A Thread for All Seasons: This Story Is Over, But Still Goes On.

[KAOS Agent]

It occurred to me while thinking of the events of "Broken" that with the exception of Hook, every other main character who did something that significantly negatively affected Emma's life is given a pass and/or she is expected to believe that it's okay that she suffered because screwing her over was understandable and justified.

Snow & David were originally shown having no choice in putting Emma in the wardrobe alone. Regina was out to murder her and this was her only chance. That worked. Emma's response in "Broken" actually allowed her to have feelings about this even if she understood why it happened. However, later we see them turning down Maleficent's help to stop the curse because they are too good for that or something. There may have been other options to the wardrobe thing, but they chose to not investigate them. And of course, there was the awful moment where they discussed sacrificing Emma's happiness and slammed the door on their little girl. Emma's response after being told about this moment was that it was okay. She had zero reaction or upset about it. To me, Emma is psychologically damaged enough by S6 to believe that she really didn't deserve better and everyone else is more important than her.

Neal decides to set Emma up for the watch theft and take off. The show claims he had no choice. Okay, let's assume he needed to break up with her for the curse to break. It makes no sense but we'll go with it. In what world would one go with the idea that there weren't multiple other ways to do this other than to set her up to take the fall for him. Let's completely damage any ability this young woman has to form a loving relationship in the future. He knew her history. He had to know the damage this would cause. Neal is an asshole to me not because he left Emma, but because he did it in the most damaging way possible. Why not run off to Canada with the money and not meet her? Why must she go to jail for his crime? Why not man up and turn himself in while giving Emma a way to move on with her life? Or maybe he could set up a life with her in Tallahassee and then take off or make her believe he was cheating or something to get her to dump him? No choice is bullshit. It disgusts me that Emma was spouting this crap. Again, it just shows how little she thinks of herself that she believes this horrific treatment was necessary and understandable.

Regina screws her over again and again and again. She treats her like shit while Emma practically begs for her friendship. She even thanks her for destroying her childhood because it made her better than her Wishworld persona. It's awful. She's just so damaged to want Regina in her life especially when that person continues to whine that her life is just so much harder than anyone else.

Rumpel is more marginal here because it is generally acknowledged that he's an asshole and Emma never feels a need to be nice to him. Still, there's an awful lot that he's excused for without having anyone call him on it. Even ignoring his awfulness in S5, he attempted to murder Henry. Does no one have an issue with that? Emma & Hook are expected to just let it go and accept him into their lives, which makes zero sense.

[profdanglais]

4 hours ago, KAOS Agent said:

Rumpel is more marginal here because it is generally acknowledged that he's an asshole and Emma never feels a need to be nice to him.

I wish I could like this entire post a million times because every word is so, so true. But to this last bit I'd add that it's always annoyed me the attitude that Emma et al took to Hook and Rumpel in S2. Hook was cast as the worstest villain ever because he was after revenge, but dude had his girlfriend murdered in front of him and had literally no recourse available except to pursue the murderer himself. It's not like there was any legitimate justice system he could have turned to. Was he just supposed to shrug and say "Eh, whatevs, there's more where she came from" and go on his merry way? Why was everyone on Rumpel's side? The fact that they just left Hook in a closet then took his ship to save Rumpel's life annoys me more the more I think about it. The least they could have done is take him along. 

Edited August 20, 2018 by profdanglais

[Rumsy4]

1 hour ago, profdanglais said:

Why was everyone on Rumpel's side?

Misogyny of the writers. They obliterated Milah's soul.

[Shanna Marie]

1 hour ago, Rumsy4 said:

2 hours ago, profdanglais said:

Why was everyone on Rumpel's side?

Misogyny of the writers. They obliterated Milah's soul.

Also, regular character immunity. Most of this show would have gone entirely differently if we pretend it's not a TV show and therefore doesn't deal with casting realities. They wanted to keep Regina and Rumple around, so they get to stay around, regardless of how anyone would actually react to them if they were real people. Other (usually lesser) villains get defeated and/or killed and leave because they're only guest players. Characters who should be part of the fabric of the community and friends with the regulars are out of the picture because they're only guest players and/or the actors get other jobs and aren't available and/or there isn't the budget to hire a big recurring cast. Characters who really have no reason to hang around with the main characters are crammed in because they're regulars.

Of course, every TV series has to deal with this, but it seems more transparent here because it's just so ridiculous the lengths they went to in order to keep certain characters around, in spite of writing them as horrible people no one would cross the street to help -- where they'd do more good for everyone by letting the horrible person die and actually cause great harm to innocents by saving the horrible person.

During the worst of the Hook vs. Rumple stuff in season 2, Rumple was the regular character and Hook was the outsider. So Rumple got the sad-faced victim status and Hook was the villain. It changed somewhat in season 4, where Hook was the victim and Rumple the villain, but because Rumple was still a regular, they were allowed to be mad at him for the length of an arc, but then they had to save him.

[profdanglais]

3 hours ago, Rumsy4 said:

Misogyny of the writers. They obliterated Milah's soul.

Yep, this is another thing that I really hate. Not that Milah would ever win any Wife and Mother awards, but she is overly vilified both in the show and in the fandom, and I think a lot of that does stem from misogyny. Rumpel made loads of bad parenting decisions, including letting his adolescent son go through a portal to who knows where all alone, but he's still treated as forgivable. I'm a Milah apologist, I think she had nothing but bad options and she took the one that was best for her, and the show excessively punished her and by extension Hook, for that decision. 

[Camera One]

I was listening to this podcast from "Welcome to Storybrooke" (see link above).  

If you listen around 8:00, the interviewer goes, "I don't see how Snow is fully to blame for the death of Cora, though, because it was really Mr. Gold..."  A&E's response pretty much explains their reasoning for that whole debacle.

Well, I still think the town should have thrown a parade for Snow for what she did.

Edited August 20, 2018 by Camera One

[companionenvy]

11 hours ago, profdanglais said:

I wish I could like this entire post a million times because every word is so, so true. But to this last bit I'd add that it's always annoyed me the attitude that Emma et al took to Hook and Rumpel in S2. Hook was cast as the worstest villain ever because he was after revenge, but dude had his girlfriend murdered in front of him and had literally no recourse available except to pursue the murderer himself. It's not like there was any legitimate justice system he could have turned to. Was he just supposed to shrug and say "Eh, whatevs, there's more where she came from" and go on his merry way? Why was everyone on Rumpel's side? The fact that they just left Hook in a closet then took his ship to save Rumpel's life annoys me more the more I think about it. The least they could have done is take him along. 

I don't remember all of the details - did Emma know the whole history of what Rumple had done to Hook and Milah at that point? Or even the vague outline? 

In any case, if my memory of the situation at that point is at all accurate, I can kind of go with it  because Hook - though fully justified in his desire for revenge against Rumple -- was pretty clearly an antagonist at this point in the story, and didn't deserve a lot of trust or consideration. Whereas Gold, while obviously shady as hell, had actually been kind of on Emma's side at certain points, and was at that moment at maybe his most sympathetic in his desire to reunite with his son. 

So I can see how, if you're not looking at it from Hook's perspective, Hook's the one being murderous and causing the problem here, so he's the one who gets locked up and abandoned. They weren't leaving him to die; I'm sure they all figured he'd find his way out of the situation. A little cold, yeah, but in many ways a far more logical response to an enemy than we often get on this show, i.e. Robin saving Rumple in S4, by which time that's an absolutely idiotic decision.

I do agree that Milah really gets shafted by the show. Even if Bae didn't believe Hook when he first told him that Rumple had killed his mother, by the time he meets his father again as Neal he has to have accepted that Hook was telling the truth. Yet...it doesn't seem to bother him. Nor does it seem to bother Belle that Rumple killed his first wife. And no one even finds out that Rumple worse than killed Milah a second time, which is treated as a blip on the radar by the narrative. That actually bothers me way more than no one finding out for certain that Regina killed Graham. It is, for me, one of the final nails on the coffin for a satisfying Rumple redemption arc. If, at a point by which he supposedly has grown and changed somewhat, he can't at minimum acknowledge that he was wrong to straight-up murder his wife for leaving him - let alone avoid doing something similar again - there's simply no going back from that.

[Rumsy4]

Rumple was a serial domestic abuser who went to heaven for it because he made a good sad-face. 

5 hours ago, Camera One said:

If you listen around 8:00, the interviewer goes, "I don't see how Snow is fully to blame for the death of Cora, though, because it was really Mr. Gold..."  A&E's response pretty much explains their reasoning for that whole debacle.

"Gagging noises"

[profdanglais]

28 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

I don't remember all of the details - did Emma know the whole history of what Rumple had done to Hook and Milah at that point? Or even the vague outline? 

Maybe not all the details, but by the time they get to NYC Hook had already shot Belle and got hit by the car, and he mentioned more than once in those exchanges with Emma and at the hospital that Rumpel killed Milah. Plus she'd figured it out on the beanstalk. Hook told Belle too but of course she didn't believe him. 

You make a good point about Hook being a clear antagonist and Rumpel seeming more grey at that point, but for someone who'd already stood up against people wanting to kill the freaking Evil Queen, Emma was pretty OOC okay with just leaving Hook to who even knows what fate. I feel like she'd have wanted to keep an eye on him. 

[Shanna Marie]

6 hours ago, profdanglais said:

Not that Milah would ever win any Wife and Mother awards, but she is overly vilified both in the show and in the fandom, and I think a lot of that does stem from misogyny. Rumpel made loads of bad parenting decisions, including letting his adolescent son go through a portal to who knows where all alone, but he's still treated as forgivable. I'm a Milah apologist, I think she had nothing but bad options and she took the one that was best for her, and the show excessively punished her and by extension Hook, for that decision. 

I don't care how bad a wife and mother she was, she didn't deserve to be murdered for it. The only justification for killing her would have been self-defense, and that hardly applies, given that Rumple was immortal and had vast magical powers at the time he killed her. I wouldn't even consider it a crime of passion. It wasn't as though he lashed out with a knife and killed her before he realized what he was doing. He ripped out her heart, then held it before crushing it. It was a two-step process, so even if he'd ripped the heart in a fit of anger, he didn't have to crush it.

27 minutes ago, profdanglais said:

You make a good point about Hook being a clear antagonist and Rumpel seeming more grey at that point, but for someone who'd already stood up against people wanting to kill the freaking Evil Queen, Emma was pretty OOC okay with just leaving Hook to who even knows what fate. I feel like she'd have wanted to keep an eye on him. 

I would think that leaving Captain Hook alone and desperate in New York would have been a bad idea. What would he get up to? What would have been the fallout if his identity and information about Storybrooke had come out if he'd been arrested by the police? What did they expect him to do, alone, without transportation, without local currently, in a strange world? Emma's lucky Tamara got to him because it could have gone far worse.

I still want to know what their plans were before Colin broke his leg. Did he get left behind because of the broken leg? Were they planning on bringing Hook with them before they needed a handy excuse for him being out of the picture?

[companionenvy]

25 minutes ago, Shanna Marie said:

What would have been the fallout if his identity and information about Storybrooke had come out if he'd been arrested by the police?

Well, it apparently didn't cause too much of a problem when Emma had him arrested at the beginning of 3B, but by then he may have been a little bit more equipped to know what not to say.

As for danger to others, Emma probably had him pegged well enough by then to at least figure he wouldn't go on a random murder spree, although that didn't necessarily mean he wouldn't have been willing to kill or otherwise cause havoc in circumstances that stopped well short of what she would have considered justifiable. 

But yeah, it probably would have made more sense to bring him along, all things considered. 

[KingOfHearts]

50 minutes ago, Shanna Marie said:

I wouldn't even consider it a crime of passion. It wasn't as though he lashed out with a knife and killed her before he realized what he was doing. He ripped out her heart, then held it before crushing it. It was a two-step process, so even if he'd ripped the heart in a fit of anger, he didn't have to crush it.

It was calculated. Rumple boarded that boat knowing full well he was going to murder her. Would anyone really expect him to just hash out the deal with no hard feelings?

7 hours ago, Camera One said:

Well, I still think the town should have thrown a parade for Snow for what she did.

This show makes Star Trek: Voyager look ethical by comparison.

Quote

Of course, every TV series has to deal with this, but it seems more transparent here because it's just so ridiculous the lengths they went to in order to keep certain characters around, in spite of writing them as horrible people no one would cross the street to help -- where they'd do more good for everyone by letting the horrible person die and actually cause great harm to innocents by saving the horrible person.

The writers had creative ways of dealing with this but didn't most of the time. They could've kept Regina around by putting her in hiding for most of S2 instead of overdoing her redemption in 2A. By the end of the season, maybe the heroes decide to tolerate her existence for the sake of Henry. Then in 3A, she's forced to work with them intimately. Then in 3B, she'd make some strides by uniting with the Charmings in the Missing Year to keep the kingdom together. (And defeating Zelena would've scored some brownie points too.) 

Edited August 21, 2018 by KingOfHearts

[Shanna Marie]

1 hour ago, KingOfHearts said:

The writers had creative ways of dealing with this but didn't most of the time. They could've kept Regina around by putting her in hiding for most of S2 instead of overdoing her redemption in 2A. By the end of the season, maybe the heroes decide to tolerate her existence for the sake of Henry. Then in 3A, she's forced to work with them intimately. Then in 3B, she'd make some strides by uniting with the Charmings in the Missing Year to keep the kingdom together. (And defeating Zelena would've scored some brownie points too.) 

Although Regina's redemption was fairly well done early in 2A (at least, compared to what came later), there was still some whiplash, with her talking about not being capable of love for so long, but now she's changed. Well, what changed her? We saw no signs of love, even for Henry, in season one until she thought he was dying, so it doesn't seem to have been adopting Henry that made her capable of love. It's a little freaky if what made her capable of love was nearly killing Henry in her quest for vengeance, and it's not like she'd softened in her hatred of those people. She'd still been sneering and trying to kill them, so she didn't realize she was wrong about vengeance. There's the one torch and pitchfork mob, and then they give up and move on and barely seem to have a problem with her afterward.

I mentioned in the episode thread for "Broken" that they seem to have deliberately mirrored the dwarfs' bow to Snow after the curse broke with their bow to Regina at the end of season 6, and that's so annoying on so many levels because she never really did anything to earn being respected as queen (and especially not to be elected queen of the universe).

We may mock Snow's hope speeches, but she did step up and try to lead. We saw her being a leader going back to her childhood. I don't recall ever seeing Regina step up to really serve as a leader. It was Emma who stepped up in 3A to rally everyone into a team. In 3B, it was Snow telling Regina to pull it together so they could present a united front and give everyone hope. Yeah, Regina defeated Zelena, but that wasn't leadership. In 4A, Regina just walked off the job and hid away because she was sad about her new boyfriend going back to his wife. Regina later just walked away from Storybrooke without so much as a farewell to follow Henry around. During the big crisis at the end of season 7, it was Snow rallying everyone to fight. So why the heck would they have voted for Regina to lead anything? I could almost have bought the door stencil thing if Regina had ever acted like a true leader, but all she ever did was hurl power around (literally and metaphorically).

I think I'd have accepted her redemption a lot more if we'd ever seen her hit anything resembling bottom, if her life had ever been diminished in any way because of her crimes. She should have had to hide out on the edge of town, maybe had to take a menial labor job to make ends meet. She shouldn't have got her magic back right away (if at all). The hole in the heart thing should have stuck. And she never should have ever been in charge of anything. Even if she reached the point of being accepted in the community, being mayor or queen should have been out of the question.

[Camera One]

1 hour ago, Shanna Marie said:

I think I'd have accepted her redemption a lot more if we'd ever seen her hit anything resembling bottom, if her life had ever been diminished in any way because of her crimes. 

Hitting rock bottom was when the "mean girls" ignored her and didn't invite her to dinner.

[profdanglais]

7 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

I still want to know what their plans were before Colin broke his leg. Did he get left behind because of the broken leg? Were they planning on bringing Hook with them before they needed a handy excuse for him being out of the picture?

That would be interesting to know, but even with the broken leg, they should have brought Hook along. They could just have mentioned he was locked up somewhere on the ship and then they put him back in jail or something other than leaving him in a closet in NYC. 

[Shanna Marie]

7 hours ago, profdanglais said:

That would be interesting to know, but even with the broken leg, they should have brought Hook along. They could just have mentioned he was locked up somewhere on the ship and then they put him back in jail or something other than leaving him in a closet in NYC. 

On the other hand, the time he spent locked in a closet, imprisoned by Tamara, and riding to Maine in the back of a U-Haul was pretty instrumental in his redemption. That's when he thought he'd succeeded and realized it didn't make any difference, so revenge had been a waste of his life. That was his rock bottom that led to his turnaround. Would he have had the same effect in the hold of his ship? Unless he was knocked out long enough to not be aware that Rumple was still alive (which is getting into serious head injury territory), he probably wouldn't have believed he'd succeeded and would have known Rumple was still alive and they were getting him back to Storybrooke, where magic would be a factor, and then he'd have been in Storybrooke when Rumple was healed and Cora was killed, so he might have been aware of what was going on. It wouldn't have been quite like him spending days believing he'd won and being forced to think about that, only to learn that he'd failed.

11 hours ago, Camera One said:

Hitting rock bottom was when the "mean girls" ignored her and didn't invite her to dinner.

That was probably the worst thing that happened to her (aside from Greg's torture of her). But does it count as rock bottom if she's not realizing that it's all her fault? If she's thinking of them as mean girls unjustly leaving her out after she tormented them and tried to kill them, it's not rock bottom.

Incidentally, the Greg torture of Regina is another one of those cases where the show skews your sympathies. Granted, torture is nasty, but Greg was clearly the victim. She tried to hold him prisoner, killed his father when she didn't have to, pretty much ruined his life by orphaning him, and lied to him about what happened to his father. She deserved some consequences for that. But she's shown as the victim and he's the villain. Really, it's unrealistic that in that town he didn't get at least a few allies among the locals.

[Rumsy4]

And Snow got to experience the torture too, on top of it. Man, the writers really turned on a dime about Snow White in Season 2.

[KingOfHearts]

1 hour ago, Rumsy4 said:

And Snow got to experience the torture too, on top of it. Man, the writers really turned on a dime about Snow White in Season 2.

Putting Snow White in a more negative position is "surprising", "edgy", and "progressive".

[Camera One]

1 hour ago, Rumsy4 said:

And Snow got to experience the torture too, on top of it. Man, the writers really turned on a dime about Snow White in Season 2.

That was so insulting.  It was equating the immorality of Snow killing Cora to Regina killing Owen's father.  In that podcast above, Eddy said that Snow was fully culpable for killing Cora and became more like Regina than she had ever been because she was emotionally manipulative instead of telling Regina the truth that the heart had been poisoned, so Snow deserved the punishment, I guess.  

[companionenvy]

2 hours ago, Camera One said:

That was so insulting.  It was equating the immorality of Snow killing Cora to Regina killing Owen's father.  In that podcast above, Eddy said that Snow was fully culpable for killing Cora and became more like Regina than she had ever been because she was emotionally manipulative instead of telling Regina the truth that the heart had been poisoned, so Snow deserved the punishment, I guess.  

How do these people have no damn sense of proportion? Snow can do something questionable without making her meaningfully similar to Regina in any way, shape or form. I mean, seriously:

Person A: Once, I lied to my sister and said that there was no more chocolate cake left so that I didn't have to share it with her.

Person B: Once, my sister lied to avoid sharing with me, so I threw acid in her face, leaving her permanently disfigured.

A&E: See! We all have darkness in our hearts. 

As for emotionally manipulative, how about holier-than-thou, Truest Believer Henry a) getting access to Regina's vault by pretending he wants to see her for lunch and standing her up and b) playing off of Rumple's grief over the very recent death of his son - Henry's own father -- in order to further his research into the identity of the Author?

[Shanna Marie]

2 hours ago, Camera One said:

In that podcast above, Eddy said that Snow was fully culpable for killing Cora and became more like Regina than she had ever been because she was emotionally manipulative instead of telling Regina the truth that the heart had been poisoned, so Snow deserved the punishment, I guess.  

Considering that Regina had just learned that her mother had rigged everything, starting with murdering Snow's mother to clear the way for Regina, and Regina had watched Cora murder an innocent woman, in spite of Snow caving to her demands, and Regina still sided with her, I doubt that telling Regina the truth would have done any good at all. She'd have sided with her Dark One mother, and the town would have been doomed.

2 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

How do these people have no damn sense of proportion? Snow can do something questionable without making her meaningfully similar to Regina in any way, shape or form.

Snow got more punishment and criticism for telling a secret as a child and for killing a mass murderer in order to save lives than Regina got for mass murder, torture, multiple other murders, the curse, etc. Snow apologized more and felt worse for killing Cora -- to save lives -- than Regina did for all her crimes. Cora got to go to "heaven" just for working things out with her daughters. Never mind all the murders that she didn't repent of.

[CCTC]

2 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

and Regina still sided with her,

I believe she actually cackled with glee when the nanny flew out the window. 

It was such a strange and pure evil reaction for someone they had receently been trying to redeem and were obviously planning on putting back on the redemption train before not too long.  Even if she had sided with Cora and hated Snow at the moment, anyone with any trace of good buried somewhere inside them should have at least been bothered by Cora's act of killing an innocent - even if it was only subtext with a shot of Regina looking troubled or conflicted as she and Cora vanished in their purple smoke.

[tennisgurl]

I think a lot of the problem is that A&E just give zero fucks about any character who isnt one of their favorites. Especially if its a minor character or a red shirt. They dont care about them, dont consider their lives to be worth anything beside temporary angst for other characters, moving from one plot point to the next, ways to establish villain cred, or for laughs. So when Regina smirks evilly about Snows innocent nanny's murder, they just consider it to be more of Cora being a villain and giving Snow a bit of angst to do between Regina scenes. They dont think about how awful it makes Regina look, because they love Regina, and dont care about the nanny, or even how Snow should feel about her death beyond one episode. Regina is their hero, so when she slaughters innocent people and destroys lives, we arent supposed to care, because they arent Regina. 

[Mitch]

On 8/21/2018 at 5:23 PM, CCTC said:

I believe she actually cackled with glee when the nanny flew out the window. 

It was such a strange and pure evil reaction for someone they had receently been trying to redeem and were obviously planning on putting back on the redemption train before not too long.  Even if she had sided with Cora and hated Snow at the moment, anyone with any trace of good buried somewhere inside them should have at least been bothered by Cora's act of killing an innocent - even if it was only subtext with a shot of Regina looking troubled or conflicted as she and Cora vanished in their purple smoke.

Actually, I don't think she cackled and she had a surprised look on her face...(haven' t watched  it since it originally aired so...) and then back in the Mayor's office Regina looks wary , but then Cora explains how she set things up that ended up in Daniel's death and then Regina looks odd and then..she just drops it and goes along with it. This episode, is like many others where it seemed as if one of the writers had to go pick up one of their kids at school and someone else finished writing the script..without reading what happened before.

[KingOfHearts]

41 minutes ago, Mitch said:

Actually, I don't think she cackled and she had a surprised look on her face...(haven' t watched  it since it originally aired so...) and then back in the Mayor's office Regina looks wary , but then Cora explains how she set things up that ended up in Daniel's death and then Regina looks odd and then..she just drops it and goes along with it. This episode, is like many others where it seemed as if one of the writers had to go pick up one of their kids at school and someone else finished writing the script..without reading what happened before.

I feel like the writers intended for Regina to be more conflicted than what was actually portrayed. You could've interpreted it as her remaining serious out of fear of Cora. If the writers wanted us to think she was totally on Cora's side,  they wouldn't have given us an entire scene of her deconstructing Daniel's murder and questioning her mother's motives. (Like Mitch said, that was right after Joanna died.) The ineptitude of the writers and Lana's performance coupled together was jarring, because the intent and the execution were so polarized. Looking back at 2B, there was a ton of character manipulation in order to drive the plot. Joanna needed to be murdered to push Snow over the edge and Regina needed to stay with Cora so she could be pissed at Snow enough to enact the failsafe. 

[Rumsy4]

53 minutes ago, Mitch said:

and then Regina looks odd and then..she just drops it and goes along with it.

I thought back then this was going to be the turning point for Regina's character. She would realize the true extent of her mother's manipulation and turn against Cora. But...nope. It was apparently more important to brand Snow a murderer and create a false moral equivalency between her and her tormentor.

[Camera One]

Every event should have many consequences, especially deaths if they are deemed necessary.  Johanna's death on this show only affected one character - Snow - propelling her to kill Cora.  It didn't even affect Snow long-term, since Johanna was apparently so inconsequential she was never brought up again.  It actually gave Snow character regression, teaching her that it was wrong to fight back and punishing her for it.

Regina never re-evaluated her own actions towards Snow, nor did it change her feelings towards her own mother despite finding out Cora used her for a revenge plot. 

Henry never found out what Cora did to Johanna while Regina stood by.   

"Bleeding Through" was all about guilting Snow for what she did and Cora's spirit seeking vengeance, with zero mention of Johanna.  Neither Charming or Emma even got to defend Snow when Regina was snidely calling her a murderer.  In "Bleeding Through" the fact that Cora murdered Snow's mother was completely ignored while the writers hammered home that Young Eva was mean to Young Cora.

Edited August 23, 2018 by Camera One

[Rumsy4]

7 minutes ago, Camera One said:

Neither Charming or Emma even got to defend Snow when Regina was snidely calling her a murderer. 

That made David and Emma look bad as well. But then, Emma watched Regina as the Evil Queen burning her mother alive (as she thought) and apparently that never bothered her afterwards. This is unbelievable as natural reactions from anyone, let alone Emma and David. 

[Camera One]

2 minutes ago, Rumsy4 said:

That made David and Emma look bad as well. 

I guess they were feeling second-hand shame for what Snow did to poor Cora.

[KingOfHearts]

3 hours ago, Camera One said:

since Johanna was apparently so inconsequential she was never brought up again. 

She was brought up once in 3B when Zelena claimed Johanna was a reference. (I am curious as to how Zelena found out about Johanna beforehand, though. Oh right - she has Smee "spies" throughout the realms.)

3 hours ago, Camera One said:

"Bleeding Through" was all about guilting Snow for what she did and Cora's spirit seeking vengeance, with zero mention of Johanna.  Neither Charming or Emma even got to defend Snow when Regina was snidely calling her a murderer.  In "Bleeding Through" the fact that Cora murdered Snow's mother was completely ignored while the writers hammered home that Young Eva was mean to Young Cora.

Bleeding Through was the last time an apology from Regina could've feasibly come out, and it didn't. Even after Regina learned the events of The Stable Boy were fully manipulated by her mother and that there was a feud with Ava, all she could muster was "it's complicated". A phrase like that is when you talk about an ex-boyfriend or the last Game of Thrones episode. It's not something to say when you're addressing a murderous conflict you've had for someone over decades.

I don't understand why the writers never had Regina apologize to Snow or show remorse. It's almost as if they didn't believe she did anything wrong. Something like that would really help their Woegina angle, so it's odd to me they didn't make her more pathetically apologetic. 

Edited August 23, 2018 by KingOfHearts

[Camera One]

1 hour ago, KingOfHearts said:

I don't understand why the writers never had Regina apologize to Snow or show remorse. It's almost as if they didn't believe she did anything wrong. Something like that would really help their Woegina angle, so it's odd to me they didn't make her more pathetically apologetic. 

 

I think the Writers' mindset was that Regina and Snow were now "even".  The line "It's complicated" was the theme of "Bleeding Through".  The conflict was bigger than Regina and Snow.  Both Regina and Snow's parents had hurt one another and you can't say one was right and one was wrong, or label one side as the "good guys", as Snow and Emma (AND the audience) had to learn.  

Edited August 23, 2018 by Camera One

[Rumsy4]

2 hours ago, KingOfHearts said:

I don't understand why the writers never had Regina apologize to Snow or show remorse. It's almost as if they didn't believe she did anything wrong. Something like that would really help their Woegina angle, so it's odd to me they didn't make her more pathetically apologetic. 

 

The writers know Regina was an evil mass murderer. They wrote her like that. But they thought they were edgy enough to write a bad guy the audience would root for (like hundreds of other writers). They were also unwilling to compromise on the "bold and audacious" aspects of Regina, which, according to them, was justification enough for her lack of repentance. So, they tried to manipulate the audience by turning Regina into boring Woegina and twisting Snow into dull old Mary Margaret. That strategy apparently worked on all the Evil Regals, but IMO even that is only because Regina took over the show. She got the most screen-time, flashbacks, and sympathetic point of view.

In the morality of OUAT, you don't need to repent to get to heaven. You just need to know how to make a good sad face if you are Rumple. And also be bold and audacious if you are a female villain like Cora, Regina, Zelena, etc. 

Edited August 23, 2018 by Rumsy4

[KingOfHearts]

7 minutes ago, Rumsy4 said:

The writers know Regina was an evil mass murderer. They wrote her like that. But they thought they were edgy enough to write a bad guy the audience would root for (like hundreds of other writers). They were also unwilling to compromise on the "bold and audacious" aspects of Regina, which, according to them, was justification enough for her lack of repentance. So, they tried to manipulate the audience by turning Regina into boring Woegina and twisting Snow into dull old Mary Margaret. That strategy apparently worked on all the Evil Regals, but IMO even that is only because Regina took over the show. She got the most screen-time, flashbacks, and sympathetic point of view.

The funny thing is that you can get away with making an evil mass murderer sympathetic. Heck, if your writing is compelling enough, you could even put them on the side of the heroes. There are many villains people feel sorry for, even if it comes with a shot of guilt. It's never been about the gravity of the crimes - it's about the remorse and how other characters react. It's the fact Regina has "no regrets" and that most of the cast was lobotomized that makes her redemption so distasteful. I used to be an Evil Regal, but I later realized that she was never going to change because she never learned her lesson. (She got better in S7 but she was mostly just held the idiot ball.)

Infinity War spoilers:

Spoiler

Thanos murdered half the universe and I still understand him better than I could ever understand Regina.

Edited August 23, 2018 by KingOfHearts

[Rumsy4]

16 minutes ago, KingOfHearts said:

It's the fact Regina has "no regrets" and that most of the cast was lobotomized that makes her redemption so distasteful.

Especially because the lobotomization was done to facilitate Regina's ascendency into the ultimate heroine of the show. The writers fell in love with Regina and lost all perspective. They couldn't distance themselves from her character and wanted to give her everything like she was a toddler throwing a tantrum. If the show had been renewed for another season, I bet Regina would have taken over as Goddess of the Multiverse, Heaven, and the Underworld. Season 9 would be meta with Regina breaking the fourth wall to give life-giving advice to the audience. 

[Camera One]

A&E said that if they had another season, they would have delayed Regina becoming Queen of Everyone another season.  I wonder if they would actually have bothered building up to it, if they had a full 22 episodes to reach that moment. 

I'm still surprised they didn't do an alternate reality where Regina didn't exist, to show how all the characters' lives would be worse... Snowing would never have met because Snow wouldn't have been on the run, which means Emma and Henry would never have existed, Hook would still have been working for Peter Pan, Rumple would never have reunited with Bae and Belle would never have tried to kiss him to see the man beneath the beast, Zelena would never have had a loving sister, etc.   The episode would end with everyone working to ensure Cora became pregnant with Regina.  

[KingOfHearts]

2 hours ago, Camera One said:

A&E said that if they had another season, they would have delayed Regina becoming Queen of Everyone another season.  I wonder if they would actually have bothered building up to it, if they had a full 22 episodes to reach that moment. 

Not that anyone could've fixed the "Queen of Everyone" contrivance, but it seemed more jarring than it could've been because nothing else in the season led up to it. Regina didn't have that much focus until the last few episodes and was largely a supporting player. 

But really, that ending was about as "Once Upon a Time" as you could possibly get - Regina worship, enough plot holes to make a net, and poor characterization all wrapped in one sequence. Say what you want, but the show's been that way since S2. (And, to a lesser extent, the beginning.)

Edited August 24, 2018 by KingOfHearts

[Camera One]

14 minutes ago, KingOfHearts said:

Not that anyone could've fixed the "Queen of Everyone" contrivance

What about a montage of Regina with a pickax mining with the dwarves, cooking up a storm in the kitchen with Granny, making wooden puppets with Gepetto and Pinocchio who's a real boy again, hoisting the sails with Hook and Emma on the Jolly Roger, herding sheep with David and Snow on the farm, and polishing chipped cups in a hot air balloon with Rumple and Belle?

[KAOS Agent]

I watched a quick interview with a psychologist discussing the difference between a psychopath and a sociopath. It turns out that one is born and the other is made. These were her exact terms. I laughed. 

[andromeda331]

2 hours ago, KAOS Agent said:

I watched a quick interview with a psychologist discussing the difference between a psychopath and a sociopath. It turns out that one is born and the other is made. These were her exact terms. I laughed. 

Was it a YouTube video? I watched almost the same thing she was explaining the difference between narcissistic, psychopath and sociopath. 

[tennisgurl]

15 hours ago, KingOfHearts said:

Not that anyone could've fixed the "Queen of Everyone" contrivance, but it seemed more jarring than it could've been because nothing else in the season led up to it. Regina didn't have that much focus until the last few episodes and was largely a supporting player. 

 

It seemed so random, especially because Regina has never really shown real interest in leadership, or skill at it. She wants people to worship her, but she hasn't really shown any skill at actually inspiring people, or the day to day issues of leadership. The Queen of Everything was basically one final A&E Regina wetdream to close the show up. To any normal show, the entire universe being smooched together under the reign of one person would be a cliffhanger for the next season to see how the heroes would stop this maniac. It was totally out of nowhere, and has horrible implications to anyone who gives it two seconds of thought. 

[KAOS Agent]

9 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

Was it a YouTube video? I watched almost the same thing she was explaining the difference between narcissistic, psychopath and sociopath. 

It was. I found it pretty interesting and it gave a clear view of how these type of people think and behave. After the born and made stuff, I was trying to categorize some of the villains on Once. Regina and Cora are definitely in the sociopath/psychopath territory. The lack of empathy, the lack of care about the consequences, the ability to be extremely charming and charismatic. It's all there. It doesn't even necessarily mean that they would be evil either, just that sociopaths/psychpaths are very ruthless and can be highly successful because of their lack of care for others. It's hard to say which category they fall into because we don't know about Cora's early childhood, but there was an interesting note that psychopathy is most likely hereditary, so it's possible it could be both nature and nurture for those two.

Edited August 24, 2018 by KAOS Agent

[KingOfHearts]

43 minutes ago, tennisgurl said:

It seemed so random, especially because Regina has never really shown real interest in leadership, or skill at it. She wants people to worship her, but she hasn't really shown any skill at actually inspiring people, or the day to day issues of leadership. The Queen of Everything was basically one final A&E Regina wetdream to close the show up. To any normal show, the entire universe being smooched together under the reign of one person would be a cliffhanger for the next season to see how the heroes would stop this maniac. It was totally out of nowhere, and has horrible implications to anyone who gives it two seconds of thought. 

I remember in 5A when Regina was appointed the new "leader" because she attempted to sacrifice herself to the Fury. A willingness to put others' lives above your own is a good quality for a leader to have, but she never did anything beyond that. She didn't take charge or inspire anyone to do anything productive.

Edited August 24, 2018 by KingOfHearts

[andromeda331]

24 minutes ago, KAOS Agent said:

It was. I found it pretty interesting and it gave a clear view of how these type of people think and behave. After the born and made stuff, I was trying to categorize some of the villains on Once. Regina and Cora are definitely in the sociopath/psychopath territory. The lack of empathy, the lack of care about the consequences, the ability to be extremely charming and charismatic. It's all there. It doesn't even necessarily mean that they would be evil either, just that sociopaths/psychpaths are very ruthless and can be highly successful because of their lack of care for others. It's hard to say which category they fall into because we don't know about Cora's early childhood, but there was an interesting note that psychopathy is most likely hereditary, so it's possible it could be both nature and nurture for those two.

So did I. It was nice to hear the difference. They definitely do get mixed up a lot especially sociopath and psychopath. It made me think of ONCE and the villains on the show. Cora and Regina lack empathy.  It doesn't always mean they will be evil. A lot do end up as CEOs or go into politics or into sales. It kind of remind me when you hear people talk about horrible people in our world like Saddam and Hitler how if they had used their skills for good instead of evil. Getting Germany going again after WWI and how bad things were wasn't an easy task but then he decided to focus on murdering, and being evil. Or with Jim Jones, getting so many people committed to trying to help people, thinking they were helping everyone from the elderly to the very young, he had people committed to do that had he truly been doing that and not a cult leader he probably could have really changed things.  Regina could have been an excellent Queen if she wanted too. She could have been ruthless with neighboring countries, criminals or conflict in her kingdom. She probably could have done whatever she wanted and been really good at it. She instead decided to focus everything on destroying a ten year old girl and anyone else who got in her way.  Cora probably could have if she hadn't focused on ruining Eva's life and used her powers for good. She could have helped people in her kingdom who had been in the same spot she had been. At the bottom of the heap with a crappy parent. 

[Camera One]

I was reading this article about a study involving psychopaths and remorse.

In the study, the more psychopathic test subjects were "more pleased with good outcomes and more disappointed with bad outcomes than everyone else."  So yes, Regina FEELS more than other characters.  

Although they have regret or remorse, psychopaths don't "take the prospect of feeling remorse into account the next time" they made a choice.  They continue to choose the riskier alternative.  

Quote from the study author:

Quote

"It is almost like every situation a psychopath encounters is brand-new to them," says Baskin-Sommers. "If you are unable to weigh the costs and benefits and integrate or remember contexts in which the similar situation has gotten you into trouble, you are less likely to inhibit that behavior."

However, this study doesn't go into remorse when their actions affect other people.  But now we know why Regina keeps massacring villages and trying to kill Snow and not learning from it.

Edited August 24, 2018 by Camera One

[KingOfHearts]

Just watched a video about Disney's twist villains and why they don't always work. For some of them, there's no indication they could possibly be evil before the reveal. They act like decent people but turn into complete psychopaths in order to drive the conflict, to the point it comes off more as inconsistent than an actual evil scheme. It just made me think of OUAT and how obsessed A&E are with their "twists", even when they don't make sense and make the characters robotic slaves to the plot. 

[Camera One]

9 minutes ago, companionenvy said:

It isn't that I even believe that it is impossible to redeem Rumple - or even have him find happiness with another woman -- given the revelation that he murdered his wife, but we shouldn't be expected to root for him to patch things up with Belle, who spends much of this episode flirting with leaving him, in the same episode that we're finding out that he killed his first wife essentially for leaving him.

And I really do think the writers, while they may see the manipulative aspect, are presenting this as a relationship to root for; we're supposed to see it as cutesy and heartwarming when Belle invites him to try a hamburger with her.

I was reading this from the episode thread, and it made me wonder - why was A&E in such a rush?  Why did Belle need to take a step towards being open to Rumple by the end of the same episode?  What was the problem with having them at odds for a couple of episodes or *gasp* for an entire season?   Looking beyond "The Crocodile", did Rumbelle need to be on positive terms in subsequent episodes?  Did that add anything to Rumple or Belle's characters for them to be an item?  

[KingOfHearts]

38 minutes ago, Camera One said:

I was reading this from the episode thread, and it made me wonder - why was A&E in such a rush?  Why did Belle need to take a step towards being open to Rumple by the end of the same episode?  What was the problem with having them at odds for a couple of episodes or *gasp* for an entire season?   Looking beyond "The Crocodile", did Rumbelle need to be on positive terms in subsequent episodes?  Did that add anything to Rumple or Belle's characters for them to be an item?  

I have to laugh at the fact Belle was totally unphased by learning Rumple murdered his first wife. (It's revealed in "The Outsider" to her.) She thinks Hook is a horrible person and has no respect for him at all, but she can be abused by Rumple and proclaim he has good in his heart. Double standards much?

Edited August 26, 2018 by KingOfHearts

[companionenvy]

To be fair to Belle, she does wind up becoming friends with Hook later, which makes her behavior slightly less inconsistent - especially as Rumple, whatever he may have done to other people, hasn't actually ever physically threatened her safety in the way Hook did. So she's capable of being forgiving across the board. But I agree the fact that neither Belle nor, especially ,Bae seems to give a rat's ass that Rumple murdered Milah is absurd. 

1 hour ago, Camera One said:

Looking beyond "The Crocodile", did Rumbelle need to be on positive terms in subsequent episodes?  Did that add anything to Rumple or Belle's characters for them to be an item?  

They probably needed to be together by the time Hook went after Belle, resulting in her becoming Lacey. IIRC, there weren't a ton of other Rumbelle scenes between The Crocodile and The Outsider, so they may not have felt like there was room for a slower reconciliation. But that doesn't excuse it; fact remains, you wound up with Belle - whose scenes with Ruby had definite overtones of someone getting out of an abusive relationship - getting back together with Rumple in the space of a single episode, the same episode that also reveals to the viewer that Rumple killed his first wife for leaving him. 

[KAOS Agent]

10 hours ago, companionenvy said:

especially as Rumple, whatever he may have done to other people, hasn't actually ever physically threatened her safety in the way Hook did.

I would argue that Rumpel has very definitely physically threatened Belle's safety - much more so than Hook since Rumpel's threats were always directed towards Belle for her own actions and not because of who she associates with. Hook was never interested in killing Belle, she was just a tool to harm Rumpel. Simply being with Rumpel was hazardous to her physical well being. The show tries to pretend that Belle is somehow protected from Rumpel, but given that he murdered Milah (twice!) and the murder of total innocents like the mute maid, one can't simply give him a pass on his threats to Belle. This is particularly true once they had him acting on his threats in S6. Once he locked her up on the Jolly, which nearly resulted in her murder, any pretense that Rumpel wouldn't hurt Belle was gone. 

[KingOfHearts]

11 hours ago, companionenvy said:

To be fair to Belle, she does wind up becoming friends with Hook later, which makes her behavior slightly less inconsistent - especially as Rumple, whatever he may have done to other people, hasn't actually ever physically threatened her safety in the way Hook did. So she's capable of being forgiving across the board. But I agree the fact that neither Belle nor, especially ,Bae seems to give a rat's ass that Rumple murdered Milah is absurd. 

Belle was reluctant at first to trust Hook though, and she didn't form any kind of bond with him until long after he changed his behavior. She gave Rumple a benefit of a doubt from the get go even after he: attempted to kill an expecting father, tortured a man almost to death, locked her in a dungeon, halfway buried her into the ground, murdered his first wife, verbally abused her, threatened to kill her, nearly beat her father to death, tortured Nottingham in Storybrooke, attempted to murder a defenseless Hook, and attempted to damn Regina after he promised not to. I'm not saying Hook was an angel or that she should've trusted him, but it's clear she had "love goggles" on with Rumple.

Just in general on this show, characters like Zelena and Hook are seen as "villains" who can't be trusted while Regina and Rumple are just innocents trapped in a web of misunderstandings. Some characters are held to much higher standards than others. Rumple murders someone in the present day and it's no big deal. Zelena gets involved with a bad boyfriend and she deserves banishment to the farmhouse. K.

Edited August 26, 2018 by KingOfHearts