Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
His death would further the CS agenda, by getting rid of the last reminder of SF.
But wouldn’t it also leave Regina utterly alone? I mean, I see what you mean by CS, but Emma’s role in Henry’s life has mostly been secondary to Regina’s. It’s not like Emma is the primary caretaker — pragmatically speaking, Henry shouldn’t be that much of an obstacle to CS, no matter who the baby daddy is.
People are already doing it
#headdesk
On a related but different note — the more I think about Emma’s evolution (involution) this season, the more I think she is becoming similar to… Rumple. At least the Rumple of the last few seasons. Both are single-mindedly obsessed with something to the point of being entirely indifferent to the moral or practical consequences of their actions and pursuits. In Rumple’s case, it’s his loved ones — like Bae and Belle, and now his unborn child — and also, presumably, power. In Emma’s case, it’s CS. To me it almost feels like Emma’s never fully gotten rid of the darkness, which seems to, among other things, ramp up the obsessive, selfish, and “addiction-prone” sides of a character’s personality. From the fact that she was still hearing the dagger, to the way they are doing her make-up, to her utter obsessiveness with Hook, there’s something a little… odd about Emma. And the whole “prophetic” dreams thing. What if it’s not just a MacGuffin? Is it possible that she’s still harboring some sort of DO left-overs?
[adrotate group="5"]At least they’re actually showing the fallout of Robin’s death and how it’s affecting Regina. It seems that they’ve learnt their lesson unlike what they did with Neal. Here’s hoping that the “heroes” recognise that Regina has every right to be angry and upset instead of thinking she’s over-reacting. Quote
Well, they don’t have another fanservicy guy that they want Regina to end up with no matter how rushed it would have been.
<p style=”text-align: right;”>
</p>
<p style=”text-align: left;”>If this fandom can be trusted to do one thing it is to start shipping. No matter how irrational, ill-matched, or momentary. I guarantee you the next passably attractive dude Regina is in a scene with and isn’t genetically related to her will probably be incorporated into a new ship.</p>@Slurpeez — I was struck by the same thing about JMo and I do think it’s a conscious make up choice (and clothing and hairstyle that accentuate this. Note the contrast with “young Emma” where she actually looks fresh faced and healthy). Whether it’s meant to index Emma’s seemingly deteriorating mental state or the fact that she’s been run down by life, I’m not sure. But that scene in the second sneak peek where she smiles as Hook comes in, she looks … Really kinda sick.
I do wonder if they — or someone on OUAT — is playing with the addiction trope again.
Also, Rainbow — that is a disgusting but hilarious theory.
In conclusion, the biggest problems pertaining to CS are Hook, Emma, and the amount of time devoted to showcasing this ship.
Nice analysis! Actually, I came across this TV trope category — it seems to fit CS perfectly.
I’m still reeling a bit from that scene too. And now that I think about it, it strikes me that Hook seemed a bit reticent/overwhelmed by Emma’s onslaught. It makes me wonder whether JMo is actually consciously playing Emma as borderline unstable in her obsession. It almost feels like Hook is a kind of drug for Emma, and I wonder if JMo, within the confines of the script she is given, is actually performing a character who is mentally and emotionally deteriorating. While the writers might be pushing CS down everyone’s throat, there’s this way in which JMo is performing Emma that seems to be sending a different, more negative message. Thoughts?
Don’t forget, Snow White probably harbors feelings of deep guilt over the death of Daniel (even though Cora manipulated 10-year-old Snow). So, Snow telling Emma not to blame herself for Robin’s death is likely Snow’s way of reassuring herself that she’s not to blame for the death of Daniel (even though she partially was).
I wish the show actually could muster the depth and thoughtfulness that your interpretation of it has. It’d be a much better show. I’m not so convinced that they are thinking about their characters in such nuanced, careful way, to be honest.
obody wants a character to undergo constant self flagellation for all the wrong they’ve done. Guilt in and of itself helps nobody. It’s about taking responsibility and learning from their mistakes. Emma never seems to do that, and THAT for me, is the most frustrating part. Perhaps that’s also one of the (many) reasons why Regina is so popular.
I think more broadly, Regina seems to be the only character who is written with any sort of self-awareness, and that actually grows and evolves somewhat organically. Everyone else is pretty much plug-and-play at this point — either there to fulfill the needs of the plot, character development be damned, or to give the audience what the show runners think the audience wants (Emma’s characterization in relation to the needs of CS)
So what will Rumple have to do to earn Belle’s forgiveness at this point? What would make this ship work again for those who have jumped ship based on Rumple’s behavior since S4 started?
I’m not sure the ship is recuperable because I’m not sure Rumple’s character is recuperable. Rumple’s original appeal as a character stemmed from the fact that he was written with enough room for interpretation, and RC’s layered acting really highlighted this. I think when people say Rumple was retconned (while other people claim that he’d always been obsessed with power), it is a testament to that original ambivalent complexity. As the show developed, the writers narrowed Rumple down, trying to “fix” the audience’s interpretation, thus recasting the entire character arc as a single dimension of that originally much more complex construct. Similarly, in the early seasons, Rumple’s relationship with Belle had a life of its own. It was underdetermined, but it was given room to breathe. By contrast, the further we go, the more the relationship is portrayed as didactic.
I think Rumbelle serves 3 purposes, none of which have to do with any sort of organic narrative development. First, it’s there to serve Rumple’s characterization. And Rumple’s characterization is itself only there to serve the purposes of PLOT — more often than not, to fill the “villain” vacuum when the show demands it. Second, it sometimes is used to nod in the general direction of the half-baked conceptual themes that OUAT attempts to raise but actually never fully explores — like the business of changing another person. And third, it serves as foil to whatever other relationships are being highlighted and peddled. Functionally, Rumbelle is the stand-in misfit relationship on the show. I suspect they’re there to enable a sense of schadenfreude — “good things it’s not me.”
In this sense, I’m afraid there is nothing to “fix.” Both Rumple and Rumbelle fulfill a specific role on the show, and it’s unlikely that this role will change.
Snow & Emma: I’m so sorry for your loss…let me treat you to some Granny’s!
Yup…
Not to mention Snow’s little reassurance speech to Emma about how Robin’s death isn’t her fault and she shouldn’t feel responsible. Actually, it kinda is and she kinda should.
Also, that gif of Tom Hiddleston captures exactly how I feel about OUAT these days.
Like Emma vs Rumple? (or maybe SB vs Rumple?) I sorta think that’s where we are going.
Unfortunately, I do to. And I’m not particularly excited about it.
Oh he’s grown on plenty of people, just take a gander at Tumblr, shows Twitter, and the shows FB. Hating Hook is a minority opinion in the audience. GA does indeed love him, he tracks well with the audience he’s easily one of the most popular characters on the show.
I have no doubt that Hook translates into eyeballs, and that many people like him. For what it’s worth, I think your original post gives a very generous interpretation of Hook’s characterization. Don’t get me wrong, we all do this with the characters we like, in the same way that we tend to read those we dislike rather less generously. For example, we can argue until the cows come home over whether or not Hook’s bling translates into something a repentant villain would wear or into a sign of deep sociopathy, but we won’t agree because the character’s deliberately written in an ambiguous, divisive way. Similarly, we can argue about whether Hook’s sacrifice at the end of the arc was all that “sacrificial” — and we’re likely not going to agree either.
But as a broader approach to character analysis, I think that the general tonality that “[Hook / Regina / Rumple] deserves worse than [Hook / Regina / Rumple] (circle the characters that apply) gets us nowhere fast because this better or worse doesn’t actually translate into changed consequences for the characters. This is what @WR was saying, I think — no matter what Hook does, he is still the creator’s pet and the consequences of the PLOT will, in the end, always be relatively mild for him. Similarly, no matter what Regina does or does not do, she remains the favorite victim, and Rumple is the go-to villain/scapegoat. Since their roles in the plot – and the distribution of negative consequences – is largely predetermined by an existing pattern, it is of absolutely no consequence (for the purposes of where the story might go) who is more or less deserving of redemption. The game, as they say, is rigged.
On a different note, I’m gonna echo @PriceofMagic on this one — I didn’t even mind Hook all that much in this episode, other than the fact that the UW story was trite. I did, however, find the make-out scene at the end by Robin’s casket just plain offensive if not a little grotesque.
Problem is they aren’t ready to end the show just yet, and they need drama. They can’t give everyone their happy ending and have all the hope finally pay off just yet.
Certainly. But some narrative decisions shape the overall story (and its meta messages) in a way that is very difficult to undo. And if these things are then undone, or brushed under the rug, then one wonders what the stakes are. For example, now that Robin is gone, what constitutes Regina’s happy ending? Wicked Sisters? Or a new love interest? That also happens to be her True Love (number 3 at this point). After a point, one will start to wonder whether romantic partners on OUAT are fungible.
Also, I think the overall logic of your argument is flawed. Not to sound like a cliche, but it’s the journey that’s important, not the destination. I don’t care if in the finale the Mother of all MacGuffins descends on SB and everyone is resurrected and live happily ever. If the way we get there is chuck full of vacuous drama for drama’s sake, gratuitous deaths, and increasingly unlikeable characters, no amount of last moment injection of hopefulness is going to improve the quality of the narrative garbage that came before. It’s like trying to fix a disastrous dish by covering it with frosting. You still have a disaster, just with sugar on top.
