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

[daxx]

I watched a documentary on Netflix last night, it's called showrunners. It was very interesting and some of the things said were interesting. The job is a burn out job, many times choices have to be made between time and quality with time having to win out due to scheduling.

there was a comment about general audience vs fan input and the showrunner speaking said you can't listen to those people (the rabid fans) they aren't your audience. And that they think they know how it's made but they only know a fraction of what's really happening.

Another showrunner said that the fans want things but often they don't really know what they want until you give it to them, then they realize, yes that is even better than what I wanted.

Not sure if that is arrogance or accuracy or a bit of both.

Granted all those people that were speculating a proposal when they were filming 3-21/22 and bts came out were likely much happier with what we got from that episode then if there was some out of the blue proposal, so I see what she's saying.

some fantastic people were in the documentary and I plan on rewatching it to write some quotes down.

Ronald D. Moore, J.J. Abrams, Joss Whedon and others. A&E were not in it.

highly recommended.

@Curio I've seen that script before, it was downloadable from some app I tried out awhile back. It is interesting.

[Curio]

11 minutes ago, daxx said:

there was a comment about general audience vs fan input and the showrunner speaking said you can't listen to those people (the rabid fans) they aren't your audience. And that they think they know how it's made but they only know a fraction of what's really happening.

The issue with A&E seems to be that they not only ignore the rabid fans, they also ignore seasoned television critics who actually know the behind-the-scenes industry secrets. Way back in Season 2, the Entertainment Weekly recapper mentioned how watching Regina do more and more deplorable things in flashbacks only makes it more difficult to root for her in the present. Instead of listening to that critique from an industry professional, A&E just doubled down and kept repeating their same mistakes year after year.

Quote

Another showrunner said that the fans want things but often they don't really know what they want until you give it to them, then they realize, yes that is even better than what I wanted.

I think there's a balance here. If you don't listen to fan feedback, you risk losing viewers, and viewers = $$$. Obviously, the Twitter fans who are like "OMG I WANT AUGUST AND EMMA TO GET TOGETHER I MISS HIM SO MUCH!!!" probably shouldn't get what they want. But I get the general sense that many of the posters in this forum are surprisingly knowledgeable about the television writing process. When we cry out for things we want to see, it's not because we live in a Bizarro World where we disregard canon and only want flowers and rainbows — we want to see actual payoff for simple arcs. It shouldn't have to come to the point where any time A&E introduce a new side character, we sit here wondering whether or not we'll actually see the conclusion to their story. I shouldn't be sitting here wondering what the hell happened to Will and if he ever found Ana again two years after he was introduced on the mother show. After spending an entire season exploring Hook and Emma's relationship and watching a half-season where Emma literally went to hell and back to save him, I don't think it's farfetched to want some meaty follow-up to that story line. 

A&E claim to not listen to any fan feedback, but some recent writing decisions really makes me think that they take some of the loudest Twitter voices into consideration more than the general audience or professional television critics.

[daxx]

I actually agree that Adam is listening to the loud voices in Twitter and that quote was more a criticism of them and how they are running the show than anything else.

i do know this forum has very knowledgeable people, I was thinking more Twitter and Tumblr.

[Free]

18 hours ago, Rumsy4 said:

Damon Lindelof was their mentor through the planning of S1--before even the Show started. This is from a couple of interviews A&E have given over the years (one of which I've linked here recently). Past S1, they had noone to offer them objective criticism. Then, with the exec meddling with 4A, the Frozen-storyline was again tightly supervised. The difference is quite telling.

That explains it, it's too different.

[Rumsy4]

Adam and Eddy exclusively listen to twitter-obsessed stalkers, lbr. Adam's always busy placating the loudest, most obnoxious among them, and it's obvious that this season in particular is a direct result of him paying heed to their "feedback". 

[TheGreenKnight]

21 hours ago, Rumsy4 said:

Damon Lindelof was their mentor through the planning of S1--before even the Show started. This is from a couple of interviews A&E have given over the years (one of which I've linked here recently). Past S1, they had noone to offer them objective criticism. Then, with the exec meddling with 4A, the Frozen-storyline was again tightly supervised. The difference is quite telling.

S1, I'd agree is above the rest. But 4A is not any different in quality than S3, imo. If anything, it had more perceived flaws than S3 that this forum mocks all the time (the Breaking Glass two-parter, Emma and Lily, Regina and Robin's affair, beginning of the author plot, etc.).

[Camera One]

S3 can't be compared as a whole to 4A.  3A is generally praised while 3B is the half-season people tend to hate.  All of perceived flaws you listed were subplots within 4A (while it had a relatively coherent series of flashbacks and current-day scenes in regards to the main plot of Frozen), but with 3B, both the main plot and the subplots of 3B, are generally criticized.  

[TheGreenKnight]

Funny, I don't remember 3B being much-criticized at the time. Seems to be more like hatred in hindsight (from a particular subset of fans).

[Camera One]

The vitriol wasn't as great as now, but I seem to remember a sense that it wasn't all that great.  I know personally, I was bored and rather irritated by Zelena and the whole feuding sisters story, disappointed by the immediate return to status-quo and lack of worldbuilding and exploration of Oz, and of course frustrated that there was so little interaction between Emma and her parents.

[daxx]

I think 3B didn't particularly upset me until Regina shot out white magic from nowhere and Snow decided she was a "brat". The rest of the season was mostly good and the spoilers were always exciting.

[maryle]

Well, favorite arc or episode is always subjectif. It is the same like people talk about the popularity of each character. the truth is nobody really know how a character is the most popular at large.   I do find interesting that I looked at two forum of two show similar to Once( because my interest for Once is falling and those show are in similar situation) and was very surprised to read how a lot of people there was comparing their show to Once and the majority  of those fantasy shows fans was saying.
 Once become a mess when the villain and mostly Regina become white washing and they decided to abandon the show  Does it proof that villain white washing has been detrimental to Once? No, it still just people on tv forum ( Grimm and sleepy hollow) comparing what they consider fallen show and why.
 

[Shanna Marie]

8 hours ago, Curio said:

we REALLY LIKE this woman.

Yikes! That's incredibly amateur for screenwriting. If you have to indicate in the script how we're supposed to feel about a character, then you're doing something wrong. If you want the audience to like a character, you write a likeable character doing the sorts of things that make people like a person. Just writing it in the directions in the script is rather pathetic. Didn't they spend years trying to get this series launched? If this was what the early attempts were like, I can see why it took them so long. A script that reads like this would get laughed out of most production companies.

As for the level of darkness (mentioned on the previous page), while season one had more of a sense of gritty realism, I don't think it was quite as bleak and depressing as the show is now. There really was more of a sense of hope underlying everything. Snow may have been cursed into a sad life without knowing her true self, but she was still probably happier than Regina because Regina is always looking for something more, while Snow is the kind of person who's content in her circumstances. She may have been downtrodden, but she enjoyed her job and was liked by the people around her, while Regina may have been in power, but she was pretty miserable. When the good guys had minor victories, yeah, Regina was still in control until the curse broke, so they hadn't won the war, but there was a sense that Emma was chipping away at her power. Each minor victory weakened Regina. Compare that to season 6, where nothing they've done has really weakened the Evil Queen (until Gideon showed up), and Snow's stuck in a time-share sleeping curse.

I mentioned this in the Other Fairy Tales thread, but I've started rewatching the Wonderland spinoff, and the thing that's struck me is the sense of joy it had. Yeah, Cyrus and Alice were separated and Jafar and the Red Queen were formidable villains, but there was still an optimism about it. There were moments of fist-pumping triumph, moments of joy, moments of pure fairytale romance and adventure. How long has it been since something was allowed to be truly joyful on this show? The only real victory so far this season may have been when they defeated Cinderella's stepmother and Emma celebrated by asking Hook to move in with her -- and even there, part of her invitation had to do with her awareness of her doomed fate. Otherwise, we've got Henry freeing Emma and Regina from the mirrorverse, but there it came across as a minor annoyance to the evil Queen. It doesn't seem to have weakened her or changed anything. Their other victories have kind of been downers -- yay, they found Aladdin, but it turns out the way to escape the Savior fate is to stop being a Savior, and then that lets everyone down and brings about the downfall of civilization. Yay, Liam decided not to kill Hook in revenge, but Hook's still left with the knowledge of what he did to his brother. Yay, Regina saved the Charmings from the Count, but that required killing someone who was only acting because he was forced to. Yay, Hook saved Belle from Jekyll, but that made us realize that the "good" side could still be evil and Regina might have to be sacrificed to end the Evil Queen.

Going back further, I guess Henry's big "clap if you believe in magic" moment was supposed to be joyous, but it was just so very bad. Hook's return from the dead was happy for about thirty seconds, and that was mostly due to the performances. But when you look in the context of the show, after that happy reunion, it was generally treated like a bad thing. No one seemed worried that Regina would go evil again after Robin's death until Hook returned. Aside from that hug with David in the background, no one acted at all happy that Hook was alive. So much for joy ... There wasn't much of a sense of victory from defeating Hades, since Robin died in the process. That whole scene was played for sadness, not triumph. Ditto with the resolution of the 5B arc, since it required Hook's death and it turned out his sacrifice was in vain. Our one big romantic moment all season may have been that horseback ride with Hook and Emma, but it was in a serious context (keeping her sane with the Dark One in her head).

I don't know if they think all this darkness will make the show be taken more seriously (hello, it's called Once Upon a Time and is about Snow White living in Maine. It's never gonna be taken seriously), if they're working through personal issues, or what, but it's just not fun anymore.

[Camera One]

we REALLY LIKE this woman.

It's so ludicrous that it's almost funny.  Why do we really like this woman?  Because she seems to care so much about Henry?  Seriously... why?  

[KingOfHearts]

22 minutes ago, Camera One said:

It's so ludicrous that it's almost funny.  Why do we really like this woman?  Because she seems to care so much about Henry?  Seriously... why?  

It seems like "we" means "A&E"

Well, they got one thing right, and it's about Henry:
 

Quote

OFF THIS strange little boy, who is clearly FULL OF SHIT --

Edited January 23, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[Rumsy4]

43 minutes ago, Shanna Marie said:

Aside from that hug with David in the background, no one acted at all happy that Hook was alive.

After her incredulous joy at his appearance, apparently even Emma felt guilty that Hook had returned because it made her BFF sad. I can see why people think there is SQ subtext.

[Curio]

15 minutes ago, KingOfHearts said:

It seems like "we" means "A&E"

Bingo.

It's kind of interesting to compare the old script with the final version. Here's the dialogue exchange from the old draft:

Quote

REGINA: You have to understand -- things have been tough lately. Ever since I became Mayor?

Regina is getting emotional now, full of regret. And what we find is that in stark contrast to the fairy-tale-land-queen, we REALLY LIKE this woman.

REGINA: I try to balance everything but...I guess it’s not going as well as I’d hoped. I just -- I just want him to be happy. But you see the way he looks at me... And lately, he’s become withdrawn. He’s been acting out. So I sent him to see a therapist.

ANNA (putting it together): Guy named Archie with a Dalmation? Henry thinks he’s Jiminy Cricket?

REGINA: Excuse me?

ANNA: He says his therapist is a cartoon character. From his book.

REGINA: ...what book?

Now Anna realizes something. That story book? Henry’s been hiding it from his mother.

ANNA: You know what, it’s none of my business. He’s your kid and I’ve caused enough trouble. I think I should be heading back.

Regina smiles warmly --

REGINA: Of course. No trouble at all. 

And this is what aired:

Quote

REGINA: You have to understand. Ever since I became mayor, balancing things has been tricky. You have a job, I assume?

EMMA: Uh, I keep busy, yeah.

REGINA: Imagine having another one on top of it. That’s being a single mom. So I push for order. Am I strict? I suppose. But I do it for his own good. I want Henry to excel in life. I don’t think that makes me evil, do you?

EMMA: I’m sure he’s just saying that because of the fairy tale thing.

REGINA: What fairy tale thing?

EMMA: Oh, you know. His book. How he thinks everyone’s a cartoon character from it. Like his shrink is Jiminy Cricket.

REGINA: I’m sorry. I really have no idea what you’re talking about.

EMMA: You know what? It’s none of my business. He’s your kid. And I really should be heading back.

REGINA: Of course.

So somewhere along the way, either A&E's mentor or an ABC exec gave notes to drop the line about Regina sending her child to therapy. Makes sense, since if A&E wanted the audience to REALLY LIKE Regina, then Regina casually mentioning her own gas lighting technique probably isn't the best way to go. A single working mom angle is much more sympathetic.

It's also interesting that they later added in the line where Regina asks if Emma has a job and later asks if she thinks being a strict mother is evil. They also dropped "I just want him to be happy" and changed it to "I want Henry to excel in life." Very different tone and message.

Edited January 23, 2017 by Curio

[KingOfHearts]

Quote

They also dropped "I just want him to be happy" and changed it to "I want Henry to excel in life." Very different tone and message.

She sounds more like Cora in the final product.

Edited January 23, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[Camera One]

And we REALLY LIKE that woman.

[Souris]

Ugh, that original script line. A&E are so very bad.

[Curio]

35 minutes ago, Camera One said:

And we REALLY LIKE that woman.

I can only imagine what the script comments were when they sent Cora into the light.

[Camera One]

CORA: Oh, I love you both.

Both sisters sob as Cora walks towards the ledge.  A giant tongue of fire shoots upwards as Cora looks bravely onwards.  We find ourselves yelling "Nooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" as if we were Regina and Zelena.  Don't take this woman away from us, we REALLY LOVE this woman.

Suddenly, a white light shines and a bridge forms.  We are SO HAPPY that Cora gets to go into the light since SHE DESERVES IT.  She really does.  No, really.  She does.  WE LOVE THIS WOMAN.  She is US, she faced prejudice and elitism from those who thought they were better than her, and she DESTROYED THEM.  Like the poor neglected writers in Hollywood being told their scripts were not good enough.  WELL, YOU SHOWED THEM, CORA.  

ZELENA: I've waited my whole life to have a mother, and now she's gone.

REGINA: (tearful herself) Oh, it's okay.

Edited January 23, 2017 by Camera One

[Shanna Marie]

I'm still shaking my head over the "We REALLY LIKE that woman" bit. A spec/selling/pitch script is a bit different from a shooting script because it's written to be read rather than to be produced (even if the production company or network didn't request changes when ordering a pilot to be shot, the script would have to be rewritten a bit to be produced because it's a slightly different form). The idea of a selling script is to paint a vivid mental image for the reader, so reading it is like visualizing the pilot episode. But even with that in mind the "we REALLY LIKE that woman" is utterly useless. It doesn't give us a mental image of her, doesn't tell us anything about her. Something more appropriate might have been, "She seems to be the polar opposite of her Evil Queen persona -- conservative attire, subdued makeup, simple hair, soft-spoken, mild-mannered, totally in control. She could be any professional single mom, someone you see in your neighborhood or at your child's school."

But then there's the problem that unless the plot was very different in that draft, trying so hard to make anyone like Regina doesn't fit the story. We don't know enough about her at that point to know if we like her, and the only information we have to go on is knowing that she put Snow White under a sleeping curse, barged into Snow's wedding to make threats, and her 10-year-old kid is so troubled that he went to the trouble of tracking down his birth mother and traveled to meet her because he felt like he needed help against his Evil Queen adoptive mother -- and the audience knows he's right. We're not exactly predisposed to like this woman. They'd have to have introduced her rescuing puppies and feeding the homeless to give us a different attitude toward her. And then the plot kind of hinges on her being unlikable enough that Emma makes the decision to give up her whole life to move to this town because she's worried about keeping track of what's going on with her son in that home, in spite of the fact that she doesn't want to be a mother and doesn't think she can be a mother. For Emma to make that decision, Regina has to be shown as fairly awful, and the audience isn't going to like someone who is that bad. So it makes absolutely no sense to ever say about Regina "we REALLY LIKE this woman" in a script, even if that weren't bad writing.

[RulerofallIsurvey]

On 1/22/2017 at 0:26 PM, Curio said:

Quote

Regina is getting emotional now, full of regret. And what we find is that in stark contrast to the fairy-tale-land-queen, we REALLY LIKE this woman.

A&E want the audience to REALLY LIKE Regina. So much so that it's in ALL CAPS in the Pilot script. If it was their goal to make the audience REALLY LIKE Regina in Storybrooke in Season 1—and particularly the Pilot—they didn't execute it well at all. I could see that being a note in a script later in Season 2 or 3 when they were giving Regina her redemption arc, but I never once got the impression in Season 1 that I was supposed to like Mayor Regina. I got the sense I was supposed to find Regina's flashback with Daniel as somewhat sympathetic, but never the Evil Queen or present-day Regina.

Trouble is, Regina might have gotten emotional, but we never (or at least, I never) saw her 'full of regret' in S1 - except when she regretted that Henry ate the poisoned apple turnover instead of Emma.  How or why on earth would the audience REALLY LIKE that kind of person?  The showrunners are oblivious idiots if they really thought (or still think) that would work.

17 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

Yikes! That's incredibly amateur for screenwriting.

^^It's posts like this that I really wish I could like more than once.  :)

[KingOfHearts]

In the scene we meet Regina Mills, we don't know if she has her memories or not. It's left ambiguous throughout the Pilot. I think she had the potential to be likeable if she was simply a strict, control-freak of a mother. But not only do A&E try to force us to like her, but they make her extremely unlikeable at the same time. She's running around murdering people. She's abusing a child, not just by being harsh, but by lying to him about his whole life. Henry even says she doesn't love him. It just doesn't make sense. How do you make a character sympathetic by making them -un-sympathetic?

[tri4335]

Just now, KingOfHearts said:

In the scene we meet Regina Mills, we don't know if she has her memories or not. It's left ambiguous throughout the Pilot. I think she had the potential to be likeable if she was simply a strict, control-freak of a mother. But not only do A&E try to force us to like her, but they make her extremely unlikeable at the same time. She's running around murdering people. She's abusing a child, not just by being harsh, but by lying to him about his whole life. Henry even says she doesn't love him. It just doesn't make sense. How do you make a character sympathetic by making them -un-sympathetic?

Because that is their ultimate twist of getting you to not only like but root for the most unsympathetic character they can create!  I don't know if they're just pulling off the long con or if they truly believe that this narcissistic sociopath really is the best most lovable character ever.

[KingOfHearts]

37 minutes ago, tri4335 said:

Because that is their ultimate twist of getting you to not only like but root for the most unsympathetic character they can create!  I don't know if they're just pulling off the long con or if they truly believe that this narcissistic sociopath really is the best most lovable character ever.

I'll admit, A&E managed to make (some) people feel bad for a mass murdering rapist. But, that had to do with editing and tricky manipulation within the narrative. It wasn't because a villain was just too damn likeable to hate.

Edited January 23, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[Free]

17 hours ago, Camera One said:

 

It's so ludicrous that it's almost funny.  Why do we really like this woman?  Because she seems to care so much about Henry?  Seriously... why?  

Because of A&E.

[Shanna Marie]

5 hours ago, KingOfHearts said:

In the scene we meet Regina Mills, we don't know if she has her memories or not.

I don't remember ever having any doubt that Regina had her memories. She certainly seemed like the same person, just dressed differently. I recall her coming across as cold and haughty, not being shown sympathetically at all.  Did they even do anything to really humanize her, like showing her frantic about her kid being missing? (I strangely enough am drawing a complete blank about that part of the episode -- all I remember is the way she acted to Emma when Emma brought Henry back.)

At any rate, a script direction of "we REALLY LIKE this woman" doesn't exactly convey a doubt as to whether she's different or has her memories. If I'm a script reader for the production company or network, my response is going to be along the lines of "oh yeah, who's this 'we' you speak of?" since there's nothing to back it up. If you're the actor or director, there's nothing you can do with that direction. My mind is still blown that professional writers did that. It's something out of screenwriting 101.

And the fact that Regina was unsympathetic and cold and haughty (and bad enough that Emma felt like she had to stay -- so Regina brought about her own downfall by not being able to play nice long enough to get Emma out of town) in the finished product makes you wonder where or when the note responding to the "we really like her" concept was given. Did they figure it out for themselves, or was it a requirement of people putting up the money?

[Curio]

41 minutes ago, Shanna Marie said:

I don't remember ever having any doubt that Regina had her memories. She certainly seemed like the same person, just dressed differently. I recall her coming across as cold and haughty, not being shown sympathetically at all.

 

Just speaking for myself, but I was definitely questioning whether or not Regina had her memories the first time I watched the Pilot. I actually was pretty convinced at first she didn't have her memories. I remember being kind of disappointed to find out she had her memories the entire time.

Quote

And the fact that Regina was unsympathetic and cold and haughty (and bad enough that Emma felt like she had to stay -- so Regina brought about her own downfall by not being able to play nice long enough to get Emma out of town) in the finished product makes you wonder where or when the note responding to the "we really like her" concept was given.

 

What's weird is that the script note for the scene where Emma questions Regina's response about Henry is really vague compared to their WE REALLY LIKE HER note from a fairly uneventful scene.

Quote

 

ANNA: Do you love him?

And Regina is thrown by that question.

REGINA: Excuse me?

ANNA: Henry. Do you love him?

For a flash we catch a look -- surprise perhaps -- on Regina’s face. And just as quickly, it’s gone.

REGINA: Of course I love him.

Whatever Anna saw? She’s keeping to herself.

ANNA: Right. Sorry. Goodbye.

And with that Anna leaves.

 

 

This is supposed to be one of the biggest moments in the episode because this is what drives Emma to stay in town. But the original note leaves a ton of room for interpretation. No ALL CAPS, just vague "surprise" and "whatever."

[KAOS Agent]

Quote

Just speaking for myself, but I was definitely questioning whether or not Regina had her memories the first time I watched the Pilot. I actually was pretty convinced at first she didn't have her memories. I remember being kind of disappointed to find out she had her memories the entire time.

The beginning of S1 episodes began with this "There is a town in Maine, where every storybook character you’ve ever known is trapped between two worlds: victims of a powerful curse. Only one knows the truth, and only one can break her spell." 

That's pretty clear that Regina knew. I don't think they meant it to be ambiguous with that beginning. I also have a hard time believing that I'm supposed to really like a woman who in the same episode was shown attempting to murder a newborn. It doesn't matter what is past and what is present. That wasn't an episode where that type of character love is going to happen (at least not in a sympathetic way). I loved Rumpel/Gold out of the gate, but it wasn't in a oh he's so misunderstood and he's changed kind of way. A Pilot episode sets the tone and introduces the characters, but it doesn't generally generate strong feelings about a character unless the focus is only on one character (see: Veronica Mars pilot). It's odd that writers would put how the audience is supposed to feel in a script. That's what the dialogue/actions/plot are meant to do. It doesn't help the cast or the director with how to act/film a scene. "This character really wants to be liked" is a helpful note "We really like this character" is not. 

[Curio]

26 minutes ago, KAOS Agent said:

The beginning of S1 episodes began with this "There is a town in Maine, where every storybook character you’ve ever known is trapped between two worlds: victims of a powerful curse. Only one knows the truth, and only one can break her spell." 

 

Did I mention I was a super casual viewer back then and didn't analyze it to death like I do now? Lol. I didn't even know that's what was said at the beginning of each episode. 

[ParadoxLost]

2 minutes ago, Curio said:

Did I mention I was a super casual viewer back then and didn't analyze it to death like I do now? Lol. I didn't even know that's what was said at the beginning of each episode. 

Don't feel alone.  My memory is crap.  I'm pretty sure I could have known in the first episode and by the time they got around to demonstrating it during that what Storybrooke was like before Emma showed up flashback that I was shocked at the revelation.

I'm still not completely sure if Regina Mills is or isn't a cursed personality even if she retained her EQ memories. 

[Camera One]

I don't remember that quote either.  I'm assuming it was a voiceover from the promo department.  

I too thought that it was ambiguous whether Regina remembered or not.  I think that was the intention, to make the audience wonder for a bit.  

Look at this article from Nov 2011 from EW:

Quote

Phew. Got that? It’s a lot. And three episodes in, there are still oh-so-many questions that need answering. Does Regina actually know that she’s the Evil Queen? Why is Henry the only one who ages in Storybrooke, and how will they explain that?

http://ew.com/article/2011/11/09/once-upon-a-time-burning-questions/

The end of the second episode could have been when most people could conclude Rumple knew, since he said "Please" quite deliberately.

There is also a Wall Street Journal TV recap from Dec 11, 2011 about "The Heart is a Lonely Hunter".

And there is now absolutely no doubt that Regina knows she’s the Evil Queen.

Edited January 24, 2017 by Camera One

[KingOfHearts]

1 hour ago, KAOS Agent said:

The beginning of S1 episodes began with this "There is a town in Maine, where every storybook character you’ve ever known is trapped between two worlds: victims of a powerful curse. Only one knows the truth, and only one can break her spell." 

That voiceover didn't happen until 1x02. It was not present in the Pilot. 

Edited January 24, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[TheGreenKnight]

18 hours ago, Curio said:

Just speaking for myself, but I was definitely questioning whether or not Regina had her memories the first time I watched the Pilot. I actually was pretty convinced at first she didn't have her memories. I remember being kind of disappointed to find out she had her memories the entire time.

Same (on both points).

[Shanna Marie]

I always assumed Regina had her memories. For one thing, she was the "one of these things is not like the other" person. Just about everyone else had a personality that was very different from their Enchanted Forest self and they were in lower positions. She was more or less the same, just a little less flamboyant, and was in a similar position of power. Then there's the fact that being frozen in time in a small Maine town while watching your enemies live mildly unsatisfying lives without them realizing they're being punished was already the dumbest revenge scheme ever. Not even knowing she should be enjoying it or that these people were her enemies being punished takes it over the top, and her being in a good position makes it seem she cast the curse and wasn't just another victim of it. Then from a writing standpoint, it doesn't work very well as a story if she doesn't realize what's really going on, if it's just Emma trying to keep an eye on her kid while fighting a corrupt politician vs. a corrupt politician trying to hang onto power while keeping her kid away from his birth mother. Regina needs to know what she's really fighting for while she's hanging onto the curse even as it weakens due to Emma's presence.

[ParadoxLost]

I thought her thing with the apples pointed to Regina having her memories more than anything.  But Regina fit the role of power tripping small town mayor a little to well.  So I always figured that Regina wasn't purely EQ; that she had a curse obtained knowledge.  Basically, I assumed that the curse did curse everyone.  Regina just had the post curse duality before the curse was broken.

[Camera One]

Watching some Adam and Eddy videos.  This one was from September.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZaU97yXzAI

Quote from Eddy about what it's like writing for Rumple and Regina:

Getting into their head and realizing what THEY want.  For Rumple, the fun of him, is he's a difficult man to love, so you can have him be completely sweet and great and heroic and then complete horrible in the next moment.  So for those two characters (Regina and Rumple) for me personally is to exercise some demons and get them out in writing.

So they justify Rumple abruptly acting one way and then another way because he's a "difficult man to love"?  Huh?  That's why the whole Rumple-reached-the-line-but-he-didn't-cross-it garbage was so unconvincing.  When is he "sweet and great and heroic"?  One would think writing a character involves looking at their demons, not at your own.

Quote from Eddy on whether they get discouraged during the writing process :

I think part of writing is problem-solving so being discouraged is part of it.  The great idea we have on Monday seems impossible on Tuesday. Wednesday it's clearly not a good idea because we can't figure it out and then on Thursday, we find a new way and it comes back again.

And then on Friday, you push it through because you *think* it now works but it totally doesn't.

[jhlipton]

THe "Season 1 has mentors, and other helpers who are not involved in Season2" explains Sleepy Hollow, too!

[KingOfHearts]

2 hours ago, jhlipton said:

THe "Season 1 has mentors, and other helpers who are not involved in Season2" explains Sleepy Hollow, too!

Now that you mention it, a Sleepy Hollow story would have been awesome for the Land of Untold Stories. Why couldn't we just get more literary cameos in 6A? I would have preferred that over Aladdin. Give me some Don Quixote or Oliver Twist.

Edited January 31, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[tri4335]

On 1/26/2017 at 1:27 AM, Camera One said:

Quote from Eddy about what it's like writing for Rumple and Regina:

 

Quote

Getting into their head and realizing what THEY want.  For Rumple, the fun of him, is he's a difficult man to love, so you can have him be completely sweet and great and heroic and then complete horrible in the next moment.  So for those two characters (Regina and Rumple) for me personally is to exercise some demons and get them out in writing.

I've been thinking about this for a couple of days and maybe this is where the disconnect is.  Perhaps Eddie is too inward focused and is projecting on these characters so he is letting out his rage but fails to see that the characters' rage and actions do not fit the story they are writing.

Edited January 31, 2017 by tri4335

[Free]

5 hours ago, jhlipton said:

THe "Season 1 has mentors, and other helpers who are not involved in Season2" explains Sleepy Hollow, too!

Yup, it all falls apart when they get free reign to mess up the framework.

[Camera One]

This is how Jane contrasted the "Once" parent show and "Wonderland" Writers' Room in an interview.  

-------

FGC: When you go into writing for both Once Upon A Time and Wonderland, are the writing sessions similar or different, and how?

JE: They’re really different. The two writers rooms are very near each other, on the same floor of the same building. When one room gets really loud and excited, we can hear it in our room. From both rooms. But they function very differently.

So the Once room is quieter. Somebody from the Wonderland staff said, “Everytime I walk by your room, you guys are sitting there, thinking.” It’s the room where we sit and we think. And one person, the head writer, does all of the writing on the board and does most of the pitching to the guys. It’s very elegant.

The other room [Wonderland] is much more “AUGHHH!” People are shouting stuff out and everybody does their own writing on the board and it’s just more – I discovered that one’s a dancer and one’s an athlete. And they’re both good and they both come out with this great product. But yeah, very different dynamics in the two rooms.

---------

Who is she referring to as the "head writer"?  The head writer for a particular episode?  Or A&E?  

[Camera One]

So many gems... here's Adam explaining why your questions are pointless in this interview.

AX: Alice goes back and forth between Victorian England and Wonderland. But is her Wonderland on the same timeline as Storybrooke on ONCE? That is, do Wendy Darling, Doctor Whale, who is essentially Doctor Frankenstein, and Alice all come from the same historical time frame?

HOROWITZ: All right. Here’s the answer. The Darlings exist in our world, the real world, in the past, so Wendy and her family are in historical our world. Doctor Whale and Frankenstein exist in what we call the Land Without Color.

KITSIS: And that, if you remember, was actually Switzerland from the past.

HOROWITZ: Doctor Whale was in fictional Switzerland and we call it the Land Without Color. The Darlings are in historical Victorian England, because they went to a land without magic. ButAlice is very much like Doctor Whale in her ownEngland.

KITSIS: In the fictional realm of Story.

HOROWITZ: But the good news is, when you watch, you will never have to ask any of these questions.

KITSIS: It’s what we call “iceberg,” which is the stuff that’s all beneath the surface, and if you need to have clarity, it’s there, but you can just jump in and watch and just know Alice is going to a Victorian England, she’s going into Wonderland.

[Souris]

They suck giant monkey balls.

[Free]

1 hour ago, Camera One said:

So many gems... here's Adam explaining why your questions are pointless in this interview.

AX: Alice goes back and forth between Victorian England and Wonderland. But is her Wonderland on the same timeline as Storybrooke on ONCE? That is, do Wendy Darling, Doctor Whale, who is essentially Doctor Frankenstein, and Alice all come from the same historical time frame?

HOROWITZ: All right. Here’s the answer. The Darlings exist in our world, the real world, in the past, so Wendy and her family are in historical our world. Doctor Whale and Frankenstein exist in what we call the Land Without Color.

KITSIS: And that, if you remember, was actually Switzerland from the past.

HOROWITZ: Doctor Whale was in fictional Switzerland and we call it the Land Without Color. The Darlings are in historical Victorian England, because they went to a land without magic. ButAlice is very much like Doctor Whale in her ownEngland.

KITSIS: In the fictional realm of Story.

HOROWITZ: But the good news is, when you watch, you will never have to ask any of these questions.

KITSIS: It’s what we call “iceberg,” which is the stuff that’s all beneath the surface, and if you need to have clarity, it’s there, but you can just jump in and watch and just know Alice is going to a Victorian England, she’s going into Wonderland.

If that's what they want to call it, it's a retcon.

[KingOfHearts]

We wouldn't be asking questions if the writing held the suspension of disbelief better. We notice all the flaws and plot holes because the story is not compelling.

[Shanna Marie]

3 hours ago, Camera One said:

So the Once room is quieter. Somebody from the Wonderland staff said, “Everytime I walk by your room, you guys are sitting there, thinking.” It’s the room where we sit and we think. And one person, the head writer, does all of the writing on the board and does most of the pitching to the guys. It’s very elegant.

The other room [Wonderland] is much more “AUGHHH!” People are shouting stuff out and everybody does their own writing on the board and it’s just more – I discovered that one’s a dancer and one’s an athlete.

That sounds to me like the Wonderland group was more collaborative, with everyone free to give feedback, which means that plot holes got pointed out and filled in the writers' room rather than making it onto the screen and then being worked out on Twitter and no one character was allowed to dominate or warp the fabric of the show, while on Once, it sounds like it's a lot more disparate, with A&E in charge and their vision dominating, and not a lot of feedback other than theirs. That explains so much.

3 hours ago, Camera One said:

ButAlice is very much like Doctor Whale in her ownEngland.

KITSIS: In the fictional realm of Story.

What it sounds like to me is that they forgot all the timeline entanglements about what happened when and how the various worlds connected, and probably around the time they were developing the spinoff they were coming up with the thing where Bae ended up in Victorian London with the Darlings, but they wanted to ground the spinoff by starting it in Storybrooke, so it had to be contemporary, and the only way out was to wave their hands and go "fictional Victorian England story world!" I guess there's enough story set in Victorian England to flesh out a world, but which era is it, and are there different regions for different eras, or are there different worlds? So, Alice and Jekyll and Hyde seem to be from 1880s Victorian world and you might get some Thomas Hardy stuff around that time, maybe some Sherlock Holmes, but is there an 1830s-60s Dickens world that maybe also has the Brontes, and the France of that world has Les Miserables and Madame Bovary? Then they did the same thing with Dorothy and Story Kansas, since they had a very 1930s Dorothy who would have had to come from 1980s Kansas, unless she was time traveling, but what else would be in 1930s Kansas? I guess that story world might also include Story California for the Grapes of Wrath. And never mind that The Wizard of Oz was only in the 30s for the movie and the book was from the turn of the century -- the book was actually kind of contemporary with Peter Pan.

[Camera One]

The whole "Realms of Story" thing is really ill-defined.  It seems like A&E are on the same page on the nonsensical worldbuilding so they can't be making it up on the fly during an interview, can they?

Edited February 4, 2017 by Camera One

[KingOfHearts]

20 minutes ago, Camera One said:

The whole "Realms of Story" thing is really ill-defined.  It seems like A&E are on the same page on the nonsensical worldbuilding so they can't be making it up on the fly during an interview, can they?

I'm pretty sure the concept was not in their minds until S4 with the Author business.