scarynikki12

I think it's more that harming/killing a pregnant character is taboo for television, especially network television, and it's getting dressed up as being taboo for vampires when, logically, it shouldn't matter given how easily they kill humans as it is. Damon would only start aging if a vampire drains the cure from his body like Silas with Katherine. If he manages to avoid vampires, then he won't age but he should know how unlikely that is. Damon himself was always the first one to drain humans wherever he went and without a second thought, so he knows that he's unlikely to be believed if he tells them they'll become human. Any vampire who hears that would assume he's lying to save himself. To return to your question, though, yes he would rapidly age to his 166 years and die after being drained.

Katherine only started aging after Silas drank the cure from her body. If that hadn't happened then, presumably, she'd have lived a normal human lifespan (not including getting killed) rather than an accelerated one.

That was so great! Everyone, including me, thought that Cap would be the only other Avenger to hold Mjolnir, as per comics, but this really worked. It was a great way of quickly showing the team that the Vision was a good guy and the resulting expressions were priceless. This also made me more convinced that Cap will get his moment with Mjolnir in the next Avengers installment and I think it will be glorious. Agreed and agreed. I thought the way the various cameos and supporting characters were used was really clever. I was worried that Hayley's cameo would somehow bring Peggy's death, so I was relieved and delighted to see her and Steve finally have their dance. Elizabeth Olsen really was a great addition. I've liked her in everything I've seen her in and I'm so happy she was able to shine in this monster of a movie. I admit, I didn't see Natasha and Banner coming, but I thought it was well written and definitely well acted. I don't know that I can truly support it since I believe she still fears the Hulk even if she values that contribution and such a relationship really can't be sustained. Plus, Banner doesn't know how to control the Hulk enough to have a romantic relationship, as evidenced by the second Hulk movie when he tried to get busy with Betty and almost Hulked out. All that said, I loved watching Natasha face her fear of the Hulk by being the one to bring back Banner with the lullaby. I loved Thanos' cameo. "I guess I'll have to do it myself" was a fantastic way to end this movie and drive us crazy with the knowledge that we won't see the next installment for years. I can't wait to see it again.

The thing about True Detective, to use his example, is that the story encompassed more than twenty years. So, no, it wasn't important if the present day interviews were on a Thursday but knowing specific details like day of the week and time of day would be important when determining if a suspect had opportunity to commit the crime. I freely admit to being anal about television timelines already but this show really only rivals The Vampire Diaries when it comes to making my head explode. The first four seasons of TVD took place over two years, and it was frustrating the entire time. And my timeline issues with that show are the same as this one: all these horrible things happen, usually by one or more of the main characters, and the victims are expected to get over it the next day. These events need to breathe so that it's more believable that the characters work through the trauma and, yes, find a way to forgive the perpetrator if it comes to that. The Charmings drop a bomb on Emma, destroying her trust and the next episode she's being told to get over it. A week had gone by for the audience but a mere twelve hours had elapsed for Emma. Let her feel her anger and sadness at their betrayal for a few days before trying to get her to consider moving past it. Snow didn't even get maternity leave since she was in the Mayor's office and then her classroom mere days after Snowflake was born. Snowflake himself is, what, 2-3 months old? At this point the show will end and he'll still be too young to walk. A timeline that follows real time would work wonders for this show.

I think what the show is trying to prove with Lily's dark influence would work better if she had negative fallout from her actions, no matter how innocent. Why not have her on the run because she made her parents dinner for their anniversary but accidentally caused a fire that quickly spread and her parents ended up in the hospital to be treated for burns and smoke inhalation? I could see a teenager being so traumatized by such an event that she runs away. Or, just have a bunch of examples of bad luck throughout her childhood that increase in severity until she's convinced that her family is in danger by being around her. The final straw could even be that a seemingly minor accident causes the death of one of her parents or a sibling. Then, upon learning about magic, the Curse, and what the Charmings did, it would make all the sense in the world for her to lose it and want revenge. Say she did accidentally cause the death of her parents. I would feel a lot of sympathy and understanding if she believed that they would be alive today had the Charmings not imbued her with guaranteed darkness. Logically, they may very well have died from the same accident but learning that she was magically disposed to be unlucky and have bad results from her choices? I can easily see such a person going dark. It could even parallel Emma's journey to darkness as both would be coming from a place of love. Lily could give into the darkness while Emma finds away to resist and figure out a way to stop her without killing her (since heroes never kill and all that). I still don't like the current trend of Emma and/or Snow calling out Regina when they're in a somewhat altered state of mind. Snow stood up for her ten year old self under the influence of the Shattered Sight spell but has no backbone when unaffected by magic. Emma calls out Regina for holding what has to be a 50ish year grudge against ten year old Snow for Cora's actions (the Curse was 28 years long and I think Snow was in her late twenties when it was cast, with Regina being unaffected, so she held that grudge a very long time) and points out that Regina planned to go to New York and attack Zelena much like Emma did with that guy at Lily's old apartment yet both times Emma's clearly shown to not be in her right state of mind. I wouldn't be surprised if we do see Emma bring up Regina burning Snow at the stake before she returns from her Skywalker cosplay, and then none of this will ever get mentioned again. I'd much rather have seen Snow and Emma be allowed to rant and rave at Regina for everything she's done, getting it out of their systems, and then forgiving her rather than putting them under spells or going dark before they're allowed to acknowledge it.

I think your assessment of Emma's POV is accurate. My concern is that I believe that the audience is supposed to agree with said POV and see Lily as nothing more than a victim of the Charmings rather than her own actions. We're supposed to see that she made bad choices, yes, but that they aren't her fault. That, somehow, Emma's belief that she failed Lily when she pushed her away is the truth of the situation. We all see that Lily was a toxic friend whose actions did nothing but hurt Emma emotionally and, potentially, physically. But I don't think the show is pushing that perspective. I think the show wants us to believe that Lily's life would have been better if Emma had stuck by her rather than the more likely scenario of Emma's life being much worse. I think the show wants us to believe that Lily's life was somehow worse than Emma's even though the former was adopted and raised by a loving family while the latter was moved from home to home with no lasting relationships. I also agree that, based on what we know of Lily, it's far more likely that she just ran away again, if only because I don't know that families can legally kick their children out before a certain age and the girls are, what, 14? If her family could legally kick her out at such a young age, then maybe they did get sick of her but her father was shown looking for her in the fall flashback so I can't imagine such a swift turn around unless she murdered a sibling or something. Anyway, her opening defense for her actions was that Emma would be taking part in the family chore wheel. That doesn't sound like a teenager whose home life is so horrible she's better off on the street. It sounds like a spoiled child who was possibly asked to help out around the house for the first time (given how she fixated on the chore wheel) and ran away to stick it to her parents. If Lily was spoiled, that's her parents fault but it isn't a good reason to run away and start committing crimes. Logically, I would assume that Lily's parents continued to look for her until she faked her death, then had a beautiful, and sad, funeral and continue to mourn her loss every day. Yet I expect her to treat Mal as her only parent and the show to expect us to do the same.

With Burke, end of season 1/beginning of season 2. She had an ectopic pregnancy and Addison had to remove one of her tubes to save her life.

The Hogwarts teachers also made a decree that students who were of age could stay behind, while the younger ones were required to leave for their own safety. Hence the description of underage Colin Creevy sneaking back to the school to help fight. Malfoy was always shown as being the leader of the Slytherins in his year or, at least, none of them challenged his authority. So, it's very possible that there were many Slytherin students who wanted to fight against Voldemort but were underage. Colin was the only example we have of an underage student returning to fight so we know that there were plenty Gryffindors, Ravenclaws, and Hufflepuffs who left despite having a desire to pitch in. We also know that Draco's future wife, Astoria, was underage at this time and we know that she turned her back on the pureblood supremacist ideals they were both raised with. She didn't stay behind but I wouldn't be surprised if her eyes were already open as to what Voldemort, the Death Eaters, and the supremacists really meant for the Wizarding and Muggle worlds. Maybe she realized this during that year of school, maybe before, but I think it's a safe bet. It's probably Northumbrian, as I don't remember Rowling explicitly stating how many Aurors were targeted that year. We know Dirk Cresswell escaped his escort to Azkaban* and was later murdered with Ted and that goblin but he's the only one we're told of. I do think that's probably accurate even if a guess. The Death Eaters would have had to take out the real threats in the Auror office and the Department of Magical Law Enforcement. My own headcanon is that Umbridge and/or Fudge let Lucius Malfoy know that Amelia Bones gave Harry a fair trial, including showing his testimony respect, and that led to the timing of her murder. I think she'd have been targeted no matter what due to her position, but Harry's trial tipped them off as to how much of a threat she was to their cause and they murdered her as soon as Voldemort's return was confirmed by the Ministry. Going back to Dumbledore, I did like those moments where we saw his real reactions to specific people/events. There's the well known flash of triumph at learning Voldemort used Harry's blood to rise again and his rage at the fake Moody, but I always love the anger that takes over when he tells Harry about Neville's parents and the grief when he speaks of Amelia Bones' murder. He was always so in control of himself and whatever situation he was in that these flashes of emotion make him more human. *Dawlish getting Confunded over and over is one of my favorite recurring bits. Neville makes me laugh the most: "Dawlish is still in St. Mungo's and Gran's on the run" will never not be funny. I do feel bad for the character but I still laugh.

What I want to know is: who finished Henry's book? Isaac was imprisoned before it ended yet Henry was able to read about Regina killing her father, casting the Curse, Snow giving birth, Charming placing Emma in the wardrobe, getting stabbed by Regina's guards, Snow thinking he was dead and Regina standing triumphant over them as the Curse gave her her happy ending. Who wrote all that? I wonder if we'll ever know.

Khaleesi is the title of Daenerys Targaryen on Game of Thrones, given to her when she married Khal Drogo in the first episode and it basically translates as Queen. Westeros is where everyone else is as well as the kingdom she plans to conquer and rule. She's been across the sea for the entire story and hasn't made her move yet but everyone knows she will. Hope that clears it up.

I always saw it as Slytherin being the house that was slowly corrupted over time and had become the house of pureblood supremacy and general magical prejudice by the time Harry arrived. When Hogwarts began, I imagine all of the houses contained students from families that agreed with Salazar Slytherin's preference for purebloods over Muggleborns. Maybe some of them even removed their kids from the school when he left. The Gaunts certainly hadn't attended Hogwarts so it's possible that some branches of certain magical families chose to either home school their kids or just send them to Durmstrang, Beauxbatons, or one of the other schools that didn't get named. Most of them obviously would have changed their minds and their descendents returned to Hogwarts. Maybe it was because they didn't want to do the teaching themselves, maybe they noticed their kids were behind magically and let the value of the education override their desire to avoid non-purebloods, or maybe they just didn't like the idea of their kids being so far away. By the time Harry was in school Slytherin was well known for its prejudices, so I always thought it was obvious that the supremacists had just taken over the house throughout the generations. The more recent graduates becoming Death Eaters, or at least not voicing objection to Voldemort's plan, would turn off a lot of students who have the classic Slytherin traits but not the prejudices. Like the hat told him, Harry would have done well in Slytherin and may very well have ended up there had he not been made aware that it was Voldemort's house before his Sorting. This is actually why I think that most students go into the Sorting with a specific house in mind and that overrides whether their personalities actually match up to the house description. Zacharias Smith's personality fit far better with Malfoy and the other Slytherins yet he was in Hufflepuff. The assumption has always been that he's related to Hepzibah (Smith is a very common last name but the wizarding world is small enough that anyone with the same last name tends to be related), a known descendent of Helga, so he may very well have gone into his Sorting expecting to follow family tradition and that overruled any chance of being put in Slytherin. To mention Sirius and Andromeda again, Sirius clearly expected to be Slytherin and Andromeda was, yet neither was a supremacist. They just were members of the Black family and Blacks were always in Slytherin. For every student like Slughorn or Lily, who were placed into Slytherin and Gryffindor based on personality, it seems that there were dozens who were placed based on their own preexisting expectations, even if those expectations made them unhappy. So, it isn't that Slytherin is the evil house, as that wouldn't make any kind of sense for a school, but that it had recently been so corrupted by the supremacist families that anyone who could help restore its reputation chose to be in the other houses. I like that Rowling actually gave us many examples of that corruption when she could have fallen back on letting everyone assume they were evil just because they didn't like Harry.

Or just someone like Sirius, who was expected to be in Slytherin and was unhappy due to his dislike of his family. If he hadn't met James he probably would have been sorted according to tradition rather than (I assume) ask to be in Gryffindor instead. Or maybe even a character like Andromeda, who was in Slytherin like the rest of the family but clearly didn't agree with their pureblood supremacy. She may very well have had a difficult time in school, especially if she started her relationship with Ted before graduation. There are so many ways to tell that story. I wonder if she could be persuaded to write some short stories about various students from the other houses to give us some different perspectives.

Neville and Ron were only Aurors for a short while before they quit to work at Hogwarts and WWW respectively, so I just fanwank it as Kingsley ordering a complete overhaul of the Auror office. After Vold War 2 ended, the British Wizarding World would want to make sure that the corruption and influence of the Death Eaters was completely removed from the Ministry and staff the offices with trusted witches and wizards. Harry, Ron and Neville would all make sense given the roles each played against Voldemort and at the Battle of Hogwarts in particular. I would assume the same would be true throughout the Ministry. Once there was consistent confidence in the Ministry, from within and the general public, I would imagine Neville, Ron and other temporary Ministry workers took their cues and left for other jobs. As for their lack of NEWTS, I've always wondered about that. We know Ron and Harry chose to not go back and complete their seventh year and Neville's was a sham thanks to Voldemort and the Carrows, but I've always assumed that taking the tests was different from completing school. We know that Crabbe and Goyle failed their DADA OWL but Snape explicitly mentions that they had the option to take that test again, so I've always assumed that a witch or wizard who is seventeen/eighteen could take the test but was unlikely to pass without adequate preparation from class. That would be how those who home schooled could still enter the workforce, to provide another example. I honestly don't remember if Rowling said that they didn't take NEWTS or just didn't complete their final year. If they still took the tests, then I could understand meeting qualifications to join the Auror office. That, or maybe they just put Neville on Herbology duty and kept Ron far away from any Potions. I've thought about the classes at Hogwarts way too much to be honest. We know that Fred and George only go three OWLS each, yet they seemed to be taking more than three classes in their final years at school. I counted at one point and they were both taking DADA, Herbology, Charms, and Transfiguration for sure, with Care of Magical Creatures and Potions implied. The most logical explanation is that Rowling miscounted but I like to think that they continued to study at the pre-OWL level, retook the tests, passed, and we just weren't told because it wasn't relevant to Harry's story. So, even though Neville didn't take Transfiguration or Potions at NEWT level, I can fanwank it that he continued to take them at pre-OWL level and that's how he earned that qualification. That, or his year of defiance in book 7 included lots of private study of countless ways to undermine the Death Eater regime, including the previously difficult transfiguration and potions. There are a lot of ways to imagine Neville getting the level of education needed to be an Auror for a while. Same for Ron and Harry, though I agree the implications of the education requirements being ignored can be unsettling. I know a language course wouldn't have fit in the story Rowling was telling but I've always been curious how that could be incorporated into the curriculum at Hogwarts. Dumbledore and Barty Crouch both knew many languages, and there's an entire department at the Ministry devoted to International Magical Cooperation, yet there's nothing to indicate how the witches and wizards learn these languages. I'm sure there's some kind of translation spell or object to make work easier, but I'd love to see those courses offered at Hogwarts post-VW2. They could teach Mermish, Gobbledygook, and Parseltongue, to name the three prominent ones from the books. Or, they could simply offer human languages. It could be interesting seeing witches and wizards learning incantations in Mandarin or Swahili, as I presume only the Romance and Germanic based languages use Latin for spellcasting. I honestly have no opinion on the Slytherin perception but I do think that what Dumbledore said to Snape is true: they sort too soon. These students come to Hogwarts and most of them already know which house they want to be in. In most cases they fit in fine, but I think this would be true for most of them no matter which house they got. If they had to keep the house and Sorting system, I think they could delay it by a couple of years. Cast a few spells and create dormitories on the main level: one for the first years and one for the second. Each one is then separated by gender, but everyone would live together and get to know one another without the pressure of their house. Then, at the end of their second year, there is a private Sorting Ceremony, with just the student, Head, Deputy Head, and maybe the ghosts to act as witnesses. When each student gets Sorted, they then enter the next room and where the prefects are waiting. None of the incoming third years know what house their friends were sorted into and the fewer witnesses means less pressure. When the Sorting is done, the new house members are brought into the Great Hall for the end of year feast, which replaces the House Cup (which I thought worked for the books but hate as a concept). The Head does a closing speech, congratulating the houses on their new members and everyone leaves. It wouldn't be perfect, as there would be plenty of chances for pressure to be applied in the lead up to the ceremony, but the student's choice also doesn't seem to be common knowledge either so it could still be explained away to anyone getting upset. Conversely, they could just do away with the houses altogether, set up the Ravenclaw Tower for the girls and the Gryffindor Tower for the boys and turn the Huffelpuff and Slytherin dorms into something else. Or vice versa.

I like reading what writers and producers have to say about their product but it tends to work better when said product is finished. Rowling talking about Harry Potter? I'm first in line to read how she crafted the story and characters and her intentions with both. Spielberg talking about the making of Jaws? I'm eager to read why certain changes were made and how he shot the USS Indianapolis scene. Roddenberry giving an interview about the societal influences on Star Trek? Let me grab the popcorn. A behind the scenes person (writer, producer, director, executive, actor, etc) talking about a movie, TV, or book series that is still in process? It depends. I've noticed that if the person in question is talking about how they approached the project, without making assumptions on how it was perceived, then it can be really interesting insight. It only truly bothers me when they are aware of audience response and are trying to change minds before the next installment. The Spike example is perfect for this. If the producers, directors, writers, and/or Marsters had given interviews where they talked about approaching that finale with a level of ambiguity, maybe because they feared spoilers getting leaked, then great. Everyone involved with the conception and execution of those scenes could talk about that and it could have been really interesting. Instead we got interviews that were designed to convince us that we'd all suffered a mass hallucination and Spike really did want his soul back so that he could be with Buffy rather than finding a way to punish her for successfully fighting off his rape attempt. I've always thought the interview retconning was an example of the producers regretting some of their choices for Spike and not wanting to put any energy into trying to make it work for the next season. At some point they decided that Spike's obsession with Buffy and her post-resurrection need for self destruction were merely the foundation for a real relationship (rather than a formula for horrific murder) and ignored everything they'd done previously. And the shippers ran with it (I can think of three I know in real life who were thrilled with those interviews because they also interpreted those scenes the way so many of us did and couldn't handle the idea that their favorite character just might be a monster after all), so the show kept up the retcon.

Television has been pushing this idea for so long it barely registers with me anymore. I think every show I've watched has embraced it unironically at some point. I will say that Once is the rare show that flat out states it while the others prefer to imply on screen and then have the producers talk about it at press events. One thing that happened last night that I did catch was that Emma had her "evil" look on her face when she told off Regina for spending a lifetime seeking revenge against a ten year old. It reminded me of how Snow has only defended herself against Regina when they were under the Shattered Sight Spell. It seems that neither woman will ever seriously mention this or any of Regina's crimes when in a normal state of mind. What that tells me is that the two mentions were supposed to be symptoms of whatever is affecting them (the spell, going dark) and, therefore, not accurate. Sometimes I wonder if the show is trolling all of us and will truly address our concerns only when we reach the final season (and no longer have to worry about ratings or renewal) but I know I'm not that lucky.

I think Emma crossed a line by stopping Cruella from killing Henry and finally getting him off my screen, but that's clearly not what the show was going for.

I think Henry would have hit some invisible barrier keeping him from going over the cliff. She was unable to use the gun against Isaac so I assume any attempts would fail along similar lines.

This episode really blew the "evil isn't born, it's made" claim out of the water. Don't think they realized it though.

I knew Cruella would die first.

Continuing my train of thought from the Once vs Other Fairy Tales thread, as these comments are more general, I think an established set of rules regarding magic would have gone a long way towards leveling the playing field between characters and making things make sense in general. Regina told Emma in season 1 that magic is unpredictable and works differently in our world yet there's honestly no evidence of this. Regina was able to crush Graham's heart into dust (which she intended), she and Jefferson were able to retrieve the apple (which she intended), the Sleeping Curse put Henry into a death like state (which Regina intended even if the wrong person ate it), True Love's Kiss broke both the Sleeping Curse and the Dark Curse (which was an established way to break the former-and therefore consistent, while unintended for the latter-though not unknown since it hadn't ever been cast before), Rumpel was able to bring magic to Storybrooke and regain his powers (which he intended), that magically imbued scarf kept his memories in tact in New York (which he intended), Zelena's glamour pendant allows her to fool Robin (which she intended), Regina's True Love Kiss for Henry broke the Dark Curse the second time around (which may not have occurred to any of them but firmly established it as the way to break it so I'm putting it in the intended column) and the villains are able to do exactly what they want when it comes to magic. There's no indication that what Regina told Emma was true. She may have believed it, as she couldn't use magic until the True Love vial went into the well and she inhaled that book, but that doesn't mean she was right. Magic has been unpredictable when Emma uses it (which only seems to be because she's still learning) but there's no indication that it ever worked differently for anyone even before Rumpel brought it back en mass. Mainly, I just wish the show would remember and build upon what first got us all hooked in season 1 rather than constantly changing the various motivations and characterizations to suit whatever twist they've dreamed up.

Forgive the novel but I've been thinking about the rules of magic in this show and, as I always do, I inevitably end up comparing it to my beloved Harry Potter. Naturally, I find it lacking, as Rowling did a great job of world building in general and with the rules of magic in particular while I strongly feel that this show has made some real mistakes in this regard. Thinking about Dark Magic, in the Potter world those spells are shown to be very dangerous (Avada Kedavra), often unstable (Fiendfyre), and require serious intent (Harry failing to effectively use the Cruciatus Curse in book 5 and then succeeding with the Imperious Curse in book 7). We're shown that Dark magic is so risky that often only the worst of the worst will use it. The results are also irreversible depending on the spell. Neville's parents never recover from being subjected to the Cruciatus Curse, wizards (save Harry) who find themselves on the receiving end of the Killing Curse always die, and anyone who creates Fiendfyre better know how to stop it otherwise it will blaze out of control with no end in sight. Rowling's world building establishes all of this. Once, on the other hand, established that the fairies can't use magic without their wands but that seems to be the only consistent rule (and only to explain why the fairies aren't constantly leveling the playing field against the villains). There's no set rule on who can or can't use magic. Regina and Cora were able to learn magic pretty easily yet there's no explanation as to why. Conversely, there's no explanation as to why the Charmings, or anyone for that matter, can't learn magic either. Emma and Zelena are both presented as being born with automatic magical abilities yet neither is presented as a crazy powerful magical practitioner on the show, which could be a logical distinction between the born and the learned (and would be a simple reason Rumpel needed to get multiple magical practitioners on his side to turn Emma dark). Regina defeated Zelena with magic she'd never even used before and Emma gets stopped time and again when she goes up against the magical villains. Snow was able to cast the Dark Curse even though it's been established that she's not a practitioner and likely never will be (and makes me wonder why Rumpel wasted his time teaching Regina magic since all he needed to do was convince her to sacrifice her father and take care of the magic himself like Regina did with Snow). There is also only one effect from using dark magic on the show: a darkened heart. At first, I assumed this would be the show equivalent of soul splitting from Potter. In Potter, if a wizard commits murder, he/she splits the soul, which is then shown to have serious, potentially permanent, consequences. On Once, the only consequence of having a dark heart is the color change. There's no indication that behavior, abilities, relationships, etc. are affected when the heart darkens. Sure Rumpel's seems to be turning on him but, when he inevitably heals at season's end (not a spoiler, just what I assume will happen based on the series to date), I doubt it will ever change color even if he devotes himself to being a good person for eternity. At first it seemed like the show was going with personality changes when the heart was removed but then they went against it by showing that neither Cora, Regina, nor Hook changed personality when their were removed. They've tried to claim that Cora would have been a loving mother to Regina, rather than a power hungry social climber, had she not removed her heart but the circumstances surrounding her abandonment of Zelena implies otherwise. Graham claimed to not be able to feel anything but his behavior didn't seem different so it's hard to tell if he was being truthful or was rationalizing the constant abuse that Regina inflicted upon him. Hook kissed Emma a bit more forcefully after his heart was taken but that was it and his feelings for her didn't show any change. Regina removed her heart on two separate occasions and yet she showed no changes in behavior (she didn't attack Snow in the Enchanted Forest and we all saw her perform True Love's Kiss in Storybrooke). Unfortunately, I think it's too late for the show to set any rules about magic, as they would just contradict what has already been shown. It's just an avoidable annoyance.

I'm really looking forward to this now that Daredevil has proven that Marvel works just fine on Netflix. I haven't been reading show reports beyond casting, as I don't want to be too spoiled but I am wondering about Tennant. What accent will he be using?

I just tell myself that she uses the daily lenses and keeps a few days worth in her jacket pockets in case of emergencies.

I always thought that either Prince John or King Richard could have worked for Regina. It would depend on whether they were their Disney versions, as Disney John is more suited (a power and money hungry nut who is willing to stomp on his subjects to get what he wants) as is Real Richard (was perfectly fine destroying lives while waging that, to quote Disney John, "crazy Crusade"). Regina would find a lot of common ground with either man. They both have the lion thing going on as well if the tattoo had to be in play. I do agree that there was no need for Regina to get a love interest this early in the series, but I think the show got bored with repairing her relationship with Henry and decided to distract us with the shiny new love interest. I feel like Robin was an instance where the producers were depending on the audience to be familiar with the legend and/or animated movie in lieu of actual character development. The problem, of course, is that Marian is a significant part of said legend and the way she was treated ultimately hurts Robin as a character. I'm still waiting for Lady Cluck to show up and beat Robin up like she did those hippos and rhinos for mistreating her Marian.

5 seasons used to be the standard. It's been changing in the last ten years, with some contracts starting at 6 while others start at 7 but that's why a lot of people think the Once cast may have signed for 5. Like FurryFurry just posted, Arrow's cast (other than Amell) has 3 year contracts, which has been a source of speculation as to whether or not various characters will be written off. It does ultimately depend on the show.