Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
RumplesGirl
KeymasterHappy Saturday!
[adrotate group="5"]"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"RumplesGirl
KeymasterI don’t know if anyone here is familiar with Good Omens, which was a collaboration between Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett (and is an absolute delight)
I am 🙂 (put a gun to my head and Gaiman is probably my favorite author of all time…)
First, characters can never fully anticipate the results of their actions, and even if they act “out of good” or “out of evil,” the consequences in fact rarely line up with their original intent
Yes. Regina cast a dark curse but ended up with a hole in heart.
Snow told Cora about Daniel thinking that if she didn’t Regina would lose her mother, only to cause Regina to become her greatest enemy.
And third, in the end, the point, like in the Moorcock example, is the perpetuation of the world in a state of balance.
And that idea of the world in balance could apply back to OUAT and Emma as a figure who manages to connect the mythic and the human world. They were separate realms with some major differences but with Emma, in her Eternal Champion mode, the worlds can exist together without having to destroy the other (going back to the EF = losing SB; going to SB = changing or fundamentally altering the EF)
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"RumplesGirl
KeymasterWant to try and answer some of those questions @Obisgirl posted
1. What would happen if the author didn’t manipulate the story?
I really need to believe that there is still free will in this show. As much as I hated what the Charmings did, I want to believe that they did it (for silly, stupid, selfish, human, parental reasons) of their own accord. Because if the heroes can be forced to do bad, then so can the villains and I don’t want this show to suddenly erase all the bad the villains did do in the past.
2. Are we all one decision away from becoming a villain and could a second chance alter the course of history for the better?
A thousand times over yes. The difference between a hero and a villain is what they do when they come to a major crossroads in their life. Do they chose love, forgiveness, heroism? Or do they chose anger, bitterness, and ego? And, as always, it’s about where you’re standing. A hero in my eyes is not a hero in yours. The waters aren’t clear and the line in the sand is thin and mostly invisible.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"April 10, 2015 at 7:39 pm in reply to: EW 4/10 – OUAT tells the genesis of Robin Hood in prequel episode #301192RumplesGirl
KeymasterAlso of note, Sean confirmed that the in-show explanation for the Tom Ellis Robin Hood would be in this episode.
*twitch*
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"April 10, 2015 at 7:35 pm in reply to: E Online 4/10 – Sean Maguire Dishes Robin Hood's "Shocking" Origin Story #301191RumplesGirl
KeymasterUnless Robin Hood was an Assassin/Thief.
So…he’s the guy from Assassin’s Creed?
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"April 10, 2015 at 4:30 pm in reply to: THR 4/10 – Patrick Fischler on the Author's "Layers," History With Cruella #301182RumplesGirl
KeymasterI’m thinking that’s it too. That’s why he messes with everyone’s story.
He was poor and they were in love but Cruella, having known the harsh reality of poverty, decided to seek a man with riches who could put her up and live a life where money wasn’t an problem.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"April 10, 2015 at 4:28 pm in reply to: E Online 4/10 – Sean Maguire Dishes Robin Hood's "Shocking" Origin Story #301180RumplesGirl
KeymasterHis “dark history” is probably that he was a thief, stealing from the rich to give to the poor. That’s not dark. That’s…off white
Actually, his “dark history” is probably that time period he alluded to, where he was stealing for himself, rather than stealing to give to the poor.
So eggshell instead of off white. A cream colored. A blush, perhaps.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"April 10, 2015 at 4:20 pm in reply to: THR 4/10 – Patrick Fischler on the Author's "Layers," History With Cruella #301175RumplesGirl
KeymasterEither the Author and Cruella are brother and sister, or the Author used to be in love with Cruella but she broke his heart.
Since it’s ONCE–it’s the latter
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"April 10, 2015 at 4:19 pm in reply to: E Online 4/10 – Sean Maguire Dishes Robin Hood's "Shocking" Origin Story #301174RumplesGirl
KeymasterHis “dark history” is probably that he was a thief, stealing from the rich to give to the poor. That’s not dark. That’s…off white
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"RumplesGirl
KeymasterBoard
Here are the finalists for #OnceFanArtFriday — congrats! Hope to see ya Sunday for a new #OnceUponATime ! pic.twitter.com/JNCH2u3BVn
— Adam Horowitz (@AdamHorowitzLA) April 10, 2015
2nd
And the runner up for #OnceFanArtFriday is by @KattisBjorky ! Congrats! pic.twitter.com/TnGW5thLZJ
— Adam Horowitz (@AdamHorowitzLA) April 10, 2015
1st
And the winner of #OnceFanArtFriday is by @MisaAntonini — congrats! Hope to see ya Sunday for a new #OnceUponATime ! pic.twitter.com/31sTBOogmt
— Adam Horowitz (@AdamHorowitzLA) April 10, 2015
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love" -
AuthorPosts