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

[Camera One]

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.

So who was behind those "Easter Eggs" in the New Alternative Storybook shown in the Season 5 finale?  The art direction department or the Writers?  

[Free]

20 minutes ago, Curio said:

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? 

The writers probably can't come up with anything creative like that it seems.

[Camera One]

We still have no idea how Hyde filled the dirigible with his "friends".  So he loaded on half-dying people like Nemo and Charlotte?  And who doesn't laugh and laugh and laugh now when you hear that dreaded phrase... "There's nothing more dangerous than an Untold Story."  

Edited February 7, 2017 by Camera One

[Curio]

1 hour ago, Camera One said:

We still have no idea how Hyde filled the dirigible with his "friends".  

 

We also don't really know how a portal was created to allow the dirigible to realm-hop. Unless the entire dirigible is a realm-hopping machine.

Come on, Hook and David! Instead of moping around Storybrooke waiting for Regina to come back with Emma from the Wish Realm, just rebuild the realm-hopping dirigible and get Emma back yourselves!

Edited February 7, 2017 by Curio

[KingOfHearts]

Quote

Come on, Hook and David! instead of moping around Storybrooke waiting for Regina to come back with Emma from the Wish Realm, just rebuild the realm-hopping dirigible and get Emma back yourselves!

I've always wondered why the characters have not tried to explore ways to reliably world hop. They had the Apprentice's Wand, but then Rumple took it. The writers didn't even need to invent it - they could have used (*gasp*) continuity and took advantage of that portal to Arendelle. 

Quote

So who was behind those "Easter Eggs" in the New Alternative Storybook shown in the Season 5 finale?  The art direction department or the Writers?  

I imagine the script said something like, "And Henry whimsically flips through the SHOCKING twin to his storybook. He peers into it, noticing illustrations of obscure characters no one cares about, such as DON QUIXOTE, BLUEBEARD, and GULLIVER."

[Camera One]

I don't think Bluebeard was there.  Now, that's one Fairy Tale character who should be scary and they should do an episode on.  

[Shanna Marie]

17 hours ago, ParadoxLost said:

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.

I think they like Regina as though she's a real person -- they refuse to let her suffer any consequences, the morality of the world warps around her so that what she does is always okay even if it's bad for other people to do something not as bad (like the old title of the morality thread: "Telling the truth is worse than murder"), the Regina Exception Clause exists, and she generally gets everything just given to her even as the writers talk in interviews about how poor Regina always gets the short end of the stick. So it's like they want to help her and do good things for her like she's a real person, even while underwriting the character. I've joked that Lana Parilla has blackmail material on them, but then I wouldn't think that most actors would want to be shortchanged in the kinds of scenes that you'd get if they really wrote her character. Maybe there's a Stranger than Fiction thing going on, where Regina became self-aware and realized she was in a story midway through season 2, and now she's making demands of the writers. That would explain a lot, especially all the stuff around Robin. The writers are acting like they're in a hostage situation:
Writers: Oops, we shouldn't have declared that Robin and Regina were soulmates before they were on screen together because that's just not working. Wow, that relationship is dull. Hey, I know, we can have Emma and Hook bring Marian from the past in the season finale. That'll create some drama, especially if it was Regina who killed her in the original timeline.
Regina: I don't think so. You're not taking my boyfriend away from me. Fix this, or else.
Writers: Okay, okay! No fireballs, please! We'll put Marian on ice and make Robin choose you. You get a sex scene. (After she's gone, to each other) But it's still boring. Maybe we can send Robin out of town.
Regina: I noticed what you did there. Give me my damn boyfriend back.
Writers: Okay, let's say that Marian was really Zelena all the time, and he can come back.
Regina: That's more like it.
Writers: This is still boring. Maybe we should add a little drama, like a baby. And maybe Robin can die dramatically saving Regina's life.
Regina: I don't think so. Fix it.
Writers: Okay, Emma will save him. (But then there's fate.)
Regina: I heard that. Fix it.
Writers: Okay, okay. Fixed it. But wow, this guy is dull, and there's nothing to do with this relationship. Let's send him offscreen for a while. Ooh, she didn't notice he was gone, didn't complain. Let's kill him, and with a special crystal that means he's so dead they can't get him back.
Regina: What the hell? You people aren't paying attention, are you? Fix this, or else.
Writers: Um, well, I guess he might still exist in an alternate reality ...

[ParadoxLost]

5 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

I think they like Regina as though she's a real person -- they refuse to let her suffer any consequences, the morality of the world warps around her so that what she does is always okay even if it's bad for other people to do something not as bad (like the old title of the morality thread: "Telling the truth is worse than murder"), the Regina Exception Clause exists, and she generally gets everything just given to her even as the writers talk in interviews about how poor Regina always gets the short end of the stick. So it's like they want to help her and do good things for her like she's a real person, even while underwriting the character.

I don't think that I can get on board with the writers just wanting Regina to have good things.  It seems like their motive would be one with more self interest or laziness as an underlying factor.  I don't think giving a fictitious character good things warms the cockles of their hearts enough to motivate them to create the Regina exception clause.

I think its more likely to be practicalities of the show.  Rumple and Regina must interact with the rest of the cast.

Rumple's motivations are usually acquisitive.  They can have the interaction because the heroes will make a deal to get his help. And when the heroes get in the way of something Rumple wants they act as adversaries.  They use the end of the story arc similarly to the REC, when an arc ends Rumple either has what he wants or can't get it.  The immediate threat Rumple poses ends.  But for some reason the heroes never decide its time to do something about Rumple because he's escalated to willingness to murder them.  They decide it was situational and will never happen again and grudgingly coexist.  Its kind of funny that flashback Snowing managed to imprison Rumple and Storybrooke folks don't even consider the idea.  The "murder" of Cora may have been an object lesson for the audience on why Rumple has to live.  Snow felt so bad when she "murdered" Cora.  Did you see the black spot on her heart?  So now its...Rumple is only standing over the body.  Now that he got what he wanted, he's not an immediate threat and we can't call it self defense. 

Regina's motivation are vengeance and wanting others to suffer.  She can't coexist with the others with that as her motivation.  But she needs to be on the side of the heroes because its too hard on A&E to keep her as a villain.  She's an active threat as a villain and its too hard to deal with Regina being completely isolated but still allowed to live and roam freely.  They like her character enough that they want to give her story that isn't just monologues to the magic mirror.  The Regina exception clause exists because creating a story about how she deserves good things and explains why the heroes forgive and befriend her is too much work.

[KingOfHearts]

Quote

I don't think that I can get on board with the writers just wanting Regina to have good things.  It seems like their motive would be one with more self interest or laziness as an underlying factor.  I don't think giving a fictitious character good things warms the cockles of their hearts enough to motivate them to create the Regina exception clause.

I can agree with this because in the past, they've said things like, "If she didn't always get the short end of the stick, she wouldn't be Regina." There are plenty of Evil Regals out there who feel she doesn't get what she wants at all. While she still does most of the time, it doesn't satisfy her. If the writers wanted to please her, they would give her some sort of satisfaction. The Wish Realm gave her everything she ever wanted, and she still is angsty.

I think the writers are more infatuated with victimization-on-demand.

Edited February 8, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[Camera One]

To me, the Writers write Regina in a way that tries to make us feel sorry for her and root for her, because that's how they feel.  To them, she's the ultimate underdog, so they give her angst thinking we would relate, just as they do.  They think this is complex writing, because they are making the audience care about The Evil Queen.

[Camera One]

8 minutes ago, Shanna Marie said:

She married him even though she knew he flayed a man alive, healing him each time so he could do it over and over again, and even though she knew he stole babies. I wouldn't have a hard time believing at this point that she married him after finding the bones of all his previous maids in the basement. He'd just have had to make sad eyes and maybe do one nice thing for her to convince her yet again that he had a good heart.

This is where the writing for Rumple and Regina collide.  In both cases, we have characters (Belle for Rumple, and everyone, especially Snow, Emma & Henry for Regina) constantly forgiving and sometimes even apologizing to someone who did horrific things that most people would run away screaming from, which makes the protagonists completely unrelatable.  They did not have this problem in Season 1 when everyone had the revulsion towards Regina and Rumple that they deserved.  Yet, with every passing season, they have actually added to the horrific deeds that these people commit.  As ParadoxLost said, the problem is they do need to keep Regina and Rumple interacting with the other main characters, yet they can't resist writing Regina and Rumple being "wicked".  Six seasons in, A&E still don't realize you can't have your cake and eat it too.

Edited February 8, 2017 by Camera One

[ParadoxLost]

What makes me think A&E are pretty terrible at their jobs is that I'm pretty easy to manipulate to get to love a Rumple or Regina type character and they just can't get it done.  All I really need is 

1) the character to be entertaining

2) the character to have a friend or lover or family that they are scrupulously loyal to even if they will throw anyone else under the bus at the slightest provocation.  

3) the character has a clear code by which they operate, even if that code is suspect to everyone else in the known universe

4) they need to get consistent recriminations when they do bad things and rarely get adequate credit for good deeds (this allows me balance the scales as a viewer on the side of praise instead of hating on them because their victims are their best friends)

They do better on the above with Hook.  This is why I am a fan of Hook.

Edited February 8, 2017 by ParadoxLost

[KingOfHearts]

Quote

They do better on the above with Hook.  This is why I am a fan of Hook.

Rumple met the criteria pretty well up through 3A, when Bae/Neal was still in the picture. After he left, Rumple had no one to fight for. It has become increasingly obvious that he only loves Belle as a possession. With Bae, I think it was something more. Regina was fighting for Henry as well, but once she got him unequivocally, she had nothing to short for. Robin ran right in her arms so she didn't have to work for that either. 

Edited February 8, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[Camera One]

One difference is they decided to reform Hook fully.  He doesn't even slip into real villainy... he's pretty much a full-out good guy now.  Being "bad" is just lying these days.  Maybe because Captain Hook wasn't as flamboyant a villain, they don't enjoy writing him evil.  Even killing his father was more angst than straight-up Villain Sideshow Fun, the way The Evil Queen and Sparkly Rumple are.  

Rumple met the criteria pretty well up through 3A, when Bae/Neal was still in the picture.

I remember saying at the end of Season 3 that Rumple hadn't been ruined yet.  Then 4A happened and they just couldn't help having him revert... big time.

[KingOfHearts]

Quote

I remember saying at the end of Season 3 that Rumple hadn't been ruined yet.  Then 4A happened and they just couldn't help having him revert... big time.

Rumple's biggest downturn was the fake dagger, imo. (I forgot when that was revealed, but I know it was before 4A. I'm pretty sure it was during the wedding monologue.) Other than that, I thought Rumple had a very believable redemption arc until then. His sacrifice to defeat Pan was very satisfying and conclusive. 

Quote

What makes me think A&E are pretty terrible at their jobs is that I'm pretty easy to manipulate to get to love a Rumple or Regina type character and they just can't get it done.  

I honestly don't think it would take much to make Regina or Rumple enjoyable to watch. It would be a greater challenge to fix all their problems, but the real issue is entertainment value. Their flip-flopping is not entertaining nor engaging. The writers tend to confuse reversion to evil with human struggles. I don't need to see Regina contemplating murder to understand that old habits die hard. Just make her light a fireball when she's angry then immediately stop herself and apologize. (But do it in S2 or S3, not freaking S6.)

Edited February 8, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[Camera One]

Rumple's biggest downturn was the fake dagger, imo

I agree, though I think at that point, he was still salvageable.  He had just been imprisoned and controlled and I could sort of see why he would do that.  Though I really didn't like that wedding in the Season 3 finale.  Too fast, and not earned.  No surprise.

[andromeda331]

7 minutes ago, KingOfHearts said:

Rumple met the criteria pretty well up through 3A, when Bae/Neal was still in the picture. After he left, Rumple had no one to fight for. It has become increasingly obvious that he only loves Belle as a possession. With Bae, I think it was something more. Regina was fighting for Henry as well, but once she got him unequivocally, she had nothing to short for. Robin ran right in her arms so she didn't have to work for that either. 

I admit I was more sympathetic to Rumple's reason then Regina. Learning that the reason Rumple was doing all everything was to find his son. They gave us plenty of times through season one to show that Rumple regretted not going with Bae. I found Regina's reason for everything less sympathetic. She was blaming the wrong person. Cora murdered Daniel, not Snow. Regina knew her mother Snow had no idea what Cora was like and Snow certainly didn't deserve everything Regina did to her. And they really didn't give Regina the reaction she should have had when she learned Cora murdered Eva. She should have had a huge one after learning that and rethought a lot of things. But that didn't happened. Rumple regretted not going with Bae. Regina still doesn't seem to regret anything. The closest we got is when Regina realized she was turning into her mother early in season two. But that got dropped quickly. For Rumple? Well, Bae is dead. Everything he did only to be reunited with his son and for him to die. 4A really should have explored that. He could have lost it over that, or been lost.

4 minutes ago, Camera One said:

 

I agree, though I think at that point, he was still salvageable.  He had just been imprisoned and controlled and I could sort of see why he would do that.  Though I really didn't like that wedding in the Season 3 finale.  Too fast, and not earned.  No surprise.

And lost his son.

[Camera One]

25 minutes ago, andromeda331 said:

And they really didn't give Regina the reaction she should have had when she learned Cora murdered Eva. She should have had a huge one after learning that and rethought a lot of things. But that didn't happened.

That really highlights how the Writers saw the situation and their purpose for Cora dying (in contrast to how many of us saw Cora dying).  I pretty much thought Cora deserved what was coming to her, and I assumed what would happen and a much more interesting development for Regina would be to finally realize how horrible her mother was and how misplaced her blame was for so many years, now that she knew how her mother manipulated the entire situation with Daniel to continue her vendetta against Snow's mother.  

But for the Writers, the whole purpose of Cora's death was to drop Snow down to Regina's level morally, and to have Regina suffer a great emotional loss due to Snow's action.  We were probably supposed to cry when Cora uttered "You would have been enough."  The Writers' POV was obvious every time in Season 3 and 4 we heard Regina pointing out that Snow murdered Cora while Snow (and often her family members) offered no defence.  

[andromeda331]

2 minutes ago, Camera One said:

That really highlights how the Writers saw the situation and their purpose for Cora dying (in contrast to how many of us saw Cora dying).  I pretty much thought Cora deserved what was coming to her, and I assumed what would happen and a much more interesting development for Regina would be to finally realize how horrible her mother was and how misplaced her blame was for so many years, now that she knew how her mother manipulated the entire situation with Daniel to continue her vendetta against Snow's mother.  

But for the Writers, the whole purpose of Cora's death was to drop Snow down to Regina's level morally, and to have Regina suffer a great emotional loss due to Snow's action.  We were probably supposed to cry when Cora uttered "You would have been enough."  The Writers' POV was obvious every time in Season 3 and 4 we heard Regina pointing out that Snow murdered Cora while Snow (and often her family members) offered no defence.  

I really thought that was where they were going to go too. That Regina would realize finally the full scope of Cora's plan to make Regina Queen and all to get revenge against Eva. I really didn't and still don't understand why we were suppose to cry at "You would have been enough" or why it was enough for Regina. She just learned what? Maybe one day ago that everything Cora did was to get revenge against Eva. Why didn't Regina get mad at her mother over that? Demanding to know why she wasn't enough? Or realize how very much like her mother she is. They both wasted their entire lives going after one person. Cora had a really nice life she had married up, her husband was a nice man, and she had a daughter. But that wasn't enough for her to give up her revenge. That should have made Regina rethink her own revenge plots and how much she threw away. The more we learned Cora the more Regina should have hated her or not wanted to be her. And we still never found out if Cora was playing Regina when she wanted to be the Dark One.

The Writers wanting us to hate Snow for killing Cora, and Regina blaming her for it. Yes, let's focus on that part. And not the part where Cora was about to become the Dark One and kill at lot of people, or that Cora murdered Eva and just murdered Snow's nanny like a day before even after Snow agreed to their deal. That's just messed up. 

[Rumsy4]

7 hours ago, Camera One said:

(and often her family members) offered no defence.  

This always infuriates me.  The Regina Exception Clause in effect again.

[RulerofallIsurvey]

8 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

I really didn't and still don't understand why we were suppose to cry at "You would have been enough" or why it was enough for Regina. She just learned what? Maybe one day ago that everything Cora did was to get revenge against Eva. Why didn't Regina get mad at her mother over that? Demanding to know why she wasn't enough? Or realize how very much like her mother she is. They both wasted their entire lives going after one person. Cora had a really nice life she had married up, her husband was a nice man, and she had a daughter. But that wasn't enough for her to give up her revenge.

I remember understanding that at the time.  Cora didn't have her heart - she'd taken it out.  (I can't remember when, but it was after her first 'prince' dumped her when he found out she was pregnant, right?)  So, my take on that was since Cora didn't have her heart in her, she couldn't really feel real human emotions, and all the nasty things she did were just kind of...rote.. to her.  Killing someone was no more than clipping her toe nails.  

Of course now that explanation makes no sense, since Regina without a heart was still able to give Henry a True Love's Soul Kiss, or something like that.

On the REC clause and writing: it seems to me it's a combination of them wanting good things for the character (haven't A&E said, repeatedly, how much they love Regina?) and liking her as a real person - and flat out laziness.  Oh, and throw a dose of incompetence in there.  :)  

[Shanna Marie]

18 hours ago, ParadoxLost said:

I don't think that I can get on board with the writers just wanting Regina to have good things.  It seems like their motive would be one with more self interest or laziness as an underlying factor.  I don't think giving a fictitious character good things warms the cockles of their hearts enough to motivate them to create the Regina exception clause.

I don't think they're doing it consciously or deliberately. I think they believe they are writing her as a favorite character, giving her lots of angst and juicy material. They're just so incapable of objectivity with her that they can't seem to make themselves follow through, and they keep pulling their punches. They talk in interviews about Regina always getting the short end of the stick, and yet she lives in a mansion, has great wealth, drives a Mercedes, has magical powers, is mayor of the town (and queen when they're in the Enchanted Forest, even though Snow is the rightful queen), and all her former victims are such good friends with her that they're willing to put everything on the line to help her, even though she's never actually apologized to them. When bad things happen to Regina, it's generally bad things happening to other people, and even then, they keep backtracking. When you think about it, it's really Robin who always gets the short end of the stick -- his wife is arrested and executed, then rescued to show up at the worst possible time, just as he's moving on with his life, then she's put under a curse that forces him to leave behind all the people outside his immediate family that he cares about, then he learns that his "wife" was actually her murderer, who's been raping him all this time and who is now pregnant with his baby, so he's stuck having to deal with his rapist and his wife's murderer, then he gets mortally wounded saving Regina and nearly dragged to the Underworld, then his girlfriend forces him to hand his baby over to his rapist, and he gets killed with a special crystal that obliterates his soul when he tries to rescue his baby. But to the writers, it's poor Regina always having bad stuff happen to her to keep her from being happy, when actually it's just stuff happening to other people that makes her sad, and it's not even a case of her being sad because bad things are happening to someone she loves, but rather her being sad because those bad things deprive her of the things she wants.

I still don't understand why they never gave her a real "come to Jesus" moment in which she realized that she'd wasted her life on revenge and she'd been wrong all that time. It would have been a big, dramatic moment for the character and a juicy scene for the actress. And it wouldn't even have changed anything else that's happened with the character, other than maybe making her relationships make more sense. That's where I see that favorite person but not favorite character to write issue. They actively avoid potentially interesting and emotional scenes if they would be painful or uncomfortable for the character if that character were a person but that are awesome for character development if you aren't worried about hurting a real person's feelings. I can see why they can't go full-on redemption for Rumple, since they're keeping him around as a villain, but Regina is supposed to be 100 percent hero now, totally good and deserving of a happy ending. So why do they hold back on these kinds of scenes for her?

[Camera One]

but Regina is supposed to be 100 percent hero now, totally good and deserving of a happy ending. So why do they hold back on these kinds of scenes for her?

Because they want brownie points for complexity.  If she's all good, she'd be as "boring" as Snowing or Emma.  She's still fighting internally blah blah blah.  It's ridiculous how they can throw in a line like, "I hate doing good" when we have seen zero evidence of that.  I say, therefore, I am?    

[KingOfHearts]

2 hours ago, Camera One said:

 

Because they want brownie points for complexity.  If she's all good, she'd be as "boring" as Snowing or Emma.  She's still fighting internally blah blah blah.  It's ridiculous how they can throw in a line like, "I hate doing good" when we have seen zero evidence of that.  I say, therefore, I am?    

She didn't seem to hate it when she was walking arm-in-arm with Robin in the Underworld, lecturing Zelena about how great it was to be a hero.

Edited February 9, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[RulerofallIsurvey]

12 hours ago, KingOfHearts said:

She didn't seem to hate it when she was walking arm-in-arm with Robin in the Underworld, lecturing Zelena about how great it was to be a hero.

Well, yeah.  That was before Robin died.  She hates when she does good and things still don't go her way - you know, kind like what happens in real life sometimes.  Except, normal people don't hate that they did the right thing even if they got the short end of the stick afterward.  

[Shanna Marie]

16 hours ago, Camera One said:

Because they want brownie points for complexity.  If she's all good, she'd be as "boring" as Snowing or Emma.  She's still fighting internally blah blah blah.  It's ridiculous how they can throw in a line like, "I hate doing good" when we have seen zero evidence of that.  I say, therefore, I am?

But I don't think that necessarily means it would have been ruined if Regina had at any point had a scene in which she realized that she'd been wrong to go after Snow, that in doing so she'd merely been playing into her mother's and Rumple's agendas, and Snow was never her real enemy. She ends up kind of acting like that, and Snow acts as though this has taken place. Everyone talks about how far Regina has come. So why not actually dramatize their reconciliation? It's as though they've been showing the results of it all along, but robbed their favorite character out of the potentially best scene for her. As for complex, wow, there's so much they could have done. Regina could have realized that her reason for going evil was wrong even as she had to admit to herself that she enjoyed doing evil.

On 2/6/2017 at 9:04 PM, Camera One said:

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.

I think the real issue with the Untold Stories wasn't so much the worldbuilding around what that land was, but how it related to what was going on in the story. There was no connective tissue there whatsoever. It really all ended up being meta rationale rather than anything from the story. The people who came over did so because the writers wanted plots involving them, not because there was any real reason for them to be there. They treated that "there's nothing more dangerous than an untold story" line like a big "mwa ha ha!" moment, except Hyde didn't seem to have any connection to the Untold Stories people. He didn't seem to have brought any who were his allies, didn't seem to be using them as diversions to bring down the Storybrooke people. He just apparently loaded his airship with random people and forgot about them. How did he choose who to bring? Why did he bring dying people? It was like Hyde read the scripts for future episodes and loaded up the characters they'd need, but there was no in-story reason for Hyde to have done so.

[KingOfHearts]

Jumping off my previous posts, there's plenty of instances in 5B where Regina was fervent to do good. Operation Firebird was her idea. She was the one who wanted to help people finish their business, without any urging from anyone else. She took the initiative. If she hated doing good and only pretended to like it to impress her family, she could have said nothing. No one was going to look down on her for not starting Operation Firebird. Henry could have suggested it later and Regina could have just went along with it. But why would you write a character who hates doing good, then make them willingly volunteer to help others without any benefit? It's contradictory. (She wasn't just talking about her parents, either.)

I don't believe Regina's speech in the S5 finale was just anger/grief. I interpreted it as an introspective revelation. It was written to be a secret only her BFF could know. If she was just lashing out of emotion, it wouldn't have been setup that way. It was the catalyst for the entire Evil Queen plot in 6A. Then, about 10 episodes later, she had the same attitude. How many episodes does there have to be before grief is no longer an excuse? This is OUAT. No consequences last that long, even when it comes to Regina. The feather thing in the premiere was meant to be conclusive in nature. After that, Robin only mattered when she was mad at Zelena. That's not grief, that a grudge.

Edited February 9, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[Curio]

7 minutes ago, KingOfHearts said:

Jumping off my previous posts, there's plenty of instances in 5B where Regina was fervent to do good. Operation Firebird was her idea. She was the one who wanted to help people finish their business, without any urging from anyone else. She took the initiative.

Wait, I thought Henry was the one who came up with Operation Firebird? Or did he only come up with the name? (I'm only going based off what was shown on television, not any deleted scenes.)

[KingOfHearts]

9 minutes ago, Curio said:

Wait, I thought Henry was the one who came up with Operation Firebird? Or did he only come up with the name? (I'm only going based off what was shown on television, not any deleted scenes.)

So I rewatched the scene. Regina sort of presents the idea, then Henry gives it a name. At the end of the scene, after everyone had left, Regina looked at the clock, saw it tick, then smiled. It's unclear if she knew it meant Henry Sr. had gone to heaven, but she probably thought it meant things were changing as they did in Storybrooke in S1. If she hated doing good, I don't think she'd be happy while no one was looking. Throughout the scene, she seemed legitimately excited about Operation Firebird. Both in front of everyone and by herself.

Quote

Regina: "Every soul in this town has unfinished business, and chances are for a lot of them, we're that business."

Edited February 9, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[Curio]

3 minutes ago, KingOfHearts said:

At the end of the scene, after everyone had left, Regina looked at the clock, saw it tick, then smiled. It's unclear if she knew it meant Henry Sr. had gone to heaven

I interpreted her smile as her being happy for her father, but I could see how it could be interpreted another way.

3 minutes ago, KingOfHearts said:

Regina: "Every soul in this town has unfinished business, and chances are for a lot of them, we're that business."

Chances are, Regina was that business. And then the writers didn't have Regina face up to any Percivals and Grahams...but oh hey, at least there was a horse.

[KingOfHearts]

Quote

I interpreted her smile as her being happy for her father, but I could see how it could be interpreted another way.

There's really no scene where Regina says, "I love doing good" under breath or anything. (That I've yet to find.) But, in 5B particularly, there wasn't any setup for hating good deeds either. If the writers were competent, they would plant seeds of disdain throughout. She would roll her eyes after someone thanked for helping them or something. I think there's evidence in arcs like 5A, but in 5B there was such a big deal about her leading Zelena to the light, reconciling with her parents, etc. From a meta standpoint, her reactions in the S5 finale don't mix with the rest of the half-season. I know many of us expected her to accept Robin's death differently from Daniel's, but she pulled a complete 180. Zelena was everything to her in 5B, and then in 6A, she was an annoying gnat that wouldn't fly away.

In a broader scope, it's obvious that Regina was twisted into a pretzel so the Evil Queen split would work. Snow and Emma were lobotomized as well to get that square peg in the circular hole. I love how they thought Jekyll's serum was totally safe. They had just met that guy and immediately they injected his non-certified medication into their step-mother/step-grandmother. Then we learned later, Jekyll wasn't even trustworthy. These are the same people who hired the Wicked Witch as a nanny and let Cruella DeVil drive right in with puppy dog eyes. (No pun intended.) How the heck was splitting Regina's psyche a good idea? They weren't even thinking of the well-being of Regina herself.

Edited February 9, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[Shanna Marie]

33 minutes ago, KingOfHearts said:

There's really no scene where Regina says, "I love doing good" under breath or anything. (That I've yet to find.) But, in 5B particularly, there wasn't any setup for hating good deeds either. If the writers were competent, they would plant seeds of disdain throughout. She would roll her eyes after someone thanked for helping them or something.

The other fact is that all the other characters seem to see Regina as being totally good. They devoted all of 4B to helping Regina get her undefined happy ending because they believed she'd earned it and deserved it because she had come so far. So if she hated being good all that time, it means she's actually even worse than she seems because she wants the rewards for being good, is willing to let other people sacrifice to get her the rewards for being good, even while she knows that she hates being good and I guess is only doing it for the rewards. And yet she also thinks she deserves forgiveness for all her killings but Zelena doesn't deserve forgiveness for being very indirectly linked to Robin's death (I guess the fact that she immediately killed Robin's killer even though she loved him doesn't count) because Regina is somehow different. I really don't think they mean to be writing her as so horrendously hypocritical. I think the audience is just supposed to have drunk the Regina Kool-Aid and agrees with their view of her.

There's room for all kinds of interesting stuff here, like if she wants to be accepted as good even though she has to admit that she likes evil, so she does a Dexter kind of thing and unleashes her evil only on other villains, or she's pretending to be good just to get the rewards of being good and has occasional slips, and then she gets angry with whatever cosmic powers dole out rewards and punishment for still treating her like a villain.

[KingOfHearts]

Quote

There's room for all kinds of interesting stuff here, like if she wants to be accepted as good even though she has to admit that she likes evil, so she does a Dexter kind of thing and unleashes her evil only on other villains, or she's pretending to be good just to get the rewards of being good and has occasional slips, and then she gets angry with whatever cosmic powers dole out rewards and punishment for still treating her like a villain.

The show's black-and-white morality is one of the major contributing factors to how botched her redemption is. Either she's the greatest hero who ever lived or a mass murdering psychopath, with little in between. Zelena has much more agency, since: A) the characters aren't forced to like her and B) she isn't held down by being stuck on either side of the battlefield. She's capable of making both good and bad choices without Henry or Snow giving a lecture. She doesn't demand respect - she tries to earn it. Her character moves on a spectrum with many more notches in it. We don't get this, "OMG Zelena is a pure hero!" or "Zelena can't go dark! She's come so far!" crap. She can just be herself, and that's way more organic. Other than the Zarian business, she has always acted in-character and the plot has never twisted her into something she's not.

Unpopular opinion: Zelena is the only character left with any free will.

Edited February 9, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[Curio]

9 minutes ago, KingOfHearts said:

Unpopular opinion: Zelena is the only character left with any free will.

I guess we'll have to wait and see how she reacts to Regina the next time she sees her. If Zelena acts as if nothing happened and totally forgets Regina hypocritically chewed her out right before she left for the Wish World, then I think Zelena has about as much free will as Hook and Charming at this point.

[andromeda331]

3 hours ago, Curio said:

I guess we'll have to wait and see how she reacts to Regina the next time she sees her. If Zelena acts as if nothing happened and totally forgets Regina hypocritically chewed her out right before she left for the Wish World, then I think Zelena has about as much free will as Hook and Charming at this point.

Its frustrating enough to watch all of these characters who can only exist if the kiss Regina's butt. Do what ever Regina, believe what ever Regina says, fight for her, never correct her, always put Regina first, if Regina hates her sister well they all do, if Regina likes her sister again they all do, everyone wants to be her friend, and fights to be her friend.  Is devastated when Regina is mad at them. Begs to be forgiven. With the exception of Rumple who does whatever he wants and Belle. Belle of course exists to fight and make up with Rumple. No matter what he does. No one wonder Regina loves to be "good" and no wonder Rumple loves being bad.  What is their to hate?

[Camera One]

The Regina/Zelena relationship is something we're supposed to care deeply about, so that's why they think a rift will make us wish for a reconciliation.  

[andromeda331]

1 hour ago, Camera One said:

The Regina/Zelena relationship is something we're supposed to care deeply about, so that's why they think a rift will make us wish for a reconciliation.  

That's not what wishing for A&E. Your getting our wishes wrong.

[Curio]

I promise this comes back around to OUAT... 

It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia's main three showrunners Rob McElhenney, Glen Howerton, and Charlie Day admitted to listening to their fans and included a game-changing scene in Wednesday's episode that will significantly impact one of the characters moving forward based on the fan feedback. For those who didn't watch the episode this week and/or don't watch the show:

Spoiler

The writers have been teasing that Mac is gay for nearly a decade now. At this point, literally every other character on the show knows he's gay, but Mac refuses to come out. At the end of last season's finale, they finally had Mac admit to everyone he's gay, but at the very end of the episode, he went back in the closet. This upset the fans, so the showrunners listened to the feedback and decided that it was time for Mac to come out for good.

 

 

Quote

“I think there were maybe a lot of people who were sort of disappointed by that, which makes sense. That’s what our show is. You know, these characters are out to disappoint you. [...] So we decided, all right, let’s find a way to actually have that happen.”

After sitting down with fellow actors/writers McElhenney and Glenn Howerton, the trio decided on a way to tackle the episode and whether it was best for the show.

 

 

From this article. (Caution: it's spoilery.) So the reason I'm posting this here and not in the IASIP forum is because of the comparison between how IASIP's writers treat their fans and how A&E treat the OUAT fans. I have a lot of respect for showrunners and writers who are able to openly admit they made a mistake or admit they listen to fan feedback. And then there's A&E on the opposite end of the spectrum where they refuse to admit they let fan feedback influence their writing decisions. Television isn't made in a bubble, they're going to hear that feedback whether they like it or not. If both A&E weren't on social media, then they have a better excuse for not listening to fan feedback. But Adam is on Twitter all the time. He even responds to fans who don't specifically @ him. A&E will never admit that bringing Robin Hood back in 6x10 was at all influenced by the fans and they will especially never admit to making a change in the show's direction based on fan feedback.

I understand the need for staying true to your artistic vision and not letting the crazy voices get to you, but there's a reason IASIP has been on the air for practically 12 years now without much of a dip in show quality—they have really good writers. (Also, they have less episodes to film each season.) OUAT's quality drastically dropped after Season 3, and unfortunately, it almost seems like A&E go out of their way to not listen to the fans. (Or if they do listen to fans, it's an extremely small subset of crazy vocals.)

If A&E were giving a similar interview, they'd probably sound like this, "It upsets a lot of fans when we don't show our characters being happy, but our show is a drama. The characters are bound to suffer and disappoint you. We wouldn't have a show if they weren't struggling. Even though our show is about happy endings and fairy tales, we want to show the realistic side to romance, which means disappointing the fans because they always want to see 42 minutes of kissing and rainbows." 

Edited February 10, 2017 by Curio

[KAOS Agent]

I was reading an article (hella spoilery) with the writers/producer of The Missing and found this portion particularly interesting in light of how Once handles its surprising twists.

Quote

[Do you] keep a close eye on online theories?

Jack Williams: Yeah, I do it quite a lot

Willow Grylls: It’s great, reading those theories

But none of them have been entirely correct so far? 

Jack Williams: There’s lots of elements I’ve seen but I wouldn’t say anyone cracked the whole thing […] You see some and think ‘ooh, that would have been good’ Sometimes you’re like ‘shit! Why didn’t we think of that?’” We’ve tried to be as fair as possible. We haven’t hidden anything so it’s not impossible to get a sense.

[Is it] annoying when fans guess the right answers?

Jack Williams: No, God it’s brilliant! It’s great because that means we’ve laid it out… You can always surprise people by just not playing fair and holding things back. You can surprise people by going ‘David Morrissey’s an alien’ but it’s not fair to do it. So when people get it right, you feel quite pleased. I think they’ll enjoy it too, I hope.

Harry Williams: We try and play fair so people are going to get there sometimes. It’s satisfying to get something right.

They recognize how stupid it is to just pull something random out as the solution rather than leaving clues that the audience can try to follow to figure it out. It's unsatisfying for the audience and unfair. What a novel concept. It's always so interesting to read how other showrunners see things and then compare them to Adam & Eddy's world of randomness. These writers recognize that Alien Vampire Bunnies are not the way to resolve your plot. It leaves people unhappy. I'd love to hear an honest response from the Once writers about all of the Alien Vampire Bunnies on their show. Are they happy watching a show that continually does that? What motivation do I have to make sure to tune in when nothing has consequences and I know I'll not miss anything because they will pull out the bunnies in the end?

[KingOfHearts]

The OUAT writers are so terrified people could catch wind of their plans... because their plans suck. That's why they're constantly trying to distract them with twists that come out of nowhere. The initial reactions can be shock, but if you think about them for longer than five seconds, they're actually disappointing and unsatisfying. 

Emerald City's twists have not been great. There was one in particular tonight that was played entirely for angst and shock value. It had very, very little setup. (If you would even call it that) The show in general is very reticent in its storytelling. There's a lot of holding back to keep everything shrouded in mystery, much like OUAT. The writers there have a better grip on the world they've built, but... how can I put this -- a lot happens but at the same time very little happens. There's a lot of shocking developments that don't actually contribute much to the main plot. It moves as slow as Christmas too. Nothing interesting ever comes about until the final five minutes of an episode. OUAT has struggled similarly, but it has gotten much worse. (Even the "cliffhangers" have grown meaningless.)

[sharky]

Ugh, Emerald City. I had so much hope for that show and it became a hate watch with me groaning at some of the storylines and "twists" they contrived.

On the other hand, I really enjoyed The Good Place this season. They had a twist in their season finale that was awesome! I didn't see it coming but once it did, they backed it up with flashbacks and explanation and it was so well done that I plan on rewatching it later to pick up all the Easter eggs. Because yes, there was foreshadowing but not in a heavy handed way so it was a surprise but not illogical. You could tell that the writers had laid the groundwork for it and had thought it out.

Unfortunately, Once seems to be becoming more and more like Emerald City. Crazy twists and lots of meaningless plot with no real explanation or emotion behind it. At least Emerald looked pretty.

[Free]

On ‎2‎/‎11‎/‎2017 at 1:10 AM, KingOfHearts said:

The OUAT writers are so terrified people could catch wind of their plans... because their plans suck. That's why they're constantly trying to distract them with twists that come out of nowhere. The initial reactions can be shock, but if you think about them for longer than five seconds, they're actually disappointing and unsatisfying. 

Emerald City's twists have not been great. There was one in particular tonight that was played entirely for angst and shock value. It had very, very little setup. (If you would even call it that) The show in general is very reticent in its storytelling. There's a lot of holding back to keep everything shrouded in mystery, much like OUAT. The writers there have a better grip on the world they've built, but... how can I put this -- a lot happens but at the same time very little happens. There's a lot of shocking developments that don't actually contribute much to the main plot. It moves as slow as Christmas too. Nothing interesting ever comes about until the final five minutes of an episode. OUAT has struggled similarly, but it has gotten much worse. (Even the "cliffhangers" have grown meaningless.)

 

2 hours ago, sharky said:

Ugh, Emerald City. I had so much hope for that show and it became a hate watch with me groaning at some of the storylines and "twists" they contrived.

On the other hand, I really enjoyed The Good Place this season. They had a twist in their season finale that was awesome! I didn't see it coming but once it did, they backed it up with flashbacks and explanation and it was so well done that I plan on rewatching it later to pick up all the Easter eggs. Because yes, there was foreshadowing but not in a heavy handed way so it was a surprise but not illogical. You could tell that the writers had laid the groundwork for it and had thought it out.

Unfortunately, Once seems to be becoming more and more like Emerald City. Crazy twists and lots of meaningless plot with no real explanation or emotion behind it. At least Emerald looked pretty.

Emerald City became too much of a watered down version of GOT and it didn't help that the characters have been splintered off into their own subplots isolated from each other throughout most of the series.

[Camera One]

I was thinking about Henry and Violet's relationship "problem" in "I'll Be Your Mirror".  The entire episode was built around this school dance and how Henry was feeling rejected.  But then Violet shows up, acts completely like the way she had been asking previously, and then she attributes her off-screen behavior as being unable to fit in at that ill-defined "school".  It all seemed like a flimsy excuse for A&E to dredge up their teenage 1980s nostalgia with "Sixteen Candles".  

Meanwhile, we had Emma and Regina coming to some huge realization of what exactly?  That Henry was growing up?  That Henry was able to stand up to The Evil Queen and not be corrupted by him?  Was there any doubt about that?  That Henry would be just fine if Emma died?  It would have helped if we saw Henry doing some research on that magical object, because it seemed like he just randomly decided to break the mirror with it not having any idea that the Dragon fire would be able to shoot through.

On the surface, it seems like that was a character building episode, but was it really?  

Edited February 14, 2017 by Camera One

[KingOfHearts]

Quote

On the surface, it seems like that was a character building episode, but was it really?  

If anything has to do with Henry, no character building is allowed.

Quote

It all seemed like a flimsy excuse for A&E to dredge up their teenage 1980s nostalgia with "Sixteen Candles".  

I don't mind 1980s nostalgia, but this show has always done a poor job of it. Sorry, but a Tron poster and Henry mentioning random popular movies is not nostalgic. It's just touch-and-go and more fulfilling for A&E then anything else. The scenes in the 1980s are never any different from the ones in the present, so we know the writers are not taking advantage of the unique setting. Owen's love for Star Wars doesn't count.

Edited February 14, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[YaddaYadda]

On 2/11/2017 at 2:10 AM, KingOfHearts said:

The OUAT writers are so terrified people could catch wind of their plans... because their plans suck. That's why they're constantly trying to distract them with twists that come out of nowhere. The initial reactions can be shock, but if you think about them for longer than five seconds, they're actually disappointing and unsatisfying. 

I was watching an old GRRM interview and the journalist asked him if he was okay with readers figuring out some things, and if he would change his storyline because the readers guessed how the story, and he said no, because he laid out the clues and it wouldn't be fair to the readers who worked to put the clues together and done so successfully. He also said that for every person that figured out his endgame or story arc A, B or C, 30 people got it wrong. 

[RulerofallIsurvey]

17 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

It's funny, not too long after that episode aired, I was at a writing conference where they had a panel of actual teens talking about what teen fiction -- what they're looking for, what their pet peeves are, etc. Except they ended up mostly talking about TV tropes rather than books. One girl went on this epic rant about hating when there was serious injustice, especially the way so many writers like to try to redeem the villain, but the redemption isn't earned.

 It boggles my mind how teenagers, who would presumably have less Life experience, can figure out that this is just wrong and bad story telling, but the writers - who are allegedly adults - cannot.

[Shanna Marie]

12 hours ago, Camera One said:

I was thinking about Henry and Violet's relationship "problem" in "I'll Be Your Mirror".  The entire episode was built around this school dance and how Henry was feeling rejected.  But then Violet shows up, acts completely like the way she had been asking previously, and then she attributes her off-screen behavior as being unable to fit in at that ill-defined "school".

That was yet another case of their poor worldbuilding and not even thinking about the world they've built. Why would Violet be feeling out of place and unable to fit in? Everyone at that school other than Henry is from a fairy tale world. The other kids their age would have spent at least ten years living in the Enchanted Forest before the curse, and then there are any kids brought over in Curse 2 who didn't get the memory download, and then there would be all the new Untold Stories kids. Violet should be fitting right in. She's not even really the "new kid" anymore. She had the chance to get to know people and blend in while Henry was off in the Underworld. There's no reason for her to feel like an outcast, unless it's from some other personality issue. If anything, Henry should be the one not fitting in, since he's never in school and is the one kid who's never lived in a fairy tale world. A more reasonable relationship/character story for that episode might have been Henry feeling like the outsider while Violet has a gang of friends she's developed.

[andromeda331]

3 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

That was yet another case of their poor worldbuilding and not even thinking about the world they've built. Why would Violet be feeling out of place and unable to fit in? Everyone at that school other than Henry is from a fairy tale world. The other kids their age would have spent at least ten years living in the Enchanted Forest before the curse, and then there are any kids brought over in Curse 2 who didn't get the memory download, and then there would be all the new Untold Stories kids. Violet should be fitting right in. She's not even really the "new kid" anymore. She had the chance to get to know people and blend in while Henry was off in the Underworld. There's no reason for her to feel like an outcast, unless it's from some other personality issue. If anything, Henry should be the one not fitting in, since he's never in school and is the one kid who's never lived in a fairy tale world. A more reasonable relationship/character story for that episode might have been Henry feeling like the outsider while Violet has a gang of friends she's developed.

Not to mention he was raised by the person to ripped them from their homes and cursed them. And probably still scared of his mother. Will Regina go on a rampage, rip out their heart? Maybe its best to stay away from him. Kind of like how kids were afraid of Bae because of his father.

[Shanna Marie]

1 hour ago, andromeda331 said:

Not to mention he was raised by the person to ripped them from their homes and cursed them. And probably still scared of his mother. Will Regina go on a rampage, rip out their heart? Maybe its best to stay away from him. Kind of like how kids were afraid of Bae because of his father.

And there's also the fact that he was the weird kid who aged when everyone else didn't, so he's now five years older than his kindergarten classmates. And his grandparents are the prince and princess (the rightful queen), who are strangely cozy with the woman who cursed them. Of course, it would violate the REC to address that, but you've got to wonder what the random peasants think of Snow being BFFs with Regina after everything they went through during Regina's reign of terror, the war, and the curse. Henry should totally be the school freak, while Violet should have fit in perfectly. Yeah, she was from Camelot instead of the Enchanted Forest, but they weren't even a whole day's walk away from each other, so it's not as though they had radically different cultures.

[Camera One]

34 minutes ago, Shanna Marie said:

but you've got to wonder what the random peasants think of Snow being BFFs with Regina after everything they went through during Regina's reign of terror, the war, and the curse. 

That would beg the question why people aren't asking for Snow to be their Mayor, why they are okay with Regina being Mayor, why the other Prince and Princesses who had their own kingdoms are okay with not ruling, why THEIR subjects aren't asking them to rule, etc.  It's all worldbuilding.  Or in this case, complete lackthereof.

Edited February 15, 2017 by Camera One