Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Hmm, allow me to preface this post by saying that I definitely didn’t intend for this to be such a long and rant-y post, so I’m sorry about that, and I will certainly understand if no one actually reads it all! I also wanted to react to the big possible spoiler in this post, but I think I’ll have to do that in another one…
I love those GIF comparison things–I’ve seen a couple of versions on Tumblr lately, and it just really brings home how they never really could’ve gotten back together. I mean in “Manhattan”, the first time we see them together in the present, it sure didn’t seem like Neal was being set up as a potential love interest at all…First he irrationally gets mad at her for bringing his father to him, then tells her “If I had [known who you were], I wouldn’t have gone near you”, and then nearly makes her break a deal with his father (despite telling him a few minutes later “I’ve seen what you do to people who break deals”). And then my favorite part of that whole thing has to be that speech Neal gave to Rumple about how he (Rumple) had messed up so badly and abandoned Bae and there was no way he (Neal) was going to let his father back into his life…And yet when Emma points out that he did the same thing to her (and arguably it was worse because while Rumple spent hundreds of years trying to get to his son, Neal didn’t even try to go back to Emma even after he got August’s post card), he just dismisses it by saying “Okay, I get it; we’re all messed up,” like it’s no big deal. Just…the hypocrisy, I can’t.
And that “Yeah, well, he’s my kid too so you don’t get to make that decision by yourself anymore” regarding Henry. Seriously? He had no right to say that. If you intentionally disappear after allowing your ex-girlfriend, with whom you’ve recently had (probably unsafe) sex, to be imprisoned for your crimes, then I’d think you forfeit any kind of parental rights. It’s not like she could have contacted him from prison to let him know about Henry, and honestly the possibility of a pregnancy probably should’ve crossed Neal’s mind at some point because there’s always that chance.
And heck, Neal didn’t know it at the time, but technically Emma wouldn’t have had any legal rights to Henry either (although also if we’re going by the letter of the law Regina would be in jail for murder, attempted murder, unlawful imprisonment, etc., so she would’ve lost custody anyway) because Emma had given Henry up for adoption. She did that because she didn’t believe she was capable of being a mother, having just been used and discarded (as far as she knew) by said child’s father. So no, Neal’s the one who shouldn’t have been able to make any kind of decisions for Henry.
Of course I get that, after knowing the whole story, it was the right thing to do to leave it up to Henry whether he spent any time with his father and that he wasn’t the terrible person that Emma would have thought he was. And no, Emma shouldn’t have lied to Henry about who his father was–although really, if she’d been completely honest with him, I feel like Henry’s first reaction upon meeting Neal would’ve been a very negative one since all he would have known about the man was that he’d left his mother pregnant and in jail for his crime, leaving her feeling so broken that she’d had to give Henry up for adoption.
Sorry for the long rant that really has very little to do with CS (well, I’ll quick make the connection–like I said earlier, Neal’s first present-day interaction with Emma sure didn’t seem like the beginning of a love story, and I can’t help but compare that to Hook’s dynamic with her in “Tallahassee”, which definitely did give off that vibe despite ending on a decidedly sour note). I think one reason I feel rather strongly about this stuff is that the opening scene of season 3, where Emma is shackled to the hospital bed while giving birth and then won’t even allow herself to look at her son because she’s sure she’s not good enough for him and has to give him up so he can have a good life, is for me easily one of the–if not the–most heartbreaking and affecting scenes in the whole series.
[adrotate group="5"]Yeah…at this point I’m kinda hoping the moderator just sifts through questions submitted via Twitter and stuff and they don’t actually have fans stand up and ask questions themselves at all. It also tends to be more efficient and balanced that way, so we’d probably get to hear more from the actual panelists.
But if they do have a fan Q&A and someone tries to drag up rape culture/misogyny in reference to CS, I’m going to scream. (Of course being over 2,600 miles away it’s not like that’d mean much, but I’m just saying.) That just drives me nuts–not only because it’s blatantly untrue, but also because it cheapens and diminishes the issue itself. Ugh.
First of all, thanks for the well wishes, everyone! I was pretty much able to keep up with this thread on my iPad even if it’s a pain to post from it. But aside from being way too hot, I had a fairly successful trip. 🙂
What was interesting about that clip is Hook says “Red Jackets aren’t in vogue until never”. “In vogue” doesn’t seem like something they would say in the EF so has the modern world started to rub off on Hook? Has Hook been reading Vogue magazine?
Haha, Hook practically has his own language with all the smaaaart people words.
How sexy is an extensive vocabulary?! 😉 Anyway, like I’ve said before, I’m a major language nerd. And because of that, I felt the need to explore the history and etymology of the word “vogue”…its use in English dates from the late sixteenth century (and the first recorded use of the phrase “in vogue” was in 1643), and it seems like an especially appropriate word for Hook to use–it has its roots in the French “voguer” meaning “to sail”. 🙂
(The current usage seems to have come from the idea of fashions coming in waves or something. Also I should say that most of my information comes from http://www.etymonline.com)
Wow–maybe they should wait and see how Elsa et al are received on OUAT itself…everyone seems to be getting a little ahead of themselves, aren’t they? Haha. 😉
How would Belle know that Rumple was a terrible person and made Milah’s life miserable? She only had Hook’s word for it and since he’d just pointed a gun in her face and had tried to kill her in the library and in Regina’s cell……. I can see why Belle didn’t think much of Hook. Also the failure of Rumple and Milah’s marriage can’t solely be blamed on Rumple, Milah played her part as well.
Well that’s why I phrased the above as a question–she still could have just asked Rumple about it. At the very least I’d think that what Hook said and the way he said it would have made her ask the question. Her complete lack of concern and/or curiosity is what gets to me. ETA: Also all of what @ellemo78 said!
And I don’t know…I’ve said how I feel about Milah here before, but I really would put the majority of the blame for their situation on Rumple. The fact that really gives me that impression is that he refused to even try to make their lives better by moving somewhere where no one would know them–that night before she left, she gave him one last chance and he still refused to make an effort for her and their marriage after his actions caused them to become pariahs in their community.
Sorry for the kinda long and decidedly off-topic post; I really should be packing for my trip tomorrow, so of course I’m procrastinating as much as possible… 😉
Oh, and regarding the whole redemption thing…Hook haters keep saying that he only did good things in order to “win” Emma. That’s obviously not true because he doesn’t even tell her what he’s done. First of all when he saved Charming’s life in Neverland–yes, he said “I didn’t do it for you, mate”, but then when they do get back to the group, Hook wasn’t even going to bring it up at all. It was Charming who was all “Hook saved my life!” even though Hook said “are you sure you want to bring this up?”. And yes he then tried to get Emma to kiss him, but I got the impression that it was just his usual flirty joking around and he didn’t actually expect her to do it. I mean, who grabbed the lapels of whose jacket? It seems to me that if he did save him for Emma, then it was in an “I-love-you-so-I-don’t-want-you-to-lose-the-father-you-just-found” way, not an “I-want-to-win-points-to-get-in-your-pants” way.
And the same applies to trading the Jolly Roger for a magic bean…if he’d done it to get credit with Emma, he would’ve brought it up himself and kept talking about it whenever possible, trying to make her feel guilty that he gave up his ship and she’s not making a big enough fuss over him. But again, he only even told Emma because she asked and he had no choice. He didn’t even mention it when he was first telling the story, she had to keep asking. (“How did you get your hands on a magic bean?” “Okay, what was so valuable that you could trade it for a bean?”) If he was trying to use the fact that he’d sacrificed his home for her as a way to make her feel obligated to return his affections, he was doing a REALLY lousy job of it.
So yeah…I had to get that out because I’m sick of some of these stupid arguments, haha. 🙂
…despite Belle’s assessment of his heart!
That always bugged me. And still bugs me when I watch that episode. I’m sorry, but I’m glad Hook shot Belle. She’s just so blinded (stupid) by her love. How can she still think the sun shines out of Rumpel’s proverbial, esp in light of what Hook told her about how Milah died? I am totally with Hook when he asks ‘how can you fight for a man like that?’ That’s a damn good question. She thinks Rumpel has reformed, but he hasn’t. He’s still a lying and manipulative <insert-expletive-here>. Just because he hasn’t got his ugly exterior any more doesn’t mean he’s still not ugly on the inside. Hook’s heart definitely not rotten but I think the jury is still out on Rumpel’s. (Yeah I know it’s not about CS, but I needed to get that off my chest)
To be fair to Belle, a guy who she only met once before and tried to kill her has now just targeted her again and stolen the one thing that would enable Rumple to find his son. I don’t blame her for disliking the guy. Why would she immediately believe Hook, the guy who tried to kill her, over Rumple? Belle is on better terms with Hook now but at the time he’d just pointed a gun in her face so I can’t blame her for being all “your heart is rotten”. Hook then shot her over the town line so she’d lose her memory. Hook got off very lightly if the worst he got from Belle was an insult. Belle was obviously going to take Rumple’s side over Hook’s because he was her true love, to expect otherwise would be unrealistic.
I’m not saying she should necessarily believe him right away, but if she just asked Rumple “Hey, so you mentioned that your first wife died…did you skip the part about your having murdered her because she had the audacity to leave you when you were a terrible husband and made her life miserable?” I do think her reaction to that was not realistic, or at least not healthy. I’d be very concerned if I found out a guy I was in love with had murdered his first wife…
Here’s a question: Pan referred to Hook as a “one-handed pirate with a drinking problem” and we have seen Hook drinking from his flask several times throughout season 3. Do you think that comment was just a throwaway line or a hint of a potential future storyline involving Hook dealing with self-image issues and alcohol addiction?
That’s an interesting idea…I just took it as a sort of funny/sad line and yet another instance of Pan being a jerk. I never really saw Hook as being an actual alcoholic, but then I don’t know a whole lot about the subject. Besides the scene in the finale with past Hook, have we ever seen him actually drunk, or just drinking from the flask every so often?
On the self-image thing, I could probably see him having a few I’m-not-good-enough moments (either for Emma specifically or just to be accepted amongst the “good guys”), depending on what happens.
I always figured that he was able to separate himself from his father for a little bit through “hysterical strength”, that surge of adrenaline or something (it’s not very well understood) that people can get in life-or-death situations like when you hear about people lifting up cars to free someone or whatever.
And regarding the finale flashback, when was that scene supposed to have taken place? Was that supposed to be like their first date or was that something that happened later? I couldn’t tell for sure. And I guess that in addition to the story element (establishing Emma’s definition of home), it felt to me like that scene was also a send-off to the character since we most likely won’t see him again. And maybe it was supposed to sort of end his story on a somewhat positive note instead of dwelling on the (weird and, to many, unsatisfying) way he died…? I don’t know.
Oh that’s interesting, I read that final ‘bad form’ as being directed at himself. Hook had just been having that inner discussion about whether he or Pan were good or bad form. And came to the conclusion he had bad form for wanting to have good form (he had concluded Pan had good form) So for Hook to want to be sent to the crocodile was a confirmation of his own bad form. (sorry, a bit confusing with all the ‘forms’)
I’m pretty sure it was said to Pan…earlier in the duel we get this: “Hook was fighting now without hope. That passionate breast no longer asked for life; but for one boon it craved: to see Peter show bad form before it was cold forever.” Then later it says “At last Hook had got the boon for which he craved…’Bad form,’ he cried jeeringly, and went content to the crocodile.” So his “boon” was to see Peter show bad form, and I also don’t think he would have died “content” if he himself had been showing bad form. That’s why I read it how I did, anyway. 🙂
