OUAT (A new twist on Peter Pan)

[shadowkat]

Finished watching my two favorite tv series - Once Upon a Time and The Good Wife, both are a lot of fun. And the sneak peek at The Good Wife this season - was great. But no time or room to discuss it here.

Once Upon a Time was not what I expected. Rather relieved by it, actually. These writers do not appear to be traveling down the trite love triangle of doom road, also the introduction of the new villain was inspired.



* While I figured out right off the bat that the kid who had befriended Henry in Neverland was in reality Peter Pan and not another Lost Boy, it was well done. And rather inspired.
Henry and Emma are once again being contrasted on their journeys towards each other. Henry's belief is his greatest power - but it is also what places him in jeopardy. Emma's inability to believe in anything including herself is her greatest flaw. It's a coping mechanism she's employed in the Land Without Magic - her skepticism and requirement for proof. The flashback at the beginning emphasizes it - she gives up Henry for adoption, because she doesn't have any faith or belief in herself to be a good mother. She lost the last smidgen of her faith when Neal left her. She'd trusted him and when he left, she stopped trusting herself. (Pinnochio and Gepetto have a lot to answer for in regards to Emma, just saying.)

But as Rumplestilskin points out - her lack of faith will cause her to fail. She must have faith in herself and her family/colleagues abilities. And she's the force that draws these long-term enemies together. Henry's belief attracts Peter Pan - he needs someone who believes with a pureness of heart or with his whole heart - enough to make it possible to fly with pixy dust. This is a nifty twist on the old Peter Pan tale - where Pan requires belief to save Tinkerbell, who drank the poison. If you believe she'll live, and requires Wendy and her two brothers belief to fly. Anything is possible - if you believe, states Pan, in JM Barrie's classic tale.

Here, Pan is portrayed as quite wicked and cruel. He's the youngest of the Lost Boys, closer to Henry's and young Baelfire's age. And his shadow rips the shadows off others, instantly killing them. Why he needs a boy who believes and has faith...is not clear. He tests Henry's belief...1) Henry's belief that his family can come there to rescue him and 2) Henry's belief that he can fly - but Henry takes a leap of faith and does fly, making it possible or so it seems for Pan to fly as well.

Personally, I think Henry's biggest weakness is he's a tad too trusting for his own good. He needs a little bit of Emma's skepticism and Emma's needs a bit of Henry's faith.

* Short work was made of Owen and Tamara. Which surprised me. I thought they'd have more of a role - along with their secret organization, but nope. These writers move fast.

One small quibble: Apparently Tamara isn't going to get either a backstory or an explanation for why she believed so deeply in her cause to kill and torture people for it. Bit disappointed by that. Was hoping for a bit more depth there. Owen got more back story than Tamara did. Although Owen's was admittedly compared with Rumplestilskin, Henry, and Baelfire's, I felt they could have done the same with Tamara - Emma, Snow and Regina. But oh well. It's admittedly a minor quibble.

We knew the double-cross was coming - because Tamara and Owen thought Peter Pan of all people wanted to end magic. Don't these people read? Pan explains to Henry that he's learned over time that fear HATE is a better motivator than belief. It is far easier to get people to hate something than to believe in something. Belief is stated various times throughout the episode. He lied to them and built upon their "hatred". Pan, explains, that he's become very adept at lying and building hate. Pan - the liar in the fairy world or the mischief maker. (It appears Pan himself is filled with hate and resentment.)

Peter Pan is the head of Tamara and Owen's "home office". As Henry points out - you really need to learn to start asking more questions. Because this is what comes of not doing so. (Yes, and reading a few books might help too.) When they discover much to their own chagrin that Peter Pan has no interest in ending magic, quite the opposite, and tricked them in order to obtain Henry - they attempt to escape. But Owen is killed easily - shadow ripped from him and Tamara is shot with an arrow. Attempting to crawl to safety - she runs into Rumplestilskin.

Backing up a bit, I love some of the lines in this.

Hook to Rumple: Ah took time for a "wardrobe change" ? A real constructive use of your time. (sarcasm heavy.)

Rumple's new outfit is basically his Rumplestilskin get-up. (I wonder if its armor? )Oh and the cane of Mr. Gold is discarded. Here he's the magical imp once again, albeit without the fancy makeup. Stilskin doesn't believe the others can help at all. (He never was much of a team player or good at taking orders, so this is hardly surprising.). And after a lengthy speech to Emma about how she can't win because she has no faith or belief and to succeed in Neverland, you have to have both - plus a wild imagination, which she also clearly lacks. A speech in direct contrast to her parents attempts to get her to believe - they did not look happy. Seriously, they had spent ten-fifteen minutes trying to cheer her up. Thank you Rumple for sticking a needle in that balloon. Then Rumple disappears, without further ado.

And stumbles upon Tamara and a dead Owen - but unfortunately for Tamara, no Henry. Almost felt sorry for her. She had a shooting chance if Henry had there. She has to be thinking : of all the people running about Neverland I had to run into him? It couldn't be someone safer, like maybe Snow White or Emma? Because the two you most want to avoid are Rumplestilskin and Regina. Particularly in a weakened state without a phaser. Not sure if Regina would have killed her right off the bat or not? I'm thinking so, considering what Regina did to the mermaids. But Rumple? You are definitely dead. No doubt about it.As Baelfire states - crossing my father doesn't tend to end well. Particularly when it concerns his son. Although unlike Regina, at least he asked questions first to determine if she'd be any use to him. Rumple tends to be a tad more patient than Regina.

Rumple is nice, he takes the arrow out of her first. Asks a few questions, discovers she's clueless, and then ...after leading her on a bit...without remorse yanks out her heart and crushes it in front of her. (Now honestly, can you really blame him - I mean let's revisit the facts for a moment here shall we? Tamara shot his beloved son Baelfire and sent him through a porthole - after Rumple had gone to a hell of a lot of trouble to locate him. And I do mean a lot of trouble. We're talking centuries. Considering what he did to the guy who pushed Baelfire down in the street by mistake, it's hardly surprising what he does to Tamara. Actually, if you think about it - she got off easy, he could have tortured her first like he did to the Sheriff of Nottingham or turned her into a snail and squashed her.)

*Next up is a brief and not very informative discussion with Pan's lieutenant, the head Lost Boy. Who apparently knows Rumple well. They are old adversaries. You're welcome here, they tell him, as long as you don't try interfere or attempt to take Henry away from us. Also, you can't survive. Rumple tells them that's okay, he knows that he most likely won't survive, but he can't comply - and being successful in his aims doesn't require his survival.
Then the kid gives Rumple an old doll - that reminds me of a voodoo doll, to be honest. Apparently it was just supposed to be a doll? At any rate - Rumple bursts into tears. And the brat tells him - it's surprising, isn't it, how the smallest things can move us? It's surprising how the things we haven't thought about in years, can still bring us to tears. (ETA: My memory for dialogue is not great.)

* The crew on the Jolly Roger run across some nasty mermaids. Who attack them. They manage to fight them off - working in tandem, or rather Regina manages to do it by throwing fire at them. They also catch one - in the hopes of interrogating her. It doesn't work. She blows a horn and causes a storm to come down upon them, along with the desire to tear each other apart - which considering the bad blood between Snow and Regina and Charming and Hook, this isn't hard to do. Regina makes it worse by turning the mermaid into a piece of wood. Seriously, if I were in Neverland - I'd steer clear of pissing off Rumple and Regina. Emma stops it by...jumping over board? And promptly gets knocked in the head with an anchor. But what do you know? It worked. Apparently everyone on board cares what happens to Emma, because they all stop and rush to save her or stand about looking shell-shocked. Unfortunately the Jolly Rodger is damaged, so change in plan. They are going by land not by river. But hey, Emma has taken charge and commanded everyone to band together for a common cause. Also, informs them that they all have their skills...the villain, the pirate, the princess, the knight...so use them, and don't worry about doing the right thing. Let's just do whatever is necessary to get Henry back - we'll worry about right and wrong after the fact. Regina snarkily wonders what Emma's power is. (Seriously, after she just helped you save the world, you ask that? Talk about short memory span. It wasn't that long ago.) Emma responds that it is at the moment leader, and mother. (Ouch. Regina deserved that.)

I did like some of the exchanges on the boat..[ETA - Keep in mind that I suck at remembering dialogue exchanges exactly, so they are paraphrased. The television series wrote it better.]

Regina: Owen told me I was a villain, and he said the villain doesn't get a happy ending. That it's not possible. Do you think that's true?
Hook: I hope not. Then we've basically wasted our lives.

or the Hook and Emma discussion about Baelfire, showing that Hook cares about Baelfire and is mourning him. He liked Neal. And had spent time with the boy, Baelfire. He gives Emma - Baelfire's sword. And they drink a toast to Neal.

* Meanwhile in the Enchanted Forest, Baelfire/Neal has awoken and healed from his gunshot.
He also makes the acquaintance of Phillip, Sleeping Beauty, and Mulan. Apparently Aurora and Phillip have been reunited and Aurora is Queen. She also has the ability to walk through the dream world. She is however unable to contact Emma and company, partly because they aren't sleeping - to busy sailing a ship and fighting mermaids. Sleeping is sort of a requirement for both sides.

Mulan and Bae have some interesting exchanges.

Baelfire: Over there, they think of us as just stories in books or legends.
Mulan: legends? Is there one about me?
Baelfire: Yes, they even made a movie about you. It was pretty good.
Mulan: What's a movie.

Later...
Mulan: May I ask you a question?
Baelfire: I'm sorry, I can't think of a way of explaining what a movie is to you.
Mulan: No, what I wanted to ask is why is it that Emma never mentioned you here? Not one word.
Baelfire: Because I broke her heart. I abandoned her - because I thought she'd be better off without me and wanted her to achieve her destiny and break the curse, but even after that - I could have found her again, I could have explained, found a way - but I didn't, I was too afraid...I didn't want to be rejected. So I took the easy way out.

I got to give this show credit for two things - addressing these emotional issues head on and not circling around them or ignoring them. (A major problem I had with both LOST and later seasons of Buffy.) The writers don't waste time teasing the audience and not delivering. Also, no love triangle of doom quite yet. It might still happen, of course.

When they reach Rumple's castle, we're greeted by even more gems.

Mulan: Who are you?
Guy in hood drawing arrow: My name is Robin.
Baelfire/Neal: No way, Robin Hood?
Robin Hood: I'd take a bow, but the quiver's a bit drawn. And why are you trespassing in my castle?
Mulan: It's technically not your castle, it belongs to the Dark One. You're trespassing.
Robin: Is he back in attendance? Because if so, I'll quickly vacate.
Baelfire: He's not and no need to vacate. You can have the place. I just need to be allowed to look around to find something.
Robin: And who might you be to grant such privileges?
Baelfire: I'm his son. Go by Baelfire in this world.
Robin lowers his bow: Okay, look around.
Baelfire: Wait..You're not going to ask for id or anything?
Robin: I figure that's not something you'd admit to, if you weren't.
Baelfire: You have a point.
Robin: Besides your father doesn't suffer imposters.
Baelfire: True, he does have a bit of a temper.
Robin: I've crossed paths with your father before.
Baelfire: That doesn't tend to end well.
Robin: He spared my life once. I owe him a debt. (Actually that was Belle who got him to do that, but whatever.)

And when they find the magical item - it turn out to Rumple's old walking stick with the Baelfire's height etched along its stem. Baelfire explains that it works for him because his father had a cloaking spell placed on it - so it could only work for someone with Rumple's blood - either Rumple or his own son. "Blood magic he called it. As much as it may appear otherwise, family does mean everything to my father."

Then he manages to get hold of the crystal ball, which Mulan helps him figure out how to work. When it does - he sees Emma in Neverland - and is upset. Because remember he spent some time getting out of Neverland. He also appears to understand how the portals work - you think of the place you want to go - and you end up there. Baelfire is interesting to me, because he has insight into a lot of things that we don't know about. Also, he seems to realize that he's repeated his father's mistakes with his own family - out of fear and cowardice.

I adore this series.



2. The Good Wife was good tonight, but not great. It lined up a few things, but spent far too much time on the case of the week - which I found a bit preachy and cliche. Yes, yes, the death penalty and yes it's inhumane and torture, I know. That's one of the many reasons I'm against it. The only people who are for the death penalty are uninformed or ignorant of what it actually entails and the criminal justice system as a whole. The death penalty is not justice - it is vengeance.

The portions of the episode that were not focused on the death penalty were interesting.

* Cary has his hands full keeping Alicia and the 4th years happy. But I love his line to Alicia - "don't you see, we're the new Will and Diane".
* Alicia is stuck in the middle again - between Will/Diane and Carey/4th years. But she knows she has to jump ship. I loved Peter's reaction and Eli's. Peter was pleased as punch.
And totally for it. (Mainly because she was leaving Will behind. He even asks Eli if that was what she was doing. And decides that promoting the lovely Mitch to Transit Authority is a good idea. Mitch isn't pleased - she liked having more power, she was also attempting to push Eli out and grab the Chief of Staff job for herself. Eli saw through her and found a way to get rid of her. Go Eli. I spent most of my time trying to place the actress playing Mitch who looked familiar).
* Eli got Chief of Staff (see above for how and why).
* I like Robin a lot. The Alicia/Carey firm feels like the new blood or second stringer firm.
* David Lee was catching on. Note to 4th years - stop celebrating in public and at Lockhardt/Gardner. Also stop discussing it using the firm's phones.
* Also, I have a feeling the Will/Alicia/Peter love triangle is far from over.

That's the story-line that intrigues me.


But I found the episode a wee bit disappointing due to the case of the week or B story line. What's coming up however...

Comments

[dlgood.livejournal.com]

The only people who are for the death penalty are uninformed or ignorant of what it actually entails and the criminal justice system as a whole.

Plenty of people know, and just don't care. Because, they are pro-vengeance. And, again, don't care about people who are convicted of crimes. Especially if those people have brown skin.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

True.

A lot of people think just because someone is "convicted" of a crime - clearly they did it. They don't think, they feel. They don't use their brains to analyze the data provided, instead they go with their gut.
As a result - they convict someone who is probably innocent but the prosecution had a great presentation.

And yep, many are racist, but don't think of themselves as racist.

It's a topic I try not to discuss with people. Mainly because it becomes emotional and about vengeance, which people refuse to admit.

I remember having emotionally charged arguments with a college friend and her hubby about it once. Here's how it went:

Me: Death Penalty should not be re-enacted and abolished. Inhumane.
Friend: But what if I broke into your mother's house and shot her dead. Wouldn't you want me dead?
Me: Well, yes, of course - but that doesn't justify the Death Penalty.
Besides it doesn't bring her back or change anything.
Friend: Prevents me from doing it to someone else.
Me: So does prison.
Friend: But do you want to pay your tax dollars for me to spend my life in prison?
Me: Cheaper than paying the government to kill you.
Friend: That's impossible.
Me: Really not. The upkeep of death row, the method, the guards, the separate facilities, the appeals -
Friend: If we didn't have the appeals, it wouldn't be a problem.
Me: Not everyone is guilty, the appeals ensure that the innocent don't end up getting executed.
Friend: If they are convicted they are obviously guilty.
Me: Yeah, right, because our criminal justice system and the lawyers and juries are so great at their jobs and infallible. You really need to stop watching Law & Order.

It begins to fall apart after that.

[dlgood.livejournal.com]

I should have amended that these people tend to not care about convicts who are poor, either...

My preferred counterarguments are usually:

1) Just because I might want to kill you, doesn't mean the State should.

2) Again, do you want the State to be in the business of deciding who lives or dies. Do you trust the government to do that?

Granted, the counterargument to #1 is that the State handles punishment so that one murder doesn't lead to a cascading string of blood-feud murders conducted by private citizens, but most pro-death penalty advocates aren't really thinking along those lines. On the other hand, most pro-death penalty people I know really don't like taxation.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Again, do you want the State to be in the business of deciding who lives or dies. Do you trust the government to do that?

This argument actually worked brilliantly in a debate in law school once.
A friend of mine used it. We were discussing the Death Penalty with a libertarian and gun dealer, who was pro-death penalty. She pointed out, okay so you don't like the government telling you what to do and feel there should be less laws? Then why do you want to give them the power to execute people? Do you really want them to have that kind of power?

His reaction was...oh, wait, you have a point. Never thought of it that way before.

Very good argument to use with libertarians. The problem with the taxation and expense argument - is people assume the cost is in the appeals (I blame tv for that - the Good Wife also showed that). It's actually in everything else. (It costs money to set up a separate facility away from the prison to house them, separate guards, and a staff to execute, plus the means to do it. It's not cheap. Actually the appeals are the least expensive. But no one can wrap their minds around that.)

[dlgood.livejournal.com]

It can be effective. But I find that many libertarians are less opposed to 'oppressive laws' they think won't really apply to them. "Leave me alone to do what I want" does not always extend out to "and I will agree to leave you alone to do what you want, if that is something I don't like." So it does not always work as well as it would if you always expect intellectual consistency.

Which is how why moderately privileged, self-declared libertarians can find room to support the death penalty and other activities of the state that disproportionately affect the poor and minorities. Or how segregation was defended on the grounds of liberty...

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Well said and a good description of libertarianism. My father used to mock libertarians - stating that as long as the law didn't apply to them, they were all for it.

I remember in law school a bunch of libertarians that I met - were against traffic regulations, such as left turn signals. The reason for this was that they lived in Western Kansas, where one car might enter an intersection once in five hours. So you're sitting there waiting for a turn signal - when well, there are no cars except you. Keep in mind these guys have never been anywhere but Western Kansas.

I've found that it's very hard for people to care, relate to or concern themselves with things that lie outside of their realm of experience.

[shipperx.livejournal.com]

I thought I saw a few Hook/Regina vibes. I could see them doing something with that.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Maybe.

But from what I've read and what I'm seeing? Don't see it.

Keep in mind these guys aren't into the sexy romance. Romance is really in the background and its sort of a kid's show. Also there's not a lot of conflict that can come from Regina/Hook. Two former villains? Be like Rumplestilskin and Cora, and look what happened there? They are much more into the Rumple/Bell vibe.

Plus there's a spoiler lurking out there that Regina and Robin Hood are going to hook up (no pun intended). How, I've no idea, considering Robin is in Enchanted Forest and Regina is in Neverland. Hey maybe Baelfire, Robin Hood and Mulan will journey to Neverland to save everyone, and Mulan will hook up with Hook.

[shipperx.livejournal.com]

Mulan and Hook?

That could be interesting too. (Basically, I enjoy the rampant mix-and-matching of Fairytale characters. Although that's purely for secondary characters as they've pretty much cemented Swan/Baelfire as true love end game. The show is very "it's primarily about family!" The Swan/Baelfire/Henry family unit (and the extended family unit beyond Snow/Charming... and Regina and Stiltskin) is the focus of the show, I think.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Agreed. The show really is Swan/Balefire & Henry. With Snow/Charming, and Regina, Stiltskin, and Hook acting as a sort of trio of not so nice great-grandparents and step-grandparents. It's a family show targeting a family audience.

Luckily for me, I like those pairings. And adore Swanfire. It helps a great deal when watching a television series if you ship the same ship the writers do and the same characters the writers do. IF you don't, you're just going incredibly frustrated and miserable. I've learned that lesson.

If Hook gets together with Emma - it'll be a brief fling, nothing series. He likes her and keeps flirting with her (she's a huge challenge and not likely to turn him into a snail) - but he also cares deeply for Baelfire (who he thinks is dead). If I were writing this, I would write in a brief fling - because the drama! But it would be admittedly a tad soap operaish. What I think will happen - is lots of flirtation, maybe a few close moments, and the moment they are about to kiss or get too close - Baelfire will pop up alive. Keeping in mind this is a family series and not a *Cought*teen gothic soap opera*cough*.

According to the commentary during the "journey before this episode" or "wrap up episode for people who haven't watched the series or are hopelessly lost" - the writers are most interested in exploring who each of these characters truly is at heart and getting them back to their core selves - in short helping them find themselves.

[shipperx.livejournal.com]

Oh I like Neal/Emma. It's a good thing they hired a good actor for Neil, because it could've been tricky making him work, but as it's played its worked fine.

The only ship that frustrates me is Belle/Rumple because they've made Belle such an enabler (and the whole Lacey -thing{and it's lack of follow-up} took it to an uncomfortable place).

The problem here is Belle. She needs to become a far stronger character if that relationship isn't going to come across as massively unhealthy.

I would be interested in seeing someone of some moral fiber up against Regina (so Regina/Robin Hood could potentially be a fun detour. Don't know that it would work long-term, but it would be difficult to judge before seeing the dynamic).

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Agreed with all of the above. ;-)

The casting of Baelfire/Neal was inspired. Michael Raymond-James looks like he could be Rumplestilskin (Robert Carylye's son) and he plays the type of role extremely well. Casting is everything in these types of series.

The only ship that frustrates me is Belle/Rumple because they've made Belle such an enabler (and the whole Lacey -thing{and it's lack of follow-up} took it to an uncomfortable place).

Ghod, yes. Right there with you. That ship does not work for me. I know what they are going for, but to be able to pull it off - you need someone who is a bit stronger than Belle and a bit older. Belle comes across as wee bit too wet-behind the ears? Not sure what the best word is.

And you're right the problem here is Belle, not Rumple. It appears to be deliberate and I think we are supposed to question it - because there's a telling DVD extra in the S2 DVDs. It's in the Good Morning Storybrook Extra, in case you have them. Belle is hosting a segment on a morning show about reading great literary romances. She has read roughly half of each of these star-crossed romantic greats. The first one, Anna Karenia, she declares to the morning show hosts, obviously ends well...and is a great romance. The Morning Show hosts look at her oddly - eh, no, Anna got run over by a train.
She moves on to Romeo and Juliet - which she also believes ended well, no again - they both died. "You really did only read half of these books?"
Next up is Phantom of the Opera...and yep, same response.

I see a pattern emerging here. The writers are not as behind the Belle/Rumple romance as we may think.

Agreed, on Regina - I want her to find someone stronger than Daniel and Henry with strong moral fiber, and no interest in magic. Robin Hood could actually work. Since they've already done Daniel/Regina, it's unlikely we'll get a repeat or a Belle/Rumple scenario with her. I suppose it's possible they'll do a Hook/Regina like they did a Rumple/Cora, but that opportunity has sort of passed us by - they could have done that last season when the villains interests were aligned towards vengeance.

No, I have a feeling we may end up with Neal, Mulan and Robin Hood traveling to Neverland - and meeting up with the characters there. But I could be wrong. Not quite sure where they are going at the moment.

[masqthephlsphr.livejournal.com]

I seriously doubt Greg and Tamara knew the home office was Peter Pan. And if they thought some Home Office types were lurking in Neverland, it was to plan the demise of that magical realm, as Tamara stated.

I would swear this particular storyline was mapped out by Joss Whedon with its, "We're soldiers, we don't ask questions," bit. Because that's so ludicrous. In real life, even if you're a committed toady to a cause, you at least have a name and a face for your leader, even if it's a false face they are showing to manipulate you. They wrote Greg and Tamara as idiots, basically, strawmen easy to knock over.

I was irritated with Tamara's demise when I thought it was going to be just an arrow in the back. Talk about fridged and forgotten. But Death By Rumple was at least a death befitting who she was and what she had done. Goodbye, 2-Dimensional-Character-Is-2-Dimensional.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Outside of the Peter Pan bit, I agree.

I seriously doubt Greg and Tamara knew the home office was Peter Pan. And if they thought some Home Office types were lurking in Neverland, it was to plan the demise of that magical realm, as Tamara stated.

Eh, would agree except for the conversation between Pan and Henry, where Pan tells Henry that he met with them and told them that he wanted to destroy magic and all they had to do was bring Henry here. (Nice trick that.)

That said, it's doubtful they knew he was "Peter Pan" or that his agents were "The Lost Boys". They may not have even specifically met "Pan" but rather the older boy in the hood. There's a flashback sequence with Baelfire - showing people who resemble Owen and Tamara or are like them, working for Pan and hunting for someone who looks like Henry - at the end of Straight on Til Morning.

I would swear this particular storyline was mapped out by Joss Whedon with its, "We're soldiers, we don't ask questions," bit. Because that's so ludicrous. In real life, even if you're a committed toady to a cause, you at least have a name and a face for your leader, even if it's a false face they are showing to manipulate you.

They did go a bit far with the metaphor there. ie: Believing is a good thing, but blind faith in one's cause is really not. (And while it is true to an extent that soliders often put blind faith in a cause and a leader without asking questions particularly when the cause regards ridding the world of something they hate and vengeance (Al Quaida anyone? or how about The Nazis?) - they do tend to ask basic ones, such as wait who is our leader and how will this work exactly? And how are we getting back.) But eh...it's a OUAT after-all, not Breaking Bad or Homeland. So, I can suspend disbelief on that one.

Also it is admittedly ironic and fun that two adults were thoroughly manipulated by a centuries old kid.

However...

They wrote Greg and Tamara as idiots, basically, strawmen easy to knock over.

Yes, they were alarmingly stupid in this episode. Which felt odd after last year.

I was irritated with Tamara's demise when I thought it was going to be just an arrow in the back. Talk about fridged and forgotten. But Death By Rumple was at least a death befitting who she was and what she had done. Goodbye, 2-Dimensional-Character-Is-2-Dimensional.

That was my main quibble with the episode. I'd hoped for some character exploration there. A little back-story. Something. But once Rumple found her - I knew she was a goner. End of Two-Dimensional Character. Now - if the other group had stumbled upon her first, she'd have had a chance, which was what I thought they were going to do.

It was unevenly written. And unfortunately, OUAT has some racist casting issues that they really need to work on.

[masqthephlsphr.livejournal.com]

On the Henry-Peter Pan hook up (no pun intended), I must be the only viewer who didn't figure out that WAS Peter Pan before he outed himself. Partly because they've been playing Pan as pure shadow in SEARCH OF a body, and he even turned his nose up at Young!Baelfire. I assumed Pan either didn't have a body of his own, OR didn't want to use a surrogate because he wanted Henry to be the surrogate (he did have Henry's picture in his possession a hundred years before the kid was even born).

As for Henry, I think the betrayal after he puts his much-touted faith in this stranger is going to be another chink that tears down his faith and trust. While he believes all the more in magic, and understands the rules of Neverland, after the big Your Mom Lied story line last year, and now this Pan-double-cross, the writers are going to slowly erode away the trusting child into something a little more like Mom: the untrusting adult.

Which is sad to see, but certainly (to the extent it's healthy skepticism) part of growing up.

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

I think what is key here is the parallels being drawn between Emma and Henry. Emma is pure skepticism, she needs facts and figures, questions everything, believes in nothing except what can be proven and doesn't trust anyone. Henry is the opposite. Henry believes with all his heart.
He doesn't require proof. And he trusts easily.

So...what is happening here is Henry and Emma are being brought together. Baelfire - who is in the Enchanted Forest - has similar issues - he doesn't have faith in love or family and fears rejection.

Henry needs to be a little less trusting and Emma needs to be a little more trusting. He needs to ask more questions, Emma needs to ask less.
I don't think it's so much about growing up as it is about realizing the world isn't one way or another. Or that we need to be able to believe in the impossible but at the same time, apply a little common sense, and skepticism.