Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
[adrotate group="5"]"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"
Okay why is the EQ fighting the figure under the hood?? Also, in a shock to no one–this means it’s definitely not the EQ under the cloak.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"“Too much fog in the street. Can’t even see the actors!”
Omg the show is learning!!
I wonder if they’ll keep the reveal of who is under the cloak to an indoor shoot.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"Bringing up the World Series again: if Sunday does turn out to have a game (if there’s no winner after 4) then the ratings will be extremely interesting. The first game opened very big with 18.72 million live eyeballs and a 5.4 in the demo. It was the best World Series opener since 2009.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"Someone correct me if I’m wrong–didn’t they have their AU memories from S4B finale? When Henry and Hook did the Wookie prisoner gag? And didn’t Hook and Henry do the same thing in S5a premiere?
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"So nobody sees what Im talking about?? Is this again one of those things that only makes sense in my head…. seriously I think the theory I came up with makes a lot of sense…
It’s not a matter of sense. It’s a matter of “are the writers thinking as deeply and comprehensively as you.”
The answer to that is no. Pretty much 99.9% of the time. Could you be on to something? Sure. Do I think there is an even greater chance that it’s a plot hole/something totally different that we can’t think of because it hinges on some sort of plot device we’ve never heard of or considered? Heck yes.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"how he even knows about Saviors to begin with.
Especially this part. And the show could connect this to Rumple and how he knows about Saviors.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"I actually have a theory that he’s an unreliable narrator when it comes to Albert. I also wonder if maybe they both were after the same thing — engineering AI sentience. But disagreed on method and ethics.
I agree. And I think the show is pushing this idea with something you brought up a page or so back–during the flashback when Dr. Ford was telling his story, it was hard to tell which one was Dr. Ford and which one was Albert. The guy looking at the Host certainly looked like Anthony Hopkins younger self but…his reaction to the newly born Host was not what I’d associate with Dr. Ford now.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"I like @sciencevmagic example above about the Charmings. My first instinct was to simply say “no” but the Charming example is spot on in how people interpret this show.
However I am going to go mostly with my gut and say “no.” This show and its plot, character motivations, ect are largely dictated by TPTB (Adam and Eddy, and also ABC) not because thier world–or even some of their characters–make sense and are consistent.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"Wow. You’re right.
Either it’s a massive plot hole or its what @thedarkonedearie suggested elsewhere– “Aladdin” is really Jafar and somehow he’s able to present himself as having Savior powers.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"
