- This topic has 25,813 replies, 124 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
So many Harlequin Romance moments this past week. I mean, the pirate and the virgin princess go for a horse ride and then kiss in a field of roses (that are growing so strangely). Good god, it was like the cover of a really cheesy and poorly written romance novel.
Actually, that’s the problem. It’s not EVEN a Harlequin romance. Harlequins actually have a formula that works (pithily captured in this Newyorker article, for your reading amusement, and speaking of pirates and virgins).
Romance tends to work best when written (or, more generally, portrayed) from the perspective of the heroine. Some writers switch across the he/she divide, of course, but CS fails to do even that. We have a super passive Emma, essentially an object to be acted upon: especially visible in the scene where Emma is lying on the cot, when both her parents and Hook discuss her like she’s not even in the room. But that, again, might work, if the story were Emma-centric. Much like Twilight worked because it’s from 1st person — Bella can have as much personality as a paper cup, but she’s a blank slate onto which the reader can project themselves.
But the whole CS “romance” (*tiwtch*) seems to be portrayed from 3rd person omniscient (!?), which I think accounts for the utter ridiculousness of it.
The stupid field of roses actually fits with this. I’ll use a literary analogy. Consider:
Standard Harlequin style:
“The rolling tide of summer grass had engulfed the small meadow in a sweet-smelling flood of lambs’ tails, coltsfoot, feverfew, the drifting pollen from them like pale yellow dust on Linden’s bare arms as she lay full length among them.”
OUAT style:
“They were in a field. There were some pink roses growing at standardized intervals from each other. It was super romantic. Really. Have you noticed how super romantic it was? No? Pay attention. It was SUPER romantic. Should I repeat it? See, it’s a PIRATE, and a VIRGIN, and they are in a field of PINK ROSES (which, btw, stands for romantic love, in case some of you in the audience are a bit dull and have forgotten your flower symbolism). So yeah, they were kissing in this field of PINK ROSES, and then the scene fades to black because we demurely draw the curtain on what happens next. Because we are tasteful like that, and this is CS, so a SUPER TASTEFUL love story. Did we say ROMANTIC?”
Ugh, Universe save us from this mediocrity of a show.
[adrotate group="5"]But the whole CS “romance” (*tiwtch*) seems to be portrayed from 3rd person omniscient (!?), which I think accounts for the utter ridiculousness of it.
Yep. Emma declared her love for Hook in the S4 finale, but we’ve yet to be shown why. Why exactly did she claim to love him? In S4, she said she lost every man she’s ever been with, to which Hook replied he’s good at surviving. Was Emma clinging to him because he’s literally her only remaining option after Neal died? She has declared Hook changed, but what is she even basing that on? Even Hook doubted her claim in S4. The fact that he gave up his ship (which incidentally, he got back *twitch*) is what Emma S4 seemed to be basing that claim on. Emma, who used to be so closed off, said she’s an open book now that she’s the dark one; yet, so far we’ve yet to see what she’s really thinking or feeling (except for *brief* snippets when Not!Rumple seems to call her own certain realizations like the pony being smarter than the pirate).
"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
OUAT style: “They were in a field. There were some pink roses growing at standardized intervals from each other. It was super romantic. Really. Have you noticed how super romantic it was? No? Pay attention. It was SUPER romantic. Should I repeat it? See, it’s a PIRATE, and a VIRGIN, and they are in a field of PINK ROSES (which, btw, stands for romantic love, in case some of you in the audience are a bit dull and have forgotten your flower symbolism). So yeah, they were kissing in this field of PINK ROSES, and then the scene fades to black because we demurely draw the curtain on what happens next. Because we are tasteful like that, and this is CS, so a SUPER TASTEFUL love story. Did we say ROMANTIC?” Ugh, Universe save us from this mediocrity of a show.
Nevermore you can have what ever drink or sweets you want, its on me.
slurp: I can not but think that crying over dreamcatcher will not relate to Neal but more likely her mourning Hook or something that is not Neal. I guess I ‘m just use to nothing but disappointment regarding Ouat when it comes to Neal related happenings. And even if its about Neal it will probably be used to foster a CS moment in the next scene.
"I will be kind but I will speak my mind."
100% agree with @Ranisha!!!
"I offended you with my opinion? Ha, you should hear the ones I keep to myself".
Someone came up with a brilliant theory about violet.
VIOLET ISN’T REAL!
A Theory Dealing With Events from ‘Broken Kingdom’
Think about it. They are setting up Violet to be Arthur and Guinevere’s daughter:
-Arthur cleaned the stables as a boy -> Violet’s family owns the stables
-Violet looks a like a cross between Arthur and Guinevere and the OUaT casting department made some deal with the devil to when it comes to casting people who look alike.
However, Arthur was so obsessed with finding the dagger that he neglected his wife and I doubt that they would ever have had a child. But heirs are an important component to a traditional monarchy, so when Arthur spread the Sands of Avalon over Camelot to create his “perfect and whole kingdom” the sand would have also created a child to add to the illusion.
Violet is a figment created by the sands to represent Camelot’s future if it had been truly whole. When Arthur’s work is undone, she will fade along with everything else.
All magic comes with a price!
Keeper of FelixEmma being the dark one really excites me. i might even go back to watching it if hook wails and whines until Emma relents and GIVES him the dagger 🙂
then it will be Rumple/Zelena all over again. its a great comparison to cs after all
btw did emma ever find out about Milah being Baelfire’s mother?i might even go back to watching it if hook wails and whines until Emma relents and GIVES him the dagger 🙂
She gives the dagger to Regina and now Emma has it. Hook is never given it
emma ever find out about Milah being Baelfire’s mother?
No
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"Ooooooh thats an interesting theory POM….. Hmmmm. I am going with that ad being true. The whole stable thing rubbed me as odd last episode and I briefly wondered if it meant anything. I also Google’d the name of her horse (Nichodemus) and found there is some character from something involving Arthur and Merlin with that name but couldn’t find anything major. All I know is,violet is not what she seems.
How bad for Henry though. Falls for a girl…who doesn’t even exist xD"I could have the giant duck as my steed!" --Daniel Radcliffe
Keeper Of Tamara's Taser , Jafar's Staff, Kitsis’s Glasses , Ariel’s Tail, Dopey's Hat , Peter Pan’s Shadow, Outfit, & Pied Cloak,Red Queen's Castle, White Rabbit's Power To World Hop, Zelena's BroomStick, & ALL MAGICOoooooh thats an interesting theory POM….. Hmmmm. I am going with that ad being true. The whole stable thing rubbed me as odd last episode and I briefly wondered if it meant anything. I also Google’d the name of her horse (Nichodemus) and found there is some character from something involving Arthur and Merlin with that name but couldn’t find anything major. All I know is,violet is not what she seems. How bad for Henry though. Falls for a girl…who doesn’t even exist xD
<p style=”text-align: left;”>
</p>
<p style=”text-align: left;”>That IS an interesting theory. There’s of course the Biblical Nicodemus, but the name comes from Ancient Greek, and according to Professor Google means “the victory of the people”. Maybe it’s literally the people’s revenge (as in Camelot peasantry rebelling against being turned into a Potemkin village) Kidding. Sort of.</p>
<p style=”text-align: left;”>I totally buy it that Violet is a magical construct. Hopefully Blue will make an appearance and turn her into a “real girl.”</p>
<p style=”text-align: left;”>Poor Henry.</p>I actually have no problem with Emma being a little thief pre-Neal. She was a runaway from the foster system so she had to have some skills to survive. Like mentioned she was stealing a car when she met Neal, it just happened the car was already stolen. She wasn’t an angel or new to the game, imo. It’s actually one of the only points of continuity I’ve heard of recently with the series.
If anything, it actually brings them closer together. So did her relationship with Ingrid, incidentally. Also, I’m pretty sure, they are now the only two characters on there show to be seen as a baby, child, teen, and adult.
So, yay! Followup!
The topic ‘Emma + Baelfire = Swanfire’ is closed to new replies.