Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Interesting read…
http://sophy-says.tumblr.com/post/81837424992/killian-and-neal-have-both-done-crappy-things-in-their
Brava! I feel like CS shippers aren’t watching the same show…
Seriously, that post gets ALL THE COOKIES because PREACH!
[adrotate group="5"]First of all, a big WORD to everything CWL has said!
Also, Neal’s death occurred the day before April Fool’s Day. In real life, Neal Cassady got married on April Fool’s Day. K&H and MJR have both used the interesting wording of the “timing” of this event.
That’s curious timing indeed.
His death occurred in an episode with a man trapped as fire…the talking candlestick. Fake name “Neal Cassidy” “dies” with a Delta symbol on his hand – the Fire symbol and triangulated dots of light in his eyes that resemble the symbol for radiation.
The triangle symbol for fire was also one of the symbols on the Vault door. And in the scene in the castle, Neal puts his had through the flames of Lumiere.
We have Neal Cassidy (assumed name) living in Manhattan. There is a superhero named Dr. Manhattan who becomes a superhero when he is incinerated retrieving his girlfriends watch. He is a member of the Watchmen and Baelfire said he would be “watching over them” from somewhere.
Interesting about the watches. SF ended up getting split up back in the day in a situation that involved stolen watches.
Three people have been marked by a symbol on their hands, Regina (who lived), Philip (who lived) and Baelfire.
Yes. And the shot that looks down on Emma and Rumple with Neal’s body is framed exactly like the shot that looked down on Aurora and Mulan with Philip’s body. They appear to have been shot in different locations, because there’s a big tree in the 315 scene, but there are logs positioned in a way that frames the shot exactly like the MAP scene was. Will see if I can find the gifs again because it’s easier to show it rather than just explain it…
*searching*
The logs in the 315 shot square the area off, like in the MAP scene. There’s also a similar tree in the bottom right of each shot. Basically, they’re set up and framed almost identically, even though they were shot in different locations.I’m not necessarily pinning a whole lot of hope on Neal being brought back to life, but I do think there are enough things that are ambiguous, don’t add up, and hints within the show itself, that leave me unconvinced that Neal’s death can’t be undone.
Yes, Neal made his own mistakes, but if this is all about Rumple having to pay up it’s not right that someone else has to pay for it with something as high as their own life. I know that there is far more to this debate than just this, but in the most general sense, it should be the person who committed the crime who has to pay the time. Or maybe I’m the only one who thinks that.
You’re definitely not the only one who thinks that!!
This is my favorite thing today
That is lovely!!
This might sound ridiculous, but when I was at a children’s museum with my boys today, I was reading some of the exhibits in their fairy tale area. And it pointed out something I’d forgotten: In the 1857 Brothers Grimm Rumpelstintskin tale, in the end, the character “in his rage drove his right foot so far into the ground that it sank in up to his waist; then in a passion he seized the left foot with both hands and tore himself in two.”
Huh.
Huh indeed! That’s pretty much exactly what we saw in this ep, Rumple being torn in two.
I think that’s ultimately what A and E want it to mean. He lost his son because he became the Dark One and chose it over Bae as a boy. And now he’s lost him for good because of his value as the Dark One.
But I think that’s a really crappy reason. Rumple should want to stop being the Dark One because it’s a horrible curse that infects his soul, not because he lost something. Losing something could mean that he doesn’t really want to give it all up but feels like he has to.
Basically, at this point, they’ll never convince me that this death was good. The only thing it’s going to do is “light a fire” under everyone. But honestly, you shouldn’t need a fire to get rid of wicked.
THIS!! OMG YES, ALL OF THAT ABOUT RUMPLE. I guess they also wanted to make it personal for Emma. Well ya know, Zelena cursed her parents and sent a Monkey to try and marry her, so really, shouldn’t that be personal motivation enough? Neal’s death was just gratuitous.
Raymond-James’ stirring swan song reminded us of what Once had, and now has lost.
Is just me or there is a critic to the show by what they did to Neal? strange coming from tv line.
I notice that no one writer has the byline on that article, but I like to think that that was contributed by Matt Mitovich, who seems to legit love the show, given how he usually writes about it.
Had a thought the other day; Adam has said 1) this has been planned since summer hiatus, 2) it is story driven and 3) he’s dead. Why is it that we are so quick to call him a liar about 1&2 but trust 3 to be true? Crack theories may be cracky, but I posture that all three items could be true.
Either they’re lying about him being 10000% dead, or they’ve been lying about the moral of their show thus far, so either way, they’re lying about something IMO, or at least they’re skirting veeeerrrry close to the lying line with their comments about his having died. I do agree with what you’re saying though, why should we assume that they’re being truthful about some things and not about one other thing.
I wouldn’t say I have faith, but I DO have hope. I will continue to hope through 322, and if I’m wrong, I’m prepared to deal with that. But I just don’t think that’s the case. I don’t think A&E have tossed the show they’ve dreamed over for a decade & built over 2.5 years. I don’t.
Yeah I’m with you. Like you say, this show is a decade plus dream of theirs, and while different plot ideas rear their heads as they’re in the process of writing, those are just detours for things that were never necessarily set in stone. I just can’t see how the whole moral of their show could be a thing that isn’t set in stone.
I listen to Greetings From SB but haven’t looked at their podcast for this ep yet. I love their fun, bantery style, but dunno if I wanna hear it to go along with this ep. I do wanna hear what Ann Marie thought though, because she ships SF. Was listening to the SQPN one before, and the main host sounded bummed about the no happy ending for Neal, but one of the other hosts was talking excitedly about all the stuff she loved in the ep and it was hard to hear because I just can’t fathom being chipper about what happened in this ep. Also, it enrages me a little bit more each time I hear someone praise the lacklustre CaptainFire moment as having been really sweet and genuine, and hearing people talk about Neal’s line about learning sacrifice from Rumple makes me wanna throw and yell stuff because how do people not see that that line was character assassination?!?! *sigh*
OUAT Gamechanger: Neal’s Death
Look, when A&E were talking earlier about the death to come in S3, they called it a gamechanger.
I went to try and google my way back to that exact quote, but what I found was that they are very fond of employing that word. About things they do on the show like breaking the first Curse. So, I leave it for someone else to find the exact quote…
But here’s the thing. That was one of the words that led so many Swanfires to dismiss the notion that Neal would die. How would killing Neal change the show and its focus? Killing Neal would in fact, negate the Second Chances and Happy Endings the season and the series promised. (Of course, THAT would be a gamechanger—that would be like going from playing Candyland to playing Risk, but we didn’t expect the basic tenets of the show to alter so drastically—even though I doubt, still, that the creators would admit/be able to see that this is what they’ve done.)
So the death was a gamechanger. Okay. I accept it (that it was meant to be a gamechanger—not that I’m going to keep watching the changed game). Because what that means is: Swanfire was the game. FamilyFire was the endgame. Baelfire/Neal was a *major* player in the game.
I didn’t imagine or misinterpret what the show was about, what I was being shown every Sunday night at 8pm. What I was being promised would come about in future seasons. I was correctly following the game.
They really were interested in learning how two people overcome and deal with all the hurt in their past and come together again. With their son, whom they’ve only just met. (For awhile, they were interested for awhile.)
And then they weren’t. And they CHANGED THE GAME.
(I will try not to dwell too long on the visual image of small children dumping the board game onto the floor in a fit of temper, spoiling it for everybody.)
They changed the game. Neal and Swanfire were the game.
And if you’re looking at the idea of Savior as archetype, then I’d argue that he HAS to be dead because of Savior-induced resurrection through love.
True. The label “Saviour” that they gave to Emma instantly makes you think of Jesus, the most famous Saviour who ever did save a whole lot of people by making them believe, and he raised *googling to find the number* three people from the dead, (one of them was even a 12 year old child). Summary of people in the Bible brought back to life.
Also, the larger face, with the hole being the mouth. Looks like a creepy face portal tree.
Ah yes, I see that too now. And the little branch off the side looks like a raised arm with a raised finger, which makes the whole thing looks like it’s screaming an anguished battle cry or something.
Obviously an enchanted tree of some sort.
The shape of the hole looks like a doorway to me.
I would argue that Henry, Blue Fairy, and Rumple were near-death experiences.
Henry was hooked up to machines in a hospital and he flatlined. He was clinically dead.
It’s also not uncommon to recycle previous props and redress them as something else, in regards to Phee’s post. It’s an efficient way of saving time and money.
The episodes aired within a week of each other, (both shows have tended to mirror each other with things here and there in the eps airing within a week of each other), it was established on WL that there’s a WoW in every land, and they used the same prop to show the exact same structure in the EF, as was in Agrabah and WL. IMO there’s no way that this was just the case of prop re-use to save a few bucks. It was deliberate.
