The Writers of OUAT: Because, Um, Magic, That's Why

[Souris]

Seconded, HoodlumSheep. His last tweet was in Jan on the importance of genetic testing for cancers - wonder if that was cause?

 

It was. He had a rare and very aggressive form of cancer. He posted a video about it. I wasn't a fan of his writing or his social media presence, but it really sucks.

 

Cancer sucks.

 

ETA: EW story.

Edited April 18, 2016 by Souris

[myril]

Sad news. Things can go so fast at times. And cancer is a beast.

Sorry for his family and friends.

[Curio]

Sad news about Scott. Hope his family is doing okay.

 

On a slightly less depressing note, I've been continuing my catch-up with Season 2 of Better Call Saul, and again, I had to laugh at the drastically different ways their writers attack "boring" everyday scenes versus OUAT's total aversion to including those scenes at all. Adam & Eddy constantly say how the audience would find scenes like Emma and Hook watching Netlix as not dramatic and how the audience would become bored if there wasn’t more action, but lo and behold, I just watched an episode where Jimmy and Kim are sitting on the couch and watching a movie. And guess what? It was still dramatic, slightly comedic, helped build their characterizations and relationship, and even had some built-up tension with a distracting phone call.

 

If the writers of Better Call Saul are able to find drama in having their characters watch a movie in their living room, then so can this show. Ideally, I’d just like to see Adam & Eddy tell the truth for once and say that they personally don’t find those scenes entertaining, instead of insulting the audience’s intelligence by saying we would find those kind of scenes boring. 

[YaddaYadda]

Curio, have you ever watched Penny Dreadful? I know it's not everyone's cup of tea, but the premise of the show is kind of similar to Once. You have Dracula, and Frankenstein, and these things exist in the real world. Even though they're always in crisis mode, they find time to have conversations. One of my favorite scenes by far is when Victor asks Vanessa to help him find a dress for his "second cousin" who will be coming to London. So they're there, in a shop, going around, looking at dresses, and he is so flustered because he has zero clue about this stuff. It was fun, and a moment of characters that go through a lot (Vanessa) having a moment to breathe.

Edited April 20, 2016 by YaddaYadda

[Mathius]

Ideally, I’d just like to see Adam & Eddy tell the truth for once and say that they personally don’t find those scenes entertaining, instead of insulting the audience’s intelligence by saying we would find those kind of scenes boring.

 

They did a similar thing by strawmanning the complaint about all villains being related to the heroes in some ways, saying one day they'll make this "Scott" villain who has no connection to them and just does bad things and messes with the heroes for the heck of it and then the audience would be all "OK, I get it now".  This is absurd, as not being connected to the heroes /=/ having no motivation to do evil and fight the heroes.  MANY great hero-villain matchups have been characters who have no familial or personal relation to each other.  The argument has gotten more ridiculous now that we have Hades, who judging from remarks on many sites seems to be a hit, who has no relationship to the heroes at all and has the sole motive of "I'm Lord of the Underworld, quit messing around with my business here!" with a side of "If I can break this curse on me, I can be free and take over the universe".  And that works just fine, no family tree connection required (and before anyone says it, no, his tryst with Zelena doesn't count, they never entered an actual relationship.)

Edited April 20, 2016 by Mathius

[Curio]

Curio, have you ever watched Penny Dreadful?

 

I haven't, but it's definitely been on my list of shows to pick up! That dress scene you described is exactly what we should have gotten between Emma and Snow before Captain Swan's first date.

 

They did a similar thing by strawmanning the complaint about all villains being related to the heroes in some ways, saying one day they'll make this "Scott" villain who has no connection to them and just does bad things and messes with the heroes for the heck of it and then the audience would be all "OK, I get it now".

 

Isn't that kind of what they did with Arthur? Maybe that's why the writers got so bored of him after a few episodes.

 

I wonder what Adam & Eddy feel about comedies. A lot of comments they make in interviews about always needing drama, not liking everyday scenes, and rarely allowing the characters play off each other naturally are all things that thrive in comedies. Do Adam & Eddy turn their noses up at sitcoms? Literally every scene of a sitcom is normal, human interactions where the characters drive the plot. I feel like this show would be a lot more entertaining if it was written more like a comedy with occasional dramatic elements instead of a drama with occasional comedic elements.

Edited April 20, 2016 by Curio

[Trepie]

Sad news about Scott. Hope his family is doing okay.

 

On a slightly less depressing note, I've been continuing my catch-up with Season 2 of Better Call Saul, and again, I had to laugh at the drastically different ways their writers attack "boring" everyday scenes versus OUAT's total aversion to including those scenes at all. Adam & Eddy constantly say how the audience would find scenes like Emma and Hook watching Netlix as not dramatic and how the audience would become bored if there wasn’t more action, but lo and behold, I just watched an episode where Jimmy and Kim are sitting on the couch and watching a movie. And guess what? It was still dramatic, slightly comedic, helped build their characterizations and relationship, and even had some built-up tension with a distracting phone call.

 

If the writers of Better Call Saul are able to find drama in having their characters watch a movie in their living room, then so can this show. Ideally, I’d just like to see Adam & Eddy tell the truth for once and say that they personally don’t find those scenes entertaining, instead of insulting the audience’s intelligence by saying we would find those kind of scenes boring. 

 

Better Call Saul is one of the best character-driven shows I've ever watched, IMO.  They really know how to focus on character's emotional development without sacrificing interesting external conflict.  But BCS has great writers, and A&E are just lucky hacks.

[Souris]

Better Call Saul is one of the best character-driven shows I've ever watched, IMO.  They really know how to focus on character's emotional development without sacrificing interesting external conflict.  But BCS has great writers, and A&E are just lucky hacks.

 

Better Call Saul is from Vince Gilligan. Enough said.

Edited April 21, 2016 by Souris

[tennisgurl]

I was just talking about The Americans (one of my favorite shows on TV) and how the last few episodes had been some of the most intense, edge of your seat drama on TV, and about 95 percent of the last few episodes is just people talking. With bursts of violence, that are even more shocking and disturbing by how sudden and brutal they are. Its seriously a spy show where most of the drama centers around characters sitting around talking to each other. Sometimes about events happening in the plot, or their reactions to it, but sometimes its just random character building stuff, or "normal" talk about family issues or work gripes. But its not boring at all. It builds character, increases the stakes, and even adds the occasional laugh. It builds a world where you are invested in the characters, so when the plot happens, you get even more interested, because you know these characters, and you get invested in them. The action becomes more exciting when you spend three episodes building up to it, or letting the characters react to the big plot events, instead of just running from one action set piece to the next, without ever checking in on how your characters are doing. I am not saying this show could ever reach those highs (or the highs of Better Call Saul or Penny Dreadful, two other shows that I love, and do great things with characterization), but it could at least give us a little more.

 

When they do things like that great little scene between Hook and Charming, they show that they CAN write scenes like that, they just choose NOT to.  

[KingOfHearts]

Typically in any form of familiar narrative, you have a sense of what will happen based on past works, whether from similar works or works of the same creator(s). This awareness can be advantageous, but without quality in the execution, it can cause the narrative to fall flat. Predictability is not inherently bad, but too much of it done in an uninteresting way can put a huge damper on the viewer's immersion. 

With Once, the meta is so obvious that the characters are not sentient beings, but rather puppets on visible strings. You know what A&E are attempting to accomplish against all logic. Characters change based on the needs of the plot, which is arguably the show's biggest flaw. There's no coherency in their actions. My suspension of disbelief is cut short because of the ever-so-obvious agendas of the writers. Perhaps my knowledge of spoilers and what transpires across the web partakes in that dilemma, but it's still an issue when you disregard all that. For instance, you don't need to follow Adam's twitter to know that Ruby Slippers was purely obligatory.

Edited April 28, 2016 by KingOfHearts

[Shanna Marie]

9 hours ago, KingOfHearts said:

Perhaps my knowledge of spoilers and what transpires across the web partakes in that dilemma, but it's still an issue when you disregard all that. For instance, you don't need to follow Adam's twitter to know that Ruby Slippers was purely obligatory.

I can only imagine how confused someone who didn't follow news reports, Twitter, or anything else like that must have been about that episode. If you didn't know that someone apparently panicked when asked a question about Mulan and overreacted in talking about writing a LGBT relationship, so that got a lot of news coverage, and then they had to follow through with it, you'd wonder where the heck that relationship came from and why they were bothering devoting an episode to a relationship between a character we've barely seen in years and a character we'd seen for less than a minute in a previous episode.

[KingOfHearts]

The writers seem to enjoy trying to play the audience for fools. They'll rush something and hit you over the head with how "legitimate" it is, then turn around and reverse for a cheap twist. We had to hear over and over in 5A about how much Rumple has changed and become a hero. Then he betrays everyone and we're supposed to think, "Oh my gosh! I thought he changed! I didn't it coming!" This same thing happens again in 5x20 with Hades. There's even a freaking TLK. But nope! The villain turned out to be a villain! Big shock.

But then there's other times where something is rushed and it follows through. Like Ruby Slippers, for example. You think maybe they won't go there so quickly or its a misdirect. Then it turns out to be the bad writing you were hoping it wasn't. 

[Curio]

In the most recent Adam & Eddy interview, Leanne Aguilera asked if Captain Swan has ever consummated the relationship. Their answer?

Quote

"You know what?" Kitsis began with a playful laugh. "I think that is a personal question that you would have to ask Hook or Emma, so if you ever see them at a bar, you should ask them."

"We're just the writers," he added coyly. "We don’t ask what they do behind closed doors…"

We're just the writers. We don't know anything, except for every single detail that goes into creating the show and understanding our characters' headspaces because we occupy them every day. Yes, it was a silly question, but I feel like they give this kind of pretentious answer way too often, regardless of the subject matter. Isn't it the job of the show runners and head writers to know their characters inside and out and ask what happens behind closed doors? Shouldn't they know their characters' favorite food, music, season, astrological sign, etc.? So apparently the journalist isn't allowed to ask about this particular couple's personal life, but A&E aren't afraid to show on screen what Regina and Robin, Zarian and Robin, Belle and Rumple, and Snow and Charming do behind closed doors. A&E ask what characters do behind closed doors all the time—it's why everyone on this show is related to each other.

Edited May 5, 2016 by Curio

[YaddaYadda]

That answer makes me despise them to be honest. 

[KateJones]

Thank you. That answer made me nuts. It's your show. You're the writers. You know. Find a different way to answer that without making it look like you have nothing to do with your own show!

[Curio]

It's pretty easy to say, "As the writers of the show we know the answer, but we've also left it open-ended so the audience can interpret it however they want."

[KingOfHearts]

I guess they don't tune into Once Upon a Time in Offscreenville... that explains a lot. You know, there are actors like JMo who create entire headcanon stories for character immersion. They have to imagine events that happened offscreen or behind doors in order to portray depth and realism. I get so impressed by all the effort they put into that. I'm pretty sure JMo and Colin have ideas about whether or not CS has consummated or not. It's sad the writers don't. Because they abuse the power of retconning, they don't think they need to plan.

Edited May 5, 2016 by KingOfHearts

[Souris]

I kind of love that there are rants in response to that article in like four different threads. Warranted.

[KingOfHearts]

It's not that I desperately need to know that CS made tacos, but every other major couple has gotten to. Outlaw Queen, Rumpbelle, Snowing. They've all gotten bed or morning after scenes. 

Edited May 5, 2016 by KingOfHearts

[Joanh23]

yeah I have to say that answer from A&E is uber annoying.  I think they've left it nearly too late to show it now, not that I'll complain if/when we do get a scene.

[Amerilla]

I'll deduct points for A&E being wankers as usual, but in general, I don't think writers should be criticized for not confirming fan headcanon. Part of their job is deciding when it's relevant to bring that up in the show, not in a magazine or website or tweet. And I think that goes for anything about characterization, not just the sex question. 

Nearly six seasons in, I think it's pretty clear that the writers just aren't that interested in the sex lives of their characters. Part of that is just timeslot stuff - 8pm on a Sunday is a world of closed-mouth kisses and fade-to-black clinches, not Outlander. But even if they were less constrained by the you can kill however many people you want, but easy with the f**king rules of US network tv, I don't think it would be much different.

The showrunners want violence without blood and romance without sex, period. They don't understand that it creates a sterile environment where neither violence nor romance has much weight to it. I think that's doubly true when the romance itself is completely joyless. Who cares if couples are screwing each other blue on every spare tabletop offscreen when the bulk on their onscreen story is just a grueling march to the next pointless plot point?

[Camera One]

Quote from A&E's May 6 EW interview (no spoilers).  They were replying to questions about some old storyline that the interviewer asked about.

 

Quote

HOROWITZ: Oh yeah, we’ll have plans. You’ll see, hopefully they’ll be great.

 

 

Quote

KITSIS: I’ll say this, we hear the fans. We know what stories you feel like we’ve dropped, and we’ve got an episode for you next year.

 

Where are they hearing these "fans" from?  They have "an" episode for every dropped storyline?  LOL at the future tense "we'll have plans".  I guess they too have to be hopeful these future plans will be great, since none of these plans were made when those characters and/or storylines were dropped in the first place.

Edited May 7, 2016 by Camera One

[Mari]

What makes me shake my head is the "you feel like we've dropped" qualifier.  It strikes me as condescending and possibly completely unselfaware.  They didn't actually drop those storylines--they were totally finished off.  You, dumb audience member, didn't realize that things like Graham were satisfactorily wrapped up, and so we'll have to make that very, very clear.

[YaddaYadda]

I hope they never pick up that Lily storyline again.

[Shanna Marie]

Graham is kind of a gray area -- we haven't seen the fallout, but he's dead. Nothing more can happen from that other than Emma either getting mad at Regina or forgiving her and blaming herself (which one would you bet on happening?).

But Camelot was dropped, since no one seems to have remembered that a whole new kingdom was still in Storybrooke, and apparently they were all in stasis for however long the gang was in the Underworld, as we never heard anything about what they were up to. A power-mad king who wanted to make a new Camelot in Storybrooke and all of his people who've been magically brainwashed to follow him were left unsupervised, and it doesn't seem like anything happened. At least, nothing important enough for Belle to mention it or for it to show up in Henry's writing when he's giving the story of Snow getting home to her baby.

Lily and Maleficent were dropped -- Emma's childhood friend has been in town all this time with her mother after announcing plans to search for her father, but neither of them has been heard from. Two seasons from now, we'll get a flashback in which they found yet another one of those rare magic beans and learn that they've actually been back in the Enchanted Forest world all this time. Then there's also the fact that Aurora (and Philip?) has been in town with Maleficent and nothing came of it.

Then there's Will, brought over from the spinoff for an exciting new storyline they were dropping hints about, as he frantically searched the library and stole a page about his true love. And then he vanished without a trace, with no one seeming to remember him at all. Oh, and August, last seen rather ill and weak after being turned back and forth into Pinocchio. Is he August for good now, or will he end up a kid again? Has he recovered? Who knows?

[Camera One]

I'm assuming the Gepetto/August reunion happened off-screen.  So much for payoff.

Granny never got a scene with Red with all the developments this season.  So much for "we really care about family relationships".

Did The Apprentice move on from Underbrooke, off-screen?  

Does Merlin's "Find Nimue" message still stand?

Where did Sidney go?  Is King George still in jail?  Is Dopey still a tree?

I'm assuming none of these are the "stories you feel like we've dropped".  I'm really looking to see an episode on all of these next year.

[Curio]

Quote

HOROWITZ: Oh yeah, we’ll have plans. You’ll see, hopefully they’ll be great.

Adam sounds a bit like Donald Trump here. "We'll have some amazing plans, it's going to be great, you'll see, you're going to love it, we're going to make a fantastic season that will blow everyone's minds and it's going to be the very best and greatest season yet."

Edited May 7, 2016 by Curio

[InsertWordHere]

@Curio, all the awards for that post. A&E could be Trump's speechwriters. 

Adam Horowitz tweeted a bit of the script from the Captain Swan goodbye scene. Why am I not surprised that the best and most emotional part of the goodbye, Hook kissing her hand and holding on until both were forced to let go, was not scripted?

[RadioGirl27]

Of course, because Colin and Jennifer understand and love their characters more than the writers do.

[InsertWordHere]

To be fair, it could have been the director or someone else on set. A hand kiss does seem to be in Jane Espenson's wheelhouse though, so maybe I am a little surprised. Now I wonder if Hook kissing Milah's hand in Devil's Due was also unscripted.

[YaddaYadda]

5 hours ago, Curio said:

Adam sounds a bit like Donald Trump here. "We'll have some amazing plans, it's going to be great, you'll see, you're going to love it, we're going to make a fantastic season that will blow everyone's minds and it's going to be the very best and greatest season yet."

Don't make fun!

They have a yuuuuge story to tell, and it's gonna be beautiful. They will make this show great again!

I find that the ship has sailed on some of the stories that have been dropped, and I just want them to focus on the main cast, like giving them reactions to the stuff that's happening, or I don't something that's normal, and human. 

[OnceUponAJen]

1 hour ago, YaddaYadda said:

I find that the ship has sailed on some of the stories that have been dropped, and I just want them to focus on the main cast, like giving them reactions to the stuff that's happening, or I don't something that's normal, and human. 

Honestly,  I think the opportunity for any fallout from Graham has been squandered.  The average audience member would hear his name and say, "Who's Graham?"  However, I would love for Regina to get some fallout from one of her victims.....who isn't her father. 

[Camera One]

I had to laugh at Adam's latest response on Twitter.

Quote

Nadezhda Aird @NadyaTalhaoui

@AdamHorowitzLA you promised many things about RH, and then you just killed him off... just why???

Adam HorowitzVerified account‏@AdamHorowitzLA

@NadyaTalhaoui it's too complicated for a single tweet. My hope is that if you should continue to watch those answers become apparent.

If she continues to watch, what would become apparent?  That the show doesn't need Robin Hood anymore?

Edited May 10, 2016 by Camera One

[KingOfHearts]

Quote

If she continues to watch, what would become apparent?  That the show doesn't need Robin Hood anymore?

Or that there are better storylines to give Regina.

[RedKeep]

I guess that depends on one's definition of better. I mean, I said this before, I wasn't some huge fan of the Robin Hood & Regina relationship as they wrote it. But the feeling I'm getting is that the writers have mostly run out of ideas for her. That they're teasing another EQ return/scare in the promo for the finale doesn't exactly suggest we're in for fresh and innovative storytelling with her character. Subjective of course, but I think I'd actually rather sit through a mostly boring, mostly happening off screen OQ relationship than another round of tears and pity and yet another will she/won't she go back to EQ mode story.

[Camera One]

The problem with flip-flopping is it allows for circular storytelling.  Rumple gets a new shiny heart, becomes a hero and then goes back to the beginning where he betrays Belle and aims for ultimate power.  Regina is reasonable and on a positive redemption arc, gets a big disappointment and goes back to the beginning with her evil impulses.  What's next, Emma opens up and then puts up those walls again?  Most of the characters have the same playback loop which gets repetitious to watch (except Emma and those walls... I can't get enough of that).  I'm not sure what Snowing gets to cycle between because they don't get character arcs... probably being hopeful, standing in the background and saying one line, and then doing something stupid because the plot demands it.

Edited May 10, 2016 by Camera One

[Curio]

Quote

They have mini boot camps going on before they begin the writing process, so they must have an idea of what will be going down. I'd think they knew all the way back in July that Robin might not make it out of season 5 alive, no?

I'm beginning to think the writing team has two "bootcamps" each year. First, there's the big session that happens over the spring/summer that last for a few weeks where they map out the major plot points for the entire season. The second and smaller session happens during the winter where the team can course-correct things if they feel like they need to make adjustments after the first half has aired on TV. I could see how the writers weren't certain about Robin's fate at the end of their summer bootcamp, but then a Shiny New Idea™ popped up during brainstorming session for the second half of the season, and they decided to kill Robin off during the winter bootcamp. Same thing probably happened when they realized the Marian debacle in 4A wasn't received well and course-corrected to making it Zelena the entire time.

This is a quote from one of Sean's post-episode interviews:

Quote

"And you know, this was supposed to be five episodes and it turned into three years, a wonderful three years that I’ve absolutely loved."

It's interesting that they only intended for Robin to be in five episodes for Season 3, but decided to expand him to a larger role. Maybe it was the same type of contract Colin got when he signed on for Season 2 where they played it safe and only signed him for a few episodes at first, but once they saw his chemistry with the cast, they made him a full regular. It makes me wonder what their original plan was for Season 3 if Robin only stuck around for five episodes. Was the decision to keep him on full-time as Regina's love interest another last-second winter hiatus bootcamp decision?

Edited May 10, 2016 by Curio

[Rumsy4]

^^IIRC, Lana asked for a Love Interest for Regina. So, it could well be that the writers were screen-testing the pair for 5 episodes.

Some plans clearly changed from their initial conception between 5A and 5B. Plans for Arthur and the Camelot crew, for instance. The scenes that were cut from the 5A finale incuded one of Arthur being led away in chains through a portal by Merida, presumably back to Camelot. I actually loved the incorporation of Arthur into the last episode with Hook.

When they cut those original scenes for time-constraints, they must have decided to change certain other things as well. Like the very important one of having Violet be part of the finale (groan). The writers also never did a call back to Robin's escape from death-by-Fury in Last Rites. This makes me think they had not planned for Robin to originally die. 

[Mathius]

43 minutes ago, Curio said:

First, there's the big session that happens over the summer that last for a few weeks

I think it actually happens in late spring, not summer...or if its in summer, its just at the start and not over the whole season, since filming always begins in July and they'll have had to have produced a full episode script by then.  Agree there are sessions in winter too, though.

And yeah, Sean also said that ABC telling A&E that they are definitely renewed for a sixth season much earlier than they usually do also probably had much to do with the decision.  If this was the final season, Robin would have lived and Regina wouldn't have to go evil again.

Edited May 10, 2016 by Mathius

[Curio]

1 hour ago, Mathius said:

I think it actually happens in late spring, not summer...or if its in summer, its just at the start and not over the whole season, since filming always begins in July and they'll have had to have produced a full episode script by then.

You're right, that's what I meant. In my part of the midwest, we jump straight from winter weather to summer weather, so I generally just call this part of the year summer, even if it's not technically summer.

This is an example of the writers ditching a previous idea, but coming up with an even better alternative:

Quote

The scenes that were cut from the 5A finale incuded one of Arthur being led away in chains through a portal by Merida, presumably back to Camelot. I actually loved the incorporation of Arthur into the last episode with Hook.

I loved it, too. While showing Arthur getting taken away in shackles at the end of 5x11 would have wrapped up his villainous arc for 5A, his appearance in The Underworld with Hook is the rare time where the writers actually wrote something better than the original. Arthur getting taken away in 5x11 would have mainly just been a quick wrap up to remind the audience that he was a big meanie and Merida could have felt good about herself for arresting him. But by scrapping those plans due to time restraints, the writers were given the opportunity to rethink how they wanted to wrap up his character, and giving him a second chance at redemption in The Underworld is a much more interesting and redeeming option. Arthur meeting up with Hook in The Underworld actually gave the episode an unexpected twist and a deeper level of meaning for Hook's own redemption. If they had just gotten rid of Arthur at the end of 5x11, the writers probably would have had to come up with a different way for Hook to get out of The Underworld. But forcing Hook to team up with the man who was responsible for killing him and the man who threatened to destroy Emma and her family truly tests how far Hook has come as a hero. I don't know why the writers think this is a brilliant idea for Hook, but get bored when they think about pairing Regina up with a former victim in the Underworld.

2 hours ago, Rumsy4 said:

The writers also never did a call back to Robin's escape from death-by-Fury in Last Rites. This makes me think they had not planned for Robin to originally die. 

Maybe they'll reference that in finale, but I doubt it. That's exactly the kind of thing they should be referencing after a course correct. They may not have intended that episode to be foreshadowing, but after all the retooling they did, they should have had a moment where they went, "Hey! We can reference the unpaid price of the Fury! Continuity!"

Edited May 10, 2016 by Curio

[Mathius]

Really. It could be like "because you didn't let him die in 5x02, the price is that he's deader than dead. Whoops!"

And agreed so much on Arthur.  Now all the complaining about the Camelot characters' departure in 5x11 being cut can be silenced since the decision now not only makes sense but things were actually better off for it.  Arthur was a jerk, but he was also so pitiful that it kind of seemed wrong to leave him without redemption and a chance to become the King Arthur told of in the legends, and as you said, it serviced Hook's story as well as his own.  I also admire how well they kept his involvement in the episode a secret, with all rumors being about him just being a villain again or even him being the one to kill Robin Hood.  The truth of what happened with him is so much more satisfying.

Edited May 10, 2016 by Mathius

[YaddaYadda]

9 minutes ago, Curio said:

Maybe they'll reference that in finale, but I doubt it. That's exactly the kind of thing they should be referencing after a course correct. They may not have intended that episode to be foreshadowing, but after all the retooling they did, they should have had a moment where they went, "Hey! We can reference the unpaid price of the Fury! Continuity!"

It would be sort of neat if they did reference it in terms of the way Robin went. Ultimately, saving Robin from the Fury might have condemned him to a worse fate where his soul just doesn't exist anymore, where there's no afterlife for him.

They forced the hand of fate by healing him even though he was supposed to die, by saving him from the fury, even though it seemed his soul was being called to the Underworld, and this is what happens in the end. 

[CalamityBoPeep]

On 5/7/2016 at 0:28 AM, Camera One said:

I'm assuming the Gepetto/August reunion happened off-screen.  So much for payoff.

Granny never got a scene with Red with all the developments this season.  So much for "we really care about family relationships".

Did The Apprentice move on from Underbrooke, off-screen?  

Does Merlin's "Find Nimue" message still stand?

Where did Sidney go?  Is King George still in jail?  Is Dopey still a tree?

I'm assuming none of these are the "stories you feel like we've dropped".  I'm really looking to see an episode on all of these next year.

 

20 hours ago, Camera One said:

I had to laugh at Adam's latest response on Twitter.

If she continues to watch, what would become apparent?  That the show doesn't need Robin Hood anymore?

 

11 hours ago, Camera One said:

The problem with flip-flopping is it allows for circular storytelling.  Rumple gets a new shiny heart, becomes a hero and then goes back to the beginning where he betrays Belle and aims for ultimate power.  Regina is reasonable and on a positive redemption arc, gets a big disappointment and goes back to the beginning with her evil impulses.  What's next, Emma opens up and then puts up those walls again?  Most of the characters have the same playback loop which gets repetitious to watch (except Emma and those walls... I can't get enough of that).  I'm not sure what Snowing gets to cycle between because they don't get character arcs... probably being hopeful, standing in the background and saying one line, and then doing something stupid because the plot demands it.

 

10 hours ago, Rumsy4 said:

Some plans clearly changed from their initial conception between 5A and 5B. Plans for Arthur and the Camelot crew, for instance. The scenes that were cut from the 5A finale incuded one of Arthur being led away in chains through a portal by Merida, presumably back to Camelot. I actually loved the incorporation of Arthur into the last episode with Hook.

When they cut those original scenes for time-constraints, they must have decided to change certain other things as well. Like the very important one of having Violet be part of the finale (groan). The writers also never did a call back to Robin's escape from death-by-Fury in Last Rites. This makes me think they had not planned for Robin to originally die. 

 

I quit watching the show at the end of 5A when they tossed the whole Dark Swan story into a "twist!" "No! Hook is the really super Dark One!" I gave up in disgust, deciding that these writers just can't be trusted to come up with an actual story idea, stay with it, and make it make sense. I've followed along here, to see people's reactions and to read the recaps on the episodes of 5B (and have pretty much concluded that if I just watch CS scenes on Youtube, I'm good.)

But the other day, it occurred to me... as I noted last year sometime, these writers think they're incredibly clever and subversive, so... maybe we've all been really underestimating their brilliance! This entire show has been an written as a brilliant exploration of Dadaism in storytelling! And here we thought it was supposed to be a family show that followed the usual rules of storytelling. The audience is just not good enough for the show! We have missed their genius entirely! </sarc (as if the tag is necessary)>

https://xkcd.com/1018/

Or... yeah... they kind of suck.

[Guest]

I'm curious as to whether the finale will again be a strong episode top to bottom as it has been the last couple years.  They've had a tendency to become like mini movies that are much better written than anything else the show does which is weird because it shows potential and capability to execute for a specific set of episodes (finales) but somehow there is a lack the rest of the time.

It would be interesting to know how this happens. Do they plan differently, spend more time, more money, etc. compared to regular episodes and everything else suffers for the lack.  Its bizarre in the repeatability.

There was another show I watched and we used to joke that the writing for a couple characters was done by a junior intern that they let out of a dungeon.  The less favored characters, away from the interference of the showrunners became a couple that took off and renewed media interest in the show.  Then the attention got it taken away from junior intern and given to the normal writers so they could bask in the acclaim and everything turned to crap again.

Sometimes I feel like junior intern is writing the finales on this show.

[Camera One]

Quote

Do they plan differently, spend more time, more money, etc. compared to regular episodes and everything else suffers for the lack.  Its bizarre in the repeatability.

 

It's almost like some of the half-seasons were simply a setup for those special mini-movie finales.  Clearly, in Season 3B, they just wanted to do time travel and a vague "there's no place like home" message.  The 3B arc did nothing to lead to that except forcing Emma to repeat over and over again that she wants to move back to NYC.  And all of Zelena's dumb shenanigans was meant to have her shatter into a million recoverable pieces, so Emma and Hook could do "Back to the Future: The Medieval Edition".

I wouldn't be surprised if the entire dumb Author plot throughout Season 4 was so the Writers could do that finale with a meta-Evil Queen is soooooooo popular book signing, and to set up a "What if" scenario where Regina was poor ol' bandit Snow with WALLS that Henry was able to break through and Hook had confidence issues that Henry helped him to overcome, while Evil Snow and Charming were static and so cold-hearted that even Emma and Henry couldn't melt them.  

Edited May 11, 2016 by Camera One

[Mathius]

Even those finales had more connection to the previous arc than this coming one, though.  The time travel spell and the Author rewriting reality were built up throughout 3B and 4B, whereas the Olympus Crystal and Robin's death that have an impact on this mini-movie finale just came out of nowhere in the previous episode.  I think this finale only comes out of necessity for setting up Season 6, and wasn't as planned out before.

Edited May 11, 2016 by Mathius

[Shanna Marie]

21 hours ago, ParadoxLost said:

Sometimes I feel like junior intern is writing the finales on this show.

I wouldn't give the junior intern the credit/blame for the season 4 finale. That was textbook A&E: a potentially clever premise that was horribly executed because they didn't develop it beyond "wouldn't it be cool," with zero worldbuilding, zero exploration of the premise, and zero logic. Supposedly, it was all about letting villains be heroes, and showing how the heroes were really villains, but it really was just different people playing the same roles, with different names. The junior intern must have been in charge of the Henry and Hook team-up to free Emma, since those parts were good.

The season 2 finale wasn't a separate movie in quite the same way, since it dealt with the plots that had been building, but it was still like something almost from a different show. I was so close to quitting entirely until the last two episodes of the season. There was some annoying stuff, but we had the Darling family stuff and then Bae on the Jolly Roger, and then there was Hook's big turnaround. Maybe they gave up before the end of the season and let the junior intern write the last two episodes then.

[Camera One]

The Season 2 finale felt like part of the normal show.  It retained the flashback structure.  It was the Season 3 and 4 finales which were set in a completely different timeline with no flashbacks.  While the time travel Season 3 finale is universally liked, it was still retread and a retelling of "Snow Falls".  Meanwhile, as you said, the Season 4 finale was basically the Evil Queen vs. Bandit story, except Snow was the Evil Queen, Regina was the bandit, and Henry had to convince Regina instead of Emma.

[Mathius]

Yeah, the Season 2 finale was more like the prologue to 3A's arc rather than the closure to Season 2.

Of course, Season 2 was tough to provide closure on because it had completely lost any semblance of focus in its story.

[Scovies]

The S3 and S4 finales were probably so strong specifically because there were no flashbacks. I felt like "Last Rites" was strong for the same reason; the pacing on it was so much better than most of the regular-season episodes.