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

[Curio]

Yeah, I'm assuming Freeform came to A&E with the opportunity to develop an original series, A&E pitched the idea for Dead of Summer with Freeform's younger demographic in mind, Freeform liked the concept, and then gave them free rein to write all 10 episodes without any need for a pilot. 

Edited August 21, 2016 by Curio

[YaddaYadda]

4 minutes ago, Curio said:

Yeah, I'm assuming Freeform came to A&E with the opportunity to develop an original series, A&E pitched the idea for Dead of Summer with Freeform's younger demographic in mind, Freeform liked the concept, and then gave them free reign to write all 10 episodes without any need for a pilot. 

Regrets ensued.

[Curio]

Because it's summer hiatus and there's nothing else to mull over, I decided to analyze the scripts A&E have written:

1x01 "Pilot" (All Characters given significant focus)
1x02 "The Thing You Love Most" (Regina Centric)
1x07 "The Heart Is a Lonely Hunter" (Graham Centric)
1x14 "Dreamy" (Grumpy Centric)
1x18 "The Stable Boy" (Regina Centric)
1x22 "A Land Without Magic" (All Characters)
2x01 "Broken" (All Characters)
2x05 "The Doctor" (Dr. Whale Centric)
2x09 "Queen of Hearts" (Cora/Hook/Regina? Centric)
2x14 "Manhattan" (Rumple Centric)
2x19 "Lacey" (Rumple/Belle Centric)
2x22 "And Straight On 'til Morning" (Bae/Hook Centric)
3x01 "The Heart of the Truest Believer" (All Characters)
3x06 "Ariel" (Ariel Centric)
3x11 "Going Home" (All Characters)
3x12 "New York City Serenade" (Emma-ish? But mostly All Characters)
3x19 "A Curious Thing" (All Characters)
3x22 "There's No Place Like Home" (Emma/Hook Centric)
4x01 "A Tale of Two Sisters" (Elsa/Anna--and Regina?---Centric)
4x07 "The Snow Queen" (Snow Queen Centric)
4x11 "Heroes and Villains" (Rumple/Belle--Regina/Robin in Storybrooke--Centric)
4x12 "Darkness on the Edge of Town" (Regina/Emma-ish? But mostly All Characters)
4x21; 4x22 "Operation Mongoose Part I and II" (Regina/Henry Centric Part I; All Characters Part II)
5x01 "The Dark Swan" (Emma-ish? But mostly All Characters)
5x05 "Dreamcatcher" (Regina/Henry/Emma Centric)
5x11 "Swan Song" (Hook--with random Regina--Centric)
5x12 "Souls of the Departed" (Regina Centric)
5x23 "An Untold Story" (Mostly Regina Centric--based off the commentary, they made it clear that the finale was supposed to be Regina-focused)

It's strange to me that even though A&E invented Emma Swan and intended for her to be a new Disney Princess and the main character, they've never actually written a "full-on" Emma centric episode. Nothing like "Tallahassee" or "Firebird." But they've written plenty of Regina episodes, several Hook-ish episodes, and lots of random-character episodes. I don't know the reasoning behind this, and maybe it's just the way the cookie crumbles in the writers room, but it's odd to me that the creators of the show have never written an episode that's clearly an Emma centric like they have with Regina's 100th episode. Whenever I see an Emma centric coming up in the spoiler thread, I automatically assume it isn't written by A&E.

(Feel free to argue with me about whether or not a centric should belong to another character. My memory isn't 100% perfect.)

Edited August 21, 2016 by Curio

[Camera One]

No Snowing centric either, though that's not really a surprise, I guess.  I assume they pick the ones they want to write, since they're top dog.  They also write the big premieres and finales, which involve all the characters, leaving the filler for others.

Edited August 21, 2016 by Camera One

[Curio]

1 minute ago, Camera One said:

No Snowing centric either, though that's not really a surprise, I guess.

Some of the "All Character" episodes have significant Snowing scenes in them (like the Pilot's True Love Kiss, the kiss at the end of Season 1, Snow crushing Charming's heart, etc.), but it is interesting that A&E have never written individual Snow or Charming centrics, either. It kind of explains the drop-off in screen time Snowing has received over the past few seasons.

Analyzing the scripts like this really makes me nervous for the series finale end point because I have this perfect vision of what could be an amazing finale in my head, but based on A&E's scripts, I'm probably way off course.

[Rumsy4]

2 hours ago, Curio said:

It's strange to me that even though A&E invented Emma Swan and intended for her to be a new Disney Princess and the main character, they've never actually written a "full-on" Emma centric episode. ... I don't know the reasoning behind this, and maybe it's just the way the cookie crumbles in the writers room, but it's odd to me that the creators of the show have never written an episode that's clearly an Emma centric like they have with Regina's 100th episode.

I swear I didn't read your post first, but I made a similar comment on the All Seasons Thread. If there is a character that can be called the writers' pet, it is Regina, and not the original character they created to helm the Show. 

56 minutes ago, Camera One said:

No Snowing centric either, though that's not really a surprise, I guess. 

OMG. I didn't realize until now that A&E didn't even write Snow Falls (or Snow Drifts, for that matter). That is rather ... telling.

Edited August 21, 2016 by Rumsy4

[Curio]

12 minutes ago, Rumsy4 said:

OMG. I didn't realize until now that A&E didn't even write Snow Falls

And I just realized that episode was written by Liz Tigelaar, who I got to see several times at the ATX Television Festival a few months ago. She was one of the more entertaining panelists and seemed extremely passionate about the writing process. It's no surprise she's moved on to greener pastures. (It looks like the only other episode she wrote for OUAT was "True North.")

[Serena]

Liz Tigelaar wasn't even really part of the writers' room, she just had some kind of weird contract with ABC where she was "on loan" to different shows. She also did Revenge the same year she did Once. I remember because I read an interview with her where she said she preferred Revenge because it was more her style (and this was in season 1, so I don't think it was code for "Because A&E are nonsensical nightmares.")

[Camera One]

I don't watch the show "Casual" but she wrote a recap for EW about an episode, and there were bits about her show's writing process.  I cut out some bits specific to that show...

But before the writing comes the breaking. And breaking an episode is actually the opposite of how it sounds – it’s putting the episode together. And this is what we do in the writers room every day… once we’ve recapped all of the events that have transpired since we were last together (the night before), contemplated every scene of our TV obsession (in this case, it was The People vs. OJ Simpson), decided on lunch, then refueled with a snack (because now we’re exhausted from all the recapping). Then the real work begins. And by “work,” I mean we talk about our exes, our sex lives, our marriages, our career mishaps, our deepest darkest most embarrassing moments, confessions and fears, which ultimately leads to our story.

When starting to break any episode, we look at where we ended the previous episode and how we want to launch into and propel our characters through the next one. We first focus on what emotional story we’re telling and then find the plot to illustrate it. We knew we wanted to explore Valerie choosing Jack...

Once we know the emotional stories and the general plot beats, we infuse specifics. For instance, one writer told a story of a friend who...

http://www.ew.com/article/2016/07/01/casual-episode-7-recap-liz-tigelaar-talks-threesomes

[Souris]

So much Regina lately in the A&E eps. Sigh. Thanks for doing that, Curio!

[KingOfHearts]

Quote

The pairings on the show who realistically should be happy with one another are the ones who are constantly put through the wringer, and the pairings on the the show who realistically should be at each others' throats are given a pass and rarely have conflict anymore. 

I don't understand why A&E, as writers, avoid conflict where it's so easy to find it. If they love Regina so much, wouldn't it stand to reason that she would get the most conflict to deal with? That tends to be the case for main characters who get the most attention. If they're so hellbent on getting the audience to understand her struggle, then they should show us her actually having to deal with big dilemmas. I'm not saying she doesn't have problems, but to say she gets the shortest end of the stick out of everyone else on the show is a very big pill to swallow. If she's such a victim, then we need to see that. I'm not sure why the writers are so scared of writing it that they feel the need to bluff about it.

[tri4335]

35 minutes ago, KingOfHearts said:

I don't understand why A&E, as writers, avoid conflict where it's so easy to find it. If they love Regina so much, wouldn't it stand to reason that she would get the most conflict to deal with? That tends to be the case for main characters who get the most attention. If they're so hellbent on getting the audience to understand her struggle, then they should show us her actually having to deal with big dilemmas. I'm not saying she doesn't have problems, but to say she gets the shortest end of the stick out of everyone else on the show is a very big pill to swallow. If she's such a victim, then we need to see that. I'm not sure why the writers are so scared of writing it that they feel the need to bluff about it.

I too don't understand. They fill the screen with manufactured angst, that gets resolved in the most simplest manner, while ignoring the true conflicts that exist between their characters.  Part of me thinks that they are just trolling everyone and seeing how far they can push the narrative of Regina's pain as being the worst of the worst while knowing that she really is the ultimate cause and that they are laughing that members of the audience are buying it. Or is it really that they project this persecution complex on this one character because they feel like victims in their own lives their beloved creation, Regina, gets to stick to the type of people who have harmed them?  Either way, I'm sure we've put more thought into it then they ever have!

[Camera One]

They truly believe it.  Eddy said in an interview that Regina has gone through the most pain out of all the characters or something to that effect.  They pride themselves on the friendships that Regina now has with her former victims and consider this complex, original writing.

Edited August 22, 2016 by Camera One

[Curio]

56 minutes ago, KingOfHearts said:

I don't understand why A&E, as writers, avoid conflict where it's so easy to find it. If they love Regina so much, wouldn't it stand to reason that she would get the most conflict to deal with?

They avoid conflict because it paints the wrong picture in their minds, even though they're the ones who set up the story to be that way. It's manipulative writing. They want Regina and Emma to be best friends, so they have to avoid the obvious elephant in the room that's Graham. They can't have Rumple and Hook constantly trying to kill each other, so they avoid the obvious elephant in the room that's Milah. They push their villains too far in flashbacks to make them seem more menacing, but then they're afraid of addressing those issues in the present timeline. Regina burned down an entire village? It wasn't her fault! It was her alter ego! Now everyone hold hands and sing kumbaya while you save Robin from a wraith.

[andromeda331]

22 minutes ago, KingOfHearts said:

I don't understand why A&E, as writers, avoid conflict where it's so easy to find it. If they love Regina so much, wouldn't it stand to reason that she would get the most conflict to deal with? That tends to be the case for main characters who get the most attention. If they're so hellbent on getting the audience to understand her struggle, then they should show us her actually having to deal with big dilemmas. I'm not saying she doesn't have problems, but to say she gets the shortest end of the stick out of everyone else on the show is a very big pill to swallow. If she's such a victim, then we need to see that. I'm not sure why the writers are so scared of writing it that they feel the need to bluff about it.

A&E think they are showing us Regina as victim. We're suppose to feel so sorry for her when Marion came back. We're suppose to feel sorry for her that she can't get her happy ending. They can't figure out why no one felt sorry for her. (A&E, Regina was the one who locked her up and executed her in the original time line). We're suppose to feel sorry for her when she gets separated from Henry,  A&E, she caused families to be ripped apart for 28 years).  Snow ruined her life (A&E Cora's the one who murdered Daniel, Regina was the one who spent next several decade trying to kill Snow and did murder entire villages, and who knows how many other people before cursing everyone for 28 years). Zelena masquerade as Marion and spend months raping Robin (A&E, Regina spend decades raping Graham and then murdered him when he dumped her. She also then dictated how things would go regarding the baby, at no time did Robin the actual victim get a say in anything, or did she ever stop to think how she did the same thing to Graham and feel bad about it he's now dead and she's BFFs with Zelena).   They don't understand why everyone isn't completely sympathetic to Regina. They don't see they're not writing her sympathetic.  Even when people point out their problems with Regina, they still don't get it and most likey write off them. 

[Camera One]

Quote

 

They can't have Rumple and Hook constantly trying to kill each other

Yep, and thus the two lines that Hook directed towards Rumple after he was rescued from Hades, announcing he and Rumple were now "even".  So Rumple helps to save him from a situation that he was responsible for, and now they're "even"?  Just like everyone was supposed to be grateful to Regina for being willing to sacrifice herself to stop the fail-safe, even though she herself brought the fail-safe into play in the first place!  It's almost funny how even Arthur and Grumpy were willing to be dragged down to hell to save Robin for Regina.  

Edited August 22, 2016 by Camera One

[YaddaYadda]

14 minutes ago, Camera One said:

Yep, and thus the two lines that Hook directed towards Rumple after he was rescued from Hades, announcing he and Rumple were now "even".  So Rumple helps to save him from a situation that he was responsible for, and now they're "even"?  

With the deleted scene that we got, it seemed like he was doing that more for Emma's sake than his own though. I know we're not supposed to take these as canon. He also said Rumple was getting a stay of execution, so I'm assuming he's waiting for him around the corner, and that this "detente" will be short-lived.

[Curio]

I'm more baffled that the writers seem convinced that the way they "resolved" Milah and Aunt Em's river executions was satisfactory. We joked in the episode thread when Milah's episode first aired that, "They have to resolve this...right? This isn't going to be another Graham situation where no one except Rumple knows about Milah's true fate...right??" But I honestly didn't think they'd pull it again. Fool me twice I guess...

5 minutes ago, YaddaYadda said:

With the deleted scene that we got, it seemed like he was doing that more for Emma's sake than his own though. I know we're not supposed to take these as canon. He also said Rumple was getting a stay of execution, so I'm assuming he's waiting for him around the corner, and that this "detente" will be short-lived.

I'm always on the fence about whether or not I want Hook to be the one to off Rumple, or if Rumple should be Rumple's own undoing. But I can also see the writers giving Rumple a happy ending along with Regina. I honestly have no freaking clue what everyone's happy endings are at the end of this series because we wasted a good two seasons on Regina and Robin. (Seriously, what was the point of the Season 4 finale?)

[YaddaYadda]

At this point in the story, I don't Milah should at all be the conflict or the source of conflict between Rumple and Hook. Rumple will always blame Hook for "stealing" her, and he still is angry that she left him for someone else, and Hook gave up his revenge because he chose Emma and the life he could have with her, and he has had enough growth to see that maybe he shouldn't have treated Rumple the way he did when he came for his wife in his pre-Dark One days, though he will always blame Rumple for her brutal death.

And that's why they should have let the woman move on from the UW, to a better place instead of being condemned to the River of Lost Souls. And this will be the same situation that we have with Graham, where the characters will probably never find out what Rumple has done to her. It's like how do you go about this? It's not like they can help her if they ever find out. 

Rumple stopping Hook from ending the Dark One once and for all can be a source of conflict, but even that, it's just, I don't know...boring, I guess? They are always going to hate each other, and they can hurt one another, they will do so without any hesitation, but the Milah conflict is done and over with, I think. 

There's really one person who deserved to have a mouth full of that river water, and that's Pan. Everyone else we saw condemned to that, even James who was a douche didn't deserve that kind of brutal ending when Cora got to move on.

And I think on my end, that's what I'm having a really difficult time with. Cora moves on, Robin gets his soul obliterated, Milah, Auntie Em, Gaston, James, all in the River of Lost Souls.

Rumple after screwing over every possible person there is in his quest for more power, or in wanting to find his son gets to have another chance at fatherhood even though he really doesn't deserve it.

Regina who is the EQ decides that the actions posed during her reign are not Regina's, but that of a separate entity. So instead of repenting fully, and accepting that she has done all these things decided to split herself to evade her own actions, and taking responsibility for everything.  

There is no real sense of justice. 

[Camera One]

Quote

 

With the deleted scene that we got, it seemed like he was doing that more for Emma's sake than his own though. I know we're not supposed to take these as canon. He also said Rumple was getting a stay of execution, so I'm assuming he's waiting for him around the corner, and that this "detente" will be short-lived.

I must have missed that deleted scene.  That message certainly didn't come across to viewers who solely watched the episode, especially when the whole matter seemed to be dropped and never mentioned again.  

Plus since that event, Rumple has already screwed them over twice (one by tethering all of Storybrooke's magic to the God Crystal and lying that everyone would die, and the other was whatever deal he made with Hyde about Storybrooke).  If anything, these new betrayals should be a reason why everyone should hate Rumple.  But then again, Emma still asked him for help after he tried to stuff her in the Hat, and after he let the Shattered Sight spell pretty much obliterate her family.  But bygones, I guess.

Quote

 

I'm more baffled that the writers seem convinced that the way they "resolved" Milah and Aunt Em's river executions was satisfactory.

Did they say this in an interview?  Or Twitter?  

Yeah, I don't consider demon skeletons jumping out of the river and smited with torches, with vague references that things might be "changing", to be a satisfactory resolution to their horrible fates.  Though I guess this was just as satisfying as that wonderful resolution to Guinevere and Lancelot's epic story.

Edited August 22, 2016 by Camera One

[YaddaYadda]

10 minutes ago, Camera One said:

I must have missed that deleted scene.  That message certainly didn't come across to viewers who solely watched the episode, especially when the whole matter seemed to be dropped and never mentioned again.  

Plus since that event, Rumple has already screwed them over twice (one by tethering all of Storybrooke's magic to the God Crystal and lying that everyone would die, and the other was whatever deal he made with Hyde about Storybrooke).  If anything, these new betrayals should be a reason why everyone should hate Rumple.  But then again, Emma still asked him for help after he tried to stuff her in the Hat, and after he let the Shattered Sight spell pretty much obliterate her family.  But bygones, I guess.

This is because the writers have chosen to completely ignore that they have a bunch of fairies masquerading as nuns. The Blue fairy was a glorified babysitter in 5B, in 5A, they pulled her out to give Belle the massive cloche with the rose in it. She didn't even bother shrinking it for easy transport between realms!

You know who else would have known about the first Dark One? The Blue fairy. You know who else might have known how to destroy Hades or at the very least had enough magic to help Emma protect the people she loves? The Blue fairy.

They have this powerful light being, who has been around for centuries, but they don't even use her. 

We hate Rumple, but we tolerate him because he's family. Even Henry whom I can't stand looked like he was at the end of his rope with Rumple in 5x23. 

Edited August 22, 2016 by YaddaYadda

[Curio]

22 minutes ago, Camera One said:

Did they say this in an interview?  Or Twitter?  

I think both? I remember reading a fan's question about what happened to Milah and Aunt Em, and Adam replied something vague like we did resolve those endings, watch the episode again.

Edit: Found it.

Edited August 22, 2016 by Curio

[Camera One]

Yes to YaddaYadda's comment about Blue (the quotes function is really finicky).  They always neuter/ignore the magical forces of good, since they're afraid having them around would prevent the villains from having their way with the heroes.  Look at the uselessness that was Merlin.  His actions didn't even make sense.  And Glinda pretty much wears a dunce cap.  If The Apprentice had said something useful before he died, that would have prevented half the go-nowhere plots of 5A.  There's no reason why they shouldn't go to the Blue Fairy to ask for advice before they go to Rumple.  But they need to "use" Rumple so that's how they keep him relevant.

Wow, Adam never ceases to surprise me (that's not a compliment).

Edited August 22, 2016 by Camera One

[Curio]

I recently finished watching the second season of UnREAL, so I've been lurking around the UnREAL forum here to get a sense of everyone's reactions. It's kind of funny to see everyone freak out about the sophomore slump, how terrible the writers were for dropping huge plots, and the flippant way the writers attempted to tackle serious issues like racism and sexism. And then it made me realize how jaded we are over in the OUAT forum because we just automatically assume most of the plots introduced every season will be ignored or forgotten. On UnREAL this season,

Spoiler

Rachel orchestrated the events that led to the black suitor's friend getting shot by a cop. But the writers never followed up on his character's hospital recovery or seriously looked into the ramifications of that action. Instead, the next (and only) time we see this character in the finale, he's totally fine as if he got a paper cut.

People are rightfully upset that the writers were so callous about such a serious plot, but in the back of my mind, I just think...wow. That's the norm for OUAT's writers now. We've even created the acronym TS;TW because we deal with crazy dropped plots like that so often now. Graham's death, Prince Phillip, Will and Ana, The Camelot Crew, Milah...

[sharky]

Although to be fair, TS;TW has been around since the TWoP days, no? I feel like I saw it on other boards before Once. If not, it should've been. Do not get me started on Chris Carter and how he continues to mess up The X-Files even now.

[Curio]

13 minutes ago, sharky said:

Although to be fair, TS;TW has been around since the TWoP days, no? I feel like I saw it on other boards before Once. If not, it should've been.

I'm fairly certain we coined TS;TW here in these forums. TWoP was still mostly Season 3, and TS;TW wasn't necessarily needed until the crap that happened in Season 4.

[KingOfHearts]

1 hour ago, Curio said:

I'm fairly certain we coined TS;TW here in these forums. TWoP was still mostly Season 3, and TS;TW wasn't necessarily needed until the crap that happened in Season 4.

I somewhat remember when it was coined and I wasn't part of TWOP. I want to say Shanna Marie thought of it, but I'm not sure.

[Shanna Marie]

I was part of the discussion, but I don't think I came up with the final version of TS;TW. Someone else came up with the semicolon that made it parallel TL;DR. But yeah, it was here and not TWOP. I think every show has their own version. Buffy/Angel had TPTB (The Powers that Be), and other shows have TIIC (the idiots in charge).

[sharky]

Thanks all! I must've been thinking of TPTB. I just hope I never have to take TS;TW to another fandom when Once is inevitably cancelled. 

[KingOfHearts]

19 minutes ago, Shanna Marie said:

I was part of the discussion, but I don't think I came up with the final version of TS;TW. Someone else came up with the semicolon that made it parallel TL;DR. But yeah, it was here and not TWOP. I think every show has their own version. Buffy/Angel had TPTB (The Powers that Be), and other shows have TIIC (the idiots in charge).

That sounds accurate.

[Camera One]

Unfortunately, some of the problems that are evident on this show are pretty common, and even hit many good shows in the latter half of their run.  This includes sidelining and ignoring certain "boring" main and supporting characters, focusing on their favorite Mary Sues and bad boys and brand new created characters who no one cares about, repetitive storylines, prioritizing plot and action over characterization (major problem in feature films as well), contrived ways to keep the villains around and contrived drama for the protagonists, inadequate worldbuilding (often because the Writers can't reconcile all the stuff they made up on the fly along the way), etc.

Though part of me can't help but wonder at the lack of lessons learned.  Adam and Eddy saw the problems that "Lost" encountered in terms of its unanswered questions and its flashback problems, yet they still repeated the same mistakes, which didn't help when they can't even hit the positives that "Lost" did hit for at least four seasons.  Surely, Jane realized the unenjoyable mess that "Buffy" was by the final season.  I know it's easier to criticize than to fix problems, but I'm not convinced they even see there's a problem.

Edited August 23, 2016 by Camera One

[sharky]

Yea, I feel like they're not even working with a basic show bible.

Reddit's tv subreddit is on a bit of a Lost nostalgia kick lately, which reminded me of two things. First, A&E wrote one of the most despised episodes where they had to kill off two characters that the creators has tried to shove into the story. And second, that there was a point when Lost flipped the flashbacks to freshen up the story telling. And yet, we still have flashbacks and new character introductions from A&E for six seasons. You would think that their work on Lost would've given them some insight, but there is some self awareness that the Lost creators had at some point that A&E are missing.

[Rumsy4]

TS;TW was definitely coined for this show, either towards the tail end of TWoP or early when a bunch of us migrated here. 

Quote

This is probably for another thread, but I was talking more about major secrets the actors should know while filming in the moment, like telling Marian's actress she's actually Zelena or telling Colin that Hook traded his ship for Emma. I know most actors want to be more in the moment, but if the character knows the information while the episode is filming, it seems counterintuitive to keep that information from the actor. 

Bringing this from the Rumple thread.  I think how much actors are told about upcoming twists totally depends on the Show. In LOST, apparently Terry O'Quinn did not know the big twist about John Locke's character in S5. However, the writing was ambiguous enough for the reveal not to be out of the blue. I think twists like these work well even if the actors aren't aware of it, if the clues were in the writing. Otherwise, it ends up as either a jump-the-shark moment, or a poorly written retcon. 

When it comes to OUAT, I think part of the issue is that the writers are sometimes making up twists mid-way through the arc. I think in this particular instance, it was a case of the writers not committing to the MarianIsZelena! twist in 4A. They may have had that as an option in their minds, but there is nothing to indicate they thought seriously about it during the Frozen arc. So there was nothing ambiguous in the way Marian was written and/or played. 

A&E seem to reveal the most details in advance to Jennifer Morrison, and to a certain degree, Lana. Apparently Lana knew in 3B that Regina had been the one to kill Marian. She even said she layered that fact into her performance. This seems totally unnecessary to me, becasue we found out early in 4A that Regina didn't even remember Marian's face. The writers told Colin that he would be "immortal" in 5A, which had him guess that he was going to be the Dark One. I don't think one can expect more from A&E when one episode retcons what happened two episodes previous to that. 

Edited August 23, 2016 by Rumsy4

[Camera One]

Quote

 

 This seems totally unnecessary to me, becasue we found out early in 4A that Regina didn't even remember Marian's face. The writers told Colin that he would be "immortal" in 5A, which had him guess that he was going to be the Dark One.

Yeah, in those situations, I don't think the actors really need to know, since their characters didn't.  But those made-up retcon flashbacks are part of the characters' memories, but A&E literally can't tell the actors about those, since they are made up on the spot (eg. Rumple signing away his second baby).  And then once in a while, they give some BS like if you watch "The Stable Boy" carefully, you'd know that Cora knew Leopold and they knew all along the backstory reveals from "Bleeding Through".  Give me a freak'in break.

Edited August 23, 2016 by Camera One

[Shanna Marie]

I'm not sure the Marian is Zelena thing would have worked even if Christie Laing had been told she was really Zelena because the writing itself didn't support that. Zelena would have behaved differently in so many of those circumstances, like when she was alone with Regina and gave her credit for saving her life, saying she wasn't a monster. That scene alone tells me that the writers hadn't come up with that twist yet, and if they had, then they're even worse writers than I thought. There was no audience to have to sell on the deception. There was no reason Zelena would have praised Regina and told her she wasn't a monster if she was carrying out this whole charade to get revenge on her. It wasn't as though that incident actually changed Zelena's mind about Regina, since she went on to contrive a reason she'd have to leave town with Robin and ruin Regina's life, so why go through the "you're not a monster!" thing? It might have made things even worse if Christie Laing hadn't been 100 percent committed to playing Marian. I'm not sure Meryl Streep could have played Zelena pretending to be Marian with that script because there was no internal truth to it. If they knew the twist when they wrote it, it showed that they don't know their own characters and didn't bother to go through the mental exercise of imagining what Zelena would do if she were pretending to be Marian. Season 4 would have been much more interesting if they had because then we would have had the stuff a lot of us really wanted from Marian -- calling out Regina, making sure Robin knew just what Regina had done to her, rallying people against Regina, running against her as mayor, serving as a sharp contrast to Regina. That seems to be the sort of thing Zelena could have done without giving up the game, since it's stuff Marian would have done. It's hard to imagine Zelena praising Regina for not being a monster and talking about not getting in the way between Robin and his real love, Regina.

On the other hand, I can't think of a reason they would want or need to tell Colin he was immortal. Hook didn't know. It wouldn't have affected his actions in any way during that segment of the show. Jen needed to know what Emma's motivation was, since that would affect the way she acted, but Colin didn't need that input.

[Curio]

18 minutes ago, Camera One said:

But those made-up retcon flashbacks are part of the characters' memories, but A&E literally can't tell the actors about those, since they are made up on the spot

The flashback surprise reveals are the main areas where the actors should definitely know ahead of time what their character did because, in the present timeline, that event already happened to the character, so that event should be influencing their current motivations. Hook knew he traded his ship for Emma when he found her in NYC; therefore, Colin should have known Hook traded the ship. Charming and Snow did the eggnapping in the past; therefore, Ginny and Josh should have known for a while that their characters did this. I'm not saying the writers can't ever add new details to the past and do a good retcon, but they should tell the actors important pieces of information if their character knows the secret in the present timeline.

[KingOfHearts]

25 minutes ago, Curio said:

The flashback surprise reveals are the main areas where the actors should definitely know ahead of time what their character did because, in the present timeline, that event already happened to the character, so that event should be influencing their current motivations. Hook knew he traded his ship for Emma when he found her in NYC; therefore, Colin should have known Hook traded the ship. Charming and Snow did the eggnapping in the past; therefore, Ginny and Josh should have known for a while that their characters did this. I'm not saying the writers can't ever add new details to the past and do a good retcon, but they should tell the actors important pieces of information if their character knows the secret in the present timeline.

One of the reasons the memory loss trope is so prevalent is that A&E don't know how to creatively get the characters to act a certain way without giving away the twist. Just take Dark Swan, for instance. All her bravado was nonsensical and OOC. But since the writers wanted to fool the audience into thinking Emma had really gone evil in order to conceal the secret about Hook, we got a pale-faced robot onscreen in place of the main character. What would have made better sense was if Emma had pretended she lost her memory too so that no one would get suspicious. I understand that's not nearly as marketable. But if they wanted something marketable, they should have written something that better accommodated.

One of the writing decisions that stumps me is the choice to make Regina the woman who killed Marian. Robin already said that his wife died because he put her in "harm's way during a job", so why create this seemingly contradictory story about Marian fighting for Snow's innocence?  If the intention was to create angst for Outlaw Queen, then that would be a "good retcon", as Curio might say. But it never had to do with anything and ultimately proved to be pointless. Regina had her brief flicker of self-awareness in 4x01, but that lead up to nothing. It really sounds like A&E were desperate to bring Marian back to screw with Regina and the only way to do that was to make Emma rescue a fellow prisoner of the Evil Queen. So it was really more for Regina/Emma angst rather than for OQ.

I remember us all dreading the Love Triangle of Doom between S3 and S4. But then it turned out to be even stupider than we imagined. A&E sure chose an... interesting route out of that one.

Edited August 23, 2016 by KingOfHearts

[Camera One]

Quote

 

But since the writers wanted to fool the audience into thinking Emma had really gone evil in order to conceal the secret about Hook, we got a pale-faced robot onscreen in place of the main character.

That's the key.. the priority is ALWAYS on fooling the audience, over what makes sense for the character or what is logical for the plot.  Though I'm sure they thought the pale-faced robot was more fun to write for than Emma.  

Quote

 

, so why create this seemingly contradictory story about Marian fighting for Snow's innocence?  If the intention was to create angst for Outlaw Queen, then that would be a "good retcon", as Curio might say. But it never had to do with anything and ultimately proved to be pointless. Regina had her brief flicker of self-awareness in 4x01, but that lead up to nothing.

And none of the obvious set-ups of this unnecessary situation was even addressed.  Robin Hood never reacted to Marian being in Regina's dungeons.  Emma wasn't at all affected by seeing The Evil Queen up close and personal being her prisoner and seeing her mother killed.  Snow didn't even get to know who Marian was. And who the hell knows why Marian was in that village standing up for Snow in the first place (she had no unfinished business, eh?).  I suspect it was just the easiest way to tie the characters together in a tight story in that 2-part finale.  They needed to have Snow in Regina's castle, so it was convenient to also have Emma and Marian there.  Or maybe it was simply a "Wouldn't it be cool if..." moment.

Edited August 23, 2016 by Camera One

[Rumsy4]

2 hours ago, Camera One said:

And then once in a while, they give some BS like if you watch "The Stable Boy" carefully, you'd know that Cora knew Leopold and they knew all along the backstory reveals from "Bleeding Through".  Give me a freak'in break.

These kind of silly justifications hurt their reasoning more. Why not just admit this was something they "delved into" at that point. 

22 minutes ago, Camera One said:

 Snow didn't even get to know who Marian was. And who the hell knows why Marian was in that village standing up for Snow in the first place (she had no unfinished business, eh?). 

Marian's biggest mistake was supporting Snow. Snow just never seemed to care, either in the past or in the present. lol

Edited August 23, 2016 by Rumsy4
This software is possessed. lol

[Camera One]

I don't remember Snow meeting Marian in the past.  We also never saw Emma telling Snow about what happened to Marian in the time travel adventures in the present.  Thus, what was the point of setting it up this way?

[KingOfHearts]

Quote

I don't remember Snow meeting Marian in the past.  We also never saw Emma telling Snow about what happened to Marian in the time travel adventures in the present.  Thus, what was the point of setting it up this way?

Answer: The writers needed a reason for Marian to be locked up in the Evil Queen's castle, and that's all they could think of. What they could have done is said that she and Robin attempted to rob her or something. That would give some continuity with Robin's story.

Edited August 23, 2016 by KingOfHearts

[Shanna Marie]

This is why I say these guys are writing idiot savants. They have this talent for setting up fascinating situations laden with potential conflict and story potential -- and yet at the same time they don't seem to notice what they've set up and don't use any of their own material, instead stretching to find contrivances to attempt to create weak drama.

The Marian thing is a perfect case study. They had Robin's wife as a victim of Regina's, and showed several of the semi-regular townspeople watching what happened to her, then brought her to the future. That should have thrown a true monkey wrench into Outlaw Queen, and not just Robin wrestling with his "code" but him having to take another look at his supposed soul mate and her having to realize that she'd caused all this pain to someone she loved -- a human face to all her faceless victims. Meanwhile, Marian's presence could have truly ruined Regina's life if the townspeople who'd seen what happened to her were reminded of all that Regina had done to them, too, and it started some kind of anti-Regina movement. It should have changed Emma's view of Regina, and it should have made Snow feel bad about being friends with Regina if such horrible things happened to people who supported her. There was enough conflict there to fuel all kinds of stories that made use of their situation of being trapped in this town together. Even if you believe that they knew all along it was really Zelena, there was potential there for Zelena to make herself the beloved heroine of the town, stirring up everyone against Regina. She could have had everything she said she wanted and could have taken away everything she said she wanted to take away from her sister.

But what did they do with it? They froze Marian to keep her out of the way. They never really addressed the fact that Marian was Regina's victim (beyond the first episode when Regina had to look up what she'd done). That never seemed to matter to Robin. The only conflict was Robin wrestling with his code and whether he should remain faithful to his wife or to his new girlfriend. Regina acted like losing her new boyfriend was having her life ruined. They contrived the whole "finding the Author" plot to deal with this situation, only to show that it was never Marian, just Zelena, and then a season later they killed Robin. If they really planned it to be Zelena, all she did with this revenge opportunity was leave town with Regina's boyfriend and get pregnant. They did the least interesting thing possible with all the juicy story potential they set up.

[Curio]

8 minutes ago, Shanna Marie said:

They never really addressed the fact that Marian was Regina's victim (beyond the first episode when Regina had to look up what she'd done). That never seemed to matter to Robin.

It never seemed to matter to Emma, either. Why didn't we get a scene where Emma checked up on the woman she helped save from the Enchanted Forest? The woman who helped save her mom's life by staying quiet? Why didn't Emma do her job as sheriff and arrest Regina when she admitted to locking Sidney up in a dungeon and briefly set up a plot to murder Marian?

[Shanna Marie]

7 hours ago, Curio said:

I'm not saying the writers can't ever add new details to the past and do a good retcon, but they should tell the actors important pieces of information if their character knows the secret in the present timeline.

Back when the eggbaby stuff was happening, we talked about good retcons vs. bad retcons. I don't expect writers of an ongoing series to know every single detail about their characters' pasts. It would be nice if they had a general sense of their background, which can be fleshed out or adjusted when the time comes to tell that story. But in an organic writing process, especially when you're dealing with actors embodying the characters, things are going to come up to inspire you. The trick is making it look like you meant it to be that way all along. The best bet is to explain something that's already there rather than making up something entirely new. Our best example for something that would have made for a good retcon was if they came up with an actual backstory reason why Hook is such a survivor -- his overworked guardian angel, his father is really Davy Jones and exerts a godlike protectiveness on his son, that ring really is magical and protects him, and the day he gave it away, he was killed. The eggbaby was a bad retcon because it's something so major and pivotal that it's impossible to imagine it wouldn't have come up before, especially while Snow was pregnant with baby #2, it's really out of character, and it doesn't actually explain anything or answer any questions.

We were wanting the backstory about Emma going from teenage prisoner to bail bondswoman, but the backstory they wrote doesn't fit and was possibly the least interesting way of telling that story, which made it feel like a retcon. It actually contradicts established facts -- if Emma was a fugitive at age 26, then she'd have had an adult record for Sydney to find rather than having to bother with getting into sealed juvenile records. It also seems unlikely that in two years she'd have managed to go from being a fugitive to being as successful as she seemed to be at the start of the series. She wouldn't have been able to work in that field without getting caught if she was still a fugitive (and if Henry was able to find her from Storybrooke, surely bounty hunters could track her down), and if she did get caught, that gives even less time before the series starts, even if she's eventually found not guilty after showing up for a trial (and she'd still have consequences for skipping bail). The flashback seemed more focused on explaining why Emma has walls, which was the last thing that needed explaining because when you look at her life, well, duh, and her walls shouldn't even have been a factor at that point in the story in the present.

It's all so very frustrating because most of the problems with this show would be a relatively easy fix -- or they would have been even a year or so ago. Season four pretty much ruined a lot of things. It wouldn't take that much effort to just think through what the characters would really do and how they'd really react. One good brainstorming session to bring up unanswered questions and list all the character conflict would help. It's mostly basic Writing 101 stuff. Even moderately proficient writers should be able to do better with the raw material they have to work with on this show.

[Camera One]

Quote

 

It wouldn't take that much effort to just think through what the characters would really do and how they'd really react.

Maybe instead of:

"How do you think ____ would react?" or
"What did ____ do in the past?"

The starting point for Writer Room discussions are more:

"How could ____ react so the entire audience could be left numb with shock?" or
"What did ____ do in the past which would be absolutely jaw-dropping and out of left field?"

Edited August 24, 2016 by Camera One

[Curio]

11 hours ago, Camera One said:

The starting point for Writer Room discussions are more:

"How could ____ react so the entire audience could be left numb with shock?" or
"What did ____ do in the past which would be absolutely jaw-dropping and out of left field?"

See also: "How does Regina react to this event, and how can we make _______ feel guilty about ruining Regina's life?"

It's funny that we're discussing good and bad retcons right now, because A&E's other show Dead of Summer just attempted to pull off a huge twist/retcon last night. While the twist kind of makes sense in retrospect, we run into the same issue we've been discussing here, where I'm not entirely sure they told the actor about the twist until too late in the game. So if you go back and rewatch earlier episodes (not that you'd want to because most of the beginning episodes are fairly boring), the retcon doesn't seem to ring true because I doubt the actor would have played the role that way had they known about the twist. And—like many of OUAT's retcons—this twist was something that the character should have known all along, so I'm very curious now to see if A&E told the actor about the secret upfront, or if they waited and told them the secret halfway through filming the series.

Edit: Spoilery article for DoS. Surprisingly, it seems like writers might have actually clued the actor in on the secret at the start after all, so I guess the wooden performance was on purpose? Also, I doubt A&E are ever going to learn from their mistakes...

Quote

Who’s going to have the strongest reaction to [removing name because it's a spoiler...]'s death?
KITSIS: "I have a feeling there’s not going to be a lot of time for reacting. They’re all going to be running for their lives, so as much as one might want to stop and mourn, they’ve just got to keep going."

Why does this sound so familiar?

Edited August 24, 2016 by Curio

[Camera One]

You're tempting me with the DoS apple since now I want to watch more episodes to see the writing flaws, LOL.

Edited August 24, 2016 by Camera One

[Curio]

5 minutes ago, Camera One said:

You're tempting me with the DoS apple since now I want to watch more episodes to see the writing flaws, LOL.

I will admit the most recent episode was actually very entertaining, but I don't know if wanting to watch one epic episode is worth trudging through the other boring episodes that came before it. It's kind of like OUAT that way. "Birth" was pretty awesome, but was it worth having to sit through multiple Merida adventures and Henry's date?

[KingOfHearts]

1 hour ago, Curio said:

I will admit the most recent episode was actually very entertaining, but I don't know if wanting to watch one epic episode is worth trudging through the other boring episodes that came before it. It's kind of like OUAT that way. "Birth" was pretty awesome, but was it worth having to sit through multiple Merida adventures and Henry's date?

That's how I feel about 5A. There's a few awesome moments, but they're not worth sitting through all the crap for.

[Curio]

16 minutes ago, KingOfHearts said:

That's how I feel about 5A. There's a few awesome moments, but they're not worth sitting through all the crap for.

You could say the same about 5B, too. A lot of filler leading up to a pretty decent "Last Rites," but then a faceplant on the finale.

Why do their penultimate episodes tend to be better than the actual finales?

Edited August 24, 2016 by Curio