake cursed-hand one-episode plot. Yet, they also try to have their cake and eat it too, which is why it’s so gross that Emma would risk herself and her family for a man who so hurt her and her family (both before and after becoming the dark one).

"That’s how you know you’ve really got a home. When you leave it, there’s this feeling that you can’t shake. You just miss it." Neal Cassidy

[hjbau]

Bar Farer wrote:

What you depicted here is the “battered wife syndrom”. She did something that pissed off her boyfriend, and he becomes violent towards her or other people, instead of putting the blame on him, she blames herself for making him angry. This is a syndrom that is common in abusive relationship.

Yes, but in real life, people aren’t literally being controlled by a “dark force” that was transferred into their body through a magical sword from Camelot. To compare it to real life abusive relationships doesn’t really seem fair. The writers are trying to make us believe that he literally had no control over what he was doing. If he literally can’t control it, it’s not fair to loop him into the category of “abusive boyfriends.” If he was always abusive, but just controlled it better when he wasn’t the DO, then ok. But he was not like that with Emma pre DO. This felt like it came out of nowhere. They want us to believe this darkness forced him to do these things. I think there is a difference. Not downplaying abusive relationships here, and I do see the parallel you are trying to make, it’s just this show is way too cray cray for me to think logically about it and attempt to compare it to actual real life relationships.

Emma and Hook’s relationship is without a doubt depicted as abusive before Hook became the dark one. Just like Rumpel was a coward and a murderer before, being the dark one just upped the traits that were already there. Hook was a murderer and their relationship was abusive and then he became the dark one so he had less control. He was still the same.

[Marty McFly]

Whoa, so many pages!
Speaking of villains getting a redemption arc:
Regina was the only one who atoned for her sins. Not ALL her sins, she had MANY. but she certainly showed great progress.
1) she SAVED the people she spent years trying to kill
2) she was only good for Henry’s sake at FIRST but became good even though she didnt expect good things to happen as a reward. She gave up Henry to save the town. Etc.
She is delightfully crazy, emotional, stormy, and regrets nothing because “it got her her son”
So she might never be fully redeemed in the sense that she had all her sins erased. But as a person she definitely grew TONS

Hook, otoh, never grew at all. Look at the apology to Belle, as an example. He said “sorry?” Regina was alot more sincere in hervapology to Belle.

And yet all of this blatant hypocracy brings me to think that it is ultimately a show about good vs evil, and evil could stare you right in the face and you wouldnt realize it. (A line regina said in season 1 to david)

Hook vs Rumple

Evil vs Good

Obviously

Isnt this why they never cut Rumple a break? No matter what he is a villain? Even when he is good he is villain

When he almost died from so much darkness, he sencerely begged Belle to go with will so he wont hurt her when he is a zombie dark one when Rumple is dead. This was when he had not even a tiny flicker of humanity left in him

From what i heard Hook was not as good to Emma while a fresh DO

[PriceofMagic]

@darkonedearie, As RG stated a general rule of television is “show, don’t tell”. Hook started as a villain so he did bad things, that’s all fine and dandy because, as a villain, Hook’s not meant to be likeable. His actions in season 2 support this such as his treatment of Belle.

However, villains can sometimes be charismatic to the point that sometimes you can’t help but like them because they are so enjoyable to watch whether it be through a wicked sense of humour or such a nuanced performance. With every villain character there is a “moral event horizon”. Basically it’s how far can a villain go before they become too unlikeable. If you want to redeem your villain, you absolutely have to make sure they don’t pass the moral event horizon, and if they do and you still want to redeem them then you have to work really hard to SHOW the redemption in order to make the audience believe that it is genuine. Even then, the audience may not forgive the character for their past actions.

IMO Once has failed completely in that regard with Hook. They’ve had him cross that moral event horizon but rather than showing us him trying to redeem himself, rather than making us believe he genuinely wants to atone for his past mistakes, they’re just telling us he’s redeemed and expecting us to accept it. They seem to think and hope that if they don’t mention Hook’s past misdeeds then the audience will forget about them. The thing is though they keep showing Hook doing bad things.

I have tried to like Hook since his introduction and every season when I reach the point of thinking maybe he’s not so bad, he then goes and completely screws it up.

The only episode I genuinely did like Hook was Tallahassee when he and Emma climbed the beanstalk.
He screwed up season 2 by his actions towards Belle.
He screwed up 3A by treating Emma as a prize to be won, even declaring that he “will win it”
He screwed up 3B by basically using Henry to get in with Emma then making the decision to get Henry out of town without telling Emma anything about it.
He screwed up 4A by trying to blackmail Rumple for his own gain then crying foul when it backfired on him.
He did something in 4B that I didn’t like but I can’t remember what it was. It’s probably written in one of the favourite/least favourite moments threads for season 4.
He screwed up 5A by going for personal attacks on Emma and calling Milah “soiled”.

The more the writers try and just whitewash Hook’s misdeeds, the more unlikeable he becomes.

All magic comes with a price!

Keeper of Felix