orza

I didn't say Emma made Robin a widower. Someone claimed that Regina killed Marion and that is simply not true. That never happened due to Emma and Hook time traveling.

I know that Hook and Emma remember those events, I just said that. However, recalling those events is not proof that they happened. That's why it's called a paradox of time travel. This is just variation of the grandfather paradox. The action of the time travelers create a consistency paradox that cannot be resolved. Some people have a hard time wrapping their heads around the idea of a temporal paradox and want to explain it away logically, but that is not possible. That's the nature of a paradox. A&E were very clear at the time that this is not a multiverse, meaning that there are no alternate or parallel timelines that spring into existence when the time travelers change things. In a singleverse, which is what we have here, the timeline is mutable and can be "rewritten" much like the Author can rewrite a story at will on the show.

Regina didn't kill Marion. That bit of villainy never happened and Regina has no memory of it. Just like Snow and Charming's memory of how they met is only what was shown in Snow Drifts, not what happened in Snow Falls. This a consistency paradox of time travel. Emma and Hook as the time travelers remember events that didn't happened because their presence and actions prevented those events from happening. We as viewers remember those events because we are not part of the story. Yes, that means that Emma and Hook they wiped out some of the events we saw in season 1, like how Emma's parents met. That doesn't take anything away from the season 1 episodes. We can still enjoy them for what they are.

No, Robin was only available to data Regina because Emma, through her clumsiness, inserted herself into the timeline and altered it. This was not a multiverse, so the "original" timeline never happened. We now the timeline was altered, but the characters in the show only know the altered reality. They had to take Emma's word for it that the timeline was changed.

Meh, the crazy people making death threats are isolated cases. It doesn't take much to be better than that. I can think of about 5 or 6 forums off the top of my head where people can discuss the show and their favorites and it isn't an echo chamber. No, not a Regina fan, or a fan of any particular character. I do enjoy Rumple when he is not interacting with Belle, but that's mostly because I enjoy Robert Carlyle's work. I watch the show with my family and we enjoy for what it is as family entertainment without getting overinvested in it. The kids love it but when it stops being entertaining we'll stop watching. It's just tv, after all.

I gotta disagree with that. The posters here are no different from anywhere else on the internet - overinvested in their favorites and excessive, over-the-top bashing of everything else.

I dunno, looking around at other forums and fan sites, there's a lot of excitement about the upcoming Evil Queen story line and people are looking forward to it. There is not the abject hate for Regina and her alter ego elsewhere that one finds on this forum. Fan interests and favorites seem to be more balanced.

Based on the titles, I don't see any studies there showing the relationship between internet usage and tv viewing habits or documenting the actual demographics of fans interacting with writers on Twitter. Judging by some fan interactions social media, it would seem that many of those fans are immature and poorly educated and not affluent, well-educated millennials. But one can be surprised. I have often assumed some forum posters going on and on about their TV crushes and ships were were overwrought, teenagers and then they casually mention visiting colleges with their teenage children or doing stuff with the grandkids. Apparently, it's a thing for middle-aged women to carry on like 15-year-olds. In any case, networks have their own market research departments for a reason because gut feelings based on casual observations on a very small number of overinvested fans on the internet cannot be trusted.

What data is there to support that? One would need to design and conduct a survey of a representative population of internet users to collect that data.

Lots of people enjoy the panel and find it entertaining. Those who find it pointless can ignore it and let others have their fun.

The polling and market research industry puts a lot of effort into selecting participants who are representative of the various demographics they are interested in for their surveys. Participant selection criteria is the secret sauce that in large part determines a pollster's accuracy. The same cannot be said for the people on social media. We know nothing about them or even if these are all different individuals or just a small number of people with a lot of sock accounts. They don't represent anyone but themselves so their views and opinions cannot be generalized to a population.

Shows have millions of viewers, but rough ballpark tallies of unique usernames interacting with show runners and writers on social media show that the number of fans active online is a tiny fraction of total viewership, many cases way less than 1%. It's easy enough to avoid exposure to show runners and writers talking about the episodes and it's also easy enough to skip over such post in forum discussions. I notice in a lot of episode discussion threads that some people have obviously only watched the episode with at best one eye and ear, perhaps because they were too busy live tweeting or on other social media or otherwise distracted. They ask questions indicating they missed major plot points and expository dialog, even whole scenes. Then they go ask the writers to explain what they just saw, or missed in some cases.

The apple is part of the product branding. Changing that is a big deal, so not something a graphic designer can decide. I don't think it is necessarily a bad thing when the people who carry the fiduciary responsibility have a say in look and feel of the end product andrein in the designers. Sometimes the graphics designers are also clueless and get caught up in design fads or expressing their own ideas without regard for the target demographic the network is trying to reach. Just look at the current trends in web design that use tiny grey fonts on a grey background making many web pages difficult to read and very user-unfriendly. So many cringe-worthy web sites out there that hipster designers no doubt think are cool.

Meh, the apple is recognizable and, apparently, people at the network like it or it wouldn't still be used. The graphics for this show are no worse than many other shows.

I like it. The apple has been the symbol of the show since the pilot. I'm glad they are not dropping it. The season 5 posters featured Emma and Hook because we had an entire season that was all about them. This season is about Regina so she is on the poster. Makes sense.

Of course we can consider it rock bottom. I found it believable that Regina was emotionally at rock bottom. Still having her magic and material possessions does not make up for the loss of her child. That's something many people never recover from. There is really no comparison between losing her magic and losing her child. It is entirely possible and happens all the time in real life that one still has the appearance of having a good life but is emotionally at rock bottom. Why do rich people commit suicide, or affluent stay-at-home mommies get addicted to benzos, or any number of other examples from real life? How Regina experienced the loss of her child had nothing to do with what other characters went through emotionally. Loss is a very individual thing and shouldn't be compared to see whose suffering is more righteous. There is no pain and suffering scorecard. That would be dumb. No one is walking on eggshells. Everything does not have to be "fair" with each character getting exactly the same amount of screen time, snappy one-liners, emotional moments, etc. Keeping score is pointless. I have also not seen anything on this show that I would consider actual verbal abuse. Not every unkind remark is abusive.

From what I understand both are awful, truly cringe-worthy. People have no taste.

What you describe is not entirely different. It is very similar with some details changed. It sounds very much like all the Storybrook High School and Pretty Woman fan fiction floating around the internet. It's still taking someone else's intellectual property, changing it just enough to avoid legal issues and passing it off as one's own original work. This sounds like someone who has the hots for Robert Carlyle as he was in his prime and used his current work as a basis for a self-indulgent fan fiction.

So how is that not Rumple fan fiction? Making superficial changes to the story or setting doesn't make it an original work when the characters and backstory are all pilfered.

He has been an occasional "guest starring" background actor, not a regular cast member so I don't see how he can leave the show, as he says, when he's not under contract. Maybe he got a full-time job that pays better than scale. The show is a union shop they can't pay less than scale. The SAG-AFTRA rates are binding. A studio can pay more than scale but not less.

Actors are working when they go to conventions. They get paid very well for their appearance. It's a business arrangement. Their job is to interact and entertain the crowd. Most people have the perspective and common sense to know that everything is all in fun there and don't take it too seriously. Actors can talk to the writers about whatever they want. There's nothing wrong with that. But unless the actor is someone like Mark Harmon the writers are still gonna write the show the network wants. No one is being thrown under the bus and what Lana says at conventions will have no negative impact on the show or her career. The loud overinvested fans of every stripe are in reality miniscule groups out there on the fringe who vastly overestimate their own numbers and importance.

Lana is no different from other actors who go to conventions, give interviews and in general promote their careers as they see fit. That doesn't make her a bitch, not in the least. It is unkind and uncalled for to denigrate actors (and writers) who are just doing their job and trying to make a living. As someone wrote recently in this thread, I believe, an actor working on his career is really running a small business and the product is the actor himself. This product needs constant promotion and marketing to be successful in the long term. Whether one chooses to play to the convention crowds and tease and cater to one's most ardent fans or give interviews and hold forth in a touchy-feely pseudo-intellectual tone about one's art, both are legitimate and time-honored ways to promote one's career.

The mod posted that we can talk about details. If you are referring Maimie McCoy's pregnancy as the reason she was not in this season much, that's been mentioned in the mainstream press. I thought the romance between Athos and Sylvie took up too much time and was not very interesting. Sylvie was not a compelling character and Athos worked better as the brooding loner..

And how about "myself" instead of "me", as in "Please ask Bob or myself.". I find that one annoying, too.

No, those are just a few examples. There are plenty more.