Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
^ Seriously, what is wrong with some people? They actually think it’s somehow romantic that Hook, a centuries-old man, met Emma while she was in her mother’s womb?! That is some messed up Breaking Dawn crap! Probably the same people who find this recent CS development to be romantic are those who loved the Twilight saga. It reminds me of the super creepy concept of a werewolf “imprinting” on a newborn. *twitch* Also, how is it that A&E expect any of us to root for CS to tie the knot when they include a super creepy flashback of the day Captain Hook met an unborn Emma and her parents?! It’s almost like they don’t want us root for CS or something….
[adrotate group="5"]"That’s how you know you’ve really got a home. When you leave it, there’s this feeling that you can’t shake. You just miss it." Neal Cassidy
Wait, so not only did Snow and Charming meet Captain Hook in past EF, but Snow was pregnant with Emma at the time?! What the heck?! And why didn’t Snow recognize Hook when he lied about being a blacksmith in S2? Let me guess: memory potion!
"That’s how you know you’ve really got a home. When you leave it, there’s this feeling that you can’t shake. You just miss it." Neal Cassidy
To me this brings up the topic of interpretative ambiguity in fiction more generally, especially in relation to whether the narrator’s actually reliable or not (Kurosawa’s Rashomon comes to mind). So I’m deliberately overthinking this, but let’s actually go back to the original premise of OUAT, and see how this might be analyzed. The Author was a concept from the start, right? I’m going to credit Mr. Lindelof with that one, I think A&E are just not that clever. So, OUAT is complicated because its premise is completely meta. It’s a story about telling stories — and about how the narrators of stories are always unreliable, get it wrong, distort, and therefore our fairytales and myths are totally twisted versions of what “actually” happened.
I’m not so sure you’re over thinking it, and I love your interoperation. I’ll just add that August W. Booth (aka Pinocchio) is totally a call out to Wayne C. Booth who coined the term “unreliable narrator” in The Rhetoric of Fiction. Hence, A&E are clued into this concept, even if it was proposed by their mentor, Damon Lindelof.
"That’s how you know you’ve really got a home. When you leave it, there’s this feeling that you can’t shake. You just miss it." Neal Cassidy
It kinda makes sense that Lana would want to rap instead of sing. It’s nice that she’s going to be giving it her all, despite not being a professional singer.
"That’s how you know you’ve really got a home. When you leave it, there’s this feeling that you can’t shake. You just miss it." Neal Cassidy
My guess is that Robert said heck no to singing in a musical, and maybe Emilie just can’t carry a tune.
"That’s how you know you’ve really got a home. When you leave it, there’s this feeling that you can’t shake. You just miss it." Neal Cassidy
MRJ has such a big heart. He does nice things for people in need all of the time and is a spokesperson against bullying. I have no doubt that his being on the receiving end of a lot of senseless trolling and mindless cyber bullying had a lot to do with his speaking up against it. And MRJ is absolutely right. Neal did deserve better!!!
"That’s how you know you’ve really got a home. When you leave it, there’s this feeling that you can’t shake. You just miss it." Neal Cassidy
I’m not 100% sure that Regina will get a happy ending. Recall that in 4×22, Regina died a hero in the AU. Part of me thinks that Regina dying to save Emma after Emma saved Regina from the dark one curse is the final twist in the story. Perhaps Regina would survive, depending on whether there is a season six, but if there’s not, then Regina might not live HEA.
"That’s how you know you’ve really got a home. When you leave it, there’s this feeling that you can’t shake. You just miss it." Neal Cassidy
Happy Belated Birthday @RumplesGirl!
TheWatcher wrote: Its moments like these that i wonder if A&E do this stuff intentionally…..
I’ve always been on board the “they do nothing intentionally” train but…this wedding dress coupled with the way they’ve been dressing Emma this season both with Hook (dark, buttoned up, ugly clothing, minimal make up, long sleeves) and without Hook (red Savior coats) makes me wonder if someone somewhere isn’t doing something intentionally.I’ve long been on the side of thinking this stuff is intentional. You all know how long I’ve been going on about how CS is really being written as a cautionary tale. I’m still open to that possibility, but part of me thinks A&E aren’t that clever, especially since I discovered that Damond Lindelof of Lost is probably behind the success of season one of Once. Nevertheless, as I’ve been writing for years, I think the acting choices, wardrobe choices, and the script itself all point to the idea that Hook has always been written as the wrong man for Emma. Despite their upcoming nuptials, which should be a happy occasion, the writers have continued to present the audience with some big red flags all season such as Hook’s lying about the shears of destiny and then nearly burning his own memories of a murder most foul. If it hadn’t been for Henry and Emma catching him in the act, I doubt Emma would have learned about either of those two incidents. Moreover, we’ve seen Emma continue to dismiss his actions as somehow being her fault, which is exactly what a codependent person would do. It’s almost like A&E looked up the symptoms of codependency at the end of season three and said to themselves, “let make Emma become codependent with Hook and pretend like it’s romantic.” I don’t see how a character could so successfully be portrayed as codependent if that isn’t what the writers, the actor, and the wardrobe/make-up departments weren’t aiming for. *sigh* I just dunno anymore.
"That’s how you know you’ve really got a home. When you leave it, there’s this feeling that you can’t shake. You just miss it." Neal Cassidy
On her Instagram, JMo recently wrote about Emma’s wedding dress She wrote:
“…Eddy, Adam, Edwardo, and I felt it would be wonderful to pull from the real life fairy tale of Grace Kelly. It is a dress that represents the elegance and simplicity of classic timeless strength mixed with the delicacy of feminity and vulnerability.
I think JMo is once again missing the point of many people’s complaints about Emma’s wedding dress. While I understand that it does take a special kind of courage for some women to be vulnerable, especially those who suffer from abandonment issues, I think it is completely the wrong message to send about Grace Kelly. At the end of the day, a dress is just a dress, but as Kiki’s wrote in her post, Grace Kelly did not live a “real life fairy tale” as JMo claimed. Grace Kelly had to give up everything to marry the prince. It’s the age-old problem with princess fairytales where the woman has to stop being who she is, or worse, never develop into the person she could be, just to be married. Grace Kelly had to stop acting, and it wasn’t her choice, as Kiki pointed out in her post. Grace was deeply unhappy in her marriage, and she tragically died young. If anything, Grace Kelly’s story should be a cautionary tale not to give up a potentially long career to marry someone who didn’t believe in her and only saw her as a movie-star fantasy or as an ideal princess, rather than a real woman with talents, flaws, and all (which I think her royal husband did).
Now, of course it depends on the prince. In real life, Prince William sounds like a much better husband than say his own father or Prince Rainier of Monaco. In general, there is nothing wrong with being married or vulnerable with one’s spouse either. However, if that spouse prevents you from being you, then that is where the real problem is. I don’t think that Emma is being her true self with Hook. Yes, he loves her and she loves him, but I think they love ideal images of one another the way that Prince Rainier seemed to love a Hollywood version of Grace Kelly and she seemed to be more in love with the idea of being royal than with the actual man behind the royal facade. Emma loves the ideal man in her head — one who is always honest with her and always does things together with her. Hook hasn’t been able to live up to this fantasy in Emma’s mind, nor has Emma always lived up to Hook’s ideal fantasy of his perfect princess savior girlfriend. Remember when he said that he had loved her before she became the dark one, and then he rejected her when she became the dark one. That was before he even got his memories back of the terrible way that she had betrayed him in Camelot. Sure, I don’t doubt that they love each other on some level, but I just don’t see how they bring out the best in each other. We haven’t been shown reasons to believe that Hook and Emma trust each other; in fact, we’ve been shown really good reasons not to believe that they trust each other. They still keep secrets from each other all the time, and Emma just excuses every thing Hook has done to her. In season five, their love was directly shown to be like a weapon when their names were written side by side on an actual sword. That is some very heavy-handed symbolism that reveals how dangerous that so-called love really is. Captain Hook is not Prince Charming, and Emma is not some fairy-tale princess. As she said in the story, she is a real person. (Not that this TV show is reality, but in the story, Emma is supposed to represent the audience, not some fairytale idealized princess that Hook would like her to be).
That is what was so great about Emma and Neal’s dynamic. She didn’t have to be “The Savior” or “Princess Emma.” No, she was simply Emma, a lost girl, who grew up alone in the real world but who found a home in the back seat of a stolen car with a lost boy who also grew up alone in the real world. That was the real happy ending. That was the way it was meant to be from the start: Emma, Neal, and Henry were all “real-life” fairytale characters from the real world. They didn’t get to live a care-free fantasy life, but they found each other again against all odds and were set to get their second chance together again. That was it: that was the narrative structure, and the writers threw the baby out with the bathwater when they changed the story. But I’ve no doubt that it was always meant to be lost girl meets lost boy in the real world, they fall in love, have a baby, and the boy finds them again and they reconcile. That’s it. That was the modern, real-world fairytale they were going for, not some Princess Grace cautionary-fairytale story. *sigh*
"That’s how you know you’ve really got a home. When you leave it, there’s this feeling that you can’t shake. You just miss it." Neal Cassidy
This is a very interesting read from Kiki (a favorite analyst long absent from our threads) that I figured some might like to read given some recent spoilers.
That is some very interesting history about the Prince and Princess of Monaco. Indeed, why would OUAT and JMo want to parallel Emma and Hook to Grace and her terrible, controlling husband? I know: for the “romance” of it all. *sigh*
I would like to take the opportunity to say I miss Bae and more importantly I miss who Emma as a character was before Bae’s death. I think the show has done a horrendous job with her and with his death. Season 1-3 Emma was tough, fair, and good. Season 4-6 Emma is weak, self centered, and boring.
Me too! Remember how Emma used to be presented both in universe and in S2 promo photos? Because I do.
She used to be more her father’s daughter, preferring her father’s swords to her mother’s froo-froo princess dresses.
Even when she was depicted in Snow White’s dress in a promo photo for S3, Emma had an expression on her face which showed she clearly wasn’t happy about being forced to wear the purple satin dress.
How can people think Emma is acting IN character when she so clearly is acting OUT of character?
"That’s how you know you’ve really got a home. When you leave it, there’s this feeling that you can’t shake. You just miss it." Neal Cassidy
