If you haven’t seen any of the second half of Once Upon a Time season 3, turn away now.   This contains a few spoilers.

First, let me just admit that Hook and Emma have undeniable chemistry.  I love them as a potential couple, and this is coming from someone who was firmly in the Neal-Emma camp entering this half of season 3.  It goes without saying (but I will say it anyway) that Emma has two very good choices here, and she has already gotten over the flying monkey.  I would have liked to see Christopher Gorham (Walsh) get more of an introduction before he turned into the monkey, though.  That would have been an interesting situation to navigate in this half of the season, but there is so much more to talk about here than Emma’s love life.

We shall begin with the premise that no one questions or seems to notice that they have a new visitor in Storybrooke that does not have a history there.  Grumpy should have been suspicious of Zelena, even if no one else was.  He was one of Snow’s protectors before Charming came along, so he would have been a logical choice for someone who would ask the right questions of any visitors to town. Speaking of Mrs. Charming, she is a stronger, more independent character in the Enchanted Forest than she is in Storybrooke.  Snow was kind of a badass, stealing stuff, shooting people, and looking out for herself by carefully judging the character of potential friends or enemies. Mary Margaret is someone who is all sweetness and light, wanting to love and accept everyone.  Sometimes it”s hard to believe these two are the same woman.  The loss of skepticism will come back to bite her in her future dealings with Zelena.

David / Charming needs to be a bit more aggressive in his Wicked Witch investigation and should have been more assertive with Mary Margaret when expressing doubts about Zelena. I hope they find out her true identity before something horrible happens.  One of the only remaining mysteries is Zelena”s endgame.  Why did she bring Rumple back?  What are her intentions toward David and Mary Margaret?  Yes, we are told that she wants Regina to suffer, but wouldn’t that have more to do with Henry than any of those three?  Her lost relationship with Henry is hurting the Evil Queen more than anything else Zelena could possibly do to her.

I have been enjoying the first three episodes, but most of the major events have been somewhat predictable.   From the first minute we meet Walsh, it was rather obvious that he would turn out to be a bad guy (although the flying monkey thing was a surprise).  The existence of Hook and Neal made that necessary – that, and the fact that Emma would have to cut New York ties if her eventual destination was going to be the Enchanted Forest or Storybrooke.  I would have liked to have more doubt about that before Emma decided to reject his proposal.

The other event I saw coming was that Zelena and Regina are half-sisters.  I can’t explain how I knew that, but somehow I did.  It makes sense, though.  There is not much difference between an evil queen with magic powers and a wicked witch.   The love Regina has for Henry and the self-sacrifice that she has shown in the past redeems her.  We have not seen anything like that in Zelena, and instead we see her in all situations looking out for her own interests.

The interaction between Zelena and Rumple fascinates me.   They would also make an interesting couple.  What powers does she have (other than his dagger) over Rumple?  Why does he appear to have lost his mind?  What part is Rumple going to play in her revenge against Regina?  Does this mean that Rumple is turning back to the dark side (if only under coercion from Zelena)?   It might not be a bad idea for the writers to do this, because Gold is a much more interesting character when he is scheming and plotting against an enemy.

More later –

Odds on couples-

Hook / Emma – up

Snow/ Charming – steady

Neil / Emma- down

Regina/ Robin Hood – no idea when or if this will happen

It’s time for another widespread boycott. I’m talking about massive outrage expressed all over conservative talk radio and Fox News. There has not been any mention of this anywhere in the media, so I feel compelled to help all of them find another worthy subject to discuss other than Obamacare.

I speak of course of a notable entry in the Easter candy department this year – ladies and gentlemen, may I present…the chocolate cross. It is insufficient to only have huge chocolate bunnies and eggs with ridiculously fake grass in huge wicker baskets. There is no such thing as lines crossed when it comes to merchandising each and every Christianity based holiday. After all, look how much we have learned to accept about the commercialization of Christmas.

The entire retail industry bases its success or failure as businesses on the Christmas shopping season.  They are intentional about this.  The birth of Christ has turned into one heck of a capitalistic success story. There is a whole category of merchandise consisting of Christmas related items – ugly Christmas sweaters, anyone?  So we have Christmas dinnerware and flatware, placemats, an inflatable Claus family, and other such things to purchase for our homes.  We have succeeded in divorcing Christmas from the birth of Christ.

It is the oldest of saws to decry this as part of the war on Christmas, or to talk endlessly about how the evil have ruined the whole holiday by selling nativity sets or trees or by not saying “Merry Christmas” to each and every one of their patrons.    This is not my opinion.  I believe Christmas became a secular holiday a long time ago, and that ship has gone way far from the shore at this point.

Christianity is a lifestyle that does not depend on sanction by the media, by the culture, or by the retail industry.   We choose to celebrate the birth of Christ and remember it in our own way.  If we choose to participate in the traditions that our culture has created for us, as long as these traditions do not require a betrayal of our faith, I see nothing wrong with participating in them. However, I think it is appropriate to ask that we are given proper respect by those with different views.

Which brings me and my long-winded self back to the chocolate crosses….

All these holidays including Easter do have some secular basis.  I do not intend to go into the reasons why bunnies and eggs are relevant to the season, but it is not too hard to figure out if you really care about the whole history of that holiday.  They do not, of course, have a single thing to do with the death and resurrection of Christ, but they sure do taste good.  These are additions to the holiday we have learned to accept.

There should be lines where Easter commercialization should end.  Chocolate crosses cross the line of what is acceptable for us.  We have already trivialized the meaning of Easter so much, but the cross is a serious affair. It is the whole basis of our faith – that Christ died and rose again so that we can have a relationship with Him.  He suffered and died on that cross.  It should be precious to us.  We should respect the cross enough not to make candy out of it.  Spirituality has been watered down in this culture, and we must choose to walk the hard path and stand for truth.

Boycotts don’t achieve anything.  A life that stands in respect and devotion to that cross means far more to the culture in which it exists. So let us rise above the culture and make this our ambition if we belong to Christ.

Quoted from that fine website – Television Without Pity:

My point, and I do have one, is that by staggering the broadcast of a mystery show such as Sherlock, you are aiding and abetting shady providers of your fine programs — the very providers you (and your for-profit counterparts) spend time, energy and money trying to shut down. Your nonsensical scheduling does more to increase the demand for shady services than all the viral marketing in the world could ever accomplish. It doesn’t take Sherlock Holmes’ cognitive powers to realize that your scheduling costs you viewers.

In the next year or decade, or however long it takes Moffat and company to produce the next season (series to you Brits) of Sherlock, will you please get your collective acts together and agree to broadcast the show on the same schedule? Given the five hour time difference between UK and the U.S. East Coast, unlike Benedict Cumberbatch, I’m not asking for a simulcast (although I’d greedily accept one). I can avoid spoilers for an afternoon. I cannot avoid them for two and a half weeks.

I don’t have much to add to this, and I co-sign this opinion – read more here.

As a fan of several British TV shows, I am beyond convinced that allowing Sherlock and Downton Abbey the same broadcast schedule in the UK and in the US will add many more viewers to the audience of those shows.  In this modern world with the internet and many new ways to push content to viewers (Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime, etc), there is simply no reason to have this generation’s version of videotape delays on shows such as Sherlock and Downton Abbey.

There are popular British shows that have the same airdates in America and in the UK. Ever heard of DOCTOR WHO? That’s the most obvious example. So what’s different about these British shows? I don’t know the answer to that question.  It should be noted by the powers that be at ITV and the BBC that there is profit in doing the right thing for the US viewers of their programming.   Consider that if you will, important decision makers across the pond.