Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
My Gosh Schmack! you are killing me here !! I couldn’t stay away from commenting
OK.
Not really sure why you couldn’t answer the question. It was basically a yes or no.
Your horse analogy is poor for horses do not have conscious choice. Regina isn’t an animal that will blindly follow whatever she desires.
Then what does Emma do?- She takes away Reginas sole motivation to change for the better
She didn’t do that at all. It wasn’t for the better. It was simply because no other option was available. She was leaving town, she had to. No choice. She knows from personal experience how dangerous Cora is. She knows from personal experience that Cora wants to get a hold of Henry. She cannot protect him if she is out of town. She takes him with her. She doesn’t take him away from Regina. If Regina is a weak minded individual that expects everyone to twist their life around for her needs and can’t understand anyone else’s motivations then she’s a lost cause.
But she was willing to give Regina a chance before ‘the Cricket insident’ hopefully she will come back to that-maybe she is already, but Regina doesn’t know that right now.
Never suggested that Emma wasn’t giving Regina a chance. I said how the kid shouldn’t be with Regina unsupervised. Which he hasn’t been since Emma got back into town. Smart woman.
You think that Henry not being with Regina, for whatever reason, is wrong. Right? OK. I disagree. There.
[adrotate group="5"]I don’t disagree that actions influence actions. We both agreed to that awhile back with the whole “there will be consequences to their actions and consequences to her actions” bit.
I understand why they thought they had to do that, in the moment where they thought Regina had killed Archie- But that doesn’t change the fact that it was the wrong thing to do.
It is comments like these that confuse me. You aren’t simply saying that anything Emma or Snow or Random Guy #2 does will influence Regina. You’re saying that what they did was actually wrong. You’re talking in hindsight or at all? Either way.. you think someone is a killer, you take a child away from them. Even if that child is keeping that person from going completely over the edge. Why? Because the child’s safety is more important than the person trying to change only for that child.
So we can agree to disagree I gotta know exactly what you’re saying here… you’re saying that even though Regina is a proven danger to Henry, he should not be taken away from her because he’s the reason she wants to change?
This is my main beef
And your quote suggests it’s their fault that Regina is scheming with Cora instead of it being Regina’s choice to scheme with Cora.
So, you feel that Regina went back to scheming because the Charmings handled the situation wrong?
Or do you feel she went back to Cora because it was her choice to do so?And the answer can’t be both. You can’t blame someone else for a choice you make. It might have had influence, but it’s not the reason.
Yeah as a society we don’t just lock people up and throw away the key. People work with convicted criminals to help them “change” but you know what? It’s not the victims who do it.
Snow, David, Emma.. they are all victims of Regina. She has done something horrific to each and every one of them. To suggest that it is them out of all the people in the realm to help Regina change is ludicrous. To say that their actions towards her have been wrong is just so incorrect IMO. Whether or not Regina killed Archie doesn’t even matter.. she still killed people. Archie would have just been the most recent. She isn’t a safe person for Henry to be around unsupervised.
Snow was so right in her small conversation with Regina. She apologized for being wrong about Archie but she let it know that just because they were wrong about Archie doesn’t mean that all is forgiven (her comment about Emma not needing to run things by her).
If they hadn’t done it, Regina wouldn’t be of behind the curtain scheeming with Cora now.
Yes, she would. If you think Regina wouldn’t be with Cora right now if they didn’t think she killed Archie then you’re crazy. Because if all it took for Regina to run to her mom and be all evil again is one setback then it was bound to happen. It doesn’t even matter what the catalyst was. It was going to happen. She was going to turn back. Why? Because she wasn’t really trying to change.
And your quote suggests it’s their fault that Regina is scheming with Cora instead of it being Regina’s choice to scheme with Cora.
I don’t even know what wrong way you’re talking about. Is this about Henry going to NYC with Emma? Like Snow said, they couldn’t find Regina. Is this about Snow’s comment about not needing to run things by Regina? It was solely her opinion which she said in the nicest way possible, but it’s something I don’t think even Emma will agree with.
Regina is the one going about things the wrong way. Her actions are her actions. It will not be Emma’s or Snow’s or David’s fault if Regina goes on a rampage and doesn’t change for the better. It will never be their fault. It will never be their responsibility to change her. Ever. Even if it’s what they want. It is not their responsibility. It is Regina’s and solely Regina’s responsibility. Once she actually puts forth effort, then perhaps I can see Emma (and maaaaaybe Snow) supporting her. But not until they actually see effort on her part.
@medchen wrote:
Sure it would be better and easier if there were more motivating factors but since there is not, at the moment, it is stupid to remove the one thing that could change things.
First of all, Henry isn’t living with her because he doesn’t want to. She originally forced him to stay with her and soon as he got there he started running away but she kept him physically bound to the house. Regina finally allowed him to leave because she realized she was treating her son the exact same way her mother treated her.
Regina is a dangerous woman. Already proven dangerous to Henry as he literally died because of her and her actions. He needs to be removed from her for his own safety. She isn’t responsible. She allows her feelings and anger to cloud her judgment. She is quick to anger. It’s not a good place for him.
That’s not stupid of Emma or David to not want Henry there. It’s responsible of them. So what if she’s trying to change and Henry is her sole factor? That means he should be put in jeopardy? I don’t think so.
And once again It is NOT Henrys responsibility to change Regina. It is Reginas. But all the other adults around them have a responsibility and play a part, whether they like it or not.
No, they don’t have a responsibility to help Regina change. The victims do not have a responsibility to help reform their attackers. No.
When they ‘take’ Reginas son away from her- her sole motivation- That will have an effect. And it is not by making things better, not for enyone, including Henry.
So because Regina is going to have a temper tantrum they should just give what Regina wants? I don’t think so. There might be consequences to Henry not being with Regina. But there will be consequences to whatever Regina does and she will have to deal with that.
I’m saying he is her motivation. And that it is okay for her to be motivated by him, instead of her own remorse, to try and find a better path
It’s not OK for Henry to be her sole motivating factor. Because what happens you remove that motivator? Exactly what happened. She goes back to evil. That’s putting an awful lot of responsibility on an 11 year old boy’s shoulders. That’s basically saying, “Be nice to her, don’t piss her off, don’t turn your back on her, don’t do anything wrong… because if you do, she’ll go back to her old ways.”
It’s great that she wants to change for Henry. But, he can’t be the only reason she wants to change. Because if she doesn’t get him in the end, or get him along the way in which she expects, then she’s going to give up and go back to how she was. Like they’ve already shown she’s done.
Regina needs to be on this redemption arc because of her own remorse, because it’s the right thing to do, and Henry can be that extra push she needs. Not the sole reason for it (as it stands now).
All the background noise disappeared until Emma placed the shawl back on his shoulders. I don’t know whether or not it was meant to indicate that he was losing his memory when he wasn’t wearing the shawl, but it certainly was a powerful effect.
It was a really cool effect. I think to indicate how his brain was getting all fuzzy… like he was starting to lose his memory and be completely Mr. Gold.
I think the scene at the end with David talking about Emma being able to take care of herself was a switch in the conversation.
Snow says how she can’t be separated from Emma again. Where is Emma right now? Separated from her. David recognizes this and switches gears in the conversation and asks if she’s worried.
It was a conversation that really didn’t flow very well. But, I don’t think David meant he would go back to FTL without Emma. That just doesn’t make sense for his character when it was HIM (and Emma) that flipped out when Snow made the suggestion of moving out.
The next episode after Manhattan is The Queen is Dead right? I think that might be more of a time for Neal and Emma to talk about things. That episode is about Snow’s mother, right? I remember Ginny saying something about that episode exploring Snow’s relationship with her mother and it’s affected her relationship with her own daughter, Emma. And maybe during all that mess there’s some Neal talk? Or.. probably more than likely they’re going to spread out that conversation the rest of the season… lol
