Once Upon a Time - 2x10 "The Cricket Game" Full Reaction
Added 2020-02-13 19:49:15 +0000 UTC
Comments
That fact that no one can tell the difference between Regina "trying to kill them" vs what she was actually doing which was trying to stop her mother from coming to Storybrooke tells me that they only think of themselves, like most leading "hero" characters. Any decision they make no matter how it affects random characters they don't care about is justifiably correct to protect themselves or their direct loved ones, but any other character does the same to protect themself or their loved ones that might harm or negatively affect the main characters is unjustifiably wrong. This and the idea that only the main "hero" characters or the ones they love and care about are capable or allowed to change and redeem themselves while those who were originally bad or acted against the main characters are not capable of redemption nor are they deserving of being given the chance to change these 2 ideas irk me and pop up a lot in shows that I absolutely love like this one. It doesn't matter how many chances were given, obviously certain people can give up on someone but that does not mean that person cannot eventually change and be redeemed. A character can choose to change for any number of reasons, and I believe that maybe there could have come a point in Regina's life where she just finally decided to let go of the pain she harbored after her love was murdered right before her eyes, but in this case she has an ironclad motivation to change, her son, that is why this time is different, she is holding herself accountable and improving herself for the love of her son Henry. Probably sounding like a broken record (to the people without sense that read my meaningless comments, anyway) but of course the thing that pisses me off most with this episode is how everyone acts like Regina (who is Henry's REAL mother) has to ask permission from Emma (Henry's mother by birth only) for permission to have her son come and stay a night with her? He is Regina's son. Emma has no right legally to keep Henry, nor should she have one morally. Regina may have been the evil queen, but she adopted and raised Henry, cared for him put in 10+ years of time, money tears love etc. parenting that boy alone. Emma gave birth to him and then went off to live her life without having to sacrifice for, care for or even spare another thought to the well-being of Henry until he showed up at her door. So legality aside, which is more than enough of a reason, it is Emma who should be asking Regina's permission to have Henry over for a night or two at a time.
Lucile Byrd
2023-08-27 18:08:32 +0000 UTCI can sympathize with David's and Mary Margaret's view as well. Everyone made compelling points and no one was in the wrong in this case, given everyone's pasts. Cora ruined all of Regina's good efforts and turned our heroes against her daughter. She is evil to her core.
Heidi Elizabeth Marcum
2020-02-14 00:02:46 +0000 UTCI just love your reactions so much, they are so genuine :-). I really appreciated Emma's conviction and belief in Regina at first. It speaks to a true consistency of character, and makes her anger at the end so much more believable because she thinks she has been duped despite defending her. Ugh I hate Cora! Also though, I can sympathize with Mary Margaret and David's position, given their shared past. However, there is an important distinction between the two circumstances that they aren't seeing. In the past, Regina didn't change, but she was honest about it the entire time... no trickery. In present time, that makes her sincerity when she says she wants to change all the more believable. I don't blame them for not seeing it, not at all. Im sure they feel like if they'd never given her this chance the first time, Archie would still be alive. But I just feel it's an important distinction to make none-the-less.
Edwin Wickey
2020-02-13 23:46:33 +0000 UTC
