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

[Camera One]

2 minutes ago, KingOfHearts said:

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

Interestingly, that interview was from Fall 2013, when they were doing Season 3A.

Edited February 4, 2017 by Camera One

[KingOfHearts]

Just now, Camera One said:

Interestingly, that interview was from Fall 2013, when they were doing Season 3A.

Oh. Judging from the article, it appears they invented the concept in order to reconcile Wonderland's timeline with Once's. 

[Camera One]

1 hour ago, Shanna Marie said:

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.

Well, apparently, they're all sitting there thinking.  About what, I'm not sure.

[Souris]

15 minutes ago, Camera One said:

Well, apparently, they're all sitting there thinking.  About what, I'm not sure.

How awesome Regina is.

[Shanna Marie]

13 hours ago, Camera One said:

Well, apparently, they're all sitting there thinking.  About what, I'm not sure.

About what idiots their bosses are, but they learned that their bosses are so thin-skinned and defensive that they don't dare speak up to point out plot problems, etc.

14 hours ago, Camera One said:

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 don't think they came up with it on the fly during an interview, but I do think it's a retcon to explain aberrations in the timeline, maybe something they came up with after seeing tweets questioning things. Kind of like the "oh, Zelena made her own dome, and time stopped for all story worlds during the curse" retcons when they forgot about the 28 years frozen thing.

[Camera One]

6 minutes ago, Shanna Marie said:

About what idiots their bosses are, but they learned that their bosses are so thin-skinned and defensive that they don't dare speak up to point out plot problems, etc.

I don't think we can assume that the staff writers on "Once" have such thoughts about A&E, just because we don't like the direction of their show.  Jane has such a good resume that she could easily have jumped ship amicably if she had wanted to.  She describes the method as "elegant" and like a dancer.  Yes, to the public, she has to remain positive, but I don't think we can conclude that she's faking it just because of our own differing perspective.  Or maybe you were just joking (in which case, never mind!).

Edited February 4, 2017 by Camera One

[Shanna Marie]

24 minutes ago, Camera One said:

Or maybe you were just joking (in which case, never mind!).

Mostly being snarky. But as a professional writer who is baffled by their story choices, poor continuity, plot holes, and bizarre characterizations, I can't imagine that anyone with even half a clue could sit in story meetings and stay silent, unless they've learned it does no good. I can also see loving the job, in spite of that. If you're protective about a character and get to be the one who usually writes the big stuff with that character, as happens with Jane and Rumple, then I could see hanging on to be able to write that, and the fear of what would happen if you quit and someone else took over. We've seen how thin-skinned they are about outside criticism, so I could imagine how they might respond to people on their staff pointing out problems.

[KingOfHearts]

8 minutes ago, Shanna Marie said:

Mostly being snarky. But as a professional writer who is baffled by their story choices, poor continuity, plot holes, and bizarre characterizations, I can't imagine that anyone with even half a clue could sit in story meetings and stay silent, unless they've learned it does no good. I can also see loving the job, in spite of that. If you're protective about a character and get to be the one who usually writes the big stuff with that character, as happens with Jane and Rumple, then I could see hanging on to be able to write that, and the fear of what would happen if you quit and someone else took over. We've seen how thin-skinned they are about outside criticism, so I could imagine how they might respond to people on their staff pointing out problems.

It still amazes me that ABC has not done much about the problem. If they saw the potential in the show, and knew A&E were squandering it, wouldn't the react accordingly? There's a massive goldmine with the marketing, Disney brand exposure, and passionate fandom. I don't understand how the network has trusted the writers all this time after all the big ratings drops over the years. Surely we're not the only ones out there who see what's wrong. They're making rookie mistakes any professional could see. (Heck, even casual watchers could see.)

Supposedly Dungey stepped in for S6, but so far it's been the worst season to date. I'm not sure if the network just doesn't know what it's doing or it's just playing a different game altogether. I realize it's too late to save it, but they could have made changes a few seasons ago and they didn't.

Edited February 4, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[Camera One]

8 minutes ago, KingOfHearts said:

It still amazes me that ABC has not done much about the problem. If they saw the potential in the show, and knew A&E were squandering it, wouldn't the react accordingly? There's a massive goldmine with the marketing, Disney brand exposure, and passionate fandom. I don't understand how the network has trusted the writers all this time after all the big ratings drops over the years. Surely we're not the only ones out there who see what's wrong. They're making rookie mistakes any professional could see. (Heck, even casual watchers could see.)

Their haphazard directions about what 6A should be like made things worse.  And it looks like 6B will be repeating the exact same mistakes.  Incompetence all-around, it seems.

[Shanna Marie]

21 minutes ago, KingOfHearts said:

It still amazes me that ABC has not done much about the problem.

I've wondered if anyone at the network actually watches the show on a regular basis. I believe there's someone who reads and gives notes on the scripts, but we know that there's often a big difference between the scripts and what goes on the air -- those ten minutes of extra material per episode. Heck, frequently their script teases released a few days before the episode airs don't make it into the episode. So if the network is just reading the scripts and occasionally checking in for the big episodes, like the season premieres and finales, they may have a very different perspective than the people who are watching the series as it airs.

[Souris]

We must keep in mind that there was a regime change last midseason. Paul Lee was a big Once supporter, so he and his regime may not have had concerns about the show or felt they needed to step in (except for Frozen, and that probably came from higher up in Disney). When Dungey came in, ABC had about a million fires to put out and still does, so they probably didn't have much time or energy to spend on an aging show whose best days are behind it, regardless. They have only so many fingers to stick into all the holes in the dike. (Enough metaphors in this post, LOL?)

[KingOfHearts]

1 hour ago, Shanna Marie said:

I've wondered if anyone at the network actually watches the show on a regular basis.

Don't they have things like focus groups to give them feedback?

[Souris]

Adam continues to troll untagged tweets. I think he searches "A&E."

[KingOfHearts]

Adam seems to be really putting a foot in his mouth here. The lesson is "wishes screw things up"? He didn't even specify "genie" wishes. Also, if it's not an alternate universe, what is it? I realize he only has 130 characters, but surely better brevity is called for. I love how the writers always implore people to interpret the show in their own way, then proceed to tell people *exactly* what they should take from it.

Edited February 4, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[KAOS Agent]

Adam would be better served coming up with a cohesive narrative with which to promote the upcoming season. I'm floored that he and Eddy sat on a panel in front of passionate Once fans who were dying to get some good stuff to spread the word on 6B on social media and they couldn't give a concise promo for the upcoming season. "Wicked is Coming" works to get people on the same page and talking/speculating. Giving a list of a bunch of dangling plot threads from 6A that requires the audience to remember specific storylines/characters after a three month hiatus doesn't work. The Jasmine/Aladdin stuff may have been dumb, but at least people know who they are. Not so much with Gideon. Robin's back? Didn't he die? Who's the Black Fairy? What was the Snow/Charming curse again?

I expect that the ratings will crater because the writers have abandoned the basic storytelling arc that at least marginally held previous seasons together. Yes, there were a lot of random stories and plots going on, but if you missed an episode you still could keep track of the main thrust of the story - stop the Evil Queen, Zelena, Cora, Ingrid, et al or save Henry, Emma, Hook. I'm not sure how Outlaw Queen, split Queen, Rumbelle baby drama, Snowing's curse, Jasmine/Aladdin and any other randomness connect. It's going to be really hard to follow if you miss an episode or two. The writers would have been much better off returning to the basics with one identifiable goal preferably using a well known fictional character and promoting the hell out of it.

[KingOfHearts]

Quote

I expect that the ratings will crater because the writers have abandoned the basic storytelling arc that at least marginally held previous seasons together. 

I would have been content if S6 followed the half-season formula. Even though's predictable, it works. We could have spent 6A in the Land of Untold Stories, then 6B with Aladdin. You can keep the EQ and Gideon subplots, they just need to be toned down a bit. Emma's Savior-itis should have been dropped altogether. She could have moved in with Hook in 6A, then met Aladdin in 6B to delve into the Savior mythology. (Without contrived hand tremors.)

If 6A had stronger focus on LoUS and its background, it wouldn't have been as forgettable or chaotic. While Aladdin was marketable, it should have either replaced it from the get-go, or waited until 6B. I think network meddling dropped it in at an awkward time.

Edited February 5, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[superloislane]

I feel like this season would have been better if they dropped the Evil Queen entirely. It ended up not meaning anything or connecting to any other story. None of the characters even seemed to care she was there at all until the plot forced them to care for particular episodes. Regina doesn't even seem like she got any character development or self-awareness from this plot and she's the one this plot was about. And now she's a snake and I'm guessing she'll either be forgotten or she'll be brought back for one episode where they finally deal with her. At least the Rumbelle baby story and the Emma story connected at the end with Gideon which also connected to the Aladdin story since he was also a Savior. That and the Untold Stories could have been this season and they could have brought in Jafar as the villain instead of just using him in flashbacks for 5 minutes.

Edited February 5, 2017 by superloislane

[ParadoxLost]

4 hours ago, KingOfHearts said:

Adam seems to be really putting a foot in his mouth here. The lesson is "wishes screw things up"? He didn't even specify "genie" wishes. Also, if it's not an alternate universe, what is it? I realize he only has 130 characters, but surely better brevity is called for. I love how the writers always implore people to interpret the show in their own way, then proceed to tell people *exactly* what they should take from it.

They need to stop tweeting because this is the first time I've thought about the fact that wishes don't actually screw things up.  Yeah, no one was happy that Emma disappeared from Storybrooke.  But Charming took care of the EQ problem without her.  And Emma was perfectly content as was the rest of the kingdom with the peaceful and prosperous world they were living in with friends and family.  Emma didn't know how to handle confrontation with Evil.  So what?  There wasn't any.  The only wish that screwed things up was Regina's.  But that was really just because Regina was being Regina and taking advise from Rumple on how to deal with things because that has always been a great idea.

[KingOfHearts]

Quote

I feel like this season would have been better if they dropped the Evil Queen entirely.

I disagree. Without the Evil Queen, 6A would have been a complete snore for me. I just think she should have been introduced in a different way. Maybe yank her from the Wish Realm or give Regina the reversion of the century. It was asinine to split Regina, since the whole splitting thing makes no sense. She should have operated as her own entity. Overall, she was mishandled. There was a lot of potential for her, but the show didn't utilize anything from her past except the sleeping curse. There was a total disregard for what made her unique as a Big Bad in the first place.

[KingOfHearts]

Adam deleted the tweet saying "wishes screw things up", LOL. Why does he engage people only to delete his own responses so much? Does he just reply impulsively, realize it was a mistake, and try to cover it up? Over and over? I guess next time I'll just copy and paste the text.

Edited February 5, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[Camera One]

What was the context of the "wishes screw things up" remark?  He really deletes things quickly these days.

[KingOfHearts]

50 minutes ago, Camera One said:

What was the context of the "wishes screw things up" remark?  He really deletes things quickly these days.

Someone was complaining about the moral lesson of the Wish Realm. They didn't like the message that Emma grew up with loving parents and ended up a cowardly wimp. Adam told them that wasn't the lesson, but rather it was "wishes screw things up".

Edited February 5, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[Souris]

Adam has said he deletes so as not to draw attention to what he's replying to. If you believe that.

[decarus]

I think the problem is that you can miss an episode now and it doesn't matter. The characters don't have interesting conversations and character moments. It isn't the plot that is so bad. Like the Evil Queen being separated from Regina wouldn't have been so bad if they actually went into Regina's issues. They just never do. The dialogue is so superficial and repetitive. Emma's savioritis wouldn't be so bad so bad if she actually talked about being worried about what not being the savior might mean for her life. Like real in depth talks, maybe being worried about losing her family, her not knowing how she fits in the group or the town if she isn't the savior. This show just has no soul anymore because the characters are so superficial.

[KAOS Agent]

Quote

Adam deleted the tweet saying "wishes screw things up", LOL. Why does he engage people only to delete his own responses so much?

There's an account called Adam's Deletes or something like that, so it's not like he's getting rid of anything. The deleted stuff just makes him look really bad - especially when they are all laid out together and you can read all of the idiocy in one place. 

[KingOfHearts]

35 minutes ago, KAOS Agent said:

There's an account called Adam's Deletes or something like that, so it's not like he's getting rid of anything. The deleted stuff just makes him look really bad - especially when they are all laid out together and you can read all of the idiocy in one place. 

Oh my gosh! I just checked it out, and one of them is a reply to one of our fellow posters.

Edited February 6, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[Camera One]

LOL, I hadn't seen some of those.  One hilarious one is...

Question: "Why doesn't Henry live with Regina?'
Reply: "Who says he doesn't?"

----

Which is true, since Henry just pops up whenever convenient and we have no idea where the hell his living arrangements are.  Keeping everything vague really does make it easier to answer fan questions!

Edited February 6, 2017 by Camera One

[KingOfHearts]

The deleting comes off like he's trying to humor trolls while not affecting his career. Would future employers really want to see him confront viewers on social media? It's really not professional or wise for marketing. 

Edited February 6, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[ParadoxLost]

2 hours ago, KingOfHearts said:

The deleting comes off like he's trying to humor trolls while not affecting his career. Would future employers really want to see him confront viewers on social media? It's really not professional or wise for marketing. 

It doesn't come across as humoring trolls to me.  It comes across as lashing out at criticism.  But I agree on him deleting because he doesn't want his social media littered with fan confrontations because its not wise for marketing of future shows.

Edited February 6, 2017 by ParadoxLost

[Rumsy4]

It's totally Adam being thin-skinned and unable to handle criticism.

3 minutes ago, ParadoxLost said:

But I agree on him deleting because he doesn't want his social media littered with fan confrontations because its not wise for marketing of future shows.

Yeah. But apparently he doesn't get that the internet is forever, and nothing ever gets permanently deleted. It's only the Show that has the no-consequences thing down going for it. lol

[Camera One]

Even though the internet is forever, some of the posts are lost, since even that Adam Deletes twitter only has some of the deleted tweets, mostly related to CS.  Execs who would be hiring A&E wouldn't know about the missing tweets, and Adam could always dismiss them as fakes.  By engaging with the trolls and having the last word, he keeps them hanging on and ups the social media profile of the show, and gets out his frustrations by replying to their face.

[ParadoxLost]

I think my favorite Adam Deletes tweet is this one.

"I'd suggest not trying to figure out what we're doing."

Words I wish I could live by.

[KAOS Agent]

Adam responds to tweets that aren't even directed at him. He clearly goes out and looks to argue with people, which is not only dumb, but also rather mean. He has extremely thin skin and can't seem to help himself. When people are just having a conversation and talking about Once, he comes in and brings all of his followers into the conversation. Then the bullies on Twitter take over and bad things happen. So he deletes and leaves those poor people to deal with the crazies. Sure, it's a public forum, but that's not professional behavior and it would seriously make me think twice before I was willing to say anything about the show on social media.

[Shanna Marie]

The seeking out dissent from random strangers on Twitter to then argue about it and later delete the arguing could explain the quiet writers room. If he does this to random strangers on Twitter, how does he behave to his subordinates? Would that be a safe space for another writer to say something like, "But would he/she really do that?" or "But that doesn't fit in the timeline we've established" or "But what about what we said before about this in an earlier episode?"?

On 2/4/2017 at 6:17 PM, superloislane said:

I feel like this season would have been better if they dropped the Evil Queen entirely. It ended up not meaning anything or connecting to any other story. None of the characters even seemed to care she was there at all until the plot forced them to care for particular episodes. Regina doesn't even seem like she got any character development or self-awareness from this plot and she's the one this plot was about.

That's the problem. They introduced what should have been a huge thing and then essentially forgot about it. The other characters never really acted like she was an ongoing threat. She was more like an occasional annoyance until she did something specifically threatening. So there wasn't really a sense of "Oh no, the Evil Queen is out there. We need to come up with a way to thwart whatever evil plan she's brewing while we also work on finding a way to get rid of her for good." It was more like they only remembered she was around when she was in their faces making specific threats. They never used the split to explore Regina's character in any way. We didn't learn anything new about Regina (other than maybe that she wasn't as good as she was pretending to be at the point of the split and still wanted to destroy them all, though I don't think that's what the writers were trying to show us about her). Regina didn't learn anything about herself. Regina without her dark/evil side was in no way different from Regular Regina -- if you missed last season's finale and didn't know that this was supposed to be a Jekyll/Hyde split, you might not even realize that there was a split rather than the Evil Queen being brought forward through time. We go back to that weird thing where Regina's their favorite character in the sense that they love her like she's a real person and want her to have all the good things, but they don't actually seem to like writing for her. Every time they come up with a scenario that might have potential for delving into her character and really digging deep, they barely brush against the surface. It really is a bizarre writing phenomenon to me, to love a character so obviously, but actively resist writing anything interesting for that character.

[Kktjones]

46 minutes ago, Shanna Marie said:

It really is a bizarre writing phenomenon to me, to love a character so obviously, but actively resist writing anything interesting for that character.

Completely agree! And it isn't the first time they've done it. This may be the most glaring, but I think they also missed a really good chance for Regina's character to develop during the Underworld arc. I still can't believe that the only victim they had her face was her father. Yes, it would have grown boring if we saw person after person confronting her, but they could have picked one person to represent all those she killed over the years and had her face what she had done and own up to it (without any flippant remarks or victim blaming). It feels like a necessary step in showing that someone is redeemed. What makes it even more bizarre is that they have Hook face someone he wronged in the past at least once per arc. I don't know why they are handling the two of them so differently...

[Shanna Marie]

23 minutes ago, Kktjones said:

This may be the most glaring, but I think they also missed a really good chance for Regina's character to develop during the Underworld arc. I still can't believe that the only victim they had her face was her father. Yes, it would have grown boring if we saw person after person confronting her, but they could have picked one person to represent all those she killed over the years and had her face what she had done and own up to it (without any flippant remarks or victim blaming).

At this point, it's not even just them refusing to show Regina atoning for her crimes or facing her victims. It's refusing to do anything that develops her character. I was worried that they'd use the split as an excuse to give us Saint Regina and absolve her of all her sins so that no one would be able to be mad at Regina anymore, since she literally wasn't the same person, but they didn't even do that much. She's exactly the same person she always was. Her relationships haven't changed, her attitude hasn't changed. There was a hint at something potentially interesting with the idea of the Evil Queen trying to turn Regina dark and with the fact that Jekyll ended up being as bad as Hyde, but they dropped that entirely. Other than in that one episode, we haven't really seen the Evil Queen tempting Regina or trying to sabotage her. Meanwhile, it's not as though the Evil Queen has been at all developed. She might as well have been a time traveler because she hasn't moved on to new hates. Surely there were things at the time of the split that Regina had come to hate more than she hated the Charmings, since she was supposedly their friend at that point. Like Rumple, who conned her into murdering her own father to cast the curse for his benefit when it turned out that she didn't really get the satisfaction she wanted from the curse. Wouldn't she have been as mad at Rumple as she was at Snow? But she was hot for him instead, which makes no sense. Taking Regina's dark side that made her hate being good out of her body and creating a separate entity has gone absolutely nowhere, writing-wise. It's given their favorite character tons of screen time, but hasn't really done anything for the character to develop her or give the actress meaty material to work with.

[andromeda331]

2 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

Surely there were things at the time of the split that Regina had come to hate more than she hated the Charmings, since she was supposedly their friend at that point. Like Rumple, who conned her into murdering her own father to cast the curse for his benefit when it turned out that she didn't really get the satisfaction she wanted from the curse. Wouldn't she have been as mad at Rumple as she was at Snow? But she was hot for him instead, which makes no sense. Taking Regina's dark side that made her hate being good out of her body and creating a separate entity has gone absolutely nowhere, writing-wise. It's given their favorite character tons of screen time, but hasn't really done anything for the character to develop her or give the actress meaty material to work with.

There should have been two people that you'd think the Evil Queen would have gone after even before Snow. Rumple should have been one. As you point he conned her into killing her own father and the curse was always meant to be broken Rumple made it that way so he could find his son. You'd think Evil Queen would be mad about that. She should be mad at him also since he's the one who found the son she adopted that turned out to be the grandson of Snow White and her always having to do what he wanted when he said "Please". The other should be Emma. For breaking her curse. For taking Henry. For not eating the apple tart and ending up in a sleeping curse. Plus, the added benefit that would hurt Snow even more then killing Snow. What about others? Would the Evil Queen want Zelena dead if she believed that Zelena's responsible for Robin's death? Even without that I can't see why she would want Zelena around. As stupid as the splitting is, they could have really done something with the Evil Queen. Have her going after Rumple and Emma, have Regina see and really remember what she used to be like and recognize she was horrible yeah I know its stretch for A&E but there was stuff that Regina could have and should have gotten out of the Evil Queen being around. But she didn't.

[KingOfHearts]

Quote

It's refusing to do anything that develops her character.

This is my biggest problem with Regina. There are a lot of people out there who will say she has changed the most as a person throughout the show's run. They probably believe this because she's had plenty of pseudo-development over the years. It's obvious she's not the "Evil Queen" any more, since she's not running around ripping hearts in broad daylight with lavish clothing on. Her enemies have become her friends, so she has to be doing something right... right?! But if you dig a little deeper, you'll realize she has only been artificially de-fanged. She's only on good behavior because it gets her things. The minute you take those things away, she's back to S1 Regina. Everything about her is purely circumstantial. That's why the writers love to screw with her - they can get those explosive emotions on speed dial. She is so impulsive that there's no deep writing or setup required.

Big, fluctuating emotion shouldn't be conflated with genuine complexity. A five year old can be happy or angry to extremes at different times, but that doesn't make them an elaborate personality. Just because someone reacts to many things on the exterior, it doesn't mean their inner self is all that impressively vast. Regina has the makings of someone deep, but she's actually very shallow. Her most dominant trait is volatility. 

Edited February 7, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[Curio]

The only drastic changes I see in Regina's character from Season 1 to Season 6 is her friendships with Henry, Snow, and Emma. If you take those relationships away, how much has Regina truly changed? The writers always go back and reference Season 1 like it's this gold standard of television, but by doing that, I think they've lost their way on how to write future seasons. They look at a scene between Emma and Regina in Season 1 and say, "Look at how hostile they are towards each other! This proves how far Regina has come because she's now best friends with Emma." But it's not progress if it isn't earned. If you take away Regina's relationships with Henry, Snow, and Emma in the current timeline, has her character really changed all that much? You look at the way she treats Hook and Rumple and various other non important citizens and it makes you wonder. Just because the biggest pushovers in town decided to be the bigger person and miraculously forgot everything in the past doesn't mean Regina is this fascinating and dynamic character—it places most of Regina's development on other characters doing most of the heavy work.

On February 3, 2017 at 10:31 PM, Shanna Marie said:

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. 

Based on the descriptions of the writers rooms, I'd definitely prefer to be in the more rowdy and collaborative Wonderland room. While A&E might have a bigger vision of the show, the best television shows tend to be a group effort and the head showrunners are usually flexible and willing to take feedback. I get the sense that A&E have created an environment where their say is ultimate and even if someone else has a good idea, if it doesn't fit their vision, it's shot down. It's also probably why certain writers mainly write for certain characters. A&E clearly love Regina and Emma, so they always want to write Regina/Emma episodes. They don't care as much about Hook or the Charmings, so they hand those episodes off to the other writers and let them fill in the gaps, which is why Goodman usually writes for Hook and Espenson usually writes for Rumple. 

21 hours ago, KAOS Agent said:

Adam responds to tweets that aren't even directed at him. He clearly goes out and looks to argue with people, which is not only dumb, but also rather mean. He has extremely thin skin and can't seem to help himself. 

Adam's Twitter antics reminds me of a certain Cheetoh in Power...

Edited February 7, 2017 by Curio

[ParadoxLost]

7 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

It really is a bizarre writing phenomenon to me, to love a character so obviously, but actively resist writing anything interesting for that character.

As a writing phenomenon, this is so strange that I've often wondered if we've got it completely wrong in terms of the writers loving Regina as a character.  Nothing they write for Regina leaves the impression that they care about her character development or her relationships.  They don't even care enough to protect her from retcon character assassination.   At best I would guess that they have fun writing the EQ flashbacks, so Regina is front and center a lot so they have a reason to do them.

I'm by no means a writer.  But the little I've written for fun seems like it would be hard for a writer not to figure out what they like to write and what their personal impulses are that need to be examined and curbed for the good of the work.

I can't really say that I have a handle on what the writers like to write about.  They don't seem to like in depth character studies.  They don't seem to like writing any type of relationship drama.  Its almost as if they like writing vignettes (a brief look at a new world or a flashback or a new villain) but find themselves trapped trying to fill a season when they only have only a half dozen scenes that they are really in love with and no interest in expanding beyond that.  Hence all the treading water doing nothing the rest of the time.

[Curio]

10 minutes ago, ParadoxLost said:

I can't really say that I have a handle on what the writers like to write about.

They enjoy writing "twists" and they enjoy trying to subvert the audience's expectations by screwing around with Disney property, but it's gotten to the point where we can guess how they're going to make a villain sympathetic because that's what they always do. It's been said before, but A&E will always be plot > character writers. If they truly enjoyed writing for the characters, they'd allow them to have casual conversations with each other that last more than 60 seconds each episode. The fact that those conversations never happen means that they find them boring. As it stands, there are currently two main characters (regular cast members, not even recurring) who haven't even shared a single 60-second one-on-one conversation alone together in the entire run of the series. Granted, Hook has only been on the show since Season 2, but that's still five seasons in a row where he and Snow have never shared a deep conversation where it's just the two of them. How does that even happen? He's going to be her son-in-law!

[Rumsy4]

32 minutes ago, ParadoxLost said:

Its almost as if they like writing vignettes (a brief look at a new world or a flashback or a new villain) but find themselves trapped trying to fill a season when they only have only a half dozen scenes that they are really in love with and no interest in expanding beyond that. 

I feel like they're writing as though they are still in writing class, where a vignette would be all that was needed for the most part. That's also why each episode has a "theme", which more often than not, doesn't connect with what has come before, and doesn't anticipate future storylines. That would also explain their obsession with "twists". 

Edited February 7, 2017 by Rumsy4

[KingOfHearts]

A long-running drama seems like the wrong style for them. They excel more in short stories where things are more linear and straight forward. Cruella's backstory or the time travel adventure, for example. 

Edited February 7, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[ParadoxLost]

28 minutes ago, KingOfHearts said:

A long-running drama seems like the wrong style for them. They excel more in short stories where things are more linear and straight forward. Cruella's backstory or the time travel adventure, for example. 

This is why I thought that the Land of Untold Stories might work better than the recent half season arcs.  It gave the opportunity to do more bottle episodes that didn't have to tightly fit into an arc, fixing the problem where they have stronger premieres and finales and not much happening in between..  But the way it fell apart makes it seem like they just don't have that many ideas.

[Camera One]

One problem with the Land of Untold Stories is the complete lack of cohesion.  Random people were there.  They seemed to go the literary route for a bit, but they didn't do the necessary research to make them worthwhile, resulting in half-baked characters like Hyde/Jekyll who were basically written in for a singular twist (Plot twist... Jekyll was evil!), dull characters who had very little personality (Nemo), or characters that had absolutely nothing to do with their literary source except they shared a name (Edmund Dantes). The only other people from The Land of Untold Stories were Cinderella's evil stepsister/mother (oops, not evil, misunderstood) and Jasmine.

[ParadoxLost]

Even the lack of cohesion of the Land of Untold Stories could have been made to work if they went more procedural and focused on everyone dealing with these fairy tale characters running amok in a town where people have an understanding of how the real world works.  Or the consequence of leaving the Land of Untold Stories is that their stories, all previously on pause, start playing to their conclusion in Storybrooke.

Fundamentally it all comes down to them not having any interest in any depth of storytelling.  They don't want to think about or portray the inner lives or motivations of the characters.  They don't want to research the fairy tales to find the interesting bits that they could really develop into something interesting.

As an example, if they were going to send Snowing under another sleeping curse, they couldn't work in Rip Van Winkle?

[Camera One]

That would have been fun, to have Rip Van Winkle.  

The procedural aspect would require the Writers care about how Storybrooke works.  The refugee situation could have been interesting, but apparently, they could all be housed at Granny's and everyone was hunky dory except for their week to go crazy.  They were even okay with Regina giving an inspirational speech even though some of these refugees could have fled the Enchanted Forest to get away from her.  The procedural method worked in Season 1 because the stories of the supporting characters helped to develop or affected the main characters in significant and meaningful ways.  And the only instance where they managed to do that in 6A was Emma with Ashley, but even that was very shallow.  For example, the Count of Monte Cristo was only around to try to kill Snowing and then be cannon fodder.  He didn't evoke any meaningful character development in any main character.  So we didn't care about the plot of their week, nor the main characters, which made it an absolute fail.

[Curio]

5 minutes ago, Camera One said:

The refugee situation could have been interesting, but apparently, they could all be housed at Granny's and everyone was hunky-dory except for their week to go crazy.  They were even okay with Regina giving an inspirational speech even though some of these refugees could have fled the Enchanted Forest to get away from her. 

 

With so much political discussion and world news about refugees at the moment, it's amazing the writers didn't tap into any current events for the Land of Untold Stories plot. What does the average Storybrooke citizen think of the new refugees? Does anyone oppose Regina and the Charmings making all the town decisions for them? 

[Camera One]

They don't even have follow-through.  So Snow is the one to coax them out of the forest.  But that's it.  Her arc becomes teaching the refugee children who came last week about Newton's Law of Physics using algebra.  Are these Writers aware of something out there called "real life"? The struggles of the main characters are not relatable at all.  I feel just like Emma, when I experienced that death prophesy last year.  I feel just like Belle, like when I chose to see the good in some psychotic monster.  

Edited February 7, 2017 by Camera One

[KingOfHearts]

Quote

That would have been fun, to have Rip Van Winkle.  

Rip Van Winkle was actually in a deleted scene from 3A. He overslept and didn't pay Rumple on time, so Rumple made him sleep for a hundred years.

Quote

One problem with the Land of Untold Stories is the complete lack of cohesion.  Random people were there.  They seemed to go the literary route for a bit, but they didn't do the necessary research to make them worthwhile, resulting in half-baked characters like Hyde/Jekyll who were basically written in for a singular twist (Plot twist... Jekyll was evil!), dull characters who had very little personality (Nemo), or characters that had absolutely nothing to do with their literary source except they shared a name (Edmund Dantes). The only other people from The Land of Untold Stories were Cinderella's evil stepsister/mother (oops, not evil, misunderstood) and Jasmine.

Quote

Even the lack of cohesion of the Land of Untold Stories could have been made to work if they went more procedural and focused on everyone dealing with these fairy tale characters running amok in a town where people have an understanding of how the real world works.  Or the consequence of leaving the Land of Untold Stories is that their stories, all previously on pause, start playing to their conclusion in Storybrooke.

There were inklings of a coherent world being built. There was Hyde's reign of tyranny, the Mysterious Island namedrop, and the random keys thrown about. The writers didn't commit to a full arc around it, but they didn't commit to an anthology either. Enough instances had connections to make the worldbuilding existent. However, none of the LoUS people had backstories that really connected to LoUS other than the fact they were refugees. We know nothing about Hyde's rise to power, what the residents did during their stay, or why Hyde wanted to shove them all into Storybrooke. The theme of "unfinished stories" never had any bearing, either.

At the end of the day, there was no rhyme or reason from a writing standpoint to use LoUS as a vehicle for introducing specific characters. If the writers had stuck with the steampunk/literary theme, it would have helped 6A's identity problem. Instead, we got stuck with Aladdin, Jasmine, the Evil Queen, and Gideon, who have nothing to do with it. Personally, I thought killing off Jekyll/Hyde early on was dumb and smelled of network meddling.

We never saw LoUS again after the S5 finale, which was disappointing. It looked really cool.

Edited February 7, 2017 by KingOfHearts