New Villain Cast For Second Half of Season 3

[Phee]

We are forgetting the whole Dark One theory about the witch.

I dunno, I kinda feel like the whole Dark One curse is gonna dissipate by the end of 311 and they’ll wrap up that storyline. Rumple’s using the dagger to stab Pan, who loses his powers and reverts to looking like Malcolm, and Belle’s supposed to fall down crying at some point, so I’m not sure how it’ll all play out, but I think the Dark One is gonna be over and done with in some way.

Maybe Pan gets the dagger and stabs Rumple, then Pan becomes the Dark One. Belle’s tears cure Rumple, and then he stabs Pan. But maybe Rumple’s now immune to the Dark One curse because he’s been cured of it once before, and so the curse has nowhere to go, and so it goes *poof*.

I get the feeling that this new evil power will be something/one totally new.

[RumplesGirl]

We’re all just speculating lol. 🙂

A lot of people thought PP and NL would have something to do with the Dark One’s curse as well but that’s looking less likely. Whatever the origin of the Dark One’s curse is, I feel like that might be a final season sort of deal. At this point, we know that Mader’s character (most likely WWW) has a history with Regina and my own headcanon is that Regina has the Ruby(whatever color they go with) slippers and WWW wants them back because they are the source of power in Oz. (probably not even close to being true but we’re just getting started) 🙂

EDIT based on Phee’s post

Agreed. We have yet to see the “undoing” but I strongly suspect it means Rumple loosing the Dark One’s ability and it being burnt off into the air, like Cora said back in The Miller’s Daughter

 

 

"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"

[TheWatcher]

We’re all just speculating lol. A lot of people thought PP and NL would have something to do with the Dark One’s curse as well but that’s looking less likely. Whatever the origin of the Dark One’s curse is, I feel like that might be a final season sort of deal. At this point, we know that Mader’s character (most likely WWW) has a history with Regina and my own headcanon is that Regina has the Ruby(whatever color they go with) slippers and WWW wants them back because they are the source of power in Oz. (probably not even close to being true but we’re just getting started) EDIT based on Phee’s post Agreed. We have yet to see the “undoing” but I strongly suspect it means Rumple loosing the Dark One’s ability and it being burnt off into the air, like Cora said back in The Miller’s Daughter

I am still holding belief that Chernabog is the creator and original of the Dark One curse. And if she has a history with Regina, then she may have a history with Cora and Cora has a history with Eva and Eva sounds like Evanora and Eva had ruby slippers and Evanora will eventually have ruby slippers… So boom >>

"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 MAGIC

[RumplesGirl]

I am still holding belief that Chernabog is the creator and original of the Dark One curse. And if she has a history with Regina, then she may have a history with Cora and Cora has a history with Eva and Eva sounds like Evanora and Eva had ruby slippers and Evanora will eventually have ruby slippers… So boom >>

People commented on Ava’s ruby slippers when we saw them before. I’m not sure your casual viewer noticed or would remember a character who appeared once in a flashback randomly wearing red slippers. Remember: we’re lunatics. We notice everything.  I’m not wholly discounting it, but it’s not as neat and tidy as I’d like ONCE’s storytelling to be (granted, the storyttelling is often unwieldy as of late). Maybe Ava just really liked the color red. She was wearing a very red dress before she got sick. Maybe Snow, remembering her mother’s fondness for the color, put her in red shoes on her funeral bed as a gesture of love.

"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"

[Phee]

And if she has a history with Regina, then she may have a history with Cora and Cora has a history with Eva and Eva sounds like Evanora and Eva had ruby slippers and Evanora will eventually have ruby slippers… So boom >>

I could see there being an Eva connection to the Oz story, but more because of her other shoes, rather than her red shoes. The red shoes might have been dropping a hint, but I think that Eva actually referring to her ruined shoes as “slippers” could be a bigger hint. We dunno if they could show the actual ruby slippers for legal reasons. I know we’ve had Neal mention them, but that term was probably used because it was a quick reference that people would automatically get. I know there’s been some speculation that maybe Bae went to Oz at some point, but I don’t think so. I think he threw the “ruby slippers” out there because it’s something he’d seen in the movie, (we did have him mentioning movies to Mulan).

So maybe Eva’s related to the Oz witches, or maybe she had the magical slippers for some other reason, but either way, I think they could build on those shoe hints. Sure, casual viewers wouldn’t remember them, but that’s easy fixed with a shot in the “previously on OUAT” clip to refresh their memories, so it’d make sense to casual viewers, and us freaks can totally geek out over it, and everyone’s happy.

[RumplesGirl]

I know we’ve had Neal mention them, but that term was probably used because it was a quick reference that people would automatically get. I know there’s been some speculation that maybe Bae went to Oz at some point, but I don’t think so. I think he threw the “ruby slippers” out there because it’s something he’d seen in the movie, (we did have him mentioning movies to Mulan).

Did he actually say “ruby slippers” or did he just say slippers? Because saying “slippers” is perfectly legal. It’s adding the color part that MGM would probably frown upon. They can make as many references to slippers as they want. The audience is smart enough to get it. And they can have the slippers themselves be sliver because the book is now part of public domain, I believe. So there is no issue there.

I agree that if the red shoes are anything, it’s just yet another in a long line of Oz references that somehow revolve around Regina. Think about. Almost every time we get an Oz reference it’s from Regina or is spoken by someone who’s closest relationship is Regina: “turn green” (We are Both–Regina); Slippers reference #1 (Rumple and Jefferson, Regina in room); constantly calling Dr. Frankie “the wizard” (The Doctor–Regina) The green curtains in hat (Hat Trick–Regina and Jefferson); Yellow Brick Road (Lacey–Regina); Munchkin reference (Ariel–Regina); ruby slippers on Eva at funeral when Cora came in (The Queen is Dead–Cora, closest relationship to Regina); Ava’a reference to slippers (The Miller’s Daughter–Cora, closest relationship to Regina)

The one outlier seems to be Neal’s reference to them in 303. But like Phee said, he was looking for a portal and knew slippers would work because he’s lived in our world and knows the movies.

But those red slippers themselves are probably bot THE ruby slippers due to copyright. Unless there is a loop hole like “different color red”

"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"

[Phee]

Did he actually say “ruby slippers” or did he just say slippers? Because saying “slippers” is perfectly legal. It’s adding the color part that MGM would probably frown upon.

Pretty sure he said the colour. Lemme go check…
“Lots of things make portals, beans, magic mirrors, ruby slippers, some kinds of ashes…”

[RumplesGirl]

RumplesGirl wrote: Did he actually say “ruby slippers” or did he just say slippers? Because saying “slippers” is perfectly legal. It’s adding the color part that MGM would probably frown upon.

Pretty sure he said the colour. Lemme go check…
“Lots of things make portals, beans, magic mirrors, ruby slippers, some kinds of ashes…”

Huh. Well that’s interesting. And MGM let them? I mean it could be a one time thing, though. The episode right before had them drop a reference to Rufio who is owned by Sony (I think). Something to ponder though.

"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"

[killianhookfan]

I’m not exactly sure how those kinds of  things work (my nephew actually just got a job with a financial firm working in the department that consults with companies helping them determine how much money they have lost when copyright infringement had occured – he is still in his last year of college so he hasn’t done anything there yet so he is of no help yet!).  But I’m guessing that just making a reference to something like “ruby slippers” without an actual storyline or product that would draw an audience or attract customers would not be a problem.  So since Neal said “ruby slippers” everyone knows what he was referring to but by mentioning them it didn’t actually attract more viewers to that episode or to the series and it didn’t result in a product being sold.  It was literally just saying two words that when said together make people think of something specific.  Now if the episode had been called “Ruby Slippers” I think that would be different because Warner Brothers could argue that people decided to watch the episode because they thought it would be about the Wizard of Oz based upon a clear 1939 movie reference.  Does that make sense????

[RumplesGirl]

I’m not exactly sure how those kinds of things work (my nephew actually just got a job with a financial firm working in the department that consults with companies helping them determine how much money they have lost when copyright infringement had occured – he is still in his last year of college so he hasn’t done anything there yet so he is of no help yet!). But I’m guessing that just making a reference to something like “ruby slippers” without an actual storyline or product that would draw an audience or attract customers would not be a problem. So since Neal said “ruby slippers” everyone knows what he was referring to but by mentioning them it didn’t actually attract more viewers to that episode or to the series and it didn’t result in a product being sold. It was literally just saying two words that when said together make people think of something specific. Now if the episode had been called “Ruby Slippers” I think that would be different because Warner Brothers could argue that people decided to watch the episode because they thought it would be about the Wizard of Oz based upon a clear 1939 movie reference. Does that make sense????

It does, actually. Thanks for that; ruby slippers could be referring to just and red shoes. We, the audience, get the reference but they aren’t actually referring to THOSE specific ones from the movie because not all ruby slippers are Dorothy’s ruby slippers. So if Neal had said “Dorothy’s ruby slippers” that wold have cost Disney a pretty penny.

"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"

[Author]

Posts