- This topic has 25,813 replies, 124 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
*screams*
Tag. Your. Spoilers.
Names of episode, filming shots, theories, guest appearances. Omg. TAG THEM. I just had to correct some 5 posts, guys!
If you do not know how—ASK ME. For the love of heaven.
[adrotate group="5"]"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"In other news
I’m kinda hoping some of our headcanons prove right and that Firebird shows that Emma bought the red jacket because it reminded her of Neal
However this show has taught me never to hope.
Slurpeez is right. A lot of this is just salt on the wound. Especially since I’m convinced that Neal will be appearing in 512 and say goodbye to Henry. I think it’ll probably be an Emma centric with a large portion of it dedicated to Hades with the savior themes of resurrection (except for Neal of course) coming into play
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"[quote quote=317050]I’m kinda hoping some of our headcanons prove right and that Firebird shows that Emma bought the red jacket because it reminded her of Neal[/quote]
Like i said in another thread about those spoiler pics, since she is wearing the same clothes that she wears in UW, i say that this is not flashback, this is UW and she is buying another red jacket, maybe bc she lost the other one, and now she will face Hades using her armor, that is the red jacket, so that place in the spoiler pics, since there is nothing that says is NY or Boston, and cant be after she got out of Jail, means is present time in UW, they are using that to show other parts of UW, especially since appears that Emilie will film in that location as well. So i really hope this have nothing to do with Neal, bc a episode talking about jail, talking about the red jacket as armor and walls, means that Neal will be blamed and i hope that this is mostly Hades centric where he is defeated, especially bc Hades car model is actually called Firebird
"I offended you with my opinion? Ha, you should hear the ones I keep to myself".
#30DaysOfHappiness Day 8: HAPPY to announce @MRaymondJames is the official ambassador & voice for #BulliesKeepOut pic.twitter.com/CC18pgOwOJ
— BulliesKeepOut LLC (@BulliesKeepOut) February 18, 2016
"I offended you with my opinion? Ha, you should hear the ones I keep to myself".
I actually agree with you — Rumple’s search for power has been consistently presented as a symptom of his villainy. I just want to point out that on OUAT characters who consciously seek power (presumably beyond their station) tend to be cast as evil. This isn’t just Rumple — this is also Cora, Zelena, Regina, Isaac, Nimue etc By contrast, characters who accidentally fall into or are born into power (Emma, Snow, Charming, Merlin) are not considered morally suspect. This is a classic fairytale trope, but one that OUAT reproduces non-reflexively. The lack of reflexivity occasionally backfires when OUAT’s medieval universe encounters modern day sensibilities. So the idea that a desire for upward mobility always = overreaching and a sign of evil is kind of problematic
Upward mobility? You are equating Rumpel wanting to become the most evil being of his time to upward mobility? Rumpel murders people so they are scared of him. He murders people because they get in his way. He is willing to harm his son and his wife, seriously harm, to keep his power. He now, in full knowledge of what being the evil dark one does to him, still wants the power. I just don’t agree with what you are saying here. I think equating upward mobility to evil can be a problem, i just don’t think that is what is going on on Ouat.
I actually agree with you — Rumple’s search for power has been consistently presented as a symptom of his villainy. I just want to point out that on OUAT characters who consciously seek power (presumably beyond their station) tend to be cast as evil. This isn’t just Rumple — this is also Cora, Zelena, Regina, Isaac, Nimue etc By contrast, characters who accidentally fall into or are born into power (Emma, Snow, Charming, Merlin) are not considered morally suspect. This is a classic fairytale trope, but one that OUAT reproduces non-reflexively. The lack of reflexivity occasionally backfires when OUAT’s medieval universe encounters modern day sensibilities. So the idea that a desire for upward mobility always = overreaching and a sign of evil is kind of problematic
Upward mobility? You are equating Rumpel wanting to become the most evil being of his time to upward mobility? Rumpel murders people so they are scared of him. He murders people because they get in his way. He is willing to harm his son and his wife, seriously harm, to keep his power. He now, in full knowledge of what being the evil dark one does to him, still wants the power. I just don’t agree with what you are saying here. I think equating upward mobility to evil can be a problem, i just don’t think that is what is going on on Ouat.
You are misreading my argument. The part of the statement about upward mobility relates to fairytales more generally. If you look at most European folklore, you get a particular narrative: hapless protagonists, usually poor, goes on some sort of harebrained quest, and by the end of the story “stumbles into” riches, a princess, and some magical helpers. Conversely, the antagonist or foil — usually the hapless hero’s more self-interested, less hapless brother, is usually either lazy or greedy (trying to get said riches, princess etc), but fails at it miserably and gets his comeuppance. That is about the desire for power and “upward mobility” as something that is considered morally reprehensible. See my argument upthread about feudal society and so forth.
More generally, then, I was making the argument that OUAT portrays characters that are from the lower classes (see post above for list) as evil. And yes, part of that portrayal is how they are showing Rumple, including all the evil things he does. My point, then, was that on OUAT if you’re a peasant, and seek to change that somehow, you’re likely going to turn evil (and yes, murder, lie, and do other vile things along the line). So no, I am NOT equating Rumple’s desire for power to upward mobility. I’m saying poor people on OUAT => tend to turn evil.
So the argument is about representations. Similarly, for example, aggressive female sexuality on OUAT is usually portrayed as evil. By pointing this out I am not, suddenly, condoning Regina’s rape of Graham or Zelena’s rape of Robin. Bad actions are bad actions. The argument is about what sort of social person tends to perpetrate those bad actions.
I think the heart splitting is not going to work just because they have already done that and have already announced that is what they plan to do. If that is the case then why don’t they walk down there and get out just like that. They can’t that’s why. There is something else going on here with Hades having trapped people here or something.
I don’t mind you joking about that, I just wanted to know why. Well, I think there’s a reason why Jane episodes don’t have a lot of CS in them (except Tallahasse, but I don’t think she ment for Hook to be seen as a love interest), and writing the scene about Rumple in 503, maybe she hoped the writers won’t ignore that scene. But according to what you say, I can’t help but think that by tweeting this: https://twitter.com/JaneEspenson/status/673745842117853185 she might have threw some shade at A&E.
Wow, Jane. But yeah, the producers giving in to what they perceived the fans want and what ABC wanted at the expense of their story is one of the biggest problems with Ouat. I don’t think Jane is a good writer. I think she makes big mistakes in her episodes. If it wasn’t for Joss on Buffy then Buffy would not be what it is now. Jane doesn’t get all the good from Buffy on her shoulders. Also, the twist of Skin Deep, Rumpel being the beast, that was Eddy and Adam not Jane.
You can’t say that Jane can’t take credit on her good episodes and blame her on the bad ones. Every writer gets outlines from the showrunner for the episode and they need to follow those outlines. While the twists in Skin Deep might not have been Jane’s idea, the dialogues are hers, this episode could have failed with a different writer. Another example I can give is 504 and 507, both showed a rushed relationships of two new characters, but 507 handled the relationship better than 504.
"All your questions are pointless"
nother example I can give is 504 and 507, both showed a rushed relationships of two new characters, but 507 handled the relationship better than 504.
Not sure I agree with this. I think both were rushed. It’s hard not to have it rushed when it’s literally just on episode. We have obviously gotten more Belle and Rump,e episodes since then, but also Skin Deep works because it wasn’t a love story to serve the plot. It was just a love story. Arthur and Guineviere, and Merlin and Nimue….were both used to move the plot along. We needed to get backstory on Arthur and Guineviere to let us know G was a robot, and Arthur was a power hungry mad man. And we got the Nimue stuff because we needed to see the first dark one and how it happened as it relates to Merlin, the sorcerer. Both were rushed because they were forced upon us to drive the plot forward.
The topic ‘Emma + Baelfire = Swanfire’ is closed to new replies.