Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Do you think the Black Fairy and Gideon would have been as interesting had their characters’ arcs been stretched out all season? Don’t get me wrong. I really like Gideon, and I would have preferred to have seen more of his story with his parents and his savior dynamic with Emma. He is an original character, which means a lot could have been done with him. Plus, he is an interesting foil for Emma. (e.g. Both were given up for their best chances, both discovered their destiny on their 28th birthday, both have magic though one is dark and the other is light, etc…). The Black Fairy is interesting, too, though her story seems like it can be contained to a single episode. Sometimes characters’ arcs seem better than they are precisely because they’re written concisely and in the span of a few episodes rather than stretched out and diluted with “filler” episodes.
[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
Here’s another article from Screwball Ninja about Emma’s drastic wardrobe change. She made the interesting point that the only time Emma has worn a braid in her hair was in the Wish World and then again when she accepted Hook’s proposal for the first time. From the article:
When Emma wears the same braid style in Storybrooke she’s making a direct visual callback to Wish!Emma– making the audience think that Emma is either “fake” or meek by association. If this isn’t done on purpose, it’s a mistake.
Hmmmm…I don’t know what to think! I mean we all know this Emma is acting and looking very different, but she’s also set to marry the guy she changed drastically for, so I don’t know what to think!
"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
Sure, I’ll play. I think eventually Regina will give up something to protect Emma, Henry, and the Charmings. Emma became the dark one to protect Regina’s happiness in S4, so I think Regina still feels like she owes Emma. I’m not sure if it’ll be this coming episode or later. Maybe Rumple will give up his dark one magic to try and save Gideon.
"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
From the first sneak peek:
Hook: Wouldn’t it be romantic to exchange our vows on the Jolly Roger?
Henry: Not if half of your guests are getting sick over the side.Oh how very meta of Henry! LOL!
"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
*Friendly reminder that Emma said she would always love Neal.*
*Friendly reminder that Neal said he would always love Emma.*
*Friendly reminder that Henry wanted to get a castle with his parents.*
Brought to you by your I-don’t-have-amnesia, proud pro-SwanFireFamily Oncer. 😀
"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
That wedding dress article was hilarious and scary simultaneously.
@nevermore – I think you’re right about ScrewballNinja having some sort of film studies degree. She does have an eye for how costume and make-up seem to fit narrative.She wrote one about Nealfire’s wardrobe in case anyone is interested. She wrote:
When he meets Emma, he’s in a hoodie/slouchy clothes, scraping by stealing cars, etc. (Yes, his jacket is red–does anyone ever talk about this wrt Emma’s fave jackets? Or wrt the red robe above, and the red pirate coat that followed it? This red is the only non-neutral/earth color the man ever wears.)
I couldn’t help but think of when @RumplesGirl and I made that observation years ago in this thread! 😀
"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 love the dress, and she looks lovely in it but I do agree that it is a little too princess like for Emma.
As ScrewBallNinja wrote, Emma’s dress is a direct knockoff of the Princess of Monaco’s dress. While the dress is pretty, it doesn’t suit Emma. It’s too girly-girl and froo-froo. I always saw Emma getting married in a more modern and edgy wedding dress, but then this isn’t the same Emma as far as I’m concerned. A short-ish modern wedding dress that is form fitting and open in the back is the type of dress I’d have chosen for Emma:"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
@AKA – Thanks for the suggestion to read ScrewBallNinja. I had also given up on her blog, but I think I’ll give her another try. I found her essays about Emma to be especially good. She says that Emma and Hook this season have been continuing with with Dark Swan arc in S6, which I thought was insightful. She has another recent essay about Emma that uses GIFs to show Emma’s progression from heroine to dark swan. Also, here is a link to a GIF set comparing and contrasting Emma’s reactions to people in need of help from S1 to S6. *sigh* What happened to Emma Swan?!
"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
Emma is not an actual person. Emma cannot be happy. She doesn’t have feelings. She is just written certain ways. This is about how character is written. That is what i don’t understand. It just seems like people are suggesting that we should care whether or not Emma, a fake person, is happy. That seems crazy to me and shouldn’t take precedents over how the writing of the show is commenting on life and how that is important. It is just having an entirely different discussion then a lot of people are having here.
Yes, Emma is a fictional character, but that doesn’t mean we, the members of the audience, don’t feel for her. I don’t think it’s true to say that it’s crazy that we should care about a fake person’s happiness. It’s not crazy; it’s actually part of basic human nature. Neuroscience researchers at Emory University have proposed that the same neural mechanisms that enable us to emphasize with real people also make us emphasize with fictional characters. Specialized brain cells called “motor neurons” are the proposed biological substrate of empathy, and these same specialized neurons are what get activated when we watch others we care about, whether real or fictional, go through difficulty. It’s proposed that these motor neurons are what allow us to take a walk in someone else’s shoes. The fact that so many people feel strongly about their favorite characters has a lot to do with their ability to identify with said characters on some level, despite the often fantastical situation. Hence, many people worry about Emma, who is a self-insert character, because they actually cared about her once the way they would a friend. Yes, it’s a bit silly, but it’s basic human psychology and biology.
In the film Shadowlands, there is a line that underscores this point well: “we read to know we’re not alone.” I think the reason humanity enjoys fiction is precisely because we see ourselves in these characters. For me, character studies are just as important as the quality of the writing. In fact, I would say that the quality of the characterization is a reflection of the quality of the writing. A good writer has the ability to make fictional characters come alive and act in ways that one would expect in real life. For many of us, Emma was the character who was one of the most believable characters from seasons 1-3a because she reacted in ways that we ourselves might react if we discovered on our 28th birthday that fairytales were real and not merely children’s make-believe stories.
To what @sciencevsmagic wrote, the problem then arises not from the characters themselves but from how they’re represented. I think that goes back to the point I made about how poor characterization is a reflection of poor writing. Indeed, I think television and other media show the struggles of the individual against the social pressures she finds herself in. So, it’s a problem when a once-amazing chacter slowly starts to crumple under the social pressures she finds herself in instead of fighting back. It’s even more troublesome when the narrative itself seems to suggest that it’s somehow desireable for said person to give in and to conform to said social pressures (in this case restrictive social and gender norms) in order to be loved, accepted, etc. That is why it’s so unappealing for many of us, especially educated female audience members, to see what is happening to Emma. It’s because of what she represnted: a strong female character. She was someone many of us admired. We saw ourselves in her! Do you know how rare it is and was to have a show centered around a strong female savior who doesn’t take crap from people? Let’s just say it’s rare! That is what this show used to be about but not longer is. That is why it’s so painful to see what has happened to Emma. She isn’t just one character. She represents many of us young women who grew up in the third and fourth waves of the feminist movement.
What happened to her?! Emma used to be this amazing, feisty heroine in season one, but very slowly, she’s been turned into this listless person who can’t go to the bathroom without Hook’s help. She wouldn’t even save her own parents after she spent an entire lifetime searching for them! What kind of terrible and crappy message is that to give to little girls? “Put your ex-pirate boryfriend who murdered your grandpa and tried to cover it up before your family or you won’t get love,” is so horrible as to be disturbing. Is that the show’s message for little girls now?! Emma from season one never would have done that! This happened on a show that has been proclaimed as feminist! The writers maintain that this show is about strong women, but I think this show is a sad wake-up call that Western women really haven’t made that much progress in the past century as I’d assumed or hoped. Being a young woman myself, I find that really troublesome. Jane Eyre was a much more forward-thinking woman than ever Emma Swan turned out to be, and Jane Eyre was written over 170 years ago (by a woman who had to use a male pseudonym)!
Humans have this amazing ability to identify with fictional characters, but it turns out that writers, especially Hollywood writers, often exploit this for short-term monetary gains. There’s even an expression of writers “selling out to Hollywood,” and sadly, now we know how where expression came from! A&E, with a lot of help from their mentor Damon Lindelof, managed to script this beautiful narrative about real hope and family reunions in season one. However, they sold their birthright for a bowl of stew. Instead of being remembered as a groundbreaking television show in the future as it was on target to do in season one, this show will sadly be cast aside in a crumpled heap on the floor the way so many other tired-out old television shows are. Perhaps that is a really fitting end for a show that just seems to have lost its very heart and soul.
"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 now of the opinion that either this show is a modern critique of what happens to Katherine in Taming of the Shrew (call it “Taming of the Swan”), or this show has made no progress in how it portrays women since the time of Shakespeare (another white male). It’s probably the latter – tragically
"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
