S04.E19: Sympathy For The De Vil

[KAOS Agent]

I've thought so much of the Cruella stuff is on Snowing's hands because they had a lot of information at the start and didn't share. They even had Ursula and Cruella dead to rights with stolen property and David covered it up. They could have thrown the two out of town right then and left them with no way to return. Emma wanted to go get them at that point, but Snowing were like, "We're going hiking. Those two are fine. Just let them be." A lot of this situation stems from Snowing's really, really bad decision making.

 

Protecting your child from evil is one of those things that people who've done it say they have few regrets. There was a story a few years ago where a guy came upon a man raping his five year old daughter. He understandably flipped out and beat the rapist to death. No charges were filed because no one is going to convict the father in that situation. He's not evil or even dark for doing so. He didn't mean to kill the guy but didn't sound particularly broken up about the death either. But he's also not going to turn around and go all evil now that he's killed someone. That's where I see Emma. She might be shocked at herself for her actions, but I don't see her feeling terrible about it either. She killed Walsh and wasn't too upset. Snow killed Cora and Emma was all for Snow sucking it up and dealing because it needed to be done. It makes little sense that suddenly now Emma is dark.

Edited April 23, 2015 by KAOS Agent

[Camera One]

Snowing should have told the truth, but telling the truth at that particular point would have made little difference since the villains were already in town.  If Rumple needed Cruella and Ursula in town, there's no way they could have been "kicked out" so easily.  Between the 2 of them, they have enough magic to barricade themselves such that it would be hard to expel them once they were in.

 

I don't think the blame lies at any particular characters' feet more than others.  Emma is the one who recklessly let the Author out, knowing that he was trapped there for a reason by the Sorcerer and if Rumple got hold of him, everyone's existence could be in jeopardy.  Even Regina didn't think Ursula and Cruella were all that bad.  If she did, she would have had Henry under lock and key.  What happened in this episode was clearly unpredicted by anyone.

Edited April 23, 2015 by Camera One

[KAOS Agent]

On a totally different topic, the theme words were sadly underused this week. The villains were shut out for the second week in a row while the heroes managed four uses (plus one use of "heroic" if that counts) giving the heroes a six point edge for the half season 29-23.

 

Happy ending was also sorely lacking this episode with only one mention. I'm giving Cruella a point as well for her use of "unhappy ending" in relation to that dreadful child, Henry. 

[Camera One]

I'm giving Cruella a point as well for her use of "unhappy ending" in relation to that dreadful child, Henry. 

 

Her best line was, "Pongo, sic!" as Henry ran.  

[KingOfHearts]

Love how the show is saying that using light magic, powered by love, to save a child's life is considered dark. Just shows you how twisted the morality is. While I believe 100% that Emma's actions were entirely justified in every way, her anger did come out when she did it. That's the only darkness I can figure from it. Cruella set her off with that hero comment. That, however, is a completely different ballpark and has nothing to do with the killing's morality.

Edited April 23, 2015 by KingOfHearts

[Shanna Marie]

A lot of the second guessing about Emma reminds me of the stuff that tends to get said after a police shooting -- why didn't they shoot for the legs or arms, why shoot multiple times, why not a warning, etc. It's really hard to judge from afar and after the fact what it's really like in the moment with the adrenaline surge and all the physical and psychological effects of that. That's the reason cops are taught to shoot for the torso -- the biggest target and easier to hit, even with shaky hands. The same may or may not apply with magic. With Emma, when she's rattled, she goes for brute force, that big shove or explosion. She doesn't have a lot of finesse. If Cruella hadn't been standing next to a cliff, she just would have been shoved away from Henry and wouldn't have been killed. I don't know that we've seen Emma manage something as tricky as removing a gun from someone's hand, especially not when she's in a tense situation. Every time we've seen her use magic in a crisis, it's been almost unconscious. Stuff happens without her doing it deliberately or planning what to do.

 

Maybe she should start practicing practical uses for magic, doing stuff like disarming people, poofing them from one place to another, etc. But she hasn't so far, so she didn't have that skill available.

 

I figure Cruella brought it on herself. You don't threaten deadly force unless you're able to use it, and when you do threaten deadly force, you're inviting it to be used on you, whether or not you really mean to use it. As we say in Texas, Cruella needed killing.

[Camera One]

Emma was able to move Hook's hook... A gun probably does require more precision.  As another poster said previously, her powers are undefined, so the writers can do whatever.  There has been zero talk about training to be better at magic so she can handle it better in stressful situations like this one.  It's impossible to predict for us viewers what she would be capable of doing in any situation because as with most things on this show, there are no rules, and not even the laws of science need apply for this show.  

 

I don't think Cruella was as smart as she was supposed to be.  Is is because she was so agitated and emotionally invested?  It seems like such a convenient way to explain away everything.

Edited April 23, 2015 by Camera One

[KAOS Agent]

If we're going to question why Emma didn't just poof the gun out of Cruella's hand, why don't we question why Rumpel didn't do the same to Belle's heart? We know he's got the skills to do so much more than Emma does. It's this show, people. They only use magic for things when it's convenient to the plot that they use them. When it's not convenient, we must forget that Rumpel is capable of pretty much anything in a magical sense.

[Camera One]

Yeah, I was taken out of the Rumple/Regina scene for that exact reason.  I find it hard to believe Rumple couldn't poof it out of Regina's hand.  Oh well, I pretty much say, "Give me a freak'in break" at least ten times per episode.

Edited April 23, 2015 by Camera One

[Rumsy4]

Oh my goodness--that bothered me sooo much, especially when Regina turned her back to Rumple and walked away. Wouldn't it have made more sense for Regina to project herself there ala Ingrid rather than actually stand there with Belle's heart in her freaking hand?? 

[Camera One]

I forgot another gem in this episode.  Apparently, when Snow was talking to Regina in 4A about having faith that she would earn redemption and have a chance at grace, she was really talking about her own sins and hoping she herself would be forgiven for separating a mother from her beloved baby.  See, look at the value of that horrible scene from "Smash the Mirror", everybody.  It was alluding to this development in 4B.  What wonderful writing.

Edited April 23, 2015 by Camera One

[Zuleikha]

She didn't know that Cruella couldn't kill.

She also didn't know Cruella's a conscience-less sociopath. Since coming to town, Cruella hasn't done anything worse than Ursula, who was able to be redeemed with a happy ending and the few bad things they did were clearly overseen by Rumple. If we didn't have the flashbacks, Cruella seemed like a Hook-level villain and Emma had no reason to believe that there wasn't something solvable causing Cruella to suddenly go so desperate. (I'm not arguing that Emma was evil or dark to kill Cruella in those circumstances, mind you, but I also don't want to pretend that it was Emma's best or only option or that Cruella was so much more obviously dangerous than villains who have been kept alive).

 

They even had Ursula and Cruella dead to rights with stolen property and David covered it up. They could have thrown the two out of town right then and left them with no way to return. Emma wanted to go get them at that point, but Snowing were like, "We're going hiking. Those two are fine. Just let them be."

 

I will never understand why the writers had Charming do that. I still think it made no sense, and it would have been better to have Charming not find the stolen item. 

 

If we're going to question why Emma didn't just poof the gun out of Cruella's hand, why don't we question why Rumpel didn't do the same to Belle's heart?

I don't have a problem believing that Regina was prepared for that and magically defended the heart against Rumpel. He's very powerful, but he's not all powerful, and that's an obvious thing for Regina to prepare for. Cruella, however, has no magic other than her control of animals so we know she can't defend against poofing. 

 

Really, for the plot point the writers wanted, they should have just made Emma's magic push be red. 

[KAOS Agent]

I'm not arguing that Emma was evil or dark to kill Cruella in those circumstances, mind you, but I also don't want to pretend that it was Emma's best or only option or that Cruella was so much more obviously dangerous than villains who have been kept alive.

 

Cruella had a gun at Henry's head. That's where she was infinitely more immediately dangerous than any other villain. Even Zelena was merely strangling Henry. That would take time to be effective. A split second's hesitation on Emma's part with a gun pointed at Henry = dead Henry. So while at other points there was danger, this one required an instant reaction and it didn't even come from an angry place. She asked the woman to drop the gun. She gave Cruella an out and she didn't take it. Anger would have had Emma throwing Cruella off the cliff instantly. Instead, she tried to talk her down.

 

I'm fairly certain this was the point where A&E were saying Emma's going dark, but not really because they don't want this to become "Once Upon a(n) Ick". It's also why I don't see them taking Emma's "darkness" that much further. You can take a hero and blur the lines, but if Emma goes too dark, it will turn off a good portion of the audience. I'm all for Emma standing up and refuting the idea that heroes don't kill. Regina would have done the same thing and I wouldn't have questioned her methods either. If a man is wearing a bomb intent on killing the crowd around him, is it wrong to take him down? Are you not a hero any longer because you stopped this person by killing them? I want the show to address this stupidity. Instead, they continue on with this ridiculous crap about not killing. They didn't kill Zelena and now Marian's dead. They didn't execute or lock up Regina and countless people suffered and some died because of it. Whether Regina is a semi-decent human being at this point doesn't matter to those people like Graham and Kurt who died because the heroes don't kill and take the "harder path". Stop the madness!

Edited April 23, 2015 by KAOS Agent

[ParadoxLost]

She also didn't know Cruella's a conscience-less sociopath. Since coming to town, Cruella hasn't done anything worse than Ursula, who was able to be redeemed with a happy ending and the few bad things they did were clearly overseen by Rumple.

 

Considering everything that happens offscreen, we can assume that August told Emma something about the torture and Cruella being the worst of them.

[kingshearte]

Frankly, I kind of don't care how many options Emma had. I cannot think of a single argument that would convince me that killing someone holding a gun to your kid's head is not an entirely appropriate thing to do.

[YaddaYadda]

Frankly, I kind of don't care how many options Emma had. I cannot think of a single argument that would convince me that killing someone holding a gun to your kid's head is not an entirely appropriate thing to do.

Try telling that to A&E who think they're so brilliant and clearly have no clue what a mother who has her back against the wall would do for her child.

[Rumsy4]

The problem is--A&E do know what a mother would do to protect her child. But it's typical of their disingenuous storytelling to twist the morality of the act to support the point they are trying to make.

[Crimson Belle]

They posted the Emma kills Cruella scene on the Facebook page for the show, and the fans' reaction does not bode well for the future of the show. They don't buy the going dark twist and a lot say they have no interest in watching that going forward.

[Shanna Marie]

Ooh, I should go back and comment on that Facebook post. Anything to send a message that someone might actually receive.

 

As for the ideas about Emma disarming Cruella ... that could actually be pretty dangerous to do anything to a gun that someone is holding with her finger on the trigger. That's why so many news reports of accidental shootings include the phrase "the gun went off in the struggle." Police have to be very careful how they disarm a person. So if Emma had tried to magically wrest the gun out of Cruella's grip, Cruella might have squeezed tighter and fired. If she'd heated the gun up to make it painful to hold, Cruella might have fired more quickly before she had to drop it. Disapparating the gun the way she did Hook's hook might have worked, but she was able to do that when she was relaxed and happy and he wasn't opposing her. We don't know if she has the control for that when she's angry and terrified. Her magic is very emotionally linked.

[Mari]

The problem is--A&E do know what a mother would do to protect her child. But it's typical of their disingenuous storytelling to twist the morality of the act to support the point they are trying to make.

And it's particularly glaring, since last season we learned that killing a bunch of people was something you can be triumphant about, as long as you get a child out of it. 

 

However, killing someone to protect that same child is wrong, as long as you're blonde or a White family member?  How does that make sense?

[Zuleikha]

So if Emma had tried to magically wrest the gun out of Cruella's grip, Cruella might have squeezed tighter and fired. If she'd heated the gun up to make it painful to hold, Cruella might have fired more quickly before she had to drop it. Disapparating the gun the way she did Hook's hook might have worked, but she was able to do that when she was relaxed and happy and he wasn't opposing her. We don't know if she has the control for that when she's angry and terrified. Her magic is very emotionally linked.

 

How is that any different than magically pushing Cruella? Cruella may have squeezed the trigger upon feeling pushed. That's just as reflexive and instantaneous as heating it would be. 

 

The point I made earlier is that we've seen Emma be stronger and do more complex magic when she's emotionally stressed. She was able to hold together and levitate herself and the plank bridge. Again, I have no problem with Emma killing Cruella given the circumstances, but given what the show has already established out of her capabilities, it wasn't her only choice for acting out of love and protectiveness. IMHO, it wasn't her best choice either; that would have been poofing the gun into her possession or pushing Cruella and then levitating her to keep her from dying. But I view that as more a reflection of shoddy writing rather than anything about Emma because I think the writers were trying to set up a situation where Emma's only choice was to try and talk Cruella down or push her and they didn't care that they've established other options. I also suspect they forgot they made a big symbolic deal out of Regina's magic changing color when she used light magic to defeat Zelena and didn't think about the symbolic implications of Emma's magic push being white. I think they probably just thought Emma magic = white.

 

They didn't kill Zelena and now Marian's dead.

Marian's dead because Rumple killed Zelena, not because Regina refused to. Zelena was powerless in the a prison cell. Rumple killing her is what set her free to go through the time portal. If Rumple had been able to show her the grace that Neal would have wanted him to, Zelena could have been monitored and (for all we know) redeemed. Zelena didn't appear to be sociopathic like Cruella, but rather mentally unwell and in need of help. Maybe Archie and some acceptance would have helped her.

 

They didn't execute or lock up Regina and countless people suffered and some died because of it.

That one, however... much as I'm grateful for Snow's soft-heartedness, it was horrible leadership and I agree that it was absolutely the wrong call given the circumstances. In an alternate 4B where Snow was still mayor, I would have loved a call back to that with Snow struggling to make hard present-day choices, admitting that she had been a horrible ruler, and accepting that sometimes leaders can't afford mercy.

[Shanna Marie]

The point I made earlier is that we've seen Emma be stronger and do more complex magic when she's emotionally stressed. She was able to hold together and levitate herself and the plank bridge.

She didn't do that consciously and wasn't even aware that she'd done it. When it comes to deliberately using magic in a crisis under pressure, her go-to has been that magic blast that pushes someone away. The risk there would have been if Cruella was holding on to Henry because Henry might have gone over the cliff with her.

 

Note to hostage takers: standing on the edge of a cliff when holding someone at gunpoint is a bad plan. And yet they do it so many times on so many shows. If they weren't on the edge of a cliff, they'd just get knocked down and probably disarmed.

 

And Emma really does need to train harder with her magic. She keeps having these breakthroughs, then acting as though she knows everything instead of working to really master it or learn new techniques.

 

In short, this plot is stupid and contrived.

[John S]

Here is the premise of this show.

Emma is "The Savior". That means that she is the "goodest" of the good. In the pilot, it was her presence that started the clock.

However you look at it, she killed a person. The "goodest" person doesn't kill people. They find other ways of stopping the "bad" people. That's why they wear the so called "white hats".

Is she currently evil? - NO.

Is she on her way to becoming evil? - Maybe - but if she is, it will take several more not so "good" steps to get there.

[dr pepper]

Slippin' into darkness
Take my mind beyond the dreams
I was slippin' into darkness
Take my mind beyond the dreams

Where I talk to my brother, oh, oh, oh
Who never said their name

Slippin' into darkness
When I heard my mother say
I was slippin' into darkness
When I heard my mother say
(Hey, what'd she say, what'd she say)

You been slippin' into darkness, oh, oh, oh
Pretty soon you're gonna pay

 

--- War

[kpw801]

When Regina went to Gold's store to talk to Belle she called Gold her "ex-husband".  Are they divorced?

[Dianthus]

Over on Tor.com there's a video mash-up of a bunch of Disney Villains falling to their doom. Cruella going off a cliff is pretty much par for the course (tho' the other villains weren't pushed). I have to admit, watching Hook fall from the yardarm (?) of his ship into the gaping maw of the crocodile bugged a little (not the Hook we've come to know and love, but still...).

[Camera One]

I don't think Cruella died in the 101 Dalmatians animated movie, though she did drive off the road.

[Dianthus]

Cruella wasn't in the montage. Been ages since I watched 101 Dalmatians. Don't remember how she meets her end there. 

[Camera One]

At the end of the movie, 

Cruella drives off the road when her incompetent henchmen crash into her car. We see her at the side of the road yelling at them amidst the wreckage of the cars.

[FurryFury]

Marian's dead because Rumple killed Zelena, not because Regina refused to.

 

Actually, Marian would have been dead anyway, only because of Regina, not Zelena.

 

When Regina went to Gold's store to talk to Belle she called Gold her "ex-husband".  Are they divorced?

I guess she meant that because they are separated. I'm not sure EFL characters view marriage and divorce the same way as we do (nor should they).

[Shanna Marie]

I guess she meant that because they are separated. I'm not sure EFL characters view marriage and divorce the same way as we do (nor should they).

If Gold is Belle's ex-husband because she kicked him out and wanted nothing more to do with him, then I suppose that would have made Milah Rumple's ex-wife if she left him and wanted nothing more to do with him. Robin could have left Marian and considered their marriage over rather than trying to stick with her and then going behind her back.

 

The "goodest" person doesn't kill people. They find other ways of stopping the "bad" people. That's why they wear the so called "white hats".

And what does that mean for people like soldiers or police officers, or anyone else going up against someone who isn't going to be stopped in any other way? Are they then not actually white hats?

 

It's possible that this is the ethos in this world, where taking any life at all for any reason is considered a stain on the soul, but then we have a problem with some of the other characters. If killing one person in a crisis moment because that person poses an immediate threat keeps someone from being a truly good person, then how can someone who has gleefully killed hundreds ever be redeemed and considered a good person? If that person can be redeemed by doing other good stuff, then why doesn't the good stuff the good person did before taking the one life balance that out and prevent the good person from going into darkness? You end up with an ethos in which there's no upside to trying to be good. No matter what else you do, killing one person, even to save another, means you're not good. But killing multiples for bad reasons isn't going to hold you back from being considered good if you decide to change your mind.

[HoodlumSheep]

Popping in here real quick to say I still can't stop myself from busting out laughing every time I see Rumple pop out from behind the tree to watch Killian. It doesn't help that my mind zooms straight to the tumblr gif of that scene that has part of the "Every Breath you take" song lyrics tacked onto it.

It's been a week and i still have AuthElla feels, despite the twisty nature. Now that the gang has found the author, I wonder what's going to happen with him siding with the heroes, rumple, or himself?

[John S]

If Gold is Belle's ex-husband because she kicked him out and wanted nothing more to do with him, then I suppose that would have made Milah Rumple's ex-wife if she left him and wanted nothing more to do with him. Robin could have left Marian and considered their marriage over rather than trying to stick with her and then going behind her back.

 

And what does that mean for people like soldiers or police officers, or anyone else going up against someone who isn't going to be stopped in any other way? Are they then not actually white hats?

 

It's possible that this is the ethos in this world, where taking any life at all for any reason is considered a stain on the soul, but then we have a problem with some of the other characters. If killing one person in a crisis moment because that person poses an immediate threat keeps someone from being a truly good person, then how can someone who has gleefully killed hundreds ever be redeemed and considered a good person? If that person can be redeemed by doing other good stuff, then why doesn't the good stuff the good person did before taking the one life balance that out and prevent the good person from going into darkness? You end up with an ethos in which there's no upside to trying to be good. No matter what else you do, killing one person, even to save another, means you're not good. But killing multiples for bad reasons isn't going to hold you back from being considered good if you decide to change your mind.

As I said, which you failed to include as part of my quote, in THIS show, there is only ONE Savior, and that is Emma. Neither soldiers, police officers, nor anyone else is in her "category". She is THE "good" person, even "gooder" than her parents. There is NO ONE else in the entire world, who is in her category.

If we were talking "real life", then your points are valid but this is the fantasy world of Storybrooke.

[FurryFury]

If Gold is Belle's ex-husband because she kicked him out and wanted nothing more to do with him, then I suppose that would have made Milah Rumple's ex-wife if she left him and wanted nothing more to do with him. Robin could have left Marian and considered their marriage over rather than trying to stick with her and then going behind her back.

 

I guess everyone decided for themselves. Regina may consider them no longer married because of her Robin/Marian experience, actually.

 

It's been a week and i still have AuthElla feels

 

They already have a shipper name? Oh, show, and your fandom.

[legaleagle53]

I guess everyone decided for themselves. Regina may consider them no longer married because of her Robin/Marian experience, actually.

 

They already have a shipper name? Oh, show, and your fandom.

 

Patrick Fischler (Author) and Victoria Smurfit (Cruella) were the ones who got that shipper name started during their live tweet session on Sunday.  Patrick is especially fond of it.

[FurryFury]

Pff, not even a good one. Cruel Author would have been better. Mashups are boring (unless they're somehow awesome, like LoVe or Violate, or whatever).

[myril]

As I said, which you failed to include as part of my quote, in THIS show, there is only ONE Savior, and that is Emma. Neither soldiers, police officers, nor anyone else is in her "category". She is THE "good" person, even "gooder" than her parents. There is NO ONE else in the entire world, who is in her category.

If we were talking "real life", then your points are valid but this is the fantasy world of Storybrooke.

 

I disagree, as I see it Storybrooke exist in a fictional world coming very close to our real world and ethics, being more or less our world. Or at least that has once been one of the things I thought the show was doing, making fictional, aka fairy tale characters face a rather real world, taking them out of their their seemingly clear cut, simple, technicolored world and ethics, away from Disney induced simplicity into a more realistic, challenging reality, with many shades of grey, complexity and annoying messiness, closer to our life experience and ethics, which I think are more complex and demanding than any philosophical musings and theory can grasp. It was a part of what made the show interesting to me in the first place. Not magic but rather real world human drama.

 

That Emma was and is constantly called the savior doesn't mean that in fact she is THE savior, it just how she is defined by everyone. Yes, that might set standards in the minds of everyone in Storybrooke and even in her own mind high, but could be more a matter of mind and not necessarily a fact.

 

Most certainly that is not what I as a viewer have to see in Emma. She is not my savior but just some other fictional more or less hero. One thing is, how Emma is judged and viewed inside the fictional reality of the characters, of the show, the other is how I as viewer judge the actions of the fictional characters based on my real world ethics. That can be a different thing.

 

For me buying into the story of Emma getting a step closer to getting dark, of crossing a line for her character here in this episode by killing with a sense of rage Cruella, I can somewhat work with the characters inside the fictional world of Storybrooke and its ethics looking at Emma with a different, excessive measure, a certain expectation (that I though don't share), but even then it's not enough for me to put Emma on a high pedestal just by name, they have to earn that through the writing and development of the character. And IMO that is not what they did, Emma was no saint over the past seasons. Additionally I don't think that expecting Emma to be the goodest of good, the one person not killing anyone, the hero of heroes is anything that would stand a "realitycheck" even just inside the fictional world of OUaT.

[John S]

I thought of this comparison. Maybe the writers have thought of it or maybe it is just a coincidence.

In one of the main religions of the world today, there is a story where the evil one says to the Savior that if he were to kneel down before him, that he would give him the entire world. Of course, the Savior says NO.

 

What if, in this make believe world, the Savior says YES? The entire fantasy world - Storybrooke, Oz, Wonderland, or wherever, would be Emma's to do with as she pleases - and there wouldn't be a single person, or a combination of people, good or evil, who could stop her.

THAT is what would happen if this Savior became evil.

[John S]

Myril - Gold has said, that if Emma is turned, she would be THE most evil person ever, far surpassing all of the evil ones who have come before her.

As I have said before, killing Cruella has NOT made her evil yet. It is, however, one step closer to getting there.

[myril]

Myril - Gold has said, that if Emma is turned, she would be THE most evil person ever, far surpassing all of the evil ones who have come before her.

As I have said before, killing Cruella has NOT made her evil yet. It is, however, one step closer to getting there.

 

Whatever Rumple said, still don't buy into killing Cruella as taking her any step closer to turning evil - ever. That is my problem with this episode and this plot with Cruella. As I see it, making Cruella a rather coldblooded though still quite campy crazy sociopath, the writers didn't serve their own idea of showing Emma on a path to darkness, and eventually coming even close to become that evil Rumple has been talking of. I see them trying to set up a sense of increasing self doubts and doubts about her own integrity, thanks particular to the crap Snow did and said to her. I can get into Emma feeling an unsettling moment of rage and satisfaction killing Cruella even, but not alone the killing of Cruella as such being a step to the darker side. It was a protective act. Now, could be the writers thought, by making it a justifiable act, probably everyone would have killed Cruella in that situation, to scale up the tragic of Emma feeling conflicted about it and even like turning dark could be inevitable for her, but is that what viewers are seeing? Maybe if they hadn't made such a silly deal of Cruella not being able to take a life anymore. That was overkill then.

 

I see people discussing, that Cruella was because of that handicap a defenseless person, or that Emma with her huge potential of magic could have done something different like zapping away the gun or freezing Cruella for a moment and getting Henry out of her reach or whatever, but should not have pushed Cruella over the brink, I see others getting angry at the idea, this could be seen as a kind of evil, unheroic deed. But how many people do say, it was okay, what Emma did, but because of her current mindset, she tragically can't even see that herself and that is the problem? So if making it extra tragic was the intention of the writers, then I think it got pretty much lost on many of the fans and possible as well casual viewers. If this episode was meant to be some important step in the development of Emma, then IMO it failed to tell that less ambiguously, it's wide open for interpretation.

Edited April 24, 2015 by myril

[Crimson Belle]

Emma is the OUAT savior, not Jesus. She's the savior because she was the chosen one to break the curse, not because of her morality. In fact, sh has been one of the more gray characters in terms of what she is willing to do to accomplish her goals, which have always been good. Killing Cruella is in line with how Emma has always acted morally, so it is impossible to see it as a change to evil.

[John S]

Emma is the OUAT savior, not Jesus. She's the savior because she was the chosen one to break the curse, not because of her morality. In fact, sh has been one of the more gray characters in terms of what she is willing to do to accomplish her goals, which have always been good. Killing Cruella is in line with how Emma has always acted morally, so it is impossible to see it as a change to evil.

The good news is that the new episode is tomorrow. We will see if she remains "good" or if she takes a step in the opposite direction.

For the record, I would NEVER compare the 2. That would be idiotic. My ONLY point is that there is a similarity in the 2 stories, whether it was intentionally done by the writers or not.

[mercfan3]

I think there's a difference between saying that killing someone is justified and killing someone is right. 

it's a perfectly valid position to say killing someone isn't right..and for heroes it's even more valid. 

 

But I agree that Emma has always been somewhere in the middle. Much more so than her parents. 

[jhlipton]

I didn't watch, and don't think I'll bother.  After the big reveal of Zelana, she doesn't even appear?

Just bleh.

 

On the "heros don't kill" font, a lot of people point out how many people would be alive if Batman didn't have such quandaries.

[Joenigma]

 

However, killing someone to protect that same child is wrong, as long as you're blonde or a White family member?  How does that make sense?

 

I don't know if this was mentioned before but I think what A&E was trying to convey was that Emma did know Cruella couldn't kill because Emma has that lie detector power. Basically A&E's reasoning is Emma should have been able to "read" that Cruella was bluffing and that she wouldn't kill Henry but killed her anyway thus making her evil. 

 

I think it's totally BS but that's the only why I can understand why they would view a mother protecting their child as a step towards darkness.

[jhlipton]

The same number that are alive now because Batman is a fiction. 

 

So is Emma!  I think you got my point -- sometimes heroes have to kill to protect others.

 

I don't know if this was mentioned before but I think what A&E was trying to convey was that Emma did know Cruella couldn't kill because Emma has that lie detector power.

 

Yeah, the "lie detector power" that is powered by PLOTonium.  It works when it's needed and fails miserably most of the time.

 

Yet another continuity error by TS, TW.

[YaddaYadda]

I don't know if this was mentioned before but I think what A&E was trying to convey was that Emma did know Cruella couldn't kill because Emma has that lie detector power. Basically A&E's reasoning is Emma should have been able to "read" that Cruella was bluffing and that she wouldn't kill Henry but killed her anyway thus making her evil.

 

But would she trust her lie detector over the psycho who is holding her child at gun point?  Again, this is absolutely wonky.  What mother would be like oh you're holding a gun to my kid's head but you're bluffing, so I'll let you go.  

 

Plus Emma's lie detector, she doesn't trust what it says to her.  She thought her parents were lying to her, so they lied to her even more to cover their asses, so her trusting her lie detector is out of the question.

 

The more we talk about it, the stupider I feel for watching.

[Camera One]

I really enjoy discussing the show with everyone here, but it's kinda like discussing what will happen in the next game of the hockey playoffs, except the rules will be constantly changing.  Like in the next game, there could be double the number of players and there might be a few baskets the puck could fly through to get some extra points plus the players might have to play while tied up; and also, all penalties and half the game occur in a darkened part of the stadium, and you never know what happens there.  Anything goes, so it's pretty much impossible to speculate or even explain any aspect of the plot that has occurred.

Edited April 25, 2015 by Camera One

[YaddaYadda]

I really enjoy discussing the show with everyone here, but it's kinda like discussing what will happen in the next game of the hockey playoffs, except the rules will be constantly changing.

 

Well to be fair, the rules are sort of constantly changing when the referees decide to you know, swallow their whistles and not call penalties or change the course of the game because they feel like it.  Maybe that's who A&E have their writers' boot camp with!

[Curio]

I really enjoy discussing the show with everyone here, but it's kinda like discussing what will happen in the next game of the hockey playoffs, except the rules will be constantly changing.

 

For the next weekly poll, we should come up with a list of completely random deus ex machina items that could magically save the day for the heroes in the 4B finale and see which one of us gets closest. (In fact, I might just have to do that.) I mean, no one could have predicted the gauntlet at the beginning of 4A, no one could have predicted there would be a time traveling portal at the beginning of 3B, no one could have predicted the Black Fairy's wand at the beginning of 3A, no one could have predicted there was a giant diamond fail safe at the beginning of 2B, no one could have predicted there was a magical compass at the beginning of 2A, etc.