Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
May 27, 2013 at 1:29 am in reply to: which characters you hate? (no flaming or bashing allowed) #196209
kfchimera
ParticipantI definitely see a situation coming up where they can get Henry, but possibly have to risk the other lost children being left there forever, harmed in some way or even risk their being killed. Regina will react like “the problem is what again?” and Emma, Snow and Charming will be horrified. I’m not sure where Rumpel and Hook will fall in that scenario. There’s also the question of how to react to GOAT–they may have a confrontation with them, where Regina will of course want to unleash her fury at what they did to her. Since Tamara shot Neal, Rumpel and Hook may just want to show Tamara that magic isn’t the only thing that comes with a price. I don’t see Emma or the Charmings going in for vengeance, though.
[adrotate group="5"]“If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?” -- Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland & Through the Looking-Glass
May 26, 2013 at 11:03 pm in reply to: which characters you hate? (no flaming or bashing allowed) #196186kfchimera
ParticipantI have a feeling you were writing that while I was writing Yuka-Chan, because we sort of talked about the same thing far as Snow doing what she did to purify her heart, so no you aren’t the only one to feel that way. I agree that I get a little irked at Snow and the “goody-two shoes” attitude sometimes, but it is a good contrast to the more practical Emma. They’re both good, but sometimes Snow and Charming seem idealistic–but that is where they get to prove their fairy-tale heroics, that they have faith that good will come out in the end.
That is an interesting thought about an act being good because God (or our heroes) do it.
I don’t think in the show we quite have that kind of morality by authority (Xavier seemed to think that way, and may have influenced Cora and Regina’s thinking). Yet those characters are not portrayed as heroes. Our heroes are shown to worry about whether they are making the right call, and don’t seem to think that whatever they do will be the good choice, just because they are the ones making that choice. They had that whole conference on saving Greg Mendel when he was just the random stranger in a car accident. They decided that they would try to save his life, despite the potential risk to the town. I think the hero characters are shown as struggling to choose the right action, while the villains are often acting out of impulse/sadness/anger. Unless we’re talking about GOAT–and we don’t really know what is driving them! We only think it’s this anti-magic thing, but I half think we’ll get another twist on that.“If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?” -- Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland & Through the Looking-Glass
May 26, 2013 at 10:31 pm in reply to: which characters you hate? (no flaming or bashing allowed) #196182kfchimera
ParticipantI wrote most of my response while running a bit late for something, so I didn’t see Demi and RG’s posts. I also messed up some formatting, with quotes running into my responses! Sorry about that!
I am genuinely interested in what people see as Neal’s flaws–it isn’t about changing someone’s mind. We know all the characters are written as having some flaws, that is what makes them interesting. So I appreciate it when someone can articulate why they don’t like something just like when they can explain why they do like it. Sometimes people can’t as it is more of a visceral thing. Sometimes though we can get into an interesting discussion of what assumptions people are making about those ambiguous or misleading scenes that are in the show.
Besides assumptions we all make about scenes, I also see a difference between results and intentions affecting people’s opinions. The way I see it, a character is responsible for his /her intentions–but the plot controls the results. Sometimes you have to infer the intentions from the results, but sometimes it is revealed through dialog. When Cora tries to take Emma’s heart, it is the plot that dictates that she cannot do it, not any reluctance or goodness on Cora’s part. She WOULD have killed Emma, but the plot required that she not be able to do it. Similarly, Rumpel WOULD have killed Henry, but Snow & Co show up to tell him the bad news. That speaks to the darkness in Rumpel’s character at that point in time. Some people will take the opposite view–if Rumpel were really so bad, he would have finished Henry off or something like that.
Heroes get “plot” armor a lot, and sometimes that might make us judge villains less harshly than their intentions might otherwise push us to hate them. The opposite happens with Heroes too–their good intentions might have horrible results, and some people might point to all the trouble they caused or could have caused. Like someone said, Snow risking all the lives of SB to save Regina, was kind of selfish. She wanted to take that risk because of the darkness in her heart. She wasn’t even really that sorry to see Regina go, or that sure this other plan would work, but she felt she had to try for the noble, good, heroic thing despite all that. The plot worked in her favor, but the writers could easily have written it the other way (and it would be a tragedy). Sometimes the hero fails, because that is what leads to more complications for continuing adventures. So they save Regina, but because of their being distracted, Henry gets taken.
What is worse then, a character who intends to hurt but gets saved by the plot or a character who wants to do something good, but the plot swerves to make something bad happen? 😈 😆
“If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?” -- Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland & Through the Looking-Glass
May 26, 2013 at 4:47 pm in reply to: which characters you hate? (no flaming or bashing allowed) #196145kfchimera
Participant@obisgirl wrote:
I think his argument with his dad after breaking up Gold/Lacey’s bullying of Dr. Whale exemplifies this the best. He doesn’t see the full picture here. Regina cursed Belle, gave her fake memories and when he sees Golden Lacey bullying Whale, he’s like “I knew you haven’t changed.” Storybrooke’s a small town and he doesn’t know that Regina cursed Belle and the only way Gold can be with her is to be bad?
That doesn’t make sense to me. That was not the only way Gold could have behaved. It was how Gold chose to behave. Yes, he fell into a trap, set by Regina, but that was her point in setting it in the first place. She wanted to prove he had not changed, and could not resist the darkness inside himself. Rumpel proved Regina right a bit, and disappointed many of us. We had people thinking “Oh, he’ll be the one to turn Lacey back to Belle by refusing to be a dark person” We hoped, but it turned out he wasn’t just playing along, he really was going on a bender with Lacey, letting his darkness run amok. Maybe Neal heard Gold saying he was stepping on Whale’s neck just for looking at Lacey. Just because Neal doesn’t see the full picture does not mean he is seeing things in black and white.
As for not knowing the whole story, his reaction might have been even worse, since that “whole story” would have to include the facts that Rumpel was conflicted about Henry. Remember, Gold was still thinking about that prophecy and what to do, even before Neal made his speech. We don’t know exactly when Gold decided to kill Henry, but we do know he was not in fluffy Grandpastilskin mode right from Manhattan. So while Gold had changed some, from his power hungry-full-on-Dark-One days, there was still a lot of truth to what Neal was saying. Despite that kernel of good, the one Belle sees, there was still a lot of dark and that was what Neal probably meant had not changed about Rumpel.
Neal was also upset that since he had been in town, Rumpel had not made any effort to meet Tamara, find out about his life, and such. When Neal comments on that, Rumpel’s response is pretty disdainful. Rumpel probably was right in what he said, but how he said it did nothing to change Neal’s view that Rumpel was an angry, cowardly, man who would cause a lot of pain for those around him. Remember, when Rumpel and Neal met, part of Rumpel’s reconcilliation was to offer to turn Neal to 14. This after of course knowing that Neal now had a son. What the pick your obscenity was that?
@obisgirl wrote:
In Manhattan, Emma had to run after him to catch him, cause Neal was still running away from her and when she did, Neal yelled at her, (it’s almost if he doesn’t call her names) and he told her that if he had known about her he would never have approached her.
Neal ran when he didn’t know who it was. When he knew it was Emma, he didn’t run away, but he walked to the bar to help calm things down. Plus, he didn’t want to be out in the street discussing “all that” magic stuff. Probably a wise move.
@obisgirl wrote:
Do you realize how rude it is to say that? Emma needed to be told she did matter to him, that she meant something but Neal laughed at her. It could be because he was nervous and yet, at the bar, Neal could have apologized but he didn’t.
He could have done a better apology, but that statement was NOT rude. She was accusing him of having planned their meeting in the first place, that all their experiences were just some big con he ran on her. THAT could be taken as rude, but he doesn’t take it that way. He can see how hurt she is, and he is trying to convince her by telling her the literal truth. He’s saying not only did he NOT plan it–the last thing he would have wanted was to meet someone from FTL. That’s different than saying having met her, he cared nothing for her and regretted meeting her. He should have been more tactful, yes, but for both of them, it was really emotional and a surprise.
@obisgirl wrote:
Why not apologizing back then? Why not telling her she did matter to him?
It is not easy sometimes to find the words when caught off guard. That was how he was in the bar scene. He doesn’t want to hear his father’s apologies, and he thinks Emma doesn’t really want to hear his, because he knows how crazy everything will sound to her. He’s very halting in how he speaks. He’s feeling a lot of guilt, and also, he’s realized that this moment he never thought would happen is happening. And it is happening after he’s gone and gotten engaged to Tamara. He is in a world of mixed, muddled emotions. He’s not trying to be rude,insult her, or undermine what she meant to him. He asks about her necklace, asks if anything good came out of their relationship, and she is the one who shuts him down.
He was looking for a sign of hope and she was not in the frame of mind then to give it to him. He doesn’t tell her to stop yelling at him, or contradict that she is the only one with a right to be angry. He is upset about his father finding him, yes, but he quickly puts it out to her that she never has to see him again, if she lies to his father. It’s a test, I think, because he does follow her back to the apartment, ready to rescue her from his father. He comes back for her at his apartment, even though he’d made this deal.
@obisgirl wrote:
Then, there’s looking back to the event post-Manhattan. Remember, how we all hated how Henry treated Emma after he found out that Neal, his bio-dad was alive? All that time together and Neal never sat Henry down and explained to him that Emma was trying to protect him and never meant to lie and hurt him? ‘Cause that would have been the fatherly thing to do, to call him out on his rudeness towards his mom. It never happened.
That’s a harsh assessment. Neal just found out he was a father, and he wasn’t sure how to handle anything. Kids don’t always respond well to parenting from people who don’t have an existing relationship with them. If Neal had said anything to point out Henry was not respecting his mother, all he might have accomplished was Henry shutting him out too. He could have been more on the ball there, but it was definitely a complicated situation.
@obisgirl wrote:
Neal keeps mocking Emma, trying to get a jealous reaction from her. This is very childish and mean behavior. Emma is wounded because he found Tallahassee with someone else, because he moved on and it’s like Neal is trying to prove to her that he’s over her now. It’s mean, rude and unacceptable.
Maybe he isn’t being as mature as he could, but again, it’s a difficult situation. He knows he hurt Emma, but he doesn’t want to hurt Tamara either. He still isn’t sure of what he feels, and what Emma feels. I don’t think he was being rude or mean.
@obisgirl wrote:
He never believed her, in her aptitudes and skills, everything that makes her Emma. He doubts her, he never believes her and treats her like a child. Yes, Emma’s super power doesn’t work sometimes but come on, she was spot on about Tamara the whole time and it wasn’t jealousy or had nothing to do with wanting to get back together with her ex.
I don’t see him treating her like a child, nor any evidence that he “never” believed in her. They seemed to be pretty equal partners back in their thief days. She was right about Tamara, but she did also have feelings she was repressing. A&E meant for her to be repressing her feelings, so that was their intention in how they had the scenes acted, directed and written. She didn’t want to get back together, per se, but she wasn’t totally over it either. So there was a lot of emotional turmoil for both of them charging their interactions. His guilt about leaving her, her hurt over having been left, their unresolved connection and love for each other, combined with his commitment to Tamara. Then on the face of it–“come on” as you say, if we the audience hadn’t seen the scenes of Tamara being evil and sneaky, what would you have thought? Remember when everyone was ragging on Tamara being evil from just a snippet in Manhattan? It seemed ridiculous to think this NY girl would have anything to do with FTL. We were supposed to think that. That’s how Neal was thinking of it–so it isn’t that he didn’t believe her even in the face of solid evidence. It was a pretty out-there thing to think, and he didn’t want to believe it could be true on top of that. She was even pretty quick to think it was “just” Greg Mendel when Charming and Snow told her they found Regina, until Tamara walked around the corner.
*edit to fix quote format
“If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?” -- Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland & Through the Looking-Glass
May 26, 2013 at 5:28 am in reply to: which characters you hate? (no flaming or bashing allowed) #196118kfchimera
ParticipantWhat things does Neal see as “black and white”? I don’t see him as belittling Emma to make her doubt herself. They have a level of familiarity with each other, and they may rib each other, but they also support each other. He tells her, when they are having that conversation about what August meant about danger to Storybrooke, that Emma always finds what she is looking for. He is supporting her to say she will figure the mystery out. When he and Emma argue about his having invited Tamara, he admits to not having thought it through. If he saw things as black and white, I don’t think he would have admitted that. He seems conflicted a lot of the time–like when he tells Rumpel he didn’t know Rumpel had it in him (regarding the speech to Belle), but then adds he is still angry.
The one thing he does see as absolute is his duty and love for Henry–and I think that is a good thing.
Also, I don’t fault Neal for not believing Emma’s “superpower” when she doesn’t always listen to it herself, nor has it shown to be accurate all the time. Sydney Glass lied to her, and she thought Regina did not lie about Archie’s murder but then had to go with the circumstantial magical evidence of a dog, despite what her “superpower” told her. In Tamara’s case, they tried to find circumstantial evidence–Neal believed Emma enough to at least look. Beyond that, I saw his reluctance to believe her as based on what he wanted to be true–if Emma was right, that she wasn’t emotional and Tamara was lying, then neither woman loved him, the other way (if she were being a jealous ex), they both do. Given his history, that’s a lot of betrayal to take in, versus believing what he wanted to be true, that he was loved and wanted.
Now, I could see disliking Neal because he was waffling a bit David-Nolan style. It can be hard to hurt or break someone’s heart, but it is the right thing to do, rather than two-time or lead someone on. So I don’t like that Neal was less than forthright about Tamara, and not entirely sending out the right signals to Emma. Even if Tamara turned out to be a two-timing evil schemer, Neal didn’t know she wasn’t the nice NY girl next door she had appeared to be. So he should have been more honest with himself and with her.
“If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?” -- Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland & Through the Looking-Glass
kfchimera
ParticipantThe speculation is what led me to these boards. We’re often wrong in wild and funny ways, & far more often than we guess right, but this experience is something enjoyable in itself. 😆
“If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?” -- Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland & Through the Looking-Glass
kfchimera
ParticipantAt the time, we all seemed to think it was Rumpel, who made the EQ and Mally look “positively moral”, but if it’s PP that opens up lots of storyline, doesn’t it?
“If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?” -- Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland & Through the Looking-Glass
kfchimera
ParticipantThere are always scenes we are not shown. Just because we do not see how August knew, doesn’t mean it had to have happened on some previous trip. How do we even know Henry kept the book at the castle from the moment he got the book? At some point Henry decides it is too dangerous to keep it in his own house–but we don’t know when that was. It could have been after Emma came to SB that Henry moved it out to the castle. Even if before Emma came to town, that still begs the question of how August would have known even if he had been in town before. So it still goes back to–he might have spied,like RumplesGirl says or magic was involved. We know August was outside Henry’s house “fixing” his Bike, and hanging around Henry enough that it spooked Regina into telling Emma to watch August.
So if we never see anything more, my guess is August spied and then dug up the book. It is also possible that August knew Henry was supposed to get the book as a trigger, and knew to look for it so he could add his story.
We don’t know anything yet that says what must have happened, only some guesses about what kinds of things might have happened. Again, the “who wrote the book” isn’t necessarily a plot hole, as it is something the writers left hidden for a future reveal. How August knew about the book, what he knew about it etc. are likely future stories too.
I agree with what Phee said–it is more likely August was happily in Phuket from the time Emma was in jail, then likely that August came back in between. It is possible of course, that August went to SB in the 2 years he mentions he spent looking for Emma in the scene where he corners Neal. Yet that obviously would not have helped August know where Henry (who was not born yet) would have kept the book.
I also agree–vague statements about what will happen aren’t quite lies.
@The Crocodile 2 x 04 wrote:
Mr. Gold: Well, I don’t lie.
David: There’s a difference between literal truth, and honesty of the heart. Nothing taught me that more than this curse.
Gold loves his half-truths, so of course we are supposed to wonder what else he has misled people about. That’s the fun of a character like him–he can be written as having known but not cared, or cared but not known, and it will eventually make sense either way because sneaky Rumpel IS sneaky, so sneaky, he isn’t always sneaky!
“If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?” -- Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland & Through the Looking-Glass
kfchimera
ParticipantIf he had been there before, it might not explain knowing the book’s location. That he must have learned by spying on Henry. The book would only have been in Henry’s hideout in the last year or so, as Henry was not given the book by MM the moment he got to SB, but only when he was in her class.
I do wonder if he could have gone and come more than a few times without Regina connecting the dots on him. Even if she didn’t know who he was, if he even showed up 2 times I think she ought to have been written as more suspicious and wary of him, more freaked out, than she seemed to be. She really felt quite threatened and was confrontational with Kurt the moment they sort of met. She calmed down for a bit but then, of course it ended tragically.
“If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?” -- Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland & Through the Looking-Glass
kfchimera
ParticipantWe don’t know if Regina saw him before as an adult.
Regina: I need you to look into something, Sheriff. Someone’s in town – someone new.
Emma: Yeah, I know. I gave him directions to Granny’s the other night.
Regina: You talked to him? What’d he say?
Emma: He asked for directions. What’s the big deal? Who is he?
Regina: I don’t know. I asked around, but no one seems to know anything. There’s something about him. Something familiar.
Emma: He must be one of the untold millions you cursed.
Regina: What?
Emma: Oh, you know. The curse. Henry’s whole thing.
Regina: Sheriff, I need you to find out who he is, what he wants and what he’s doing here.
I find that pretty ambiguous about whether she had seen August in storybrooke, or was thinking of little boy Pinnochio all grown up. She also says to Greg/Owen that she almost didn’t recognize him–but she eventually does. So she can place a grown up face to a little boy’s face–but perhaps August was a little harder for her to recognize as she hadn’t spent as much time with little Pino as she had little Owen.
“If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?” -- Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland & Through the Looking-Glass
-
AuthorPosts