Happily Ever After: Relationships Are Hard

[stealinghome]

I suspect this may be true about the writers.  For me, it is the romantic relationships that tend to get a little boring, a combination of I'm not much of a shipper and these writers view relationships at something of an adolescent level.  They can do it if they want, they did a very good platonic friend/sidekick in Will Scarlett on 'Wonderland'.  They just apparently don't want to, or different writers were in charge.

This is what frustrates me about Once going all-in on the romantic relationships: it's that they write the platonic relationships so, so much better. Rumbelle and Outlaw Queen are pretty terribly written (and I say that as someone who, despite myself, still likes Rumbelle), Snowing and Captain Swan are better but not by a lot. Really Snowing only works on the strength of Goodwin and Dallas' chemistry, and (obviously this is ymmv) Captain Swan doesn't have that same level of chemistry, so I can't overlook the writing fails with regard to that relationship in the way that I can just shut my brain off and enjoy Snowing.

 

Whereas the platonic relationships are some of the more complex and interesting and emotionally resonant on the show. There's the goldmine that is Snow+Charming+Emma+Henry, which could sustain three seasons all on its own. I loved S1 Red and Snow's friendship, and I was really digging the Charming+Red brotp in S2. Snow+the dwarves always makes me smile. Henry+Rumpel is just begging to be delved into. I enjoyed the girls' night out in S1, and Team Princess in the abstract, and wished we'd seen more of that kind of stuff. David+Abigail seemed to have developed a nice friendship. Hook+David is always good for a laugh (heh, Hook+Snow too, come to think of it). Regina+Rumpel is delicious. While he was still alive, Rumpel+Neal was the most interesting thing about both characters; ditto for Cora/Regina, even if the show totally did wrong by that relationship. Hell, even though I can't stand the whitewashing of Regina, Regina+Snow is the most twisted, layered, f'ed up, but therefore one of the most interesting relationships on the show! So it frustrates me to no end that the writers basically chuck all of these awesome, so laden-with-potential relationships out the window to focus almost exclusively on terribly-written romantic relationships.

 

Rumbelle does have a distinct musical motif played whenever they're onscreen.

It's usually a variation on "Rumpelstiltskin in Love," which is on the S1 soundtrack, if you like it! I think it's one of the more beautiful pieces of music the show has done.

 

Some of the innuendo he gave to Team Princess might come across as obnoxious or even suggestive of "rape culture" if it had been said to the woman sitting beside him on the subway, but I think it's very different in context when it's coming from a man who is badly outnumbered, surrounded by three armed warrior women (and one kind of useless one).

His "I'm going to jab you with a sword" to Emma as they swordfought wasn't just suggestive of rape culture, it was a rape joke. As was past!Hook's "Oh, I'm usually the one getting the woman drunk" in the S3 finale.

 

I haven't really wanted to wade into the debate, but I guess I am now. First, I absolutely agree that Regina raping Graham and Rumpel killing Milah, on the scale of "problems that this show has with sexual violence and domestic abuse," are way more up there than Hook's behavior. No question. Regina is actually a rapist--repeat, Adam and Eddie I hope you're reading this, Regina is actually a rapist--who killed her victim when he was throwing off her shackles, and Rumpel killing Milah for saying she left him because she didn't love him is basically the textbook example of domestic abuse. So: Regina and Rumpel are worse, absolutely, no question.

 

But that doesn't mean Hook's behavior hasn't been problematic, either, and I don't think he gets a pass just because Regina and Rumpel are worse. Hook as a character was pretty strongly associated with sexual violence in S2. There wasn't just the rape joke to Emma, there was the way his hook was used to pierce an unconscious, unwilling Aurora's body to take her heart (that's not phallic at all), and there was the way that, in 'The Outsider,' he most definitely gave off rape vibes to Belle when he cornered her on his ship--I honestly wasn't sure if he was going to try to kill her or rape her. So I don't think people are "making stuff up" or "reading too deep" or "only looking for what they want to find" when they connect Hook to sexual violence and rape culture, because that association was absolutely made in S2. As Camera One has said, that's something they've totally downplayed in S3, for obvious reasons, but it doesn't make Hook's S2 behavior go away, and it's not at all unfair for people to still find the S2 behavior problematic or hold it against the character. The show doesn't get to whitewash Regina, but it doesn't get to whitewash Hook, either. (And imo, it's problematic to brush off a rape joke as just "flirting" or "innuendo," because that is most definitely rape culture.) And I can understand where Hook would further be incredibly frustrating to people, because, for all that Adam and Eddie and Lana can't stop putting their feet in their mouths on twitter and in interviews, in-show, what Regina did to Graham was never, ever presented as anything other than totally wrong and very disturbing, and ditto for Rumpel and Milah, whereas Hook's gross behavior has never really been called out or recognized for being problematic. 3x21 is a great example--Hook made a rape culture joke, and we were supposed to find it flirty and innuendo-laden and completely ignore the fact that it's a rape joke. That is incredibly problematic, pretty much emblematic of rape culture, and I suspect that that's why Hook in some respects hits a nerve that Regina or Rumpel don't. (And here's the distinction between Charming in 1x16 and 3x21, to me. One of the greatest, most subversive things about 1x16 is that Charming got his ass kicked by Snow when he kissed her the first time. The whole point of 1x16 is that, even if you love someone and are legitimately acting in their best interests, you can't just impose a kiss on them. You have to earn it, you have to respect that they have to come to you. I love love love 1x16, and that's part of the reason why--it's just so subversive when you really stop to think about it. But that kind of subversion has been lost in later seasons.)

 

Now, with that all said, I don't think Hook's behavior toward Emma in particular has given off any undertones of sexual violence. I've never found the 3x05 kiss to be problematic--Emma Swan, of all people, would not kiss someone because she felt like she had to. The most unfortunate thing about the Captain Swan storyline is that it can give off the "when a woman says no, you just keep pursuing her until she says yes" thing, but given that Emma never actually said to Hook "stop pursuing me," it escapes the full measure of being unfortunate in that respect, imo. So.

[KAOS Agent]

 

Hook's gross behavior has never really been called out or recognized for being problematic. 3x21 is a great example--Hook made a rape culture joke, and we were supposed to find it flirty and innuendo-laden and completely ignore the fact that it's a rape joke.

 

I don't think that's the case. The show used Hook himself to call out Past!Hook for being a womanizing jackass in that situation by punching himself out. Past!Hook was shown to not be the type of man Hook believes should be anywhere near Emma. He was judging himself and his actions were meant to demonstrate that Past!Hook's actions were bad. "He was asking for it!" was said for a reason. Emma was the one who was not judging and was in fact engaging in the same behavior that you are calling out Past!Hook on. She was getting him blackout drunk and promising to go back for a "nightcap".  There are plenty of people out there who would've liked Emma to actually engage in that nightcap and my perception of some of Emma's looks is that she would've actually considered it. So is she not participating in rape culture herself? Why is she not judged?

 

A very drunken Hook would've been all in on the sex no doubt, but switch out a man for a woman in that situation and suddenly she's incapable of giving consent - even if she really is interested in the sex and would not regret or otherwise be at all concerned about engaging in it because one cannot assess whether the consent is meant or simply a result lowered inhibitions due to alcohol. Emma should be held to the same standard in that Hook is also not in his right mind to give consent, but that's never mentioned. It's always only that Hook is bad, Hook is the problem, Hook is emotionally blackmailing Emma into doing something she doesn't want to do. Emma Swan doesn't do anything she doesn't want to do. Ever. Period. Full stop. And if she was somehow forced into something - say she only kissed Hook in "Good Form" because she had to - would she ever deal with that person in a friendly manner again? Would she smile about it afterwards and tell another person that she was "feeling good" when she did it, encourage that person to continue thinking of her, leave her son in his care, repeatedly mention to other people when he is not there that she trusts him or search him out of her own volition and proceed to kiss the hell out of him? She would not. The assumption that all of Captain Swan is some horrible rapey thing takes away all of Emma's agency. Apparently, she is completely incapable of saying no or kicking Hook's ass if he does something she is not interested in.

Edited July 9, 2014 by KAOS Agent

[stealinghome]

Past!Hook was shown to not be the type of man Hook believes should be anywhere near Emma. He was judging himself and his actions were meant to demonstrate that Past!Hook's actions were bad.

That's never been what I've gotten from that scene. Present!Hook was just jealous of past!Hook. I don't think punching past!Hook out had nearly as much to do with present!Hook despising past!Hook as much as it did his own jealousy (well, and the fact that they needed to get rid of past!Hook so they didn't completely mess up the timeline!).

 

There are plenty of people out there who would've liked Emma to actually engage in that nightcap and my perception of some of Emma's looks is that she would've actually considered it. So is she not participating in rape culture herself? Why is she not judged?

Off the top of my head, because she wasn't getting Hook drunk with the express intention of having sex with him while his inhibitions were lowered?

 

But yes, in 3x21, if Emma had gotten past!Hook blackout drunk and then proceeded to have sex with him, she would have raped him. And I would have judged her very harshly for it. But given that she didn't, and that doing so wasn't her intent, I'm not sure how she suddenly became the bad guy here.

[MaiLuna]

A&E did say something about being ashamed of his past self.

 

"It was a fun moment for us, but there was a serious subtext to it, which is that it's Hook looking back on the man he was. He's another character who's evolved some. He knows that that Hook with Emma is not something he wants to see."

Source: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/once-a-time-finale-frozen-elsa-season-4-703314

 

I know Emma wasn't inteding to get Hook drunk and sleep with him, but why did she go back with him to the JR if she really thought PresentHook would be gone by then? Was she just planning to get him even more drunk until he passed out and then leave? Or just slip out?

[Souris]

That's never been what I've gotten from that scene. Present!Hook was just jealous of past!Hook. I don't think punching past!Hook out had nearly as much to do with present!Hook despising past!Hook as much as it did his own jealousy (well, and the fact that they needed to get rid of past!Hook so they didn't completely mess up the timeline!).

 

Off the top of my head, because she wasn't getting Hook drunk with the express intention of having sex with him while his inhibitions were lowered?

 

But yes, in 3x21, if Emma had gotten past!Hook blackout drunk and then proceeded to have sex with him, she would have raped him. And I would have judged her very harshly for it. But given that she didn't, and that doing so wasn't her intent, I'm not sure how she suddenly became the bad guy here.

 

Neither was it ever Hook's intent to rape Emma or anyone else that we've been shown. A sex joke (which the sword line was IMO) isn't a rape joke. So if we're judging characters on the rape argument by intent, not just effect, then that counts for yet another reason why Hook isn't Rapey McRaperson.

 

I will grant you the "getting people drunk is usually my tactic" line. That was a bad line that shouldn't have been filmed.

 

As far as Hook knocking out Past!Hook, it was a combination of jealousy and this Hook not liking that past version of himself. From The Hollywood Reporter:

 

We also have to talk about Present-Day Hook punching Past himself in the Enchanted Forest in the Past. Did you want a clone scene?

Kitsis: We loved the idea of Hook being jealous of himself. We wanted Hook to punch himself.

Horowitz: And kissing Emma. It was a fun moment for us, but there was a serious subtext to it, which is that it's Hook looking back on the man he was. He's another character who's evolved some. He knows that that Hook with Emma is not something he wants to see.

Edited July 9, 2014 by Souris

[kili]

That's never been what I've gotten from that scene. Present!Hook was just jealous of past!Hook. I don't think punching past!Hook out had nearly as much to do with present!Hook despising past!Hook as much as it did his own jealousy

 

I think it needs to be taken in context to how he behaves prior to Emma interacting with Past!Hook as well. He warns her that he isn't a nice guy and to be careful. He's not just being jealous (although, he clearly is a little). He's not all keen on the plan because he knows what kind of guy he was at that point in his life and that's not the kind of guy he wants people he respects around. It's clear that Current!Hook is judging Past!Hook and that is indicating to the audience that it is not okay.

 

Off the top of my head, because she wasn't getting Hook drunk with the express intention of having sex with him while his inhibitions were lowered?

 

She was getting him blackout drunk so that they could trespass on his property, impersonate him and not have him remember anything. He is certainly being specifically taken advantage of there (and if it were a male character doing it to a female character, there might be more questioning of it). He was also later assulated (sexually by Emma ( as we learned in New York, kissing counts (and his NY kiss is used an example of rape culture) and he is unable to give consent by that point) and physically by his future self), but that wasn't in the plan while getting him drunk.

[Dani-Ellie]

The most unfortunate thing about the Captain Swan storyline is that it can give off the "when a woman says no, you just keep pursuing her until she says yes" thing, but given that Emma never actually said to Hook "stop pursuing me," it escapes the full measure of being unfortunate in that respect, imo.

 

This is what I'm saying. :)

 

All the other stuff, absolutely, yes, problematic to the nth degree. But Captain Swan in and of itself? Not seeing it.

 

I mean, look, I'm about as protective of Emma as they come. If I really thought Hook pressured her into anything, I would be ripshit. Never once did Emma say, "Go away and leave me alone." From my perspective, all the big progressions in their relationship have been at her initiation. The kiss in Neverland, the "good" at the town line in "Going Home," the kiss in "There's No Place Like Home." There is no doubt in my mind that if Emma had ever said, "Lookit, Hook, it's never going to happen between us so move on with your life," he would have done it. He would have been upset, of course, but I think he loves her enough that he'd let her go if that's what she really wanted.

 

But she encouraged him along the way. If she didn't want to kiss him in Neverland, she wouldn't have kissed him. If she didn't want him to think of her every day, she wouldn't have said "good." I actually think Emma of all people would have discouraged him at that juncture because she knows how awful it is to yearn for a love that isn't -- or doesn't seem to be -- returned.

 

I didn't start out shipping Captain Swan. I found their banter fun in "Tallahassee" and over the hiatus between seasons two and three, I found myself hoping Hook would flirt with her in Neverland, but only because I wanted to see Overprotective Daddy Charming go all apoplectic over a pirate interested in his baby girl. That was as far as it went for me. Captain Swan really only won me over when I saw Emma responding positively to the attention. It won me over when Hook made Emma Swan, she who never smiles, smile. 

Edited July 9, 2014 by Dani-Ellie

[Kaw912]

Stealinghome - you make a lot of good points regarding Hook and rape jokes and their relationship to rape culture. I don't have a problem with people not liking some or even many of the comments that Hook has made during his two seasons on the show. I do have a problem with people coming to San Diego Comic Con with a petition signed by victims of rape or possibly domestic abuse and making an explicit plea for A & E to cease and desist with the Emma/Hook romance storyline that they have been writing and building up, without making any mention of the other problematic relationships in the show.

If I were a rape victim, I'd be a lot more bothered by seeing Regina crush Graham's heart than hearing the "if I jab you with my sword you'll feel it" line. If I were a victim of domestic abuse, I probably would have been unable to continue watching the show after watching Rumple kill his ex-wife for having left him and hurting him with the words "because I never loved you," and if I had managed to continue watching I'd be yelling at Belle to run as fast as she can every time she had a scene with him. I would have much less problem with this whole petition/protest thing if they were going to bring up all these questionable moments - ones involving Hook included - rather than exclusively focusing on the writing for his character and the Emma/Hook relationship alone.

[Shanna Marie]

I do think the context matters. If Hook had made the remark about getting women drunk when he was in the process of getting a woman drunk so she'd sleep with him or if we'd actually seen him doing anything like that, I'd be pretty harsh with him. But he makes that comment when a woman has approached him, taken total control of the situation, and is in the process of seducing him while deliberately getting him drunk and tossing her own drinks aside to ensure that she remains in control of the situation. She was the one touching him, caressing his hook and putting her hand on his thigh. I don't recall him touching her at all until they were on their way to the ship and she pretended to be drunk to slow them down and buy time. She was the one unlacing her bodice and shoving her breasts in his face (and then he looked at her face, carefully avoiding looking at her breasts -- I wonder if that was written/directed that way or if it was Colin being shy and a gentleman and it came across that way accidentally). It fits the pattern of him making remarks like that when he's in a vulnerable position and not in control of the situation.

 

And even so, present Hook, the one who's pursuing a relationship with Emma, is very unhappy with the person he used to be and ashamed for Emma to see him like that. I don't think it was just jealousy of himself. Even when they were coming up with the plan, he was warning her about his past self and what he was like.

 

I'll refrain from commenting on the sword remark until I've rewatched that episode because my memory of it is hazy.

[stealinghome]

I know Emma wasn't inteding to get Hook drunk and sleep with him, but why did she go back with him to the JR if she really thought PresentHook would be gone by then? Was she just planning to get him even more drunk until he passed out and then leave?

As I recall, Emma didn't know whether presentHook was gone yet when she took pastHook back to the ship, but she told presentHook that she couldn't stall pastHook any longer--the implication being that she didn't want to go back to the ship but couldn't find a reason not to. At that point, I figured Emma thought it was at least better if she went with him back to the ship, so she and presentHook would outnumber pastHook or she could distract pastHook. But my memory of that episode is hazy.

 

Neither was it ever Hook's intent to rape Emma or anyone else that we've been shown. A sex joke (which the sword line was IMO) isn't a rape joke.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this, because given that Emma was fighting Hook for her life in that moment, and he had her pinned on her back in a very vulnerable position, I don't see how the joke avoids a rape association, given that in the next line he told her "you might want to quit" so that he didn't have to "jab [her] with [his] sword."

 

Re: the subtext of Hook not liking his past self, well, let me just say that this is yet another case where what Adam and Eddie apparently intended didn't translate, for me. I got far less of "Hook thinks his past self is a jerk" and far more "present Hook is just jealous."

 

She was getting him blackout drunk so that they could trespass on his property, impersonate him and not have him remember anything. He is certainly being specifically taken advantage of there

Yes, this I do agree with. Emma getting pastHook drunk to trespass/steal his property/knock him out was hardly a shining moment of morality for her, for sure, as was kissing him while he's drunk. Shady. But to me, Emma getting Hook drunk fundamentally to distract him is very, very different from Hook joking about getting women drunk and having sex with them. The issue isn't even whether or not Hook did it (I mean, it is, but it isn't really)--it's the fact that it's a joke at all. That's what's rape culture-y about it, writers.

 

I don't have a problem with people not liking some or even many of the comments that Hook has made during his two seasons on the show. I do have a problem with people coming to San Diego Comic Con with a petition signed by victims of rape or possibly domestic abuse and making an explicit plea for A & E to cease and desist with the Emma/Hook romance storyline that they have been writing and building up, without making any mention of the other problematic relationships in the show.

Oh, I totally agree with this as well. I think Swan Queen or Rumbelle fans who object to Hook/Emma because of the Hook/sexual violence association are massively, ridiculously hypocritical. And I agree that Comic-Con is not the time or place to have these conversations (conversations that the writers for the show desperately need to have, I would add).

 

But I also think it's unfair to say that people who equate Hook with sexual violence are just looking for an excuse to dislike Hook, because I suspect that a fair number of them began to dislike Hook in the first place precisely because of the association between Hook and sexual violence that the show presented in S2.

Edited July 9, 2014 by stealinghome

[InsertWordHere]

 

Never once did Emma say, "Go away and leave me alone."

I do think there's an argument to be made that Emma shouldn't have to verbally tell him to go away if she was truly uncomfortable with his attentions. But non-verbal consent or lack of consent becomes a gray area IMO when talking about anything other than the act of sex itself, because that's simply not the way human interactions work. People don't always verbally consent to starting friendships or flirting or romantic relationships. Half the time people just fall into these things naturally. I've never in my life said, "I'd like to initiate a flirty banter with you" or "I see you might be attracted to me, please proceed with the wooing" to someone. That type of consent to pursue is never going to happen on a tv show when it rarely even happens in real life. Especially between a couple that is being deliberately written to be suspenseful, and IMO, it would be rather uninteresting if every couple ever was a mutual like at the same time type of couple.

 

Regardless of how we interpret Emma's silence on the subject, this argument loses steam for me when I take into account the fact that Hook never actually pursued Emma. One declaration of feelings and a declaration of intent does not a relentless pursuit make. Especially since he declared his intention to back away just two episodes after that. Searching for someone who was living a false life with the intent to save her is not a selfish act done only to "gain" the woman's love, regardless of the fact that Hook clearly hoped that Emma would love him. He never pressured her after that. He never said, "I did this and this and this for you so we should give it a go." That simply didn't happen. Standing by her side and being supportive, when half the time she came to him, will never fit the definition of unwanted sexual advances in my book.

 

That said, others might have things that trigger them about Hook and I completely understand that. Where I draw the line is when they say that their interpretation is the only valid interpretation. Not everyone's going to watch a tv show and see it the exact same way as everyone else. We all bring our own biases and life experiences into it.

[RadioGirl27]

Stealinghome - you make a lot of good points regarding Hook and rape jokes and their relationship to rape culture. I don't have a problem with people not liking some or even many of the comments that Hook has made during his two seasons on the show. I do have a problem with people coming to San Diego Comic Con with a petition signed by victims of rape or possibly domestic abuse and making an explicit plea for A & E to cease and desist with the Emma/Hook romance storyline that they have been writing and building up, without making any mention of the other problematic relationships in the show.

I agree with you here. I understand some people has problems with Hook. I had some myself in season 2, and, while I liked Colin's pretty face, I didn't like Hook that much (season 3 is another story, I think his redemption story has been really well handled, and he has become probably my favourite character). But there are more problematic characters and relationships in the show that this people tend to forget. That's the problem I have with this question, that they are concentrating their criticism in a character they don't like and no in the most problematic characters (Regina, Rumple, Neal). Really, I don't like rape jokes but I hate rapists and abusers.

[ShadowFacts]

 

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this, because given that Emma was fighting Hook for her life in that moment, and he had her pinned on her back in a very vulnerable position, I don't see how the joke avoids a rape association, given that in the next line he told her "you might want to quit" so that he didn't have to "jab [her] with [his] sword."

 

I have to agree.  I feel like I am neither overly sensitive nor dense on the subject, but this scene made me cringe.  It was threatening, not flirty sass.  And I found the early Hook not amusing, but sleazy.  I can see where he got peoples' hackles up. I hated his actions toward Belle.  I only warmed to him after he admitted he was wrong in his vengeance quest, and I melted some more when we saw his back story with his brother.  The writing began to take him in a different direction away from the sleaze, and I was happy to see it.  It had to, though, or Emma wouldn't have given him the time of day and then, no triangular drama.

[MaiLuna]

I do think there's an argument to be made that Emma shouldn't have to verbally tell him to go away if she was truly uncomfortable with his attentions. But non-verbal consent or lack of consent becomes a gray area IMO when talking about anything other than the act of sex itself, because that's simply not the way human interactions work. People don't always verbally consent to starting friendships or flirting or romantic relationships. Half the time people just fall into these things naturally. I've never in my life said, "I'd like to initiate a flirty banter with you" or "I see you might be attracted to me, please proceed with the wooing" to someone. That type of consent to pursue is never going to happen on a tv show when it rarely even happens in real life. Especially between a couple that is being deliberately written to be suspenseful, and IMO, it would be rather uninteresting if every couple ever was a mutual like at the same time type of couple.

 

Regardless of how we interpret Emma's silence on the subject, this argument loses steam for me when I take into account the fact that Hook never actually pursued Emma. One declaration of feelings and a declaration of intent does not a relentless pursuit make. Especially since he declared his intention to back away just two episodes after that. Searching for someone who was living a false life with the intent to save her is not a selfish act done only to "gain" the woman's love, regardless of the fact that Hook clearly hoped that Emma would love him. He never pressured her after that. He never said, "I did this and this and this for you so we should give it a go." That simply didn't happen. Standing by her side and being supportive, when half the time she came to him, will never fit the definition of unwanted sexual advances in my book.

 

That said, others might have things that trigger them about Hook and I completely understand that. Where I draw the line is when they say that their interpretation is the only valid interpretation. Not everyone's going to watch a tv show and see it the exact same way as everyone else. We all bring our own biases and life experiences into it.

Completely agree. S2 Hook is questionable, but in S3 it has come to the part where apparently showing interest and flirting with someone is a part of rape culture. How can two people become a couple if neither party can express their feelings respectfully because it'd be part of rape culture? Or is only when Hook does it that it's  rape culture? Did every couple in this show (or in real life for that matter) ask for consent when they first kissed? Things happen naturally and Hook never said that Emma needed to reciprocate his feelings, or that he deserved to be loved back. He just let her know how he felt. And I don't see anything wrong with that. Was he just supposed to never tell her he had feelings for her? I really don't get it.

[Dani-Ellie]

I do think there's an argument to be made that Emma shouldn't have to verbally tell him to go away if she was truly uncomfortable with his attentions. But non-verbal consent or lack of consent becomes a gray area IMO when talking about anything other than the act of sex itself, because that's simply not the way human interactions work.

 

Well, yes, one shouldn't have to rely on a "Go away" just to be left alone, but you are right that it becomes a tricky area.

 

That's really broad, though, and I'm trying to only speak of this instance. Emma didn't seem to me to be at all uncomfortable around him. Emma never verbally discouraged him, aside from when she said she only had room in her heart for Henry. And what do you know, Hook actually backed off. She was also actively encouraging him, with words and with actions. Like I said above, she initiated lots of things here, and the progressions happened at her pace.

 

 

 

Standing by her side and being supportive, when half the time she came to him, will never fit the definition of unwanted sexual advances in my book.

 

Same here. I just do not and probably never will see Hook's standing by her as wearing her down. Goodness knows Emma needs someone to be in her corner. Let's just pretend for a hot minute that Archie was the one who was in Emma's orbit all throughout 3B (no real reason for Archie, either ... it could be anybody who's not Hook). That it was Archie standing behind her at the graveside funeral for Neal and it was Archie telling her to embrace her magic and it was Archie pushing her to explain the whole "New York is the bestest" nonsense. Pretty much any scene Hook is in with Emma, mentally remove him and replace him with Archie. I know I'd see a friend supporting another friend. Why, then, does it need to be something vaguely sinister just because Hook has feelings for her? Why does everything have to have an ulterior motive? Why can't he just want to do something nice for her because he likes her?

Edited July 9, 2014 by Dani-Ellie

[KAOS Agent]

 

 

Off the top of my head, because she wasn't getting Hook drunk with the express intention of having sex with him while his inhibitions were lowered?

But yes, in 3x21, if Emma had gotten past!Hook blackout drunk and then proceeded to have sex with him, she would have raped him. And I would have judged her very harshly for it. But given that she didn't, and that doing so wasn't her intent, I'm not sure how she suddenly became the bad guy here.

 

But see this is my problem because Emma's actions are taken in context. She wasn't intending to sleep with him, so getting him drunk to distract him is okay while with many of the actions Hook is attacked for, the context is completely removed. I don't judge Emma for her actions. I don't give a good god damn what she did to Hook while drunk because I believe Hook has some responsibility to control his own alcohol intake and not get so drunk he's easy to take advantage of (I'm not into victim blaming, but I also believe in personal responsibility).  I judge people who look at specific context and evaluate those actions taken only for specific characters, while completely ignoring the context with others. Which is why I bring up Emma's activities in that situation because I guarantee you that if Hook was doing the same thing to Past!Emma, even with the same motivations that Emma had with regards to Past!Hook, Hook would be savaged. The context would not matter. And that's why I'm often not willing to engage in a conversation about this because it's not an equal and balanced viewpoint. 

 

Hook's stupid comment about getting someone drunk does fit into a rape culture and again when combined with Present!Hook's warning about how Emma needs to be careful with Past!Hook, it does imply that Hook was not a good guy which we already knew. The show was saying this was wrong. He was down with ships passing in the night with a nameless female. At the same time, he'd also spent significant time drinking with Emma, but was completely willing to go find someone else if she said she wasn't interested in the nightcap. So even Past!Hook was not interested in forcing someone to do something they didn't want to do.

 

I don't handwave Hook's past actions. He was an asshole. He was also suicidal, depressive and functionally alcoholic and he was called out on that by Emma. As in hey dumbass, you think shooting Belle was such a great thing, but look at you now chained to a bed with an immortal magician out for your blood. Good luck with that, Dead Man Walking. The show didn't have Emma even considering a romantic attachment with that jerk. They showed her thinking he was a stupid moron who had screwed himself with his choices. They also spent time in 3B having Hook telling Emma to keep off of the path that made him into that miserable excuse for a human. He recognized he sucked, worked to change and I saw Emma get interested in the man he was becoming.

[Shanna Marie]

I have to say that as someone who has been in a situation where someone was attempting to wear me down and get me to change my mind about him, Hook with Emma is NOT what that looks like. He didn't ask her out, he didn't even seem to seek her out. He wasn't showing up at places he thought or knew she'd be, wasn't keeping track of her schedule and movements. He seldom touched her at all -- once even pulled his hand away abruptly after starting to touch her back in an automatic gentlemanly gesture (that was probably the norm in his time/world but not the norm here). He didn't come up with excuses to hug her, brush against her, pat her on the back, squeeze her arm, hold her hand, or anything like that. He didn't campaign with her friends and family members to get them to advocate for him. When he was with Henry, he focused entirely on talking about Henry's father, never saying anything about trying to get Henry to talk him up to his mother. If she was uncomfortable with his attentions and wanted him to give up and leave her alone, then she was sending the entirely wrong signals in seeking him out, asking for his help, asking him to do favors for her that required a lot of trust, entrusting her child with him, inviting him to join her family for dinner and hanging out with him and showing off her magic skills. While it is entirely possible that she trusted him as an ally, enjoyed his company as a friend, and wanted him to have a relationship with Henry because of his connection to Henry's father while having zero romantic interest in him (been there, done that, as well), in that case she is responsible for setting the ground rules for the relationship and making that clear, then leaving the choice up to him whether he wants to accept the relationship on her terms. Since she knew his romantic interest and continued to initiate interactions with him without making anything clear about her lack of interest, you'd have to be really, really stretching to complain about his behavior or call it a sign of rape culture. In fact, I think it does a disservice to rape awareness to stretch the definition enough to contain this kind of behavior because then it trivializes real rape culture.

[YaddaYadda]

I have to agree.  I feel like I am neither overly sensitive nor dense on the subject, but this scene made me cringe.  It was threatening, not flirty sass.  And I found the early Hook not amusing, but sleazy.  I can see where he got peoples' hackles up. I hated his actions toward Belle.  I only warmed to him after he admitted he was wrong in his vengeance quest, and I melted some more when we saw his back story with his brother.  The writing began to take him in a different direction away from the sleaze, and I was happy to see it.  It had to, though, or Emma wouldn't have given him the time of day and then, no triangular drama.

 

Hook was a villain and he never really pretended to be something else.  He was a total jackass and a complete jerk in season 2.  He also decided to steal the bean that could have saved countless people.  Hook has done a lot of bad things in the name of his vengeance.  Even now, when he turned over a new leaf, he has a hard time with this whole "hero" status.  He has self-awareness and he scaled down on those innuendos.

[formerlyfreedom]

That said, others might have things that trigger them about Hook and I completely understand that. Where I draw the line is when they say that their interpretation is the only valid interpretation. Not everyone's going to watch a tv show and see it the exact same way as everyone else. We all bring our own biases and life experiences into it.

 

Very well said!

 

And now is a good time to move on. We have begun repeating ourselves on the topic of Captain Swan. Thanks, all!

[Souris]

I'm going to go back to something someone (stealinghome?) said awhile back about liking the friendships on the show and wanting to see that more. I think the show was great about that in S1. We had the start of the friendship with Emma and Mary Margaret, which I really enjoyed. They may know they're mother/daughter now, which of course would alter the dynamic, but I'd like to see the friendship part of the relationship return. Moms and daughters can be friends, too!

 

Then the friendship among Red, Snow and Charming was awesome. I actually jokingly called them my OTThree. (Honestly, if one wanted to ship a trio, they were a great opportunity!) Red was a really important character, and I hate that she was so marginalized that Megan Ory moved on. I unfortunately can't see them bringing Red back to that level even now that Megan is available again, because 4A seems like it's going to have a cast of thousands. But I hope they at least acknowledge the important role she plays in their lives. 

 

I desperately hope that Hook and David's bromance actually becomes canon, not just fanon. I mean, they had some moments in S3, but fandom kind of took it and ran with it a bit farther than was there. They haven't shown a true male friendship on the show, so that's a perfect opportunity.

 

I'm also not sure that Snow really hates Hook as much as fandom has decided she does. Obviously, she wasn't a fan up through the Neverland arc. But by the time of "The Jolly Roger," she was assuring Ariel that Hook would help her. And now she has the memory of him being helpful Prince Charles back in the day, too. I think David likes him more, of course, but I'm curious to see where the show takes the Snow/Hook relationship in S4, whether they go with the fanon interpretation or whether she's supportive of him because he makes Emma happy.

 

I do side-eye the insta-BFFs that the show cultivates sometimes. Like Snow and Ariel being suddenly so close.

Edited July 10, 2014 by Souris

[MaiLuna]

 

I desperately hope that Hook and David's bromance actually becomes canon, not just fanon. I mean, they had some moments in S3, but fandom kind of took it and ran with it a bit farther than was there. They haven't shown a true male friendship on the show, so that's a perfect opportunity.

I'd really like that too but I don't know how much closer they can get now that him and Emma are "together". They can have a nice friendship/bond nonetheless, I mean Charming already knew there was something going on there but I think things may change when he knows Hook's kissing his daughter on a regular basis.

 

 

I do side-eye the insta-BFFs that the show cultivates sometimes. Like Snow and Ariel being suddenly so close.

Snow and Ariel don't bother me as much as Belle and Ariel. Those 2 seemed even more rushed.

 

I'd really really like to see Snow/Ruby back too. And about Hook/Snow, in the finale when Hook made the comment about Kathryn, she seemed pretty amused. I don't think they'll focus much on them but I'd like to see some scenes. I actually think they'd get along and find things in common.

 

 

And another relationship I'd love to see more of is Emma/Gold. Some of the best scenes in season 1 were their dynamic, I'd love to get that back.

[Camera One]

Some of the actors do have insta-chemistry so I don't mind insta-BFFs sometimes (on the whole, the show does a great job of choosing good actors... despite not really using them most of the time).  I thought Ariel had pretty good chemistry with Snow, and I actually thought Ariel and Belle worked pretty well too.  One of the more unfortunate aspects of Belle/Rumple is that I pretty much question her judgement 24/7 and it's really hard to take her seriously.  Having said that, I thought Belle & Mulan and Belle & Neal were both unexpected yet worked pretty well as friendships in their respective episodes.  So it's kind of a shame that the romantic aspect sort of drags both Rumple and Belle down.  The friend I rewatched Season 3 with last week remarked that Belle's vows to Rumple were so cheesy.

Edited July 10, 2014 by Camera One

[Dani-Ellie]

I'm also not sure that Snow really hates Hook as much as fandom has decided she does.

 

I'm not sure she does, either. She was kind of a Team Neal cheerleader for a while there, and I think that got interpreted as being anti-Hook. I don't recall anything between the two of them that would suggest she hates him.

 

I'm also waiting for the moment when Charming realizes that Hook was Charles, which meant he actually had that little heart-to-heart about True Love and the nature of it with Hook. Basically, I hope there's follow-up to Hook's sarcastic, "I hope you remember that" and that Charming actually does. I just think it'd be a nice moment.

[Mari]

I'm going to go back to something someone (stealinghome?) said awhile back about liking the friendships on the show and wanting to see that more. I think the show was great about that in S1. We had the start of the friendship with Emma and Mary Margaret, which I really enjoyed. They may know they're mother/daughter now, which of course would alter the dynamic, but I'd like to see the friendship part of the relationship return. Moms and daughters can be friends, too!

 

Then the friendship among Red, Snow and Charming was awesome. I actually jokingly called them my OTThree. (Honestly, if one wanted to ship a trio, they were a great opportunity!) Red was a really important character, and I hate that she was so marginalized that Megan Ory moved on. I unfortunately can't see them bringing Red back to that level even now that Megan is available again, because 4A seems like it's going to have a cast of thousands. But I hope they at least acknowledge the important role she plays in their lives. 

, , ,

I do side-eye the insta-BFFs that the show cultivates sometimes. Like Snow and Ariel being suddenly so close.

I almost feel like I should say this in a teeny, tiny, whispery voice--or save it for the unpopular opinions thread:  I'm glad Red is mostly gone.  I didn't dislike her, or love to hate her like I do with some of the characters.  I just thought she was boring.  But I would join you in cheering if it bringing back Red meant they managed to bring back at least a believable friendship between Emma and Mary Margaret.

 

I actually would like to see more time on the relationship between Regina and Rumple.  I know they're more frenemies than friends, but I think their scenes together pop more than the actors' scenes with most of the other cast, and their relationship is interesting.  I've found some of their most likeable--or at least for me relatable--moments were with each other.

 

And I firmly join you in side-eyeing Snow and Ariel.  (Although, despite really not enjoying Belle.  Really.  At all.  If we were voting people to be frozen, Belle would make my top three.  I did think Belle and Ariel worked well together as potential friends.)

[KAOS Agent]

 

I do side-eye the insta-BFFs that the show cultivates sometimes. Like Snow and Ariel being suddenly so close.

 

I sometimes wonder if Snow's confusion and misunderstanding of her daughter comes from her total disbelief that Emma isn't her immediate BFF. I mean everyone else she meets just seems to love her and trust her explicitly almost from the instant that they first interact. As Mary Margaret she didn't have the secret ingredient that makes her such a special snowflake, but now that she's the wonderful Snow White, how could Emma not love her instantly? Seriously, I'm kind of with Regina on how fed up I am with just how perfect Snow White is. They give her character traits showing she's not perfect, but the instant BFF stuff runs counter to that and is just so sickening.

 

It's also one of the things that I have issues with when Snow tries to compare her own experience on the run as a bandit with Emma's life. First, because Snow had loving family and friends and went on the run as an adult/older teen, but also because everyone Snow meets is not only nice and helpful, but in the case of Ariel and the Huntsman, willing to sacrifice their own happiness/life for Snow White. Who does that? It doesn't even jibe with the jaded, cynical Snow White from "Snow Falls". Everyone we've seen meet her while on the run loves her, why is she so cynical about life and people? I'd love for Emma to go off on it because while I may joke about the perfect Snow, Emma & Snow's experiences are not the same at all and I really don't think Snow understands this. Actually, I don't think the show understands this either.

Edited July 10, 2014 by KAOS Agent

[Camera One]

I sometimes wonder if Snow's confusion and misunderstanding of her daughter comes from her total disbelief that Emma isn't her immediate BFF. I mean everyone else she meets just seems to love her and trust her explicitly almost from the instant that they first interact. As Mary Margaret she didn't have the secret ingredient that makes her such a special snowflake, but now that she's the wonderful Snow White, how could Emma not love her instantly? Seriously, I'm kind of with Regina on how fed up I am with just how perfect Snow White is. They give her character traits showing she's not perfect, but the instant BFF stuff runs counter to that and is just so sickening.

 

You get what you give.  Snow is more likely to become BFFs with someone because she is generous with them, as seen with her first interactions with those who became her friends like Red, Grumpy and Ariel.  It's not like she just expects people to love her for no reason.  

[stealinghome]

Then the friendship among Red, Snow and Charming was awesome. I actually jokingly called them my OTThree. (Honestly, if one wanted to ship a trio, they were a great opportunity!)

Oh, I call them my OT3 for this show all the time, only I'm soooo not joking. That's three very, very pretty people that I would absolutely watch kiss the hell out of each other! And I love Red's friendships with both Snow and Charming--in part because they're very *different* friendships. It really illuminates a lot of the differences between Snow and Charming, and I like how Red plays off them very differently. I would love a hilarious episode where Snowing are fighting and they both go to Red to vent. Hee!

Sign me up as another one who thought Belle/Ariel really clicked. I think Belle as a character actually benefits when she's a bit grounded. Ariel is pragmatic, so that offsets Belle's naïveté, but Ariel also totally has her head in the clouds and doesn't know the landlubber world, so that grounds Belle more, forces her back down to earth a bit.

Emma/Gold is a great dynamic--ita they should have those two interact more. Rumpel/Regina is fun too, though less so now that they've both been neutered a bit.

Edited July 10, 2014 by stealinghome

[wingster55]

Hell to the yes (can't believe I said that), to Red, Charming and Snow. (Particularly the first two) 

[KAOS Agent]

Ruby and David are great fun, but I always feel a little sad for David because Red will always be Snow's friend first. David needs his own circle of friends that aren't tied to Snow. I wonder if he had any friends in the village he grew up in. That would be an interesting episode if they could bring in some of David's backstory - maybe something about the dead father? - and incorporate a childhood friend that could be in Storybrooke. Even if we never see the friend again, I'd feel better with a headcanon that David goes out and throws back a few with his buddy on occasion. David needs a friend who is not dating his daughter, not good friends with his wife, not the Dark One and not a soul mate to the Evil Queen.

[Shanna Marie]

It's funny, but I'm enjoying season 2 (the first half, so far) more as I rewatch than I did the first time around. Back when it aired, I was mostly frustrated that there was all the build-up to the breaking of the curse, and then instantly Emma and Snow were sent away, so we didn't get to see much of David and Snow reunited or them together with Emma as their daughter. But now, what I'm enjoying is that this allowed them to explore all the dynamics other than the romances. This was the best we've seen of the Emma and Snow interaction, where you could tell Snow was missing being a mother by the way she mothered Aurora, but then we also got to see Emma reacting to the way her mother was a total badass in her home environment. Meanwhile, back in Storybrooke, I absolutely love the relationship between David and Henry, where Henry has a father figure for the first time in his life and David is such a dad with him. Then there's the friendship between Ruby and David and David and the dwarfs. And that tense, uneasy allies relationship he has with Regina and Rumple. Taking David out of Snow's orbit allows him to be more of a fully realized person in his own right instead of just Snow's Prince Charming. I don't have anything against romances, but I have to admit that all the relationships were more interesting and complex during the part of the season when there wasn't much romance at all, aside from Belle and Rumple while she still seemed to have him on probation and the very beginnings of a flirtation between Hook and Emma.

[Camera One]

Emma seems to have gotten past him locking her in the cell, likely because she recognized the fact that she'd already done pretty much the same thing to him and it might not have happened if she'd trusted him

 

I don't think that's the reason why Emma "got past" it.  I think she is willing to forget about it because she assumes that Hook knows it was wrong and he shouldn't have been working with Cora and he was consumed with revenge and he regrets it.  Isn't that the reason why his redemption is better handled than Regina's?  I can't see Emma thinking, "Oh if only I had trusted you back then, you wouldn't have been forced to shut us up in a cage." or "It was totally fair game since I left you with the giant."  

Edited July 11, 2014 by Camera One

[Shanna Marie]

I think she is willing to forget about it because she assumes that Hook knows it was wrong and he shouldn't have been working with Cora and he was consumed with revenge and he regrets it.  Isn't that the reason why his redemption is better handled than Regina's?  I can't see Emma thinking, "Oh if only I had trusted you back then, you wouldn't have been forced to shut us up in a cage." or "It was totally fair game since I left you with the giant."

It could be both. She can forget about a lot of his past deeds because she knows he's realized they were wrong and regrets them, and he even already started making it up to them by saving Aurora's heart (which he stopped in the middle of a fight to do, leaving himself vulnerable to attack while he was reaching out for the heart). But she would also know that it would be hypocritical for her to hold that against him if he's not holding a grudge for her chaining him up at the top of the beanstalk (and all the other times she's tied him up or chained him up -- I think she's actually ahead of him in the captivity game). Neither of them's blameless against each other, but both seem to have decided that they had their reasons at the time and are moving past it all. However, the point remains from the original discussion that while Emma can forgive or understand things done to her, she wouldn't get past anything that was done to Henry, for whatever reason (unless it's Regina doing it because Regina is coated in magical Teflon).

[retrograde]

Buzzfeed: Proof That “Tangled” And “Once Upon A Time” Have Identical Romances

[YaddaYadda]

I can't help but laugh at the picture explanation (not in a bad way, thought it was nice).  Gosh, I loved Tangled so much!  I was incredibly disappointed by The Tower and how lackluster Rapunzel was. 

[pezgirl7]

Oh man, one of those images on buzzfeed is mine, but it's credited to someone else because they reposted it without credit. :( Here's my original post:

http://hooked-on-hiddles.tumblr.com/post/67689074718/hooked-on-hiddles-captain-swan-tangled

I was disappointed by OUAT's Rapunzel as well. She was just so blah, and didn't have any of the spunk I was expecting. It would have been nice to see the Tangled versions of the characters, but because they are so similar to Emma and Hook, I can see why they went in a different direction.

[Camera One]

It seems pretty clear that intention really matters as far as True Love's Kiss goes. Thus I don't think Rumpel's curse not breaking means Rumbelle isn't True Love. I just think it means that they kiss (as True Loves do) but actively don't want his curse to break, ergo it doesn't.

If Belle and Rumple *could* kiss and the Dark One Curse would break, then it would be logical for Belle to ask why he isn't willing to let it go, now that he has found his son. She would have suggested that they make it happen at the Wedding. I mean, why not. Isn't Rumple supposed to be completely redeemed now, in her eyes? Their relationship even survived DEATH, as she threw into the vows. Why are they still discussing which giant ass purse to throw the dagger into when they go out to eat, when they could dispose of the one thing which could allow some megavillain to control Rumple like a puppet?

 

Yeah, it seems to me like if you're willing to choose to have something else rather than True Love, it can't really be True Love. I could sort of handwave it pre-curse because he was holding onto power in order to get to his son. But now, if he kisses her and the curse isn't broken, I have to say that it no longer counts as True Love because he loves something else more. Plus, the lying and deception and stuff.

That's why I wish they didn't make Rumple and Belle True Loves in "Skin Deep". They could have sprouted some BS that being in a romance would weaken the Dark One powers without saying it would eliminate it completely. That would have allowed them to keep Regina's plan of weakening Rumple.

Edited July 15, 2014 by Camera One

[Shanna Marie]

If Belle and Rumple *could* kiss and the Dark One Curse would break, then it would be logical for Belle to ask why he isn't willing to let it go, now that he has found his son. She would have suggested that they make it happen at the Wedding. I mean, why not. Isn't Rumple supposed to be completely redeemed now, in her eyes?

In Storybrooke, how would they know if the Dark One Curse was broken or not? In the Enchanted Forest, he's all glittery, but in Storybrooke, he seems entirely ordinary, so there's no sign of whether or not he's the Dark One as long as he's not using magic. If he's willing to lie to her about who has the dagger, might he pretend that the curse on him was broken and now the dagger is just a dagger? As long as she didn't see him using magic, he might be able to pull it off. Then the situation might come where he needs magic, possibly even for a selfless reason like saving her life, and the whole deception would come out.

 

Not that I imagine they've considered that. You'd think he'd have pretended that at the wedding, but that might have been one plot point too many to throw into the end of the season.

[Serena]

Honestly, Belle would have to be pretty dumb to ask him to give up his powers. Storybrooke is under threat basically 24/7, and the DO would be an useful ally. The problem aren't the powers, but how he chooses to use them.

[Camera One]

The problem aren't the powers, but how he chooses to use them.

But supposedly the Dark One is corrupted and people have claimed it prevents Rumple from having full free will since it's a "curse" which predisposes him to do evil things. If Regina can "learn" to do magic, why can't he since he was actually the teacher? Would he be completely unable to do magic if he lost his Dark One powers? Yes, his powers definitely come into use given there's a crisis every season, and while I understand why the writers want to keep him as the Dark One, it is only logical that Belle and Neal would have insisted upon Rumple "retire" the Dark One mantle.

[Shanna Marie]

Honestly, Belle would have to be pretty dumb to ask him to give up his powers. Storybrooke is under threat basically 24/7, and the DO would be an useful ally.

So far, though, his powers have been more threat than assistance. With Cora, there was the danger of her getting the dagger, killing him with it and becoming a potentially worse Dark One. Then with Zelena, she used him as a puppet weapon. His powers were only really useful against Pan, and there's a lot of vulnerability built into his powers, since anyone who gets the dagger can make him do anything and since anyone who kills him with the dagger becomes the new Dark One. Regina is kind of insane, but at least her magic doesn't seem to come with those same risks. She's shielded her heart, so she can't be controlled that way, and killing Regina would probably just result in a dead Regina, not a new Big Bad. Emma's heart can't be taken, so she can't be controlled and, again, killing Emma just gets a dead Emma, not something potentially worse. With Rumple, you've got a powerful potential ally if he's in control of himself or being controlled by someone good and a powerful potential enemy if he's being controlled by an enemy (or out for his own agenda in opposition of everyone else). If he's an enemy, whether of his free will or not, he's nearly impossible to kill or defeat. I'd say the risks of Rumple outweigh the rewards. Zelena wouldn't have been nearly as big a threat if she hadn't had him (thanks, Neal!). So it wouldn't be unreasonable of Belle to want him to let a True Love's Kiss break the curse on him now that he no longer needs to find his son, since she has every reason to believe he'd be safer and happier without being the Dark One (since she's delusional about how much he wants and enjoys the power for the sake of having power).

[KingOfHearts]

Rumpbelle is a great and amazing concept on paper, but it only works if the Beast becomes uncursed.

 

In the original Beauty and the Beast, Belle never loved the beast side. She always saw the man inside, and the beast tried to be that man for her. In Once, Rumple doesn't even want to be cured. In the Disney movie, the Beast is doing all he can to win Belle's heart and transform back into a normal person. He wasn't an evil person, nor someone who would ever try to go on the offense. Rumple, on the other hand, enjoys idle cruelty and wickedness. 

 

Since Rumple has no plans to TLK and choose Belle over power, Rumpbelle is a waste. It's going to keep going around and around, with Rumple doing something mean and Belle getting mad, until one of them just dies. (Again.) The relationship worked well in Skin Deep because it was new, fresh, and had some hope. They really should not have put Rumple and Belle back together so soon. She should have been more of an endgame thing, where she's finally able to cure the beast. But the way it looks now, it'll probably only happen on his death bed in the series finale.

 

Beauty and the Beast is a completely different couple from Rumpbelle. Unlike on Once, Belle and her lover respect each other with admiration. Disney Belle was never the doormat nor cheerleader that Once Belle is. Beyond Skin Deep, it's a botched adaptation of one of Disney's true works of art.

 

 

So far, though, his powers have been more threat than assistance.

 

A lot of the threats on the show are there because Rumple was the Dark One in the first place. Rumple taught Cora, Regina, and Zelena, organized the Dark Curse, caused his son to want to leave, left his son for power, and warranted Hook's thirst for revenge. If he wasn't the Dark One, none of that would have happened. When Rumple does assist, it's usually just from a magical item. He wouldn't need powers for that. Anything else can be done by Emma or Regina. I'm basically with Neal and Belle on curing him.

Edited July 17, 2014 by KingOfHearts

[ShadowFacts]

 

Beyond Skin Deep, it's a botched adaptation of one of Disney's true works of art.

 

It is, and I think that is the intent of the venerable Adam and Eddy.  By having Lacey enjoy Gold's sadism, and Belle love his dark parts, they're making their twist on the original naughty and racy.  To me it's just more evidence of their arrested development.

[Mari]

Funny, to me Leo became more sympathetic over time and particular in Bleeding Through, even though the writers probably tried to make Cora look like some poor peasant betrayed by her fiance and some jealous princess. Still think that if Cora hadn't lied, were open about everything earlier, Leo might have reacted differently. I found Leo when we first meet him more of an oldfashioned though generous patriarch, benevolent as ruler but too ready to comply to tradition. With Cora he was a lot more open to break with tradition - maybe the experience with her though made him stick more to the rules.

I guess I have to agree with your post, pretty much completely, but I'd like to add a little.

 

Cora wasn't just lying to her boyfriend/fiancé.  He was next in line in a hereditary monarchy.  If she had married him, and then had a baby that was not Leopold's, in most hereditary monarchies, she could be executed.  (Anne Boleyn, Catherine Howard).  It would be treason--because she's not just misleading him, she's giving the country to someone else's child.

 

Now, obviously, in some monarchies adoption is an option.  They might've been willing to accept the baby if they'd known about it, and it wouldn't be the first royal that accepted a child that was not his/hers. 

 

But by lying about it to the Crown, and therefore trying to pretend that the child was Leopold's?  That's treason.  She's lucky she wasn't executed--and Leopold shows his mercy there.  Letting her go was the act of a kind, generous, and forgiving person.

[stealinghome]

This doesn't at all follow from the previous conversation, but I've been thinking recently about Regina and potential love interests, and I've come to the conclusion that I really think that Regina needs a love interest from a different world than the Enchanted Forest. (Or, if it's someone from the Enchanted Forest, they need to be from a land far enough away that they've never even heard of Snow White or Prince Charming or Rumpelstiltskin or The Evil Queen.)

 

One of the things that makes Outlaw Queen really not work for me, and makes Robin look like he's actually braindead (or, even more than Belle, gets off on his lover being a psychopath), is that Robin spent years being hunted by Regina's men. Years. And not just that, he had a firsthand look at the atrocities she committed. He has to at least have heard about the villages she murdered. He knows that she spent years hunting an innocent Snow White. He and his men were suspended in time for 28 years because of Regina, and woke up to a ruined, far more dangerous world. I mean, Regina earned the moniker The Evil Queen, you know? Everyone agrees she was an evil tyrant! So when the show tries to spin it as "well, I heard all these bad things about you, but in person you're cool and Bold and Audacious, let's get horizontal!", it doesn't work for me, because even if Robin never met Regina in the Enchanted Forest, he knows enough true information about her that he should be running screaming in the other direction. I mean, seriously, what kind person walks up to their world's equivalent of Stalin or Pol Pot and is like "you're hot, let's date" without being repulsed by that person and what they've done? (Also looking at you, Belle.) (And I could kind of, maybe be on board with it if Robin had shown that he was appalled with himself for being attracted to a vicious evil murderer--but nope, he literally does not care that Regina is a mass murderer and has no qualms about getting into bed with the evil dictator/mass murderer of the Enchanted Forest. That boggles my mind. Even Belle had hesitations about getting with Rumpel!) So for me, any romance between Regina and someone who so much as knew of her in the Enchanted Forest is pretty much going to flop, because it's going to cast the romantic partner in a very negative light, because...really, who is willing to start a romantic relationship with someone like that?

 

Whereas with someone from another world, you really could have a storyline where this person meets Regina and genuinely falls for her as she is now, and then is totally flummoxed by finding out who she was in the past. And that person could do a lot of soul-searching and say "I don't condone who you were or what you did, but I know the person you are now, and I want to be with that person." And it just makes them look less bad, because a) they didn't fall for her knowing she was a mass murderer/rapist/destroyer of an entire world, but also b) they didn't have a front-row seat to her most evil deeds. I mean, I'd still side-eye the character a bit, but it would be far more understandable to me because that person fell for Regina without knowing her full story, and without having him/herself be personally affected by Regina's tyranny (whereas with Outlaw Queen and Rumbelle these days, it's just impossible not to judge Robin and Belle).

[FurryFury]

Or it could be a person who had done something in the past he's not proud of, or maybe had already an experience with forgiving someone. 

 

For me, the real problem is Robin's lack of personality and lack of strength of personality. The only type of person I could (and want) to see romancing Regina is someone equal to her (hell, I generally only care about romances between equal character - yet another reason I can't stand Rumbelle). Robin really isn't. He's just following her lead, he doesn't have his own agenda. He exists to Regina to alternately be happy with and angst about. He doesn't have a story of his own.

 

If Adam and Eddy want to be smart (and I do think they were mostly smart with Captain Swan - it could be much better than it is, but it's still a mostly OK romance story), they will get rid of Robin, simultaneously giving Regina's redemption storyline more fuel, and find a character (most likely not Disney - it's possible to create an interesting and popular non-Disney character on this show, see: Rumple, they just need to stop being lazy), slowly introduce him, either a (maybe unwilling) villain or (my preferred version) a foil/rival/unwilling ally for Regina and work from there. And do a chemistry test.

Edited July 19, 2014 by FurryFury

[Rumsy4]

Fully agree, stealinghome. It's as though Robin Hood decided to have a romance with a reformed Sheriff of Nottingham. While the concept his reformation is a plausible one, it makes one mind boggle to think that one of his former victims would have total amnesia as to think they had only ever been "bold and audacious". Robin Hood was fighting the system, and he does not even acknowledge the fact that Regina was that system he was fighting against, other than as a joke. 

 

They should have had a flashback episode for Robin Hood that fleshed out his character a little more before they put him and Regina together. Or they should have at least shown a reluctant romance developing between them in the Lost Year, that might explain his inexplicable passion for her in Storybrooke. So many missed opportunities... 

[FurryFury]

They could have also waited until they had some sort of story in store for him (I'm really going to hell for alliteration...) I mean, Hook was obviously intended as a love interest for Emma from his conception and "Tallahassee", but he was involved in the plot and got a fleshing out and a motivation. Robin's flashback was all about Belle and Rumple, not him, and neither was any of stories in season 3.

[Rumsy4]

It also doesn't help that he's being played by a different actor now. The disconnect is huge! He also didn't come off well in letting Neal use his son as Shadow-bait. If, by some twisted logic, he felt that he owed a debt to Rumplestiltskin, he should not have risked his son's life to pay it off. In addition, the power/wealth imbalance between Robin and Regina is huge. He is basically homeless in Storybrooke, while Regina lives in a palatial house. It looks as though Robin is attracted to her power and wealth, as much as by her looks. 

Edited July 19, 2014 by Rumsy4

[stealinghome]

No, he's just attracted to the fact that she's a mass murderer/rapist/destroyer of an entire world/enslaver of an entire world's population. It makes her "bold and audacious," don't you see??? ;)

[FurryFury]

He and Belle should start a support group.