S04.E19: Sympathy For The De Vil

[KAOS Agent]

Does anyone else wonder how the Author can suddenly see the future and know the end of the story? How the hell would he know and be able to say with authority that the story ends with the Saviour going dark? 

 

I was okay with the Author manipulating people to put them in a position where the story will most likely be more interesting, but I am not at all happy with the free will removing magical Post-It notes where anything you write happens. How come Rumpel never found this guy? Couldn't he have just written that Bae returns to his father and poof no need for a curse? Must not think about how badly this story messes with everything about this show ever.

[Camera One]

That's exactly what I was thinking too.  Since Rumple is apparently oh so knowledgeable about this Author guy.

 

How the hell would he know and be able to say with authority that the story ends with the Saviour going dark?

 

Yeah, I was wondering about that.  I thought he was speculating/assuming that if Emma killed Cruella, she would go dark.

[Rumsy4]

Or maybe he is an Observer, and can see all the possible futures. Oops... wrong show. 

[Camera One]

The Observers were so much cooler than that loser.

[jhlipton]

Does anyone else wonder how the Author can suddenly see the future and know the end of the story? 

 

He can see the future but can't predict that giving Cruella magical powers was going to be good idea?  Yeah, right!

[YaddaYadda]

He can see the future but can't predict that giving Cruella magical powers was going to be good idea?  Yeah, right!

Can he really see the future or was he parroting what Gold told him?  Gold said that Cruella took the Savior's son and then went on about the Author and Cruella both lied to him about knowing each other, then the Author showed Gold the paper about Cruella not being able to kill anyone and Gold had that evil smirk on his face.  And I really don't wanna revisit the episode as in finding the scene, but I could have sworn Gold said something about the Savior turning dark.

 

When I'm reading a book, I usually have an idea how it ends when I'm midway through, so maybe it's the same thing with the Author, he has an idea but can't really predict the ending.

 

Also, this whole thing about Cruella knowing the Author, all she knew was that Isaac traveled around and wrote stories, had a magic quill, how does she know that he is the actual author they're looking for?  Unless they bumped into each other in the EF which we have no clue how she even got there in the first place, how does she know that he is the one and the same person?

 

It's entirely too early for this!

[Whodunnit]

Small quibble;

How was Cruella bespelling Maleficent if she only had power over small animals? If she could control larger creatures, why didn't she control humans?

[Camera One]

Good point.  Though the writers would probably say she could control animals that can't talk or something.

[YaddaYadda]

The Author sais she would have control over all animals.

 

I wanna know how she enchanted her car?  

[Curio]

I wanna know how she enchanted her car?  

 

Horsepower.

[legaleagle53]

Small quibble;

How was Cruella bespelling Maleficent if she only had power over small animals? If she could control larger creatures, why didn't she control humans?

 

Most people don't think of humans as animals.  It's why we don't keep them as pets.

[Dianthus]

legaleagle53, on 29 Apr 2015 - 3:55 PM, said:

Most people don't think of humans as animals.  It's why we don't keep them as pets.

We don't keep dolphins or elephants as pets either, but we still think of them as animals. Back in the day, slave owners thought of their slaves as chattel, and treated them accordingly. Those in the White Power movement still view people of color as inferior, even though it's total BS.

We're not vegetable or mineral, we're animals.

Edited April 30, 2015 by Dianthus

[KingOfHearts]

 

We're not vegetable or mineral, we're animals.

I'm sure it bends to whatever the Author categorized as an animal. Intent seems to be a major contributor to what the writing actually manipulates.

Edited May 20, 2015 by KingOfHearts

[KingOfHearts]

I realized just yesterday during my grand rewatch that this episode has the same plot as 1x11.

 

A man with a tedious job meets a woman and falls in love with her, discovering there's more to life than what he has known. The woman claims to be trapped by their evil homeowner, gaining the sympathy of the man who helps her escape by any means necessary. By his assistance, the homeowner is murdered by two animals. The man then realizes the woman was manipulating him this whole time. She never loved him and was only using him to kill the person in their way. The man is then disillusioned and uses magic to affect the rest of the woman's life.

 

Meanwhile in the present, Emma goes on a goose chase to stop the woman from wrecking havoc. Succeeding, however, proves to have lukewarm results.

Edited November 25, 2015 by KingOfHearts

[HoodlumSheep]

Dang. Never thought about that. I liked this episode better than 1x11 though. Probably had to do with the characters involved.

[KingOfHearts]

This episode is probably the most memorable from 4B. There's definitely some stupid parts, like Emma becoming a murderer™ and the "timeless story realms" crap. However, I'd be lying if I said this wasn't one of my favorite centrics from the show. The writers absolutely nailed Cruella DeVil despite making drastic changes to her backstory. They played with our expectations, portraying her as a victim, only to turn it around and show her to be an unapologetic sociopath. She's bad. She's irredeemable. She's psychotic, and it's actually refreshing to see a character like her treated for what she is. However, all that being said, it all falls apart when Emma kills her to defend her child and that's considered a bad thing. Cruella wants to murder everyone, even if she can't, yet her death was wrongful? That's such a 180 from the story A&E were spinning with her flashbacks. 

I'm kind of glad Cruella died in this episode. Even though I find her ridiculously entertaining, her schtick would've gotten old real fast. Sometimes less is more.

Spoiler

Yeah, she comes back in 5B, but that was fine. She didn't take over the show or anything.

Edited March 15, 2019 by KingOfHearts

[Shanna Marie]

I don't think I've rewatched this one since the first airing, since the ending made me so furious that I was on the verge of quitting the show entirely.

I think the Cruella backstory twist is even more fun on the second viewing, knowing what's really going on and reading the double meanings to what's going on. See, they were capable of occasionally setting up a good twist that's satisfying and that works when you look at it again after knowing the twist.

I believe we had two "did a number on you" incidents in one episode. Cruella's mother says it to Isaac, and I think Regina says it to Belle.

The ending still enrages me, as does all the fear about Emma going dark. None of the stuff about the potential darkness ever made sense, going back to the Chernabog. If Emma had all the darkness sucked out of her, then she shouldn't have potential to go dark, and her going dark shouldn't have been a worry. This part of the story would have been far more effective without the stupid eggbaby plot.

Spoiler

Especially since it ends up coming to nothing and means nothing, and all the other plot threads related to it are just dropped.

If we're supposed to worry about Emma going dark, then maybe her having had all her native darkness removed before birth wasn't the way to go. There are plenty of other things that could have caused her to be angry at her parents -- and isn't her being angry about what her parents did to the eggbaby rather than grateful that it worked out for her a sign that she isn't dark? She doesn't buy the justification, while someone who was dark might have.

I was skimming through the posts from when the episode originally aired, and one thought that came up was that if Rumple wanted to turn Emma dark, he should have killed Hook, or at least arranged his death. The #1 way for people to go dark on this show is to have a loved one killed, and then they go off the deep end wanting revenge. That's a win-win for Rumple. He gets rid of an enemy and he gets to turn Emma dark. For bonus points, engineer an excuse for David to get mad at Hook and he ends up killing him, so Emma can be furious at her father. David has his moments of utterly hating Hook every so often and thinking he's a villain, so it wouldn't be a huge stretch. David would probably buy any suggestion that Hook was up to something and might jump in to defend Emma. Not that I'd have been totally keen on killing Hook, but if you're looking what Rumple wants and what would be effective for getting it, the surest plan with lots of bonuses would be killing Hook.

The whole "realms of story" thing and the Author really undermines the original point of the series. In season one, they even had a voiceover at the beginning of the episodes about how the stories are real, that they're real people living real lives, and therefore they're different from what we know. But now they're saying they live in these artificial timeless pocket universes, and there's a person who can manipulate their lives with his magic pen.

I maintain my stance that this has been the worst arc of the series run.

[Camera One]

2 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

If we're supposed to worry about Emma going dark, then maybe her having had all her native darkness removed before birth wasn't the way to go.

Were we supposed to be worried because her parents didn't raise her, so the potential for darkness was still there?  Rumple's big plan to turn Emma "dark" seemed to come out of nowhere.  

[KAOS Agent]

This was the episode that crushed my interest in the show. Prior to this I was still anticipating each episode and excited on Sundays even as the stories kept getting worse and worse. Once I read the post-episode comments from the showrunners about how Emma had "crossed a line" and a bunch of other nonsense, I never had that feeling of anticipation again. Had Regina killed Cruella to protect Henry, she would have been heralded as a hero. Self-defense and protection of innocents does not make you evil, but this show consistently makes the "heroes" play by an entirely different set of rules than the others. You must stand by and let villains kill you or others because defending yourself/others is the easy path. By this shows morals, killing Stalin to stop him from murdering millions would be worse than standing by and doing nothing. I hate everything about this. 

[andromeda331]

1 hour ago, KAOS Agent said:

This was the episode that crushed my interest in the show. Prior to this I was still anticipating each episode and excited on Sundays even as the stories kept getting worse and worse. Once I read the post-episode comments from the showrunners about how Emma had "crossed a line" and a bunch of other nonsense, I never had that feeling of anticipation again. Had Regina killed Cruella to protect Henry, she would have been heralded as a hero. Self-defense and protection of innocents does not make you evil, but this show consistently makes the "heroes" play by an entirely different set of rules than the others. You must stand by and let villains kill you or others because defending yourself/others is the easy path. By this shows morals, killing Stalin to stop him from murdering millions would be worse than standing by and doing nothing. I hate everything about this. 

Yes, that's exactly what would have happened. Regina would have been praised to the moon and back for protecting Henry. But because Emma did it for some reason its wrong. I loved this episode up until the end. I hated each one of 4B until this one. It was nice to see Cruella didn't have some sob story. She was a psychopath, she was happy to be a psychopath and treated like one. Except for the two many parts. Regina basically the same thing except always gets treated differently and then Emma killing Cruella who was threatening her son and treated like she did something wrong. You know exactly what happened back in season two when Snow killed Cora and got the exact same treatment. That it came after a episode where Rumple was dying entirely his own fault but for some reason still deserved to be saved rather then left to die. I knew I was going to hate every episode that followed and I was right.

[KingOfHearts]

7 hours ago, KAOS Agent said:

Had Regina killed Cruella to protect Henry, she would have been heralded as a hero.

I both agree and disagree with this because...

Spoiler

In S6, Regina killed Monte Cristo in order to save Snowing, and it was treated as a bad thing, because it supposedly meant her heart was going dark again. Of course, the difference is that the Charmings assured her it was no big deal. Typical. Regina felt really guilty about it, but only because she was afraid of becoming the Evil Queen again - not because someone died. And also, the Count was an innocent, not a serial killer like Cruella or Cora. I get the two situations are different, but it's the third time this show said killing in self-defense was wrong. (But when Regina did it, it was mostly just an oopsie.) If Regina had killed Cruella to save Henry, I still think Snow would be like "omg I can't believe you did that, Regina!" but it would just be a slap on the wrist.

Edited March 16, 2019 by KingOfHearts

[Shanna Marie]

10 hours ago, Camera One said:

Were we supposed to be worried because her parents didn't raise her, so the potential for darkness was still there? 

I don't know if we were supposed to be, but I figured that since we've seen three and a half seasons of Emma being good, and that comes after what had to be some of her lowest points when her parents weren't raising her, then I don't think that's a factor anymore. She's an adult, and she's already more or less turned out the way she's going to be. A big turning point might change her, depending on how she reacts to it, but I don't think her reaction would come down to how she was raised. She turned out good in spite of growing up the way she did, and the worst she did as a feral teen was steal to survive, without being anything that would be considered "dark." Whatever direction she goes at this point in her life is on her, or on whatever might have been done to her to alter her fundamental nature.

And that's why the whole fetal darkectomy thing is so dumb. It was utterly pointless and detracted from the story rather than adding to it. They're not even clear about the effect it had. Did Isaac make the Apprentice lie to the Charmings about the whole procedure, so it didn't really change anything? If she still has the greatest potential for darkness, then it doesn't seem like there was any point to it, unless her potential didn't change even as she lost some of the capacity. But if she has a lower-than-normal level of innate darkness, then she should be harder to turn dark, which might fit with her turning out good in spite of her background, but then that would mean there's less of a risk of Rumple being able to manipulate her into turning dark. I really hate the idea that she managed to turn out okay in spite of what she's gone through because she was altered in the womb, and I also hate that everyone's acting like this is a serious threat now.

I know I should probably be siding with Emma against her parents on this because what they did was pretty awful and indicates that they had no faith in her, but the whole thing is just so ridiculous that I can't take it seriously, and therefore I found myself wanting Emma to just shut up about it. I think to some extent I'm just tired of the Hollywood take on hypocrisy. Not that I think hypocrisy is a good thing, but it seems like on TV and in movies hypocrisy is the Ultimate Evil, like the absolute worst thing you can do is try to be good and fail. It's better to be outright evil and just murder your way across the country because at least you're honest. But if you try to be good and fall the least bit short of the mark but still act like you're good, you're the worst evil ever. That seemed to be what Emma was saying, that her parents' lie about this one thing while claiming to be heroes was worse than all the evil that Hook and Regina did, which was okay because at least they were honest about it. Though I disagree about Regina being honest about it, given that this whole storyline is happening because Regina has decided she's a hero and deserves a happy ending, even if it takes breaking all the rules of the universe for her to get it. If Regina were honest about what she was, she'd say she doesn't deserve a happy ending, especially one that takes away the happy ending of a good person who was one of her victims, and she'd have to work to atone to maybe one day merit her own happy ending.

I hate this arc so much.

There's a bit of a paradox in this episode. The twist works because we're expecting one of those villain sob stories of the "villains aren't born, they're made" variety, so it's a shock when it turns out that Cruella really has been a villain all along and isn't the victim. But then that means they're aware of what they're doing with all their villain sob stories -- and they seem to be really proud of all their "gray" villains and their sympathy for the villains that means their stories are "complex." So, does that mean they think this episode is weak because it's more black-and-white? But then if Cruella is a villain through and through without a tragic past and sob story that means she's really a victim, then why is it so bad that she gets killed while holding a child hostage? Or does she become a victim because she loses the ability to murder? It's all a jumble. If we're supposed to be shocked and horrified that Emma killed Cruella, then it seems like a weird time to break their usual pattern and show that Cruella was born evil and is a flat-out psychopath who's only not murdering all the time because she's magically prohibited to do so. We have a psychopath whose happy ending is regaining the ability to kill, and Emma is on the path to darkness because she killed her while trying to save her son, not knowing that Cruella actually couldn't kill him and was making empty threats.

[Camera One]

1 hour ago, Shanna Marie said:

I don't know if we were supposed to be, but I figured that since we've seen three and a half seasons of Emma being good, and that comes after what had to be some of her lowest points when her parents weren't raising her, then I don't think that's a factor anymore.

That's exactly why I didn't buy it at all.  It's one of those super obvious "you know the ending" plot points, just like we knew The Author wasn't the solution to Regina's happy ending.  

Spoiler

And then at the end of the season, the cliffhanger hinged on whether Emma's Dark One will be the worst ever given her potential for evil.  

[Camera One]

1 hour ago, Shanna Marie said:

 But then if Cruella is a villain through and through without a tragic past and sob story that means she's really a victim, then why is it so bad that she gets killed while holding a child hostage? Or does she become a victim because she loses the ability to murder? It's all a jumble.

It is a huge contradiction as usual but I really think they believe all sides of it, believing that's "complexity".  Maybe we were supposed to feel sorry for Cruella because she was unarmed and it wasn't a fair fight even though it seemed more like an accident and Emma had no idea Cruella couldn't kill.  

[KingOfHearts]

12 minutes ago, Camera One said:

Maybe we were supposed to feel sorry for Cruella because she was unarmed and it wasn't a fair fight even though it seemed more like an accident and Emma had no idea Cruella couldn't kill.  

Cruella was dumb for standing by a steep cliff like that, but even dumber for not considering Emma might call her bluff. 

Edited March 16, 2019 by KingOfHearts

[tennisgurl]

What a weird episode this was. There is a lot that I love about it, and a lot that REALLY pisses me off. Its a real mixed bag.

I love Cruella, and I love the twist, that instead of doing the billionth villain sob story, she is just a monster and psychopath who needs to be stopped. I do appreciate some self aware writing from this show, and the twist on the Cruella backstory. Its really pretty dark, not only did she kill her own father, apparently just for fun, but she fed her mom to her moms own dogs, and then made her coat out of them! And her happy ending is to kill more people! Thats awesomely fucked up. Even the name of the episode is clever in a way that most episode titles in this show arent. Its not only an obvious pun, but its a clue as to what the twist is, as the song its clearly punning, Sympathy for the Devil, is about the Devil asking for understanding and kindness all the while he gleefully brags about being involved in numerous atrocities throughout history. And I just love being in a world that isnt a freaking forest for once! I mean, the whole "realm of story" thing just gives me a headache, but thats a rant for another day...

However, I hate the ending so much. As always, everyone acts like killing a person, even someone about to, as far as they knew, murder their child, is evil. Who cares if she couldn't actually have killed him, she could have seriously hurt him without killing him, and Emma didnt know about the no killing thing! Its all so stupid and makes zero sense, and its just disturbing to me. I mean, we`ve established that Cruella is a bad seed serial killer, but killing her in defense of another is bad because...she cant kill anyone? Even though Emma had every reason to believe that she would?

And dont you love how the show makes Emma look like she is sliding down the path towards evil for killing a psychopath who was threatening her son, while Regina can rip out Bells heart, control her like a puppet and force her to kiss her ex husband she would certainly not want to kiss on her own, and threaten to kill her all so she can run off to save her boyfriend, and its all just fine and her being bold and audacious or whatever. Hypocrisy much? I mean, I guess its consistent at least that Regina gives zero fucks about violating peoples consent.

I just dont know how to even feel about the stupid egg plot. How in control of this are Snow and Charming anyway, if the Author made them egg nap in the first place? I mean, its not an ethical question if the people involved had no choice in what they did that was morally questionable. And I hate this idea that bad guys can just do whatever they want and kill tons of people with no consequences, and then say a half assed sorry and its all cool, but if a good person makes a mistake, then they're the freaking anti Christ. 

[Camera One]

50 minutes ago, tennisgurl said:

How in control of this are Snow and Charming anyway, if the Author made them egg nap in the first place? 

The Writers confirmed that Snow and Charming made the decision and were culpable/guilty.  But I guess The Apprentice wasn't culpable since he was forced by Isaac.

[KAOS Agent]

The writers can talk all they want on Twitter or in post-episode interviews about how they saw the incident, but this was not at all clear onscreen. They needed to be explicit about how the whole thing worked because as far as I can tell, the Author writes the story and it happens. It doesn't make sense that he could write a story that was happening in front of him and only control one guy's actions during the story. 

[andromeda331]

6 hours ago, tennisgurl said:

What a weird episode this was. There is a lot that I love about it, and a lot that REALLY pisses me off. Its a real mixed bag.

I love Cruella, and I love the twist, that instead of doing the billionth villain sob story, she is just a monster and psychopath who needs to be stopped. I do appreciate some self aware writing from this show, and the twist on the Cruella backstory. Its really pretty dark, not only did she kill her own father, apparently just for fun, but she fed her mom to her moms own dogs, and then made her coat out of them! And her happy ending is to kill more people! Thats awesomely fucked up. Even the name of the episode is clever in a way that most episode titles in this show arent. Its not only an obvious pun, but its a clue as to what the twist is, as the song its clearly punning, Sympathy for the Devil, is about the Devil asking for understanding and kindness all the while he gleefully brags about being involved in numerous atrocities throughout history. And I just love being in a world that isnt a freaking forest for once! I mean, the whole "realm of story" thing just gives me a headache, but thats a rant for another day...

However, I hate the ending so much. As always, everyone acts like killing a person, even someone about to, as far as they knew, murder their child, is evil. Who cares if she couldn't actually have killed him, she could have seriously hurt him without killing him, and Emma didnt know about the no killing thing! Its all so stupid and makes zero sense, and its just disturbing to me. I mean, we`ve established that Cruella is a bad seed serial killer, but killing her in defense of another is bad because...she cant kill anyone? Even though Emma had every reason to believe that she would?

And dont you love how the show makes Emma look like she is sliding down the path towards evil for killing a psychopath who was threatening her son, while Regina can rip out Bells heart, control her like a puppet and force her to kiss her ex husband she would certainly not want to kiss on her own, and threaten to kill her all so she can run off to save her boyfriend, and its all just fine and her being bold and audacious or whatever. Hypocrisy much? I mean, I guess its consistent at least that Regina gives zero fucks about violating peoples consent.

I just dont know how to even feel about the stupid egg plot. How in control of this are Snow and Charming anyway, if the Author made them egg nap in the first place? I mean, its not an ethical question if the people involved had no choice in what they did that was morally questionable. And I hate this idea that bad guys can just do whatever they want and kill tons of people with no consequences, and then say a half assed sorry and its all cool, but if a good person makes a mistake, then they're the freaking anti Christ. 

I love and hate the episode for the same reasons. I love that we finally have a villain who has no sob story, she murders and is happy about it. She's pretty evil for killing her parents and feeding her mother to her mother's dogs. It was nice to see a land that wasn't a forest. But I hate so much that killing someone for threatening to kill your son it is wrong. That's bull. Someone threatening to kill your child you have the right to kill that person and save your son. Its the same crap they pulled with Cora. And with all the villains who murder hundreds if not thousands of people but that's no big deal. They can slaughter villages and its no big deal. But a good person kills someone for the RIGHT REASONS is treated like their even worse then the villians. That's complete bull.

I don't like the eggnapping. First it makes no sense for Charming and Snow, then they go through all of it for a maybe. Their baby may or may not be evil. Wow its almost like that's what it is for everyone. I know Snow is obsessed with being good but I can't see her doing anything like that. If anything she'd planning on how to raise her kid the same way her parents raised her. Four they once again try to claim Emma had a good life but this time at the expense of Lily. Lily who actually ended up with a family that loved her and adoptive/foster father that came looking for her. Compared to Emma who got sent back at three, in and out of bad foster homes, Ingrid who was good to her but only wanted her for her powers and stole her memories, August who bailed on her, the one foster family she got and was happy with that Lily ruined for, August who returned and help convince Neal to bail and frame Emma for his crime. Emma did not have a good childhood! She had a shitty one!

And the very last reason why I hate this arc. Even if we have to buy it happened which is out of character for Charming and Snow and all that stuff, REGINA still sent children to their deaths, she murdered children along with everyone else in the villages she slaughtered, she was going to kill Baby Emma but couldn't only because Charming managed to get Emma to the wardrobe before she could kill her, she ripped children from their parents (Grace from Jefferson; Hansel and Gretel from their father) and got away with all of it. But somehow the Charmings are worse.  

Edited March 22, 2019 by andromeda331

[Shanna Marie]

12 hours ago, Camera One said:

The Writers confirmed that Snow and Charming made the decision and were culpable/guilty.  But I guess The Apprentice wasn't culpable since he was forced by Isaac.

As I recall, in the season finale, there's a bit where

Spoiler

Isaac pretty much says that he made the Charmings do it because he wanted to take the heroes down a peg. So they can't seem to keep it consistent between what they show and what they say. Or maybe the backlash was so great that they decided to handwave it away in the finale.

11 hours ago, KAOS Agent said:

It doesn't make sense that he could write a story that was happening in front of him and only control one guy's actions during the story. 

And if Isaac makes the Apprentice tell them that they must do this thing (and keeps him from telling them all the real ramifications), then how culpable are they for agreeing to it? The way it was presented to them, it was like "you must do this or your child will end up evil, and it's not like it's going to do any real harm," and only afterward were they told that it probably wouldn't do any good and it did do real harm. True, it still wasn't a great thing to do and was a dumb decision, but they were acting based on incorrect or incomplete information, and Isaac set them up by forcing the Apprentice to give them the incorrect and incomplete info.

6 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

REGINA still sent children to their deaths, she murdered children along with everyone else in the villages she slaughtered, she was going to kill Baby Emma but couldn't only because Charming managed to get Emma to the wardrobe before she could kill her, she ripped children from their parents (Grace from Jefferson; Hansel and Gretel from their father) and got away with all of it. But somehow the Charmings are worse.  

And we come back to the "hypocrisy is worse than murder" issue. Even if Emma doesn't know about all the children Regina sent to their deaths, she did know that Regina was trying to send Hansel and Gretel into a foster home outside the city (that she now knows might have killed them), and she knows that Regina deliberately separated Jefferson from his daughter. It's not better that Regina did far worse while being openly evil while the Charmings were trying to be good and didn't mention this one thing they did.

Not that this fits into what they've shown us before. Wouldn't the Charmings have been constantly watching Emma for signs of darkness? Wouldn't they have worried each time she got angry or made a questionable decision? Yeah, Snow was iffy on some of the things in Neverland, but not on the level of "we were warned when you were an embryo that you had the potential to be a great villain."

[Camera One]

41 minutes ago, Shanna Marie said:

Not that this fits into what they've shown us before. Wouldn't the Charmings have been constantly watching Emma for signs of darkness? Wouldn't they have worried each time she got angry or made a questionable decision? Yeah, Snow was iffy on some of the things in Neverland, but not on the level of "we were warned when you were an embryo that you had the potential to be a great villain."

Exactly. 

Spoiler

In Season 6, they would definitely have talked about this issue when they were in that retcon where they could have joined Young Emma early.  And Season 6 was written AFTER Season 4.

I think you are all undermining and failing to appreciate A&E's ability to write a complex story with grey characters.  The whole point of this arc is "heroes and villains", whereby we see that these labels are unfair.  Snowing cruelly separated a mother from her daughter and Emma pushed a defenseless woman to her death.  Full stop.  If Emma had jazzed hands the opposite direction, she could have frozen Cruella and separated Henry away from her.  If Snowing hadn't been prejudiced against "villains", they could have embraced their child whether or not she became a female version of Chucky.  Snowing and Emma are absolutely worse than "villains" like Regina and Rumple, who represent us, the people. 

Another clever irony in this arc is that Cruella de Vil is often accused of animal cruelty.  But on this show, Cruella has a special kinship with animals and the characters most guilty of animal cruelty in 4B, due to their despicable treatment of a newborn baby dragon, are Snowing.  The Queens of Darkness represent diversity and embrace of nature with an Animal Whisperer teaming up with a Half Dragon and a Half Fish allying with someone seen by society to be ugly (the "Crocodile").

Edited March 22, 2019 by Camera One

[KAOS Agent]

12 hours ago, Camera One said:

the characters most guilty of animal cruelty in 4B, due to their despicable treatment of a newborn baby dragon, are Snowing.

Pretty sure Regina cursed a horse, who presumably doesn't have True Love with anyone and so can't be awakened, in a fit of pique early in 4B. The baby dragon at least had some chance of surviving and living life. The poor horse is effectively dead.