Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Belle has no storyline outside of her two male romantic partners. She’s not even allowed to interact in any meaningful way with her father, let alone with another female except when Belle is supposed to be “Google” or when her life is threatened.
Then again, where Belle’s concerned, I don’t think A&E would know the Bechdel Test if it stole their dinner.
[adrotate group="5"]I don’t think the DO curse helped, but he still made the choices he made, even back from the moment he became the DO–like mass murdering the soldiers.
I agree that Rumple systematically made terrible decisions, I don’t think the point is to absolve him of responsibility. Rather, lets rephrase the issue. To what extent are dark and light magic qualitatively different, or are they like the Force in Star Wars, two sides of the same coin, colored by a person’s choices and motivations? Speculatively, and within the OUAT universe, do you think one could be a DO and “overcome” the curse by “lightening” the magic (rather than by breaking the curse through external means)?
I have no idea what they intend to do next, which is what the writers seem to care most about these days, making sure the audience is continually blindsided and shocked, but they forget that if the characters don’t much care about half the stuff that happens to them, then increasingly, neither will we. It’s no joke that the show had a huge lift in ratings from Frozen yet managed to shed most of that bonus audience–without even the excuse of erratic scheduling that affected Season 2 B.
The problem is what appears to be an incredibly skewed set of priorities for the writers, whether it’s at the level of A&E or further “down” the food chain, I don’t know. It seems that, as you point out, what they care about is ratings, but in a deeply cynical way (such as riding on the coattails of Frozen). And yet, when the fanbase comes up with genuine criticism — whether small and plot driven, such as “the characters seem inconsistent” or serious and “social,” such as “You’re making a mess of consent issues” or “Your handling of race is problematic” the response is a defensive dismissal along the lines ‘You can’t please all those crazy shippers.” I hate to say it, but really, OUAT as it stands now is written from a place of pretty egregious white male privilege. Even their handling of gender, which, in S1 was quite progressive for mainstream TV — and was one of the show’s strengths — is becoming increasingly normalizing of very problematic dynamics and cultural assumptions (for ex. Emma’s evolution, and Belle’s characterization)
I do actually wonder if Rumple’s black heart isn’t the result of what he’s done but as a consequence of being the dark one. He’s been the dark one a lot longer than most people are dark ones so what if it is just the effect of being the dark one for such a long time? Rumple likens not being able to feel any kind of love as a type of death, wouldn’t it be somewhat fitting if Rumple’s power was killing him, much like drugs do to a drug user?
Yes, I have been wondering the same exact question. Especially in light of the wafting writing about the physical/spiritual nature of Rumple’s condition. As I am interpreting it, the black heart isn’t actually 100% the result of “bad choices” but interrelated with them, such that it both partially motivates and is enabled by these negative emotions and decisions. In other words, as Rumple’s heart progressively blackens, his entire worldview shifts more towards “evil”, which, in turn, makes it less possible to see what the “right” thing to do might be, which blackens his heart more and thus ad infinitum. This would actually explain the quirky temporality of what seems to be a sudden turn for the worse — towards the end, the process accelerates — and also explain why the Dark One curse is actually a curse, rather than practical omnipotence offset by a gnarly skin condition.
A bit dated, but I think this speaks to the conversation.
This is fairly anti-Rumbelle, so fair warning.
This isn’t a play on Beauty and the Beast where the relationship actually is messed up and we’re supposed to hope Belle escapes and becomes her own person again. It’s simply meant to be Beauty and the Beast, with all of its potential issues, and plenty of new ones, laid bare.
I don’t necessarily completely agree with the article, in that I think we need to differentiate Rumple 1.0 from Rumple 2.0. Pre-pit-of-goo Rumbelle (which involved Rumple 1.0) was essentially a story about how people can change (and be redeemed). Rumple 1.0 wasn’t evil for evil’s sake, and the resolution, where Rumple sacrifices himself to save everyone and dies a hero was the logical completion of Rumple 1.0’s character arc.
Resurrected Rumple (Rumple 2.0) is completely rebooted, and has very little to do with Rumple 1.0. It’s essentially a different character. At this point, Rumbelle changes accordingly. This story is essentially about how people cannot change and, in the context of Rumbelle, this becomes about an abusive relationship with a sociopath. If any of you have seen Dexter, Rumbelle 2.0 has a lot in common with Dexter’s relationship with Deb.
The problem, is that while Rumple has been entirely rebooted, with a clear, but unexplained break between R1 and R2, Belle has remained the same character, by and large, except that she is now rewritten to fulfill the parameters of this new take on Rumebelle, which isn’t a story of change and redemption, but of stasis and repetition.
The problem, as with Dexter, is that the story is told to us from Rumple’s perspective, and Rumple is an unreliable narrator. In other words, we get very little of Belle’s take on things I think because almost no episode are ever from her POV. That being said, I think it helps me to think that Rumple 2.0 is, actually, a different person (i.e. he came back wrong), with the same set of memories and physical conditions, but a different character make up. I doubt that was originally intended by the writers, but I think that’s how it’s coming across. I don’t have much hope for Rumbelle because Rumbelle (which, as far as ships go, I associate with the early seasons) is now underpinned with an entirely new narrative premise
Just a thought.
How about magically remove the baby from Zelena, and stick it in Regina, and Zelena can sit in the asylum under the hospital forrrrrrevvvverrrrr!
Now lets combine it with the other suggestion by @Felie that the baby is really Rumple’s. Taadaaam! Game of Thrones messed up kinship, you got nothing on OUAT. Nothing!
If they are playing with O and E myth, then it’s worth pointing out that in the end Orpheus loses Eurydice
By not having faith in the gods’ promise, if memory serves.
To me, the story of Rumpel and Belle right now feels like Orpheus and Eurydice in reverse.
That’s interesting. In reverse in that Orpheus is Belle and Rumple is Eurydice? *tries hard to picture Rumple fleeing an enamored Aristaeus* Jokes aside, yes, I can see how there are parallels especially with S3
A parent’s love is often said to be the greatest form of love–even greater than romantic love. I think Regina is going to have to face this very realization and difficult choice herself in the coming weeks if and when her story gets rewritten. If the Author rewrites her story such that she met Robin Hood in that tavern, then that would mean she never would’ve adopted Henry. So Regina is going to have to choose whether to put her child first, the same way that Robin is currently having to put his unborn child first.
Yes, this is actually a great way to reframe the issue. Although I’m still squeamish about the idea of using a baby as, essentially, a plot device. I would have liked to maybe see them explore Robin’s relationship to Roland instead — I mean, the poor boy just had his mom turn into the resident Boogyman (boogywoman? boogyperson?) I’d say older child with now obviously dead mom should take priority over everything else, including OQ, “Robina” (sorry) or anything else. But, oh well.
I want Zelena’s baby to be Rumples’. I want it to be, like, the worst evil thing this show has ever seen, and they should just go for gold now because I’m all for it #GoBigOrGoHome!!!!! Let’s see where the ride takes us. Let’s see how off-the-wall this show can really get before it gets canceled.
I’d be very concerned about the child’s likelihood of developing a very serious skin condition with that particular pairing. O_o
That is exactly how it seemed to me. Robin didn’t choose Zelena over Regina. He chose to protect his unborn child. That is the definition of honor (protecting the innocent).
‘
I may be totally wrong, but doesn’t he say “I can’t leave her“? Since at 6 weeks, there’s no way to know whether the child is a boy or a girl yet (the sex of the fetus becomes fairly reliably identifiably by ultrasound at around 18 weeks or so), he’s talking about Zelena. Which may still be a reference to the fact that he can’t abandon his unborn child, but the phrasing is kind of awkward.
On the rape issue. I don’t see it like that at all. People impersonate others all the time in the real world. Identity theft is a very real problem. Just because people aren’t magically transformed on the exterior, they still present themselves as someone they aren’t to their spouses, partners, girlfriends/boyfriends.
Absolutely about the impersonation stuff, but the question, ultimately, is that Zelena put Robin in such a position that he was by definition incapable of giving (informed) consent. To me that seems to cross the line from identity theft into sexual coercion: Robin’s case could be construed as an instance of impaired judgement, where, by nature of Zelena’s egregious deception, his consent cannot be considered valid.
While I’m not going to defend the poor way in which Robin’s character has been written, what you wrote about him comes across to me as victim blaming. Robin’s reaction was one of disbelief, but then again, the situation is almost beyond belief.
I can’t comment as to the intent of the original post obviously, but I think the way I read @POC’s critique is precisely based on the inconsistencies in Robin’s characterization. In other words, it isn’t that Robin the fictional character should be blamed for what happened to him — what Zelena did to him is utterly utterly vile. He’s in an impossible, grotesque situation. But how he is written and portrayed — so the combination of his lines, and the acting — make him come across as simultaneously passive-aggressive and morally inconsistent (preachy one minute, lost the next). In other words, the writing is such that it relies too much on viewer generosity and putting the character in an awful situation to produce sympathy, instead on character-driven likability. Although, again, maybe this is another case of unreliable narration.
I’m just waiting for that soap opera moment where Rumple is readying himself to kill Zelena, but just before his fatal blow she turns round and in her terror declares; “You can’t kill me! The baby’s not Robin’s, it’s yours!” Dun dun dun!!!!!!!!!!!!
