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

[Camera One]

Quote

Rumple is still around not because of any character or story reason, but because Robert Carlyle is one of the stars of the show.

As Eddy said recently, "we" (aka they) often forget that Rumple is Henry's grandfather and all of these characters are connected.  Since they need to "remember" this connection when it's convenient.

It especially annoys me when they have characters running to Rumple for help despite everything he has done.  The latest was David making a "deal" to find out about his father.  He lucked out the idiotic exchange was to give Belle a cassette tape which ultimately had zero point.  To me, this is just bad writing.  A total disservice to David's character, who otherwise got nothing else this half season (except a good night's sleep that made him miss an entire episode... I forgot that).

Edited December 19, 2016 by Camera One

[Guest]

18 hours ago, Camera One said:

It especially annoys me when they have characters running to Rumple for help despite everything he has done.  

This is actually one of the things that I think the writers do that is better, relatively speaking.  They have made Rumple consistently be unwilling to help the heroes unless it served his purposes, Belle brow beat it into him (which was probably part of why he put her to sleep for two seasons), or the heroes made some kind of deal/trade.  It consistently underlines that Rumple is not their friend. 

Given that the heroes usually overcome the villain's schemes, I don't think its unrealistic that they would periodically need something that only Rumple can provide and make a calculated deal on the assumption that they can get whatever they need from Rumple and then still overcome the consequences of the price he extracts.  They don't go to this option often enough that I think all the heroes are too stupid to live.  I have a harder time with it when Rumple doesn't give them an upfront price and they make the deal blindly.

It makes more sense than the relationship they have developed with Regina.

[KingOfHearts]

Quote

Given that the heroes usually overcome the villain's schemes, I don't think its unrealistic that they would periodically need something that only Rumple can provide and make a calculated deal on the assumption that they can get whatever they need from Rumple and then still overcome the consequences of the price he extracts.  They don't go to this option often enough that I think all the heroes are too stupid to live.  I have a harder time with it when Rumple doesn't give them an upfront price and they make the deal blindly.

I don't mind the heroes coming to Rumple for a deal. When they're desperate, what other choice do they have? I just wish we could see the characters reasoning for not doing anything about him. If they're terrified of his power, or just think he's unbeatable, one of them should say so. Right now you could interpret their inactivity as either, "He's Henry's grandfather, so he gets a pass" or "We know he's a menace who kills innocents, but we need him around for our own purposes". Emma has never been concerned that he could possibly try to kill Hook again. Regina knows how evil he can be, but she's not worried he'll do something to Henry. Belle's just delusional about the whole thing. (And the way the writers talk, it's almost as if the general consensus in Storybrooke is that Rumple is gray or redeemable.)

[Shanna Marie]

20 hours ago, Camera One said:

As Eddy said recently, "we" (aka they) often forget that Rumple is Henry's grandfather and all of these characters are connected.  Since they need to "remember" this connection when it's convenient.

Which brings up another of their writing problems: they stay in the shallow end, with the characters, plots, and relationships all being very superficial, and any depth that they may have inadvertently written in being ignored, with Rumple as practically the case study. They think they've written a complex character because he's a villain who makes sad faces and has a sad backstory. They've actually written a character who has a web of very complicated relationships that I'm not sure they even realize they've created. Just the web of ties between him and Hook would give them seasons worth of potential conflict and complicated interactions, but I suspect that each one of them was just about the plot at the time and they don't realize the pattern they created. Rumple's first wife leaves him for Hook, who's basically his polar opposite in being bold and courageous. Then Rumple becomes powerful, which allows him to be bold, but in a coward's way, by being cruel and bullying, so Rumple's son wants to get away from that, but Rumple chickens out and stays where he can have power. Bae then literally lands at Hook's feet, and he spends far more time with Hook than he did with his father (and it would have been nice to know what that relationship was and how it worked). Then wife #2, Belle, actually chooses Hook over Rumple when she makes Rumple give Hook's heart back and then kicks Rumple out of town. She becomes friends with Hook, and when she leaves Rumple again, she turns to Hook for shelter and moves in with him. Hook manages to save her from Jekyll after Rumple's attempt to control her actually traps her with Jekyll. You'd think Rumple's head would be exploding about this by now. Wouldn't he hate Hook even more? Would he try to find a way to kill him and not get caught? Or undermine him? To make things even twistier, Rumple's father, Pan, allowed Hook to stay in Neverland although he kicked Rumple out, and Pan seemed to have some respect for Hook. Wouldn't that have been fun material to play with? And now there's Henry, where they forget Rumple is his grandfather, which Rumple seems to have forgotten, as well. The entire premise of the show happened because of Rumple's desperate attempt to find his son, and now he has a grandson who is all that's left of Bae, but Rumple seems to have mostly forgotten about him. He did try to spare him from the Shattered Sight spell, but other than that, he might as well not exist. There's no conflict between him and Henry, in spite of Henry's firm stance about heroes. Henry doesn't seem to have tried to redeem him. And now Hook's coming into play there, too, as he's taking on the role of Henry's dad.

But all they do with Rumple is have him do something evil to get power, Belle gets mad and leaves, he does something good or is a victim, Belle comes back, lather, rinse, repeat.

Or there's their way of taking the least interesting approach to everything -- throw in a random magical object rather than have the characters work to find or learn something. Need to give someone something to feel bad about in their past? Let them kill their father! Make sure any piece of backstory is simple enough to be shown and resolved in a single episode.

I think this ties into that inorganic writing problem, as well. If they really delved into the characters and relationships, that would make it harder for the characters to behave the way they're needed to for the plot. If you keep it shallow and reduce each character to a single key trait that you repeat over and over again (Snow-hope, Emma-walls, Hook-guilt), it's easier to twist the characters into the shape they're needed to serve the plot.

[Free]

On ‎12‎/‎18‎/‎2016 at 10:48 PM, Camera One said:

As Eddy said recently, "we" (aka they) often forget that Rumple is Henry's grandfather and all of these characters are connected.  Since they need to "remember" this connection when it's convenient.

It especially annoys me when they have characters running to Rumple for help despite everything he has done.  The latest was David making a "deal" to find out about his father.  He lucked out the idiotic exchange was to give Belle a cassette tape which ultimately had zero point.  To me, this is just bad writing.  A total disservice to David's character, who otherwise got nothing else this half season (except a good night's sleep that made him miss an entire episode... I forgot that).

The question is what do they remember because there's a lot they forget about.

[Mitch]

On 12/18/2016 at 5:19 PM, KingOfHearts said:

It would have been awesome in S2 to see Emma try to apply American justice to the fairy tale characters - giving Regina a fair trial, for example. They're still in Maine, it's not like they should be able to do whatever they want. It would be so much more interesting if the barriers were down and they had to follow the rules of the real world as to not arouse suspicions. Magic complicates things quite a bit, which makes it even more of a unique challenge for someone like the sheriff.

I thought S2 was going to do this..have the characters deal with magic being back, keeping that hidden from the rest of the world, and bringing Regina to justice (or trying to) using real world methods...it would have been interesting to see Emma and whomever, trying to come up with something to charge Regina with that would stick and would not send out warning signals to the rest of the world..they couldn't charge her with Grahams murder as there would be no evidence to tie her to it, and they could have Emma say, "People, there are no rules on the books for Evil Queens kidnapping hundreds of people in a town frozen in time for 28 years.." The closest they could get her on is corruption, which I would think Regina would be smart enough to at least keep the prophecy in mind and to funnel tax dollars to a secret account in the outside world so she could make her escape if she needed to. They needed to have put Regina on trial for that, and an off the record trial for casting the curse.  That would have been a great time for them to do some world building and explaining of the rules of the curse...( Regina: "Do people think I had all the time in the world to create new identities for you? As if I care enough to make the town crier mute...though that is a good one! I cast the curse, it did the rest on its own..I don't do details..I'm too busy dressing fabulous in both worlds!" Rump, "The curse took us through space and time... the rest of the magical realms left behind have been frozen in time since the start of the curse as we are all tied together because of magic. While we have been here for 28 years it has been hundreds of years that the rest of the lands have been frozen." etc.  It would have helped them to create the rules going forward and also, give both Parrila and JM great opportunities to act, especially if during the course of the trial Graham was brought up.

But they were so busy jumping into "Magic is BACK.." that instead of the slow build up of the mystery of SB we got in S1, we jumped right into cartoonville. Then the totally screwed things up with "Welcome to SB" where Storybrooke was always cut off from the rest of the world, though we saw in S1 that it wasnt. I can buy the curse providing food and clothes and power, but after the curse broke, where is the food coming from? Where do they get Iphones...who is their carrier??? Why even have the ruse of being a modern small town if no one knows you exist???

[Curio]

@Mitch, while I would have liked to have seen that scenario, it seems like A&E have a meager understanding of the American legal system, nor do they seem to show interest in any kind of legal or justice system. If they did, we wouldn't have the outrageous morality rules on the show. I've been crying out for some more legal intervention on this show for years, but it ain't going to happen. Otherwise, Regina and Rumple and every other villain would never be able to get their happy endings and would never be best friends with the Charmings.

Edited December 20, 2016 by Curio

[KingOfHearts]

It probably would have stood to reason if Emma had judged people solely on their crimes in Storybrooke and not dipped into the Enchanted Forest business. That just wouldn't be her jurisdiction as sheriff, as they weren't committed under the American legal system. But, however, she could take that into consideration when judging character. The curse could be punishable since Regina basically kidnapped an entire town and kept them from leaving.

Edited December 20, 2016 by KingOfHearts

[Shanna Marie]

From the ratings thread:

14 minutes ago, Curio said:

I'd love to be a fly on the wall during the meeting between A&E and the ABC Execs where A&E desperately try to plead for one more season.

I found myself imagining the conversation about the execs telling them what they needed to do to get another season and turn things around, in which A&E were all enthusiastic about what they're doing now with all-Regina, all the time, which they're sure fans want based on their Twitter conversation. Meanwhile, the execs were pointing out the ratings and questioning why they were writing the show based on a few people on Twitter who've been disruptive for events and have driven cast members away from social media, thus hurting the opportunities for them to promote the show. In my imaginary conversation, the execs were getting increasingly frustrated with the weird blinders about the showrunners being totally incapable of perceiving another viewpoint or seeing anything wrong with the show, while the execs kept saying, "but look at the ratings -- you're bleeding audience members, maybe you should reconsider. I know you've already written and shot a lot, but since you shoot too much, maybe you can fix some of it in editing and with a little reshooting, and then we need to adjust the scripts that are written and change course."

I was going to write clever fake dialogue for this conversation, but it just got depressing and probably too realistic.

[Souris]

I honestly doubt ABC has too much to say to A&E, because they have so many other things to worry about. I kind of doubt they'd expend the effort on trying to "fix" Once. It's clearly on its last legs, so IMO they'd just let it die without any intervention and put their energies elsewhere.

[Shanna Marie]

I will confess that as part of my imagined scene, the executive busted A&E on most of the more rabid SwanQueeners actually being their own sockpuppets, where they were trying to create the illusion of demand for what they wanted to write. They tried to deny it, but the exec pointed out that Disney owns Lucasfilm, Marvel, and Pixar, so they have plenty of really good geeks who were able to figure it out and prove it. Pure fantasy, I know, but it amused me.

[Rumsy4]

I think this is an appropriate time to repost this 2013 interview (scroll to page 43). I saved it as a pdf and have uploaded the pdf online. 

From the beginning this Show was conceived as a way for the poor misunderstood Evil Queen to get her Happy Ending. Regina has been Woegina from the start.

Quote

Kitsis: “The first thing we talked about was the Evil Queen and how hard it would be to live in a land where everything you did failed.” ...

"Their Evil Queen wasn’t just a baddie; she was misunderstood.“

She's also a self-insert character.

Quote

It’s a metaphor for Hollywood. “As writers, you have to believe what you’re doing because it’s so difficult to get anything off the ground.” ...

"Where would this character succeed. Where does good not always win? Her world. Then that led to the idea, What if she cast a curse and came to our world?”

Something like A&E imagining a world where their scripts would always be accepted.

4 hours ago, Souris said:

I honestly doubt ABC has too much to say to A&E, because they have so many other things to worry about. I kind of doubt they'd expend the effort on trying to "fix" Once. It's clearly on its last legs, so IMO they'd just let it die without any intervention and put their energies elsewhere.

That's what I feel. But they might make some strong suggestions based on the advisory board and other focus groups polls. A&E may promise to implement the ideas, but not truly. Look at what happened with Aladdin and Jasmine this season. I feel pretty sure that was part of network-interference. A&E managed to tank those two so hard. They didn't even make an effort to give them a proper story or even personalities. 

Edited December 21, 2016 by Rumsy4

[KingOfHearts]

Quote

Something like A&E imagining a world where their scripts would always be accepted.

So Isaac's world, basically. In one interview, A&E said Regina wouldn't Regina if she didn't get the short end of the stick. In 4x21/22, an Evil Regal asked Isaac if Bandit!Regina would ever get her happy ending. He gave her a very Adam answer and whispered, "#NoSpoilers". 

Quote

That's what I feel. But they might make some strong suggestions based on the advisory board and other focus groups polls. A&E may promise to implement the ideas, but not truly. Look at what happened with Aladdin and Jasmine this season. I feel pretty sure that was part of network-interference. A&E managed to tank those two so hard. They didn't even make an effort to give them a proper story or even personalities. 

The time for the network to act has long gone. There's nothing you could do at this point to fix it, even if the writing got better. If ABC was keen on saving Once, they would have done it already. Either they tried and failed or just said "screw it".

Edited December 21, 2016 by KingOfHearts

[Camera One]

First page of the article...

Quote

In their apartment, they worked the same way they do today, with Horowitz at the computer and Kitsis on the couch... Then, as now, “It’s a lot of, ‘What if this, wouldn’t it be cool if that,’ back and forth, typing furiously, printing it out, reading it aloud.”

This is why there is zero long-term planning.  What's cool momentarily is not necessarily what can sustain an entire half season.

Quote

Said agent, Ari Greenburg, informed them that they were drama writers. Kitsis recalls their confusion: “We’re like, ‘No we’re not, we’re funny.’

Now we have someone to blame for making A&E think they can write drama.

Quote

Horowitz says of Felicity, “so that as writers it forced you to dig in and tell stories just about characters in a very small circumstance but with big emotional implications. It was a rigorous kind of storytelling.”

Forced, eh?  Maybe too rigorous... that's why it can't happen on "Once".

Quote

Their Evil Queen wasn’t just a baddie; she was misunderstood. “So then the thought process was, Where would this character succeed? Where does good not always win? Her world. Then that led to the idea, What if she cast a curse and came to our world?”

Clearly, their own idea warped into something else.  If she's just misunderstood, then why have her massacre a village?  And if Fairytale Land is where "good always win", why is it such a miserable place for everyone except the villains?  They broke their own conception, yet kept writing the same way despite that.  That's why stuff like "Villains never get happy endings" makes no sense, since that is not the way they are portraying their world.

Edited December 21, 2016 by Camera One

[Rumsy4]

24 minutes ago, Camera One said:

Forced, eh?  Maybe too rigorous... that's why it can't happen on "Once".

Heh. I think we got their number on why the writing on ONCE is so shallow.

Quote

Clearly, their own idea warped into something else.  If she's just misunderstood, then why have her massacre a village?  And if Fairytale Land is where "good always win", why is it such a miserable place for everyone except the villains?  

But, but--hypocrite Snow didn't understand how much she was hurting. And all those nasty villagers deserved what they got because they supported the brat. And Regina feels everything with all her soooooul. 

[Shanna Marie]

2 hours ago, Camera One said:

 If she's just misunderstood, then why have her massacre a village?  And if Fairytale Land is where "good always win", why is it such a miserable place for everyone except the villains?

You know, the show based on that concept would have been interesting -- the fairy tale villains devise a scheme to come to our world, where villains can win and there are shades of gray between "hero" and "villain" that some of them might fit into, so that the "misunderstood" villains would just be considered gray here rather than all-out villains. But that's not what they wrote. They didn't write Regina as "misunderstood." They wrote her as a murderer bent on getting revenge on a child for what Regina's mother actually did. She talked a bit about the other villains having a chance in our world before she cast the curse, but we never saw those villains in Storybrooke.

[Camera One]

Everyone struggles in their career or education at some point and maybe see themselves as the underdog.  I find it quite the leap to be in that situation and think, "I'm just like The Evil Queen in Snow White!".  You mean, like how she refused to recognize the fact that some people are just more deserving?

[Shanna Marie]

10 minutes ago, Camera One said:

 I find it quite the leap to be in that situation and think, "I'm just like The Evil Queen in Snow White!".  You mean, like how she refused to recognize the fact that some people are just more deserving?

Or the fact that people who are kind and helpful are better liked than those who torture and murder? And it's not as though Regina has ever really been a failure who struggled. She's always lived in wealth and comfort. She had great magical power. She was queen. Her only "failure" was her inability to kill a rival who wasn't even really a threat to her. She was desperately unhappy because someone else existed and was able to be happy. I'm not getting how you get "just like being a struggling writer" out of that. Heck, I am a sometimes struggling writer, and I identify a lot more with Emma. Regina is more like the person who seems to just get everything easily and is a bitch about it, stomping down on all perceived rivals, even though she's actually more successful than they are.

[Camera One]

4 minutes ago, Shanna Marie said:

Or the fact that people who are kind and helpful are better liked than those who torture and murder? 

Yes, that's another important one.  Especially since I was thinking more in terms of the Disney Snow White movie, which supposedly made A&E think how being The Evil Queen was like being an unsuccessful Hollywood Writer.  

This is making me think of a plot for my next screenplay.  

Two down and out Writers are in their apartment, one on the computer, one on the couch.  They talk to their computer screen...

A&E: "Dell Monitor, Dell Monitor on the wall, Who's the fairest writing team of all?"  

Monitor: "Wouldn't It Be Cool if..." is thy skill.  But hold... actual worldbuilding and character development I see!  Alas, they are better Writers than thee."

A&E: Alas for them!  Reveal their names!

Monitor: There are too many to mention.

A&E hear something and they go to their window.  

Downstairs, a hardworking scribe is writing by a well.  A network executive on a steed ride by.

"One Script.  You have but one script.  One script, we want to air."

A&E: How unfair!  How hard is it for us to live in a place where everything we did failed!  I wish we could go to a land where quality doesn't matter and we would still get viewers!

Genie: One season of quality I shall grant.  But after that, it all depends on your skill!

[KingOfHearts]

Teacher: "Ok kids, what was your favorite character in Snow White?"
Girl: "I like Snow White! She was so nice and pretty!"
Boy: "Dopey. He's so funny!"
A&E: "We liked the Evil Queen."
Teacher: "Uh... why is that?"
A&E: "She was just misunderstood. Why can't she be the fairest of them all? Snow should apologize."
Teacher: "You do realize the Evil Queen sent a huntsman to kill her, right? Poisoned her? Tried to kill all the dwarves with a boulder?"
A&E: "She was just acting out. Snow White's the real villain for daring to be prettier than her. We can't believe the huntsman didn't cut her heart out."

Edited December 22, 2016 by KingOfHearts

[Writing Wrongs]

I just re-watched Birds of Prey and I didn't realize A&E were producers. They wrote the story for an episode called "Split" where a superhero becomes so obsessed with the villain that killed his fiancee that after he kills him, he becomes him. So part of the time he is the good guy and then he morphs into the killer. I guess they really liked that concept. LOL

[Camera One]

Oh boy, I actually considered watching that show, but my VCR back then was malfunctioning so I missed taping Episode 2 so I gave up.  Thanks, VCR.  

Edited December 22, 2016 by Camera One

[AnotherCastle]

From Meghan Ory's S2 exit interview:

Quote

TV Guide Magazine: How did it come about?
Ory: It was all very crazy and serendipitous. I was under contract for Once, but there have been so many new characters this year that the storyline [executive producers] Eddy [Kitsis] and Adam [Horowitz] wanted to do with Ruby ended up not being able to happen because they decided to take the show in a different way. They are so brilliant, so when they were inspired they had to follow their amazing idea for what they wanted to do with Neverland. I hadn't been in a few episodes — my last was when everyone came back from New York — so I talked to the boys and asked them, 'What's going on? Is everything okay?' And they said, 'We love you, but we have this story that's so huge we don't know where we're going to put you at this moment.' So I said, 'Maybe I should look elsewhere?'

TV Guide Magazine: At the start of the season, it seemed as though Ruby in wolf form was going to end up as either a pawn of the Queen or Mr. Gold.
Ory: I think that may have been an idea at one point, but the [Neverland] story took on a life of its own, and you can only tell so many stories. Originally, Josh [Dallas, who plays David] and I were going to be together longer in Storybrooke, but I think they decided to bring the girls back sooner from Fairytale Land.

http://www.tvguide.com/news/kecks-exclusives-meghan-ory-once-upon-a-time-intelligence-1065627/

This seems to happen again and again and A&E just never seem to learn or change their pattern: Every year they make a character/actor a regular and then use them in a way or use them so little that frankly making them a regular in the first place seems like a big waste of money before letting them go the next year.

S1: Raphael Sbarge/Archie

S2: Meghan Ory/Ruby

S3: MRJ/Neal Cassady

S4: Michael Socha/Will Scarlet (this one still takes the cake. He only had 20 minutes of screentime during the whole of the Season)

S5: Sean Maguire/Robin Hood

Edited December 23, 2016 by AnotherCastle

[Camera One]

Good on her for making it seem like it was a good thing.  But seriously, most of that stuff they *did* write in 2B had nothing to do with gearing up for Neverland.  Was this the reason for bringing Neal to Storybrooke and then doing nothing with him?  It's one thing if it made sense, but what a lame excuse for dropping her like a red potato.

[KAOS Agent]

To be fair, I think there was a better plan to work in the Neverland stuff earlier in 2B, but Colin broke his leg and they had to rapidly change course to write him out of several episodes. It was confirmed by Colin and MRJ that they were set to film scenes together, presumably while the characters were still in NYC, the day after Colin got in his skiing accident.

Edited December 23, 2016 by KAOS Agent

[Camera One]

With these writers, I have doubts that would have made much difference.  It's not like they used Colin and MRJ together when they could have in 3A or even 3B.  

[andromeda331]

29 minutes ago, Camera One said:

With these writers, I have doubts that would have made much difference.  It's not like they used Colin and MRJ together when they could have in 3A or even 3B.  

Exactly, they could have easily used them together either of those times or both but didn't.

[KAOS Agent]

It's impossible to discuss the quality of what may have been written, but blaming the writers for not bringing in Neverland in 2B when Hook was their clear connection and then Hook was out of commission for several episodes due to no fault of their own isn't fair either. They obviously meant to bring it in earlier (they were setting it up by having Neal know Hook and refer to being older than he looked) and had to pivot really quickly to other stuff when that wasn't possible. 

[Camera One]

I actually don't care if they brought in Neverland or not in 2B.  It wasn't necessary.  

There could have been a lot of other things they could have done if they had extra time leftover due to Colin's injury, including subplots they themselves created which needed a lot more padding (eg. the plan for everyone to go back to the Enchanted Forest, how Emma felt about it, Rumple and Neal in Storybrooke, Regina having second thoughts about Cora, etc. among others).

Edited December 24, 2016 by Camera One

[Free]

6 hours ago, Camera One said:

Good on her for making it seem like it was a good thing.  But seriously, most of that stuff they *did* write in 2B had nothing to do with gearing up for Neverland.  Was this the reason for bringing Neal to Storybrooke and then doing nothing with him?  It's one thing if it made sense, but what a lame excuse for dropping her like a red potato.

Oh definitely, Neal/Baelfire seemed like his character was supposed to head somewhere, but then it seemed to have went up in smoke after he reunited with everyone and the Neverland arc wrapped things up.

[Mathius]

8 hours ago, AnotherCastle said:

This seems to happen again and again and A&E just never seem to learn or change their pattern: Every year they make a character/actor a regular and then use them in a way or use them so little that frankly making them a regular in the first place seems like a big waste of money before letting them go the next year.

S1: Raphael Sbarge/Archie

S2: Meghan Ory/Ruby

S3: MRJ/Neal Cassady

S4: Michael Socha/Will Scarlet (this one still takes the cake. He only had 20 minutes of screentime during the whole of the Season)

S5: Sean Maguire/Robin Hood

And although she was made a regular last year rather than this year, Rebecca Mader/Zelena still qualifies for this position in S6.

[Curio]

12 hours ago, AnotherCastle said:

This seems to happen again and again and A&E just never seem to learn or change their pattern: Every year they make a character/actor a regular and then use them in a way or use them so little that frankly making them a regular in the first place seems like a big waste of money before letting them go the next year.

 

I can understand an inexperienced showrunner running into this problem once, maybe twice, but A&E continually getting sidetracked by shiny new plots every single season is a huge red flag that they just aren't showrunner types. They're probably great in a writing room to bounce ideas off of, but with their track record on OUAT and the failure that was Dead of Summer, I'd be surprised if they get to run another television show anytime soon.

[Free]

5 hours ago, Curio said:

I can understand an inexperienced showrunner running into this problem once, maybe twice, but A&E continually getting sidetracked by shiny new plots every single season is a huge red flag that they just aren't showrunner types. They're probably great in a writing room to bounce ideas off of, but with their track record on OUAT and the failure that was Dead of Summer, I'd be surprised if they get to run another television show anytime soon.

Yeah, their track record is pretty bad, their ADD style of writing is even worse.

[Rumsy4]

6 hours ago, Curio said:

They're probably great in a writing room to bounce ideas off

I donno...the spate of "wouldn't it be cool if"s might get tiresome after a while. ;-) 

[Camera One]

1 hour ago, Rumsy4 said:

I donno...the spate of "wouldn't it be cool if"s might get tiresome after a while. ;-) 

A&E: Wouldn't it be cool if only Charming or Snow is awake at any given time?

Another Writer: How would that affect their emotional arc?

A&E: Wouldn't it be cool if Belle and Rumple's son came back as an adult?

Another Writer: How would Charming deal with Snow being asleep all the time?

A&E: Ooh... wouldn't it be cool if Belle and Rumple's son was EVIL?

Another Writer: And how would Snow deal with no Charming?

A&E: OMG OMG OMG OMG I just found an old script with The Black Fairy.  Wouldn't it be cool if she was Rumple's MOTHER and she turned Rumple and Belle's son EVIL?!  It looks like we have the big twist of the arc... let's go for lunch!

Edited December 24, 2016 by Camera One

[Writing Wrongs]

So instead of "Member Berries" they have "Wouldn't It Be Cool Berries"?

[Curio]

Just now, Writing Wrongs said:

So instead of "Member Berries" they have "Wouldn't It Be Cool Berries"?

No, they have both. The "Member Berries" is how we got this recycled Evil Queen plot this year, and the "Wouldn't It Be Cool Berries" is how we got...everything else.

[Camera One]

I read another page of that interview Rumsy posted.

The two had a deal at ABC, as did Lindelof, so they pitched the idea to him, and he encouraged them to follow through on it—more than once. They sent three outlines to the studio, “but before they could give us notes, Adam and I would call and say, ‘We don’t like it; we want to change our minds,’” Kitsis recalls.

Wow... indecisive much?  Maybe this is why half-seasons sometimes go through a U-turn halfway through... they change their mind.

“We usually talk about the flashback first because it will be the emotional underpinning of the episode and usually the character we’re focusing on,” says Goodman. After figuring out the dilemma, they’ll see where it can be reflected in the present.

This is why the flashbacks are usually more interesting and emotionally affecting than the present-day.  And this is why they will never get rid of flashbacks.

Often an episode offers up a wrong choice/right choice mirror, “where you see a character make the wrong emotional choice in flashback, only to make the right one in the present.” Only after the emotional element is hashed out do they conceive the plot.

Thus, why it feels so formulaic.  Yeah right for the last line.

They cast the Wonderland [Writers'] room accordingly. “Jan Nash [Without A Trace] comes from a procedural background; Rina Mimoun [Mistresses] comes from this great emotional, character, soapy background. We have Richard Hatem [Grimm], with great scary genre stuff. We have all these different people who come from different backgrounds, which to me is a microcosm of what this show is.”

Maybe that's why "Wonderland" was more interesting... they had new blood with different backgrounds.

Plus first season is always easier.

Asked how old his kids are, Horowitz sighs, “I don’t know.” Adds Kitsis, “It’s crazy and intense and you don’t ever get to see your family

Hopefully, this was moreso the case when they were running two shows.  Whatever the problems with the show, they're clearly hardcore.

[Rumsy4]

Quote

“We usually talk about the flashback first because it will be the emotional underpinning of the episode and usually the character we’re focusing on,” says Goodman. After figuring out the dilemma, they’ll see where it can be reflected in the present.

1 hour ago, Camera One said:

This is why the flashbacks are usually more interesting and emotionally affecting than the present-day.  And this is why they will never get rid of flashbacks.

This strategy doesn't even make sense to me. One would think the writers map out the present day arc in advance, and then think of flashbacks to go along with the present day storyline. But if they are going about things upside down, no wonder the present day stuff stalls for several episodes before the action picks up steam!

[Camera One]

1 hour ago, Rumsy4 said:

no wonder the present day stuff stalls for several episodes before the action picks up steam!

More like stall for 3/4th of a half-season!  

[Free]

3 hours ago, Rumsy4 said:

This strategy doesn't even make sense to me. One would think the writers map out the present day arc in advance, and then think of flashbacks to go along with the present day storyline. But if they are going about things upside down, no wonder the present day stuff stalls for several episodes before the action picks up steam!

And it doesn't work.  The flashbacks were a major complaint back during the Lost days, it's even worse here with these writers.

[Shanna Marie]

21 hours ago, Rumsy4 said:

One would think the writers map out the present day arc in advance, and then think of flashbacks to go along with the present day storyline. But if they are going about things upside down, no wonder the present day stuff stalls for several episodes before the action picks up steam!

In a way, this kind of makes sense for season one. Then, the present day part of the story was more about relationships while the plot was in the past. The flashbacks were telling the story of how the curse came about, so there were specific events that needed to take place, while in the present, it was about Emma getting to the point where she was ready to believe, so up until the last few episodes, it didn't really matter what specific events occurred as long as we got the bonding between Emma and Henry and Emma and Mary Margaret, the relationship between David and Mary Margaret, and the conflict between Emma and Regina. Then it made sense to plot out the flashback that was needed at that point in the story, and then find a parallel to show in the present.

It's harder to imagine how they could do that sort of thing when the narrative drive is in the present, though it would explain a lot. In 3A, there were specific events that needed to happen in the present, and it looks like they came up with flashbacks to match that thematically, since there was no story being told in the past, just flashbacks that fit the theme of the present. But when you look at the flashbacks, it may be that they had stories they wanted to tell, like Regina adopting Henry, Regina's soul mate, and Hook's backstory, and maybe they did create present-day events that gave them an excuse to tell those stories. That would certainly explain why about half the flashbacks in the Neverland arc involved Regina, while they barely got into the history of Neverland and the characters who came from that story. We got to see Regina's ultimatum to the Charmings, Regina not meeting her soul mate, Regina adopting Henry, and Regina posing as Ursula to torment Snow and Ariel. Meanwhile, we saw Hook's pirate origin story, Pan taunting Rumple about Bae, and Rumple's father becoming Pan, with Tinkerbell as a secondary character in Regina's soul mate story. If they planned the flashbacks of that arc first, they really went about things the wrong way.

[Rumsy4]

6 hours ago, PixiePaws1 said:

For me the rot began to set in around 3b...    Emma's attitude was so wilfully cruel and resentful at having to come back, i thought she was pushed too far out of character. I think they took it way over the top in order to contrast her revelation in Rumple's vault (in the wonderful 3b finale)...

This is a huge writing issue in the show, and they do it with all charatcers. I feel the writers of this Show have a fundamental misunderstanding of how to create high stakes drama. Good writing comes from emotional development coupled with plot. The writing in ONCE exclusively relies on plot. They ignore all the passing emotional beats, and attempt to artificially create high-stakes by pushing their charatcers to extremes before talking them off of the cliff-edge. 

Emma's cruel barbs to Hook in 3B is a prime example of this. Some Emma fans would resent even a hint that Emma was being unfairly cruel to Hook, and turn into an argument about how "Emma didn't owe Hook anything". Emma owed it to Hook to act like a decent human being, and her comment about him having one-hand was a low blow. 

Another example was Dark Hook's deal with Nimue to bring all the Dark Ones to Storybrooke in exchange for his revenge. It was OOC, even for a character consumed by the Darkness.   

The most recent example is of course Rumple, who stalked and terrorized his pregnant wife all season long, and we're supposed to laud him from backing off from speeding her pregnancy and stealing her baby at the last minute. 

As for Regina, there are simply no words. 

This is exactly why there are so many factions in the ONCE fandom. Only fans of the charatcers remain fans after the extremes the writers take them to. What is so great about that? This shows how little respect the writers have for their own creations. 

Quote

That would certainly explain why about half the flashbacks in the Neverland arc involved Regina, while they barely got into the history of Neverland and the characters who came from that story. 

Yeah. This explains a lot of the 3A flashbacks. For Lost Girl, we should have totally got an Emma's childhood flashback. Instead, we had yet another Evil Queen/Snowing flashback. 

[Camera One]

30 minutes ago, Shanna Marie said:

It's harder to imagine how they could do that sort of thing when the narrative drive is in the present, though it would explain a lot. In 3A, there were specific events that needed to happen in the present, and it looks like they came up with flashbacks to match that thematically, since there was no story being told in the past, just flashbacks that fit the theme of the present. 

It does make you wonder.  For a half-season series of flashbacks that tell a coherent story (eg. Season 1), I can definitely see the need to plan out the pre-Curse events and how Snowing, Regina and Rumple were all connected.  As you said, the difference in Season 1 was that the present-day direction was obvious since it was about Emma's journey to believe.  Likewise, for 4A, they clearly planned out the Frozen flashback story first.  And the present-day story's only highlight but also an anchor was Emma and Elsa's friendship, and Emma coming to terms with her magical powers... by luck or forced network interference, they DID find a good link between flashback and present-day which also explored character.

But using this plan-flashbacks-first strategy in subsequent seasons clearly led to the present-day storyline NOT having any narrative drive.  I can definitely see them deciding first and foremost in 3B that the "twist" would be Snowing casting the Curse and splitting a heart, and in 4B that the "twist" would be Lily being Maleficent's daughter and the eggnapping crap.  As a result, the present-day was basically everyone spinning their wheels with no emotional development.  

It is definitely more problematic for half-seasons like 3A or 6A where the flashbacks do not tell a coherent story.  In which case, the Writers probably planned the biggest twist (eg. Peter Pan being Rumple's father, or Morpheus being Rumple's son), and then the rest of the flashbacks were inserted based on who needed a centric.  

Edited December 27, 2016 by Camera One

[Camera One]

Reading A&E's Yahoo interview from earlier this month.

Quote

In this episode, we get to see an alternate universe version of Emma, where she never becomes the Saviour. Why did you decide on exploring this angle?

Kitsis: I think it’s something as writers it’s something we’ve talked about, which was: What would’ve happened to Emma if she never became the Saviour? Who doesn’t say, “Oh, well, what if I did this in life?” or “What if I made this other choice?” The grass is always greener, and that’s what we’re going to explore. It’s a great punishment for the Evil Queen, but for Emma, to get something you always wondered is best for you, it’s a real chance to examine if the grass really was greener.

The way Eddy answered this certainly made it seem like it was an alt-reality scenario that they are trying to explore.  But they never had Emma think about whether the grass really was greener.  Or was that when Emma told Regina she's glad she got saved?  

Quote

It seems like they aren’t even close to cracking that problem of how to defeat [The Evil Queen].

Kitsis: I think in the winter finale, you’re going to see some big steps taken forward. Maybe there is a way to defeat her, maybe there is a way to deal with this seemingly insurmountable problem of the connection between them. Or there won’t be!

He said this before "Wish You Were There" aired.  The Evil Queen turning into a snake was the "big step"?   Or was he talking about the sword?

Quote

Kitsis: The trouble with the Internet is that everyone has a different opinion. The truth of the matter is, Adam and I worked 12 really harsh years and a lot of passes to get this show on air. So at the end of the day, we’re just going to go with what we think is best. We can’t listen to every voice on the Internet. Obviously, we love our fans and we’re inspired by our fanbase, but the truth is, this week’s episode was filmed months ago. It really doesn’t work real-time.

Horowitz: What we like to say is, we hear our fans but we can’t listen to them. We’re very sensitive to our fans and we’re very sensitive that we’re making the show for the fans and we want them to love and enjoy it as much as we love and enjoy making it. But we can’t be taking requests.

Kitsis: TV is very interesting because it’s in your home and you see it once a week and fans have this sense of “I can change the course,” but they don’t apply that to any other art form. Nobody is trying to tell Adele what song to do.

Tell that to the people on Twitter.

Quote

How much do you monitor fan feedback to decide which characters to bring back?

Hororwitz and Kitsis: Zero!

LOL!

Edited December 28, 2016 by Camera One

[Rumsy4]

20 minutes ago, Camera One said:

Quote

Kitsis: I think it’s something as writers it’s something we’ve talked about, which was: What would’ve happened to Emma if she never became the Saviour? Who doesn’t say, “Oh, well, what if I did this in life?” or “What if I made this other choice?” The grass is always greener, and that’s what we’re going to explore. It’s a great punishment for the Evil Queen, but for Emma, to get something you always wondered is best for you, it’s a real chance to examine if the grass really was greener.

The way Eddy answered this certainly made it seem like it was an alt-reality scenario that they are trying to explore.

This makes me so angry at their hypocrisy. On Twitter, Adam claims that the EQ's wish clashed with Emma's wish to make her cowardly. But in interviews, he and Eddy talk as though this was a real exploration of how Emma's life would have turned out without the Curse, and how much she needed teaching a lesson. Anyway, in the episode, Emma thanked Regina becasue the wish-version of her "sucked". I just can't even with these two jokers.

23 minutes ago, Camera One said:

Quote

How much do you monitor fan feedback to decide which characters to bring back?

Hororwitz and Kitsis: Zero!

LOL!

Hahhahahah hahah "Robin-cough-Robin" ha

[KAOS Agent]

Quote

How much do you monitor fan feedback to decide which characters to bring back?

Horowitz and Kitsis: Zero!

This actually makes them pretty dumb - even if they are lying their asses off. If killing off a character is important to the story they want to tell, then fans shouldn't change that. However, bringing back a fan favorite for a quick story is a good idea. People want to see this kind of thing and this show lends itself to these kinds of appearances. Cinderella's return was fun. Archie's return was nice to see (even if the story was lacking). Why wouldn't you pick characters that fans want to see back to fill these stories? Even bringing back Robin wasn't necessarily a terrible idea. The execution is important and if listening to fans changes the stories and leads to characters being twisted out of recognition, there's an issue. But otherwise you should give the fans what they want.

[Rumsy4]

7 minutes ago, KAOS Agent said:

But otherwise you should give the fans what they want.

They're going for high concept "art for art's sake" motivation. As though TV writers, especially they, never pander to fans.

[KingOfHearts]

33 minutes ago, Rumsy4 said:

They're going for high concept "art for art's sake" motivation. As though TV writers, especially they, never pander to fans.

Don't fans provide their paycheck? Don't get me wrong - it's not always a good idea to listen to the fans. But, this stage of the game, the fans are the only viewers watching. I think A&E's vision was fulfilled a long time ago. 6A was the first arc where I really felt like they were running on fumes. Everyone, from the writers to the actors, phoned it in. It really wouldn't hurt to embrace the fan service like other shows tend to do in later seasons. (And I don't mean making Swan Queen canon!)

It's total crap that A&E don't listen, though. Their damage control has been so extremely obvious.

Edited December 28, 2016 by KingOfHearts

[Free]

1 hour ago, KingOfHearts said:

Don't fans provide their paycheck? Don't get me wrong - it's not always a good idea to listen to the fans. But, this stage of the game, the fans are the only viewers watching. I think A&E's vision was fulfilled a long time ago. 6A was the first arc where I really felt like they were running on fumes. Everyone, from the writers to the actors, phoned it in. It really wouldn't hurt to embrace the fan service like other shows tend to do in later seasons. (And I don't mean making Swan Queen canon!)

It's total crap that A&E don't listen, though. Their damage control has been so extremely obvious.

It's pretty clear by now they don't care, they make crap up, especially this late in the game.