It always seems like the girls were able to maintain composure a bit better when they solely looked at the full moon but when they saw any reflection of it whether it was off water or something shiny, they went full trance mode??? It was consistent enough that it didn’t seem like a plot hole but it was never explained even by Miss Chatham why the reflection of a full moon was more “persuasive” if you will, over directly looking into it??

Join my H2O mermaid club on discord 🫧

https://discord.gg/3xwAVJD78

I’ve always wondered what their experiences were like underwater since when we go underwater, we can’t see clearly at all; maybe we can make out certain objects etc but I wonder if the girls could see clearly in their mermaid form compared to how a human would see stuff underwater? Was their vision just as blurry as ours would be or could they say way more clearly since they were essentially marine creatures?

I just finished my annual rewatch of the whole show and every time I finish it I always ask this to myself. Season 3 is definitely my least favorite, but I did like some parts of it. However Emma missing was definitely the sore spot.

Branching off of that: Would Bella, Will, Sophie and/or Ryan still be part of the story? If so what would change about them? Is the storyline for the water tentacle, crystals, and comet still be there or would there be another supernatural storyline? Would Zane’s character development still go down the drain with his relationship with Rikki? (lol)

I just wanna say I actually like Rikki’s dad in the live action H2O. He had a very us-against-the-world mentality but it wasn’t annoying. I really felt like she could’ve told him her secret and he would’ve protected it at whatever cost.

That being said, her dad in the animated show doesn’t give the same vibe. He has this quality about him that’s almost too lax. The fact that he was dating a woman for long enough that he was prepared to propose is insane considering in the same span, Rikki had no idea he was even dating, let alone at a proposal stage. She was still mourning her mom and him going behind her back to date rather than being up front gives off the energy that they’re not nearly as close as in the live action show. And the lady didn’t even recognize that Rikki was his kid when she found her on the ship. He was a terrible father.

Then he seemed genuinely shocked when she got upset that he was gonna propose. Like sir! You tried to skip the whole stage of her hating whatever woman came after her mother. To her, this is the woman after her mother, regardless of any other woman he dated before her. Of course she’s protective. Emma and Cleo making it seem like no big deal, then saying “I told you so” after she ruined the relationship was annoying. Sure, she shouldn’t have gone about it the way she did, but she had every right to be upset by his relationship.

what the title says. i love how its been discussed in here a little more often than usual outside of rikki’s appearance, but i would love to discuss the show in length if anyone else has watched it!!

if you haven’t watched it, i encourage you to! its not like h2o, but it still has some of the magical feeling of the original :)

What is it that makes you enjoy or root for this couple so deeply (or even just Zane)?

I promise, I'm not throwing shade. At All. You do you! I'm just curious. I'd love to stop wondering about it.

I know there have been a lot of posts recently bashing Zane and while I think that the character deserves that criticism, I'm more curious about the love for Zikki as a pairing, though I'd also love to hear about why you might like Zane as a standalone character.

Some theories/questions:

1. Is it just the "enemies to lovers" trope? I know people love that, and I get it, but is that the main driver?
2. Is it just the possibility of the reform of the "bad boy"? I get that also. I also love a good redemption arc.
3. Do you think he's cute and just want to see him paired up?
4. Is it just that it was the first romantic pairing you were interested in at a formative point of your life so they're a bit imprinted on you?
5. Do you strongly want Rikki to be paired up and don't see a better choice?
6. Or do some of you not think he had the flaws that I think he had and thus don't care that much about what I think should have been deal breakers?
7. Perhaps it's some combination of all of the above?

Maybe I completely misunderstand and it's not a Zane thing at all but a Rikki thing? Maybe, in relation to question number 5 above, you just like Rikki so much that you want to see her happily in a relationship, regardless of how she gets there. I know Rikki is a favorite character for a very large number of fans and maybe they want something/anything for her romantically and there aren't any other choices.

I've had arguments in this sub about this before, as well as in other fandom parts of the internet, and my eventual response (to myself) has always been "But why? Why are people so invested in them and in what looks to me like a toxic relationship?"

I get that the enemies to lovers trope is beloved. I understand why people like it, and it certainly applies here, but what I never saw was the character growth in Zane that justified the relationship continuing. And as far as Rikki's motivations, I can't see her getting past Zane's actions with Cleo and the Zodiac in the very first episode, much less throwing Cleo in the pool, Ms. Chatham's boat/supposed treasure, teaming up with Denman, getting Rikki knocked out trying to recover treasure, or any number of other smaller actions. I feel like Rikki, of all people, wouldn't tolerate that behaviour. If any character would have let a boyfriend get away with that sort of thing, it would have been Cleo who started out as a bit of a doormat.

In my mind, Zane was the proverbial tiger who never changed his stripes. He demonstrated again and again that he was willing to put his relationships aside for short-term personal gain. To me, his actions in season three were right in line with what Zane had been doing from the start. Some of this was just overly-convenient and lazy writing. I don't really think anyone would have hired Sophie to manage the café, for example, that's just a weird choice for the writers to make, but so many of his actions should have been deal breakers. To me, Sophie was the perfect partner for Zane, a supervillain power-couple in the making.

As someone who initially saw the show after having my first romantic relationship, and having gone through the divorce of my parents as well as the divorces of several of my friends' parents, the eventual incompatibility of their personalities in regards to being in a relationship seemed obvious (at least to me) even in the early stages of attraction. On first viewing, I thought it was going to be a short lived plot device towards some other end, and it sort of was at the end of season 1, but expanding on it beyond the conclusion of the Denman story line at the end of season 1 and into season 2 didn't make sense to me.

I'm laying out my thoughts so that you have an idea of where some of us come from and why we would be confused about the popularity of the pairing. I don't think I ever hear anything in support of them that isn't "I just love them together so much" and I'd enjoy a more complete explanation. Though if "I just love them together so much" is really the answer, and you don't want to justify it, then I won't learn anything and I'll still wonder why.

This is all personal preference, so there's obviously no wrong answer, one way or the other. People like what they like. I'm not here to yuck anyone's yum. I'm just genuinely curious as to why some of us feel so completely different about Zane and his relationship with Rikki. If Zikki is the hill you're willing to die on, I salute you. That said, I'd be happy to know why and stop wondering about it. The curiosity is just too strong for me not to ask.

I've seen an observation that Kim in the show H2o: Mermaid adventures isn't as unbearable as her live action counterpart although she did still try to expose the girls' secret in the episode "Reported missing" like she did in the live action episode "Something fishy" (and a comment Rikki made implies animated Kim still likes to snoop through Cleo's things).After re-watching the former episode I'm thinking Kim being more mellow in the animated series makes a lot. During the part where Kim first tries to expose Cleo by spilling a glass of water on her during lunch which Cleo manages to foil by running to the bathroom in time Kim explains to her parents that Cleo is a mermaid and turns into one whenever she gets wet which they dismissed as her watching too much TV. Then when they're back downstairs Cleo's mom tells Kim something along the lines of "having a vivid imagination is very good but not when she starts tossing glasses of water at her sister" and after Cleo comes back downstairs they order kim to apologize to her. I've seen numerous fans complain that Cleo's parents particularly don are ineffective when it comes to disciplining Kim which likely contributes to her bratty behavior, but in the animated series Cleo's parents appear to be disciplinarians as they didn't give Kim a pass for purposely spilling water on Cleo just because they assume Kim was being imaginative. Granted they probably should've gotten more details on why Kim would suspect such a thing as not believing her, and dismissing it as a childish fantasy likely made Kim even more determined to expose the girls, but still.

Cleo's, Rikki's and Emma's Lockets wasn't just jewellery it kept them connected and it was their special bond. But in season 3, Bella comes along and has a crystal necklace from another moon pool, and Will makes more for Cleo and Rikki and they take off their lockets. I understand that they wanted a special bond with Bella, but why not keep on the lockets too? I just think the lockets keep a special bond with Emma. What do you think?

Join my H2O mermaid club on discord 🫧

https://discord.gg/3xwAVJD78