Happily Ever After: Relationships Are Hard

[Shanna Marie]

Hook has said what he sees in Emma. He's talked about her being a hero, being brilliant, being brave, being strong, being good. But he also enjoys that she does have a touch of pirate in her, that she's willing to break rules or occasionally do something crazy for the greater good.

 

She's never outright articulated it, but based on the way she's reacted to him, I think a big part of his appeal for her is that he's 100 percent in her corner, that she's learned she can always count on him to be there for her, regardless of the cost. The first time she kissed him, he'd saved her father's life. The second time, she'd learned that he'd given up his ship to reach her. She knows he'd follow her to the ends of the earth, through a time portal, or anywhere else. For someone with her background, this is huge. She's been abandoned so many times that having someone she can always count on to be there for her has to be extremely appealing.

 

Now, this is still kind of one-sided, verging on "what I love about you is how much you love me," and I'd like to see it even out more, but I think she has to get used to enjoying having someone be so very there for her before she'd even start to look for more.

 

Not that I have much faith in this show to give us that more. They seem to think that a kiss is enough to resolve a major emotional arc and don't seem to feel the need to show them having a conversation or reacting to the things they've been through.

[MaiLuna]

I get what you're saying, and I do want to see more of why Emma likes Hook, but love & relationships aren't logical or practical. Emma and Hook like each other's personalities, looks and what they've seen the other do in their adventures or learned about their pasts. They've bonded and maybe yeah, there isn't a logical reason for Emma to be in an actual relationship with Hook, though Emma said she thought about what he said in 4.03 before asking him out. I don't know if either of them have thought about their future. Does Emma only want some love&support while being the savior? Is Hook going to get tired of being on the heroes' side in Storybrooke, only doing what Emma tells him to do and never setting sail on the sea again?

 

I do want to see Emma liking Hook for something else than loving her but time keeps passing on the show and it continues to be mostly one-sided. I don't know if the writers think Hook has to make up for formerly being a villain, or if they find male-to-female affection more romantic than the other way around.  And it doesn't have to take a lot to show it, just have Emma smile or look at him lovingly while he's being himself instead of when he's just swooning over her. Or ask him about his past like he has done for her. I know he's less willing to talk about that than she is, but if anybody has a shot, it's her.

[Amerilla]

Ah, at last we have come to the part of the hiatus where we have the exact same discussions that we had back in October/early Novermber. ;-)

 

These are Forum Evergreens. It's like the "Snow Is A Terrible Mother" discussion and the "Neal Abandoned Emma And Thus Is Hitler" discussion. You can set your watch by them.

 

it crosses into "female protagonist gets hot, marketable boyfriend" territory. There's nothing wrong with that, I just prefer fuller relationships. I realize they've just started dating and it's moving fast, but it's been much longer for the audience. I'm not looking for uber deep conversations about their inner psyches. I'd just like to see them actually talk positively about each other instead of the current crisis when they're on a date.

 

I'm aiming even lower at this point in the game. I'd like some sign they HAVE inner psyches. 

[KingOfHearts]

 

Hook has said what he sees in Emma. He's talked about her being a hero, being brilliant, being brave, being strong, being good. But he also enjoys that she does have a touch of pirate in her, that she's willing to break rules or occasionally do something crazy for the greater good.

It's more about Emma than Hook. Hook has been upfront about the relationship since the beginning. The show has been subtle about how Emma feels, but in this stage its time for those feelings to be more outward now that they're in a committed relationship. It's one of those things that the show should be actually addressing instead of expecting people to pick up on, though they obviously have. I just don't see much in the couple besides "I like you, you like me". That may be enough for people, but not for me personally. That's just how I feel about it.

 

I'll back away quietly on that subject now. ;)

 

 

These are Forum Evergreens. It's like the "Snow Is A Terrible Mother" discussion and the "Neal Abandoned Emma And Thus Is Hitler" discussion. You can set your watch by them.

"Regina is the Devil Incarnate", "The Writers are Idiots", "Plot Hole, Plot Hole, Plot Hole", "Where's My Spoilers?", "Emma is a God-sent Angel on Earth", "Hook's Hot Therefore Awesome", "Belle and Henry Are Horrible Characters", etc.

Edited February 23, 2015 by KingOfHearts

[FabulousTater]

There doesn't have to be "logical reasons". All I want to know is what Emma sees in Hook, not necessarily the why.

 I think the show has given reasons about why and what it is that Emma and Hook see in each other. I don't think it has been spelled out in a black and white bullet point list which seems to be what you're looking for/want (or whatever the TV show equivalent is of a bullet point list). But again, neither has any other relationship on this show.

 

Starting from Snow and Charming -- which in your own opinion are more shallow than Hook and Emma, and yet you give them a pass because reasons -- all the way down to Dreamy and Nova, none of them have sat down and said "I love you because no one else folds their socks like you do/<insert other reasons here>". If you're waiting for the bullet point list of "why I, so and so, love other character, so and so" I'm afraid that's not going to happen. I think the only couple on this show that has done anything remotely resembling listing the reasons of why they love each other was Rumbelle who only ever mentioned it in their wedding vows, and even then not everyone gets their relationship. Like I said before, either you can see it and accept what and why they like about each other or you can't. *shrug* I think that just applies to every relationship on every show ever.

 

These are Forum Evergreens. It's like the "Snow Is A Terrible Mother" discussion and the "Neal Abandoned Emma And Thus Is Hitler" discussion. You can set your watch by them

Heh, you really, really can, can't you. It should be a game. Name the time of year based on the thread discussion.

Edited February 23, 2015 by FabulousTater

[Amerilla]

"Regina is the Devil Incarnate", "The Writers are Idiots", "Plot Hole, Plot Hole, Plot Hole", "Where's My Spoilers?", "Emma is a God-sent Angel on Earth", "Hook's Hot Therefore Awesome", "Belle and Henry Are Horrible Characters", etc.

 

And my personal favorite: "Now I'm Not Saying Belle Deserved To Get Shot, But She Was Very Mean To Poor Hook." Plus: Baby-Neal-Gate.

 

Maybe over the winter hiatus, we should just set up a formal schedule?

 

I think the show has given reasons about why and what it is that Emma and Hook see in each other. I don't think it has been spelled out in a black and white bullet point list which seems to be what you're looking for/want (or whatever the TV show equivalent is of a bullet point list).

 

It's still a writing fail. It's the sense that the writers don't extend themselves much beyond: "Hey, they're both carbon-based life forms. They both breathe oxygen. Let's get back to the action!" It's the writing attitude that takes two people from two completely different worlds (something that is unique in the show's Relationship Roster) and turns it into a wan little joke about Netflix. It's the attitude that Emma spending a large part of her life catching criminals and Hook spending a large part of his life being a criminal is just completely not worth examining, if even just to probe Emma's "moral grayness" or how she sees Hook fitting into a life that involves raising an easily-influenced teenage son. The show doesn't treat this as anything more than an assigned relationship, and even though I don't ship them, as a writer, I still find myself outraged by the lame blandness of it all.

[OnceUponAJen]

I hope that the one-sidedness may be alleviated in 4B. I agree Emma was awful to Hook in most of 3B, pining for New York and all (i.e. wanting to run away). There's been some good character growth for both of them since S2, and I'm liking the progression of their relationship. I do think they need to step things up a bit and show them having more conversations or quiet moments together. I'd just like to see everyone really take a bit of a break from crisis mode and see what everyday life would be like for them.

Edited February 24, 2015 by OnceUponAJen

[FabulousTater]

It's still a writing fail. It's the sense that the writers don't extend themselves much beyond: "Hey, they're both carbon-based life forms. They both breathe oxygen. Let's get back to the action!" It's the writing attitude that takes two people from two completely different worlds (something that is unique in the show's Relationship Roster) and turns it into a wan little joke about Netflix. It's the attitude that Emma spending a large part of her life catching criminals and Hook spending a large part of his life being a criminal is just completely not worth examining, if even just to probe Emma's "moral grayness" or how she sees Hook fitting into a life that involves raising an easily-influenced teenage son. The show doesn't treat this as anything more than an assigned relationship, and even though I don't ship them, as a writer, I still find myself outraged by the lame blandness of it all.

But my point is that could be said for every single relationship on this show.  If you're going to pick on Captain Swan for not clearly listing a bullet point list of "This is what I like about my S.O." and therefore in your opinion being guilty of "lame blandness", then by that same standard you should also call out Outlaw Queen, Rump & Belle, and Snow and Charming.  We haven't been told what specifically Charming loves about Snow. We haven't been told specifically what Snow loves about David. David spent his life as a poor shepherd and married a Princess. Snow spent her life as a Princess and married a poor shepherd. When have they ever examined that aspect of their relationship? Never. I don't know what specifically Regina loves about Robin (aside from that damn tattoo). I don't know what Robin loves about Regina other than her ass. She spent her life killing people and being a tyrant, he spent his life opposing tyrants. When have the writers ever examined that aspect of their relationship? Never. What Belle and Rumpel love about each is still a total head-scratcher.  So, I'm not clear on why you're picking on the writing for one relationship when the same lack of explicit, spelled out in black and white bullet point list that says "what does X love about Y" applies to all of them. 

 

Hence circling back to the joke that "OMG we've had this discussion so many times like clock work that we could make a game of it!" because no one is changing anyone's mind. I think the show has given reasons and shown the what and why Emma and Hook are into each other and together. Are those reasons explicit enough to satisfy every single viewer out there? No, but not even the best writers on earth could satisfy every single viewer or convince every single viewer to like a relationship. I feel like we're chasing our tails with this discussion. You don't like Captain Swan? Great. Have a cookie. You do love Captain Swan? Great, have a cookie. The writers suck at exploring relationships in a way that will satisfy everyone? Everyone have a cookie.

Edited February 24, 2015 by FabulousTater

[Amerilla]

Well. I guess I'll just take my pile of cookies and go to bed.

[KingOfHearts]

 

But my point is that the same is true for every single relationship on this show.

I don't disagree with this at all. None of the couples on this show are deep or flawless. Little to nothing on this show isn't in the same category. So yes, cookies for everyone!

Edited February 24, 2015 by KingOfHearts

[FormerMod-a1]

[FabulousTater]

Well. I guess I'll just take my pile of cookies and go to bed.

Don't forget the glass of milk (soy if you're lactose intolerant). The milk and cookies are a consolation prize to everyone still watching the show...though they really should be giving out bottles of alcohol.

[daxx]

Don't forget the glass of milk (soy if you're lactose intolerant). The milk and cookies are a consolation prize to everyone still watching the show...though they really should be giving out bottles of alcohol.

I have my captain Morgan all prepped for Sunday.

[KAOS Agent]

No, I'm not expecting a TLK and I find them completely played out to be honest so I don't really care about that personally.

 

I think this show has played out the True Love thing too, and I don't actually need any of the relationships with non-confirmed True Love to demonstrate it. What's up with the levels of love anyway? Can't you just see kids fighting about how their mom and dad are True Loves so as the product of True Love they are just that much better everyone else? Kids like Henry could brag about how their parents love them sooooo much more than other kids' parents. How about if Baby Snowflake is cursed and Snow breaks the curse with a kiss, but it's never tested and probably wouldn't work with Emma. Is that proof Snow loves Snowflake more than Emma?

 

There is also a problem with characters like Emma & Regina having a love so true with their son, but not with their romantic love. We have proof that they are capable of loving to that incredible level, but they just aren't that loving of their romantic partner, which is kind of sad and a bit squicky if looked at in a certain context. Emma also got a True Love rainbow when she accepted her magic and loved herself. I wonder if she gets cursed, can she kiss herself and break it? 

 

It would be nice if they could demonstrate that love is wonderful even if it's not so true that it can break a curse, but they've created a problem in that it's been played as so super special that if your favorites don't have it, it's sad. Nalini Singh has a series about people who develop a "mate bond" with their romantic partner. It's supposed to be very rare, only ends in death and comes with special benefits - your typical romance novel trope. To break the mold and show that "normal" love is great too, she wrote a book about two characters who do not have that bond. In fact, one of the characters rejected the bond with another woman to be with the heroine. It was supposed to be sweet and beautiful, but a lot of fans felt like these two characters were cheated by fate and left settling for a lesser love. When you have a story that revels in how special True Love is, it makes it very, very difficult for the main characters to not share in this super special True Love over plain old regular love. Of course, then you end up with everyone sharing True Love with everyone, so it seems neither rare nor special for any relationship within the story. 

Edited February 24, 2015 by KAOS Agent

[Shanna Marie]

David spent his life as a poor shepherd and married a Princess. Snow spent her life as a Princess and married a poor shepherd. When have they ever examined that aspect of their relationship? Never. I don't know what specifically Regina loves about Robin (aside from that damn tattoo). I don't know what Robin loves about Regina other than her ass. She spent her life killing people and being a tyrant, he spent his life opposing tyrants. When have the writers ever examined that aspect of their relationship? Never. What Belle and Rumpel love about each is still a total head-scratcher.

For Belle and Rumple, we've got the fact that she craves adventure and values heroism, and he's a coward who avoids risk and was too afraid to move to another village to make his wife happy.

 

It is interesting that they haven't explored some of these dynamics, given that most TV relationship writing tends to focus on the obstacles between a couple, the things keeping them apart. On the one hand, it's kind of refreshing to have a show that isn't all about the "they're total opposites, but they're totally drawn to each other!" dynamic. It's nice not to have to listen to Regina and Robin repeatedly having the "you're a tyrant/you steal from tyrants" argument that really has you wondering why they bother. On the other hand, it would be nice to see the differences at least addressed a little bit. Did David have any struggles in going from being a farmboy to being a prince? What did Snow think when she found out he was a farmboy? As I recall, we saw her hear from George that her "Charming" wasn't his son, but they seem to have entirely skipped the part where she learned who he really was. Obviously, it didn't matter to her in the long run, but their relationship started with him as an impostor, and didn't that mean anything? Have they had any clashes between her attitudes that came from being a princess growing up in a palace and him being a shepherd growing up on a farm?

 

It's the attitude that Emma spending a large part of her life catching criminals and Hook spending a large part of his life being a criminal is just completely not worth examining, if even just to probe Emma's "moral grayness" or how she sees Hook fitting into a life that involves raising an easily-influenced teenage son.

I'm not sure you can put Emma entirely on the "law" side of the law vs. criminal dynamic with Hook, though. After all, this is a woman who still drives a stolen car. She went through her own criminal phase. Shoplifting Pop Tarts may have been survival, but she was having fun in her crime spree with Neal, and she was the one who wanted to use his cache of stolen watches to finance their life. Then there's her job. Her work in bail bonds was more about finding people than catching criminals, especially since she dealt with them at the point when they were still "alleged" criminals, before a conviction. Since they keep saying she's a bail bondsperson rather than a bounty hunter or skip tracer, that would suggest that she's also playing a role in granting the bonds, which means her business would have been giving alleged criminals the benefit of the doubt and a chance. That requires at least some ability to be sympathetic to their situations. Her role with these people would only have become adversarial if they violated her trust and skipped out. It's hard to consider her brief time as sheriff in Storybrooke as catching criminals, since she hasn't really investigated an actual crime that didn't turn out to be a frame job. I'd say that her personal criminal background and her career of giving people a chance and then hunting them down when they failed her would actually make her more sympathetic to Hook, a former criminal who's trying to reform. She'd have a lot less in common with someone along the lines of David, who's never dabbled in the wrong side of the law.

 

And, really, when you look at most couples, what's important in whether or not they work isn't a list of things they like about each other or shared interests. It's more about a worldview or an essence that just works. Both Snow and David are idealists. He may be a bit more practical than she is, but they still see the world in the same way and have the same morals. That makes them well-suited to each other. I think Hook and Emma are kindred spirits of sorts. They've both been abandoned and betrayed, have both been on the wrong side of the law and found their way back. Even if she doesn't know that he, too, was an abandoned kid, I think she senses that he gets that part of her on a fundamental level, and that's what's allowed her to open up to him about her past in a way she still can't with her parents. I guess I can even see the potential for that kind of thing in Robin and Regina because they both have that mix of good and bad, hero and villain. They've both been bad (though on a different scale), have both hurt people, and both have tried to change but are both still really flawed and selfish. That allows them to get each other in a way that I doubt a lot of people would be able to understand either of them. Maybe they do deserve each other.

[Shanna Marie]

While painting my kitchen (wheee), it occurred to me that even the most bizarre-seeming and unhealthy romantic relationships on this show look like made-in-heaven, pixie dust-ordained, organically developed, healthy relationships compared to the idea that Emma and Regina are or even should try to be friends.

 

Even removing the fact that Regina focused her life on trying to kill Emma's mother, cast the curse that ruined Emma's life, murdered Emma's previous almost boyfriend and has tried to murder her a couple of times, why would Emma want to be friends with her? I can see her wanting to be civil enough to share parenting with her (though there, you'd think that nearly killing the kid would remove Regina from the parent list -- in the outside world, that would have had her parental rights terminated, and the fact that she was trying to kill someone else wouldn't help her case). But why else? Emma mentioned the fact that they both have magic, but they've shown that they have different magic from a different source that works a different way, and they use it for different ways. She also mentioned feeling left-out and different, with no one understanding them, but Emma is that way because she was sent to another world as an infant and grew up not knowing who or what she was, with no home or family -- thanks to Regina's curse. Regina is that way because she focused her whole adult life on revenge and murdered or tried to murder everyone close to her, and generally was such an unpleasant person to be around that no one wanted to be her friend. I'm not seeing the common ground.

 

And then there are the murder attempts. That's generally a deal-breaker for a friendship, and it's not like Regina has even made up for it by frequently saving Emma's life or otherwise being there for her. She did stop the snow monster, and she gave Emma the happy memories of bringing up Henry, but otherwise, their relationship has been entirely one-sided. Emma bends over backward to include and support Regina, and Regina focuses on her own wants and needs, barely acknowledging that Emma exists unless she needs something from her.

 

Then there's this silly "I owe you a happy ending" thing. I could see pulling for the underdog if bad things just kept happening to Regina, but Regina's current state is her own fault. She rejected Robin in the first place because she decided she'd rather focus on getting revenge on Emma's mother, and lost him in the second chance basically because she threw Emma and Marian in her dungeon. I suppose a truly good person wouldn't point and laugh, but would a truly good person think this was someone worth devoting that kind of time and energy to?

 

I really hate that it's Emma who's doing the chasing after, groveling and begging Regina to be her friend. If anything, it should be the other way around. Regina's the one who needs friends (thanks to killing or betraying all of hers). She's the one who's wronged Emma and should want to make it up to her.

 

Basically, I suspect that the entire basis of this friendship (and I use the term loosely) is a very vocal Twitter contingent.

[Mari]

Basically, I suspect that the entire basis of this friendship (and I use the term loosely) is a very vocal Twitter contingent.

It might be.  It wouldn't surprise me at all.  But they did such bizarre set-up for the friendship, and I still can't figure out how we are supposed to square "Regina has true hate for Emma." with "Regina and Emma are friends."  It's like the Emma and Regina who are "friends" are identical twins with identical names, but completely different characters from the Emma and Regina who are enemies.

 

It's not just a case of Emma keeps begging for friendship from someone who's abusive.  It just makes no sense.  There's no transitional behavior from one episode to the other;  there's simply sometimes an Emma who desperately wants to be a friend to Regina, and sometimes an Emma who could care less.  There's sometimes a Regina who's chilly but civil to Emma, and sometimes a Regina who hates Emma just as much as she used to hate Snow.

 

If they hadn't bounced back and forth between the different scenes where Regina hated Emma, and included a scene where Regina's hate is what breaks a spell, confirming it's not just hyperbolic use of the word hate, maybe?

 

I don't understand why, even if it they were just developing the relationship for fan service, they didn't do even a slightly better job of it.

Edited February 27, 2015 by Mari

[Curio]

I could see pulling for the underdog if bad things just kept happening to Regina, but Regina's current state is her own fault.

And honestly, is Regina's current state really that bad where she needs to be considered an underdog? Throughout 3B, she was devastated that she was separated from Henry and that he didn't remember her when he returned to Storybrooke. She was even willing to put herself under a sleeping curse because she was separated from him. But now Regina has Henry fully in her life and he loves her completely. That should be enough for Regina, right? Wrong. Emma is now suddenly on a mission to get Regina her happy ending with Robin because of her massive guilt complex she inherited from her mother. Shouldn't Regina be content with the fact that she has her son who loves her despite what she did to him in the past, she has Snow and Emma who are groveling at her feet to be her friends despite what she has done to them in the past, and that the entire town seems to have forgiven her despite the curse she put on them in the past? Like, shouldn't all of those things be worth way more than some week long romance?

 

Emma and Regina's forced "friendship" seems even more screwy when you compare it to another similar pairing on the show: Belle and Hook. Hook has done some atrocious things to Belle and has never sincerely apologized to her for them. Sound familiar? But I can bet you anything the writers would never have Belle groveling to Hook's feet begging for them to become friends. Therefore, you would think Emma shouldn't have to be the one who has to grovel to Regina for friendship. And Belle shouldn't have to do any groveling because she was the person wronged in her situation. But if Hook pulled a Regina, he'd be yelling at Belle for his whole heart situation because Belle had the audacity to be Rumple's wife, which somehow lead to Hook losing his heart and becoming Rumple's puppet.

 

Hook might be one of my favorite characters, but I can also recognize where his character has screwed up, and Belle is one of those situations. Could you imagine an entire episode like Breaking Glass where Belle follows Hook around like a puppy and begs to become his friend and takes his verbal abuse and calls herself an idiot? No. No one could imagine that because it would be ludicrous. Some time in the future, I expect Hook to eventually seek Belle's forgiveness and truly apologize, but not the other way around. So I have no idea why the writers are doing the exact opposite with Emma and Regina. It just makes no logical sense. Unless the writers are trying to hammer in the fact that Regina is completely delusional and Emma is brainwashed. If they're doing that, then they're doing a fantastic job.

[Camera One]

The writers would say that Emma needs Regina as a friend in a way that Belle would not need Hook.  Accrording to "Bleeding Glass", only Regina can truly understand the difficulties that Emma go thorough.  

[Curio]

The writers could say that, but then I'd just rebuttal and say only Hook can understand the betrayal Belle has felt from being lied to and manipulated by Rumple. They're both non-magical beings and seem to like books, so there's the potential for friendship there. I'd actually like to see those two become begrudging friends, just as long as it's not treated like it is with Emma and Regina. If the writers go that route, then I'll totally make fun of that friendship, too. (I'm an equal opportunity snarker, what can I say.)

[YaddaYadda]

You know what bothers me with Regina these days?  It's the fact that her snarkiness which used to be fun is now on like most of the time and comes off as bitchiness. There's a difference between the two and a time for everything.  You can be snarky without being bitchy or you can be plain bitchy.  The only person she talks to with some form of respect without that whole bitchy side is Henry.

 

Hook might be one of my favorite characters, but I can also recognize where his character has screwed up, and Belle is one of those situations.

 

Belle is the person Hook has screwed over the most in the name of his revenge and she deserved none of that.  She can be as dense as she wants to be when it comes to Rumple, but him hitting her and shooting her?  Just no.  I did not want Belle and Hook in each others' vicinity for the longest time because he victimized her.  If he says anything ridiculous to her then she has carte blanche to knee him in the jewels.  

 

The main difference between Hook and Regina is that he is self-aware.  He knows the things he has done and he doesn't blame it on someone else and I can even understand his whole view of collateral damage.  He was a military man and a pirate after all.

 

Anyway...we will see how things go on Sunday, won't we.

[KAOS Agent]

The Emma/Regina friendship as it was played out in 4A reminded me way too much of that Looney Tunes cartoon with Chester and Spike where Spike walks along too cool for school while Chester hops around him begging him to do things. Can we, Spike? Huh, huh, can we? Can we? Then Spike slaps Chester in the face and tells him to shut up. It's not fun to watch. The cartoon is entertaining because it ends with the positions of Spike & Chester reversed (karma!), but I wouldn't be interested in Emma abusing Regina in that way either. Unequal friendships are not fun. 

[buildmeupbuttercup]

Emma and Regina's forced "friendship" seems even more screwy when you compare it to another similar pairing on the show: Belle and Hook. Hook has done some atrocious things to Belle and has never sincerely apologized to her for them. Sound familiar? But I can bet you anything the writers would never have Belle groveling to Hook's feet begging for them to become friends. Therefore, you would think Emma shouldn't have to be the one who has to grovel to Regina for friendship. And Belle shouldn't have to do any groveling because she was the person wronged in her situation. But if Hook pulled a Regina, he'd be yelling at Belle for his whole heart situation because Belle had the audacity to be Rumple's wife, which somehow lead to Hook losing his heart and becoming Rumple's puppet.

 

Hook might be one of my favorite characters, but I can also recognize where his character has screwed up, and Belle is one of those situations. Could you imagine an entire episode like Breaking Glass where Belle follows Hook around like a puppy and begs to become his friend and takes his verbal abuse and calls herself an idiot? No. No one could imagine that because it would be ludicrous. Some time in the future, I expect Hook to eventually seek Belle's forgiveness and truly apologize, but not the other way around. So I have no idea why the writers are doing the exact opposite with Emma and Regina. It just makes no logical sense. Unless the writers are trying to hammer in the fact that Regina is completely delusional and Emma is brainwashed. If they're doing that, then they're doing a fantastic job.

So much word! I'm reserving judgment until Sunday but I don't see there could be any way that the Hook and Belle friendship could be handled as atrociously as the Emma/Regina friendship--because as you said it would be ludicrous!

 

Here's the thing, I didn't hate Emma/Regina scenes until this season. Last season when they would have to team up and work together, I was ok with that. I get that the days of Emma chainsawing the apple tree are gone (even though that was my favorite of their interactions) but they set up Snow and Emma's (especially) instant-bff status with Regina so awfully from the beginning it's just so unpalatable now.

 

I'm not on Tumblr and I've tried to stay away from even casual lurking lately with the bickering over the Emma/Regina friendship but I saw this reblogged today and had to share because this is what we've been saying this whole time and it's made even better by the fact that it's coming from a former Regina/SQ stan. My hatred of this "friendship" doesn't come from thinking they're going to make SQ a romance or anything "ship" related. I hate the idea of being instant bff without any buildup to it given the history of hurt and life-ruining one party has inflicted on the other. That meta sounds like it was written by one of use on here because how many of us have said the same thing as this:

Every other relationship on the show, from romantic to familial to even friendship, is warped or dropped to cater to Regina. This is not character development; this is character annihilation.

and:

In order to prop up some kind of Savior Queen friendship, this is what will continue to occur, Emma’s relationships and history and character being diminished or thrown aside in order to make Regina’s “redemption” and “character development” seem legitimate (and not poorly written)...

Woegina continues to just be the worst and not see her role in any of the misery she inflicted on her victims. Do they need to show her apologizing to every citizen? No, but at least check the bitch 'tude at the door and show some remorse. And while we're at it let's stop this character assassination where Emma effing Swan is a doormat. SnarkyRegina is entertaining but Parilla is playing it (or it is coming off) as straight-up-bitchiness. Maybe it will be different in 4B TS, TW so my hopes are slim because even if they righted it now the damage of 4x05 is already done.

Edited February 27, 2015 by buildmeupbuttercup

[Lieutenant]

So, I was reading this article and my brain pretty much exploded out of my head at this:

In contrast, Regina's last act of love was sacrifice when she let Robin Hood (Sean Maguire) go out of Storybrooke. Will her actions make her cause more sympathetic to The Author?
Kitsis: If there's anyone on the show who's kind of gotten the short end of the stick, it's Regina. She did horrible, horrible things but she has continually done the right thing. She's definitely somebody who's trying to redeem themselves. A big question that we're asking on the second half of the season is: If you do something bad, can you come back from it? Does it make you a villain or can you still be a hero? I think that is a realistic thing. Very few people are good all the time.

 

Whaaaaaat?  Because murdering countless people (including her own father), destroying Snowing and Emma's lives, treating her son like a crazy person, and straight up raping Graham is totally getting the short stick in life.  And she's absolutely done the right thing by apologizing to those she's wronged, treated them with kindness and respect in the present, and shown some remorse for all the carnage she's caused.  Oh wait.  I just....*speechless*   I guess that truly is the question, Eddy.  How much hell does one person have to commit to see some actual consequences on this show?  Apparently more than Regina's racked up.  And that's pretty telling right there.  How can Regina have any sort of healthy relationship when she's not had to truly face what she's done to those around her?

Edited February 27, 2015 by Lieutenant

[KAOS Agent]

The comment section on that article is the best. I've never, ever seen the argument that Regina is okay for killing an entire village because they had a choice of snitch or die and they chose wrong. Apparently, it's cool to kill people when they can keep a secret. It's also cool to kill people when they can't keep a secret. I guess providing options makes everything okay. I weep for the future.

 

On the topic of happily ever after relationships, I just wish that they would acknowledge that a true happily ever after is what we make it. This quest for a "happy ending" is so messed up because no matter who or how much you love, life happens. Things change, people drift apart or die. Why is there no acknowledgement that everyone works for their happy ending? Snow & Charming are the ultimate True Love couple, but they argue and disagree with the others' choices. They aren't frozen in a Happy Ending Bubble. Their love for each other isn't an ending it's a beginning. I really, really, really hate this happy ending/author storyline.

[Dani-Ellie]

I commented on that article. I couldn't just let it sit. It won't do any good but I just can't anymore.

 

On the topic of happily ever after relationships, I just wish that they would acknowledge that a true happily ever after is what we make it.

 

This. I'll forgive them a lot if this ends up being how the storyline turns out. The Author's all, "Dude, Y'all make the story, I just write shit down." Because the only true ending in life is death and there's a lot of life that's going to happen in between then and now. Sometimes shit happens. It's learning to deal with life's obstacles in a healthy manner that makes happiness.

[YaddaYadda]

If anyone here had any doubts at all that this show was always about Regina and her dumb happy ending, then please don't have any doubts anymore.

Much as I tried to sort of not think about the whole book/author storyline, I am now worried that where they are headed is indeed where we don't want them to go which is basically to say that well everything that happened, happened because the author wrote it this way and Regina was the Evil Queen because the Author wanted her to be so she had no control over any of her actions and you guys are just stories, you're not even real, so who cares what you did anyway.  Thank you for pointing out that Regina has the inability to be happy.  That's the one thing we agree on.  The curse to end all curses did not make her happy, having her son back, still not fully happy.  Having Robin?  I'm sure she'll be happy for 30 seconds before she gets bored with him and zeroes in another happy ending.  Emma better hide her pop tarts.

I get the impression that they're going to trash the whole premise of the show...Evil isn't born, it's made...you have to work at your life and make yourself a better person in order the achieve that good place in your life and so on, that we have freedom of choice.

Someone who has twitter should tweet this to Adam as a reminder...because this quote is absolutely relevant.

“We've all got both light and dark inside us. What matters is the part we choose to act on. That's who we really are.” - Sirius Black

I am down with Emma walking the dark side for a moment because every show I've ever watched has the good guy crossing over to the dark side and it can actually provide moments of growth, but I know for sure they will be like see, Emma and Regina are no different when they should be saying that Emma and Regina are different because ultimately, Emma turned away from temptation and that's who she really is, she may stumble and fall because she is only human, but ultimately, she makes the right choice, takes the right decision even if she ends up with the short end of the stick.

 

Regina was defined by Daniel's death and when she had a chance at being happy, she chose to pursue revenge.  This is the difference between Hook and Regina and Rumple.  Regina chose her revenge over going into that tavern and meeting her meathead, Rumple chose his power and Hook finally let go of his vengeance when he was offered something else.  He grabbed on, not even knowing it would give him what it is that he wanted.  These characters ALL HAD CHOICES and two of them chose wrong! 

So I'm going to go neglect my work and watch House of Cards because Frank Underwood is an evil asshole and he's okay with it.

Edited February 27, 2015 by YaddaYadda

[buildmeupbuttercup]

Some more "gems" from the same commenter:

• Emma owes Regina her life because if Regina doesn't make Snow go on the run (by putting a bounty on her head!) she never meets Charming and Emma never exists!!!
• Graham agreed to kill Snow then chickened out and insulted Regina's intelligence with the pig heart, thus totally deserving of the rape and death thing.
• What does Regina have to do to please the unreasonable "Anti-Mills people"
• Emma did nothing to save them from Pan, Cora, or Zelena (you know nevermind that Regina was actually working with Cora there and Snow "earned" her black heart for saving everyone)

 

My faith in humanity is restored somewhat by the number of commenters calling bull on this skewed "morality" shit and A&E's comments, so that's reassuring.

 

ETA: Dani-Ellie I'm pretty sure I know which comment was yours because when I was reading through them this morning I thought "Wow, that sounds exactly like what we've always said" on here, so bravo for sharing with the rest of the world LOL.

Edited February 27, 2015 by buildmeupbuttercup

[Dani-Ellie]

Hee, thanks! ;) And obviously, Emma owes Regina her life because Regina sent Snow on the run, allowing her to meet Charming. *rolls eyes* I couldn't let that one stand, either, because that's some gold-medal-worthy mental gymnastics. I'm going to get lambasted for it but I don't even care.

 

 

 

Regina was defined by Daniel's death and when she had a chance at being happy, she chose to pursue revenge.  This is the difference between Hook and Regina and Rumple.  Regina chose her revenge over going into that tavern and meeting her meathead, Rumple chose his power and Hook finally let go of his vengeance when he was offered something else.  He grabbed on, not even knowing it would give him what it is that he wanted.  These characters ALL HAD CHOICES and two of them chose wrong!

 

Exactly. *sigh* I miss when this show remembered that.

Edited February 27, 2015 by Dani-Ellie

[orza]

Why is a spoilery media article being discussed in the relationship thread and why are the same dead horses being mercilessly beaten for the gazillionth time?

[Curio]

Why is a spoilery media article being discussed in the relationship thread

There should probably be a warning about the article containing spoilers, but the actual quoted part in the post doesn't really contain any spoilers.

 

and why are the same dead horses being mercilessly beaten for the gazillionth time?

Because: hiatus.

[Dani-Ellie]

Why is a spoilery media article being discussed in the relationship thread

 

Because the information revealed in the quoted part of the article (the quote wasn't spoilery) directly informs how the relationships on the show are being written, which then impacts how those relationships play out onscreen. I would have dragged my comments to the writers thread but with the closure of that thread, I didn't know where else to put it.

Edited February 27, 2015 by Dani-Ellie

[Shanna Marie]

I would add to the Hook/Belle parallels to the Regina/Emma "friendship" that Hook has never acted in any way like he was being left out or mistreated because Belle didn't include him in her social circle, has yet to whine about how Belle never has his back and is never on his side, and hasn't complained to Belle that she has everything and he has no one. Also, Hook (urged on by Emma) was the one who took the first step in mending fences by offering to help Belle with research and guarding her, so she wasn't put in the position of asking any kind of favor from the person who hurt her. I also can't think of any case of Hook continuing to insult Belle or make disparaging remarks to her after they stopped being enemies. I can't even think of a time when he said anything vaguely lewd and innuendoish about or to her once he turned himself around. He's probably been nicer to/about Belle than he has Snow.

 

So, yeah, they know how to write a reluctant and tentative thawing between people who have had serious differences, where one has done great harm to the other but they have to deal with each other. If they do end up developing some kind of friendship in the aftermath of what Rumple did to both of them, I think I could buy it, based on the groundwork that's been laid, if it continues in this way and at this pace. And I could have possibly bought some kind of really gradual enemies to frenemies to real friends relationship between Emma and Regina if it had been handled in this way. But this insta-friends thing where it's treated as though Regina is the one who was wronged is absolutely ridiculous.

[RadioGirl27]

 

So, yeah, they know how to write a reluctant and tentative thawing between people who have had serious differences, where one has done great harm to the other but they have to deal with each other.

Yeah, and they know how to write a romance and how to write a redemption arc. And yet, they are not doing it for Regina, even if she is clearly their favourite character. A&E are so blinded for their love for Regina that everyting about her has to be immediate (redemption, love and now friendship) without her actually working for it.

 

 

And I could have possibly bought some kind of really gradual enemies to frenemies to real friends relationship between Emma and Regina if it had been handled in this way. But this insta-friends thing where it's treated as though Regina is the one who was wronged is absolutely ridiculous.

I think that Emma and Regina should never be friends; civil for the sake of Henry, yes, but not friends. But if this storyline had been writen differently, as something gradual and not one-sided, maybe I wouldn't be so mad. I wouldn't like it, but I would accept it. But the way they are doing it, just to appease a very vocal group of fans, is ridiculous. I'm starting to think the six weeks time jump is there so they can show Emma and Regina already as BFF without showing the process of them becoming friends, because they knew it would be impossible for them to write it in a logical, acceptable, non rage-inducing way.

[KingOfHearts]

Emma and Regina being friends I'm okay with. It's a Once drama thing to do that I can handwave. They play off each other extremely well. However, Emma being passive and submissive to Regina's insults is just pathetic and it's unfaithful to to their original dynamic.

It's out of character for both of them if you ask me. Regina's lash out in 4x05 didn't make a lick of sense. Yeah she was mad about Marian, but she knows better. She knows Emma isn't an idiot. Her kneejerk reaction was very her, but I speculated she would have gotten over it quickly. It was played out as some sort of justice for Evil Regals, and that's what broke the episode. Prior to it, she was fairly mellow. It just came out of nowhere.

Emma's lines like, "I always know when you're lying, Regina" or "I think you're bitter and taking it out on the wrong person" keep her dignity intact and Regina in her place. We got no dialog like that and it just made the insults from Regina super harsh.

Edited February 27, 2015 by KingOfHearts

[Shanna Marie]

I think that Emma and Regina should never be friends; civil for the sake of Henry, yes, but not friends.

In the real world, no. Attempted murder is pretty much a friendship dealbreaker. You can't really move past it. In the real world, they wouldn't even be civil for the sake of Henry because that attempted murder would have had Regina's parental rights revoked and she would be in prison, which would have made a friendship with Emma difficult. I also wouldn't expect Belle to ever so much as give Hook the time of day. She'd be more likely to have a restraining order (assuming he wasn't in prison). However, in fiction, it's kind of like the redemption thing -- the fact that people with enormous differences can move past them to restore a relationship gives us hope about our own relationships that might have faced more minor differences.

 

So, in fiction, I'm okay with the idea of Hook and Belle overcoming their differences and coming together to work on a problem that affects both of them, in part because helping her is part of his redemption arc and because working with him is part of her growth. She didn't wrong him in the sense of hurting him, but she was wrong about him in a way that led to her being hurt. Her preconceived notions about him kept her from being able to listen to him, believe what he told her, and heed his warnings, and that led her to get in way over her head with Rumple while being blinded by love. So I think that starting again now that she's had her eyes opened and being able to look at Hook as a person rather than judging him as that awful pirate who must have done something awful to Rumple is good for her, just as being willing to set aside any past grudges and help someone he hurt is important for his growth. I don't know that I ever want them to become social friends, but I like the idea of them working together for a greater good and maybe occasionally discussing books along the way.

 

And if things between Regina and Emma had gone that way, I might have been more open to it, if it had been Regina approaching Emma and trying to help her. But instead, Regina's the one who's caused the most harm, and yet Emma's the one doing all the helping.

[KAOS Agent]

Emma acting submissive and rolling over for anyone is just wrong. It makes no sense. It's especially disturbing when it was explicitly brought up by David in 4.03 that she can't let Regina get her down. They acknowledged in show that the things Regina says make Emma feel useless. One of the things that makes this uneven relationship even worse is that we know Emma struggles with feelings of being unlovable and low self-worth. When Regina puts her down, even if it's more snarky than mean spirited, it's hard to take because it feeds into Emma's issues. Emma's out of character lack of response to endless insults makes it appear that Emma's fears of abandonment and unlovability are causing her to respond in an atypical way so that her friends/family don't leave her. That's not a healthy reaction for anyone. Emma isn't some poor delicate flower who needs to be protected from Regina's barbs, but they need her to respond in kind and I'm not sure that the writers understand that.

[Dani-Ellie]

Emma isn't some poor delicate flower who needs to be protected from Regina's barbs, but they need her to respond in kind and I'm not sure that the writers understand that.

Exactly, and that was precisely what was wrong with 4x05. Not that Regina went off on her but that Emma just stood there and let her. That is not the Emma Swan of literally every other episode of this series. How do we go from Emma "I think you're just bitter and taking it out on the wrong person" Swan in 4x03 to 42 minutes of Emma "kicked puppy chasing after her abuser" Swan in 4x05?

 

I'm willing to reserve judgment on any Emma/Regina friendship until it airs, because if it plays out like 3x13 and 3x17 where they both snark back and forth at each other, I'll be okay. If it continues to be like 4x05, the writers and I are going to have serious issues. 

[KingOfHearts]

What the show misunderstands is that there are different kinds of friendships that all come with their own dynamics. Not all friendships are about shopping and talking about boys, and not all friendships have to be super close. I'm fine with Emma and Regina being friends in that they respect each other silently, can banter without hurting each other's feelings, can co-parent civilly, and can work together to solve cases. You don't have to be BFF Care Bears to be "friends".

 

What I'm not okay with is abuse, illogical romance, enabling and one-sidedness. That's a corrupted arrangement, similar to Regina/Snow and Rumple/Belle. Antagonism is only funny when it comes from both sides. Otherwise it's just pitiful. That's not conflict - that's injustice.

Edited February 28, 2015 by KingOfHearts

[Curio]

No, but you guys have it all wrong. Regina and Emma are "an example of two strong women having a friendship instead of attacking each other."

 

(Oh, Jennifer. What kind of kool-aid are the writers giving you and may I please have some?)

[YaddaYadda]

I sort of see where she's coming from.  It's better for two women to you know work together and band together than be bitchy to each other and stab each other in the back.  I'm taking what she said as that.  Maybe Regina is showing some maturity or something.

 

Yeah, I don't know.

Edited February 28, 2015 by YaddaYadda

[Shanna Marie]

Maybe she means it from her perspective -- like it's the way she finds Emma's motivation, that Emma believes it's better for them to work together instead of attacking each other, and that's why she's not striking back at Regina's abuse.

 

I can only imagine the knots these poor actors have to twist themselves into to find ways to make some of these things make sense for their characters. Here they've done all this work on figuring out their characters, and then the characters are forced to say and do things that go totally against everything they've developed, so they have to find a way for it to work if their portrayal is going to be at all sincere. The Emma who's been established would snark back, but the script has her dying to be Regina's friend and supporting Regina's insanity, so the way to rationalize it is with Emma deciding to bite her tongue and swallow her pride so they can work together, since that's probably better for the big picture.

[KAOS Agent]

I think that answer is a great big non-answer designed to avoid the massive hate she'd get from Regina/Swan Queen fans if she was even remotely honest about the relationship. 

[myril]

Something from the spoiler thread - no spoiler though:

 

 

Anytime Adam and Eddy says something, my opinion of them just sinks that much lower. They think Belle being all "Change or fuck off" is a show of power and strength? That that is the height of her character being strong or something? Say what? This right here sums up everything wrong about Rumbelle and the writers just doesn't get it. How about finding a guy you can love without requiring him to change? And how is it love when you want the guy to change and can't be with him if he doesn't? More like fuck off writers.

 

RumBelle is a common trope: beautiful often innocent soul through her/his unwavering love saves dark soul, which has eventually some tiny bit of good left inside, and is probably some by circumstances or the past  tortured person or some cursed beast. It's one interpretation of The Beauty and the Beast. And it's one quite liked in romance, I would say, looking at the success of Twilight and 50 Shades of Grey. It's particular attractive if the tormented or cursed dark soul is in his/her way attractive and more important rich, because then they will have a happy ending living in richness and love together. Doesn't everybody dream of being so great to succeed even in changing the evil guy and become some happy rich princess/queen or prince/king?

 

It's often confused with misunderstood beast being feared by public, who has become somewhat of a proud but gloomy outsider or at worst grumpy loner and eccentric. Those outsiders are feared because of their looks and maybe way of living but seldom do bad things and have no dark soul, more a lonely one. Snow-White and Rose-Red is a fairy tale telling such kind of story.

 

The Beauty and the Beast is somewhat borderline, the Beast is not much of nice guy,  it was pretty much his arrogance bringing the curse on himself. Still he his mostly "just" a jerk and eccentric but not a dark soul in the sense of evil doing. So I can see why some love this fairy tale and even more so the Disney animated version of it so much while understanding it as tale of love conquers all. It is attractive to be the one to tame the beast, to uncover the good beneath the ugly outside, to beat the evil and foster the good, to succeed where others have failed. Not to mention the underdog gets the happy ending trope.

 

The problem of OUaT is, that the lines are at best blurred, that the beast is not just some misunderstood loner, though Rumple's  pre-Dark-One sob story suggests that a bit, but that he has a dark and evil soul. And it's debatable if the Dark One Curse created that dark and evil soul in a good heart or if the Dark One Curse thrives on a dark which already has been in Rumple's heart (like envy, insecurity, feelings of neglect, anger coming from the betrayal of his father). Whatever.

 

The show has shown pretty much only Rumple's side of the story, to the annoyance of Belle's fans, Belle as Rumple's anchor, support, conscience, love, enabler. And the writers have been walking rather miserably a fine line between enabler of the bad, endurer of her own and other people's abuse, even embracing eventually the dark side, and Belle as the other force besides Bae in Rumple's live able to change his attitude to the better for a moment at least. Even Belle's own episode, where she saved Phillip's life and met Mulan, was little more than giving context for Belle with Rumple. She has a thing for beasts, oh great to know. But we barely ever have seen Belle's side of things IMO.

 

What the writers give us on this show is the trope of more or less innocent girl changing bad guy through love. It's boring and it's even annoying and can tell some quite wrong message. You have to love hard enough and you can change even the worst guy - and if he doesn't change it's your fault, you didn't love hard enough. Not that maybe the guy was the one not deserving your kindness and love in the first place and would never change no matter what, it's the mistake of the person not turning the tide.

 

Seeing it that way, IMO Belle telling Rumple kinda"Change or fuck off" and going through with it (for the moment) is progress and her showing a bit of spine and self-respect, finally. Overdue. For Belle that is showing some sort of strength, I think. Question is, will she keep it that way, let Rumple back only when he has changed, or will she cave in before, again hoping for the best? Yup, Belle should go and look for someone not needing to change to be a good person to love, but at the moment it would be enough for me, if she indeed stays away from Rumple (unfortunately, because TS TW they probably will rejoin regardless)

 

What I missed dearly is how Belle got from turning blind eye to eyes wide open, and not by some props and events, that we got, but the inner process. So that she does that now doesn't feel quite like showing strength on her side. I am honestly confused even, what Belle's character story, development was meant to be this first half of season 4, it seemed it was all about her guilt, she failing other people, so why did she gave Rumple the boot? Out of guilty feelings for failing everybody else while still catering hope Rumple had changed? Somehow doubt that is what the writers thought of.

 

This show seems to want to be some lightweight family fun entertainment with dramatic elements, but neither do they write light fun family entertainment (something like The Librarians did with its 1 season a better job at that) nor are they any good in exploring the depth of human drama and inner conflicts. The relationships on the show aren't romantic ideal role models, and shouldn't be (oh goodness, no), but they could be real and interesting. At the moment they are mostly just flat, static, tiresome tropes most of the time, with hardly any development of characters.

[Shanna Marie]

One of the real problems with the relationship between Rumple and Belle is that they're trying to have their cake and eat it. Belle is pretty traditional -- there's no twist to her character. She's basically the same "Beauty" from the fairy tales and the Disney version (in essence, though not in execution). But then they're doing the clever (and I use the word loosely) twist on the Beast side by making Rumpelstiltskin be the Beast. He's not a misunderstood outsider being judged by his appearance. He's not even an arrogant jerk who once judged someone else for their appearance and is being punished for it. He's the Dark One who took on his curse and weird appearance by choice, by killing someone to get it, and who doesn't want to let go of it. He hurts people and enjoys doing so. These two things don't go together very well. You can't really have idealistic Belle who's able to love the person behind the fearsome appearance and the guy who's uglier inside than he is outside and who doesn't want to change. Then there's the problem that the writers don't want him to change. They want to keep him evil. You can only have the "I can change him with the power of my love" story if the guy actually changes. This is a relationship trope that's hard to do in an ongoing series unless all aspects of the relationship are on the slow burn -- if, say, Belle had stuck to her "call me when you're not evil" guns and lived in the same town as Rumple, maintaining some degree of friendship but not being romantic and certainly not marrying him. Then they could have shown her gradually transforming him with the power of her faith in him (and maybe some nagging), maybe with a lot of ups and downs along the way, until finally they get together in the happy ending when he really has changed. But by throwing them together in a marriage without dealing with any of the issues (like him still being evil), they created a really icky situation.

 

So they distract viewers with the imitation of the iconic ballroom scene and a few made-for-tumblr romantic moments, and then turn right around and show him being evil. That just made Belle look stupid for going on about seeing the good in him when they weren't showing any good in him. The only way to salvage her character was to have her finally wake up.

[KingOfHearts]

Rumpbelle is based on the belief that Rumple is redeemable and that Belle can save him with her True Love for him. However, from a writing standpoint, Rumple can never be truly redeemed outside of a series finale or a character farewell. Knowing that, Rumpbelle doesn't really work like a Beauty and the Beast story. It's more like a desperate woman staying around an abusive husband she knows is bad just to feel better about herself because she continually believes she can "change" him, when deep inside she knows she can't.

 

Granted, Rumpbelle worked well in Skin Deep. Having it as a temporary relationship showing an area in Rumple's life that had a little light and that he was capable of love added a great level of depth to his character. It should have just stopped there. Unfortunately since Belle is a Disney princess, she can't be killed off nor eternally cut away from her "True Love". It's the price of working within the Disney universe.

Edited March 1, 2015 by KingOfHearts

[Shanna Marie]

Granted, Rumpbelle worked well in Skin Deep. Having it as a temporary relationship showing an area in Rumple's life that had a little light and that he was capable of love added a great level of depth to his character. It should have just stopped there. Unfortunately since Belle is a Disney princess, she can't be killed off nor eternally cut away from her "True Love". It's the price of working within the Disney universe.

The thing is, they've given themselves multiple opportunities to reset to "Skin Deep" and maintain that vibe without the relationship progressing further while he's still evil. There was the time when she realized Rumple had been lying to her about her father and her father was trying to control her, and she told them both to stay out of her life -- and then she was back with Rumple about five minutes later. Then learning what really happened to Rumple's wife, that he'd been lying about it, and seeing him nearly beating Hook to death should have given her pause and a reason to back off, but it didn't seem to bother her at all. When she came back to herself after being Lacey, she should have had some serious second thoughts about what she'd seen in him, but instead of reacting to him like "what the hell kind of person are you?" she went straight to "oh, my beloved Rumple!" At any one of those points, she could have pulled back to her "I know you have the potential for good, so call me when you're ready to go there" attitude and maintained her "Skin Deep" sass with him, and she still could have believed him totally changed when he sacrificed himself for the town. Then the current plot wouldn't look so much like she missed all the huge warning signs and only got bothered when he didn't love her as much as he loved power.

[jhlipton]

Marian had no Curse memories--it's not like she could have adjusted to living in the Land Without Magic right away.

She's going to get this help from Robin????  LOL

 

Here's a woman who gave up everything she knew, gave up a soft life to Do The Right Thing, and adjusted to the bandit life-style with no problems.  I think she'll figure out the modern world just as well as Ingrid obviously did.  WTF does she need a lout like Robin for?  

[Writing Wrongs]

I must be hard-hearted, because watching Emma and Hook swoon over each other annoys me. I can only tolerate that with Snow and Charming.

[Curio]

I must be hard-hearted, because watching Emma and Hook swoon over each other annoys me. I can only tolerate that with Snow and Charming.

 

Do you kick puppies in your free time, too? ;)

 

No, I can actually kind of see where you're coming from. I love the Captain Swan pairing to death, but I'm almost to the point where I want them to take a couple episodes off from kissing each other and finally just have some serious conversations. I like Hook and Emma the best when they're written like the scene with Emma's childhood box or when they're working together on an adventure like in the time travel episode. Oh, and I miss the shameless flirting. Hook, you can still be Captain Innuendo even though Emma is your girlfriend now!

Edited March 4, 2015 by Curio