A Thread for All Seasons: This Story Is Over, But Still Goes On.

[Camera One]

1 hour ago, Noneofyourbusiness said:

Even after Zelena herself said, in these exact words, "I killed Neal." ?

Yes, she did.  I was referring to the general pattern of villain fans who defend their bold and audacious characters.  One common insistence is that Zelena didn't kill Neal because he chose to resurrect Rumple.  While he did ultimately pull the trigger, Zelena's role was so huge that to me, she was still the main murderer without any doubt.  Though unlike with Regina, the show actually acknowledged what she did, so that's one of the reasons why Zelena was a more rootable character, though that still doesn't stop certain fans from dismissing her role in the death.

1 hour ago, Rumsy4 said:

That retcon was once again done to place the responsibility on the Charmings for abandoning baby Emma instead of rightly on Regina. 

Yep, that was another prime example of retroactively making Regina less responsible because they "chose" to not reunite.  The Writers ensure that the "heroes" are often given choices so they're partially at fault, since that apparently automatically makes the show grey and complex.  As Shanna Marie said, they're often portrayed as hypocrites, so many people actually end up disliking Emma or Snowing.  Which was quite rampant when I read the comments from Youtube clips.

Edited November 27, 2017 by Camera One

[Rumsy4]

1 hour ago, Camera One said:

Yes, she did.  I was referring to the general pattern of villain fans who defend their bold and audacious characters.  One common insistence is that Zelena didn't kill Neal because he chose to resurrect Rumple.  While he did ultimately pull the trigger, Zelena's role was so huge that to me, she was still the main murderer without any doubt. 

I think this is the first time I've been counted as a Zelena-apologist. lol. I certainly am one of the people who place the blame on Neal for resurrecting his father, despite Belle's warning, and his own previous experience with his father's Dark Magic. If Zelena had, let's say--threatened to kill Belle if he did not comply, then I would have accepted that she killed Neal. He bullheadedly went ahead with it, even after Belle's warning, convinced that his father would find a way to work around whatever price was required. As such, I believe Neal bears responsibility for what he did.

That flashback of Neal attempting to resurrect his father in order to reunite with his son was clearly chosen as a parallel to what Rumple did, and ultimately, to get Neal to "understand" his father's actions and narratively justify Rumple by comparison. Nevermind the thousands of lives Rumple ended or upended in his quest. They also had a dying Neal tell his father that he was the one who had taught him the value of sacrifice (presumably when he killed Pan and himself to save Neal and Belle), when we have seen young Baelfire sacrifice himself for the Darlings. Again, this was in part to paint Rumple as merely a flawed man, whose mistakes could easily be replicated by others under similar circumstances.

Quote

Though unlike with Regina, the show actually acknowledged what she did, so that's one of the reasons why Zelena was a more rootable character, though that still doesn't stop certain fans from dismissing her role in the death.

IMO, this is another instance where the writers ignore the actual problems and deal with artificial ones. Zelena actually killed Marian and raped Robin. For neither of these crimes has she paid any price. In fact, she got to raise her child, while Robin died. The only price she has paid for any of her actions is that she lost her magic. She didn't even regain her magic by the end of Season 6, which I suspected to be the case, as the writers are allergic to making consequences stick, which pleasantly surprised me. She also thankfully did not receive the same coddling from the heroes as Regina did (and was in fact treated horribly by "redeemed" Regina). All this definitely made me enjoy Zelena's occasional appearances in the Show in the previous season. 

Edited November 27, 2017 by Rumsy4

[Noneofyourbusiness]

2 hours ago, Camera One said:

Yes, she did.  I was referring to the general pattern of villain fans who defend their bold and audacious characters.  One common insistence is that Zelena didn't kill Neal because he chose to resurrect Rumple.  While he did ultimately pull the trigger, Zelena's role was so huge that to me, she was still the main murderer without any doubt.  Though unlike with Regina, the show actually acknowledged what she did, so that's one of the reasons why Zelena was a more rootable character, though that still doesn't stop certain fans from dismissing her role in the death.

Yeah, I know what you were referring to. These Zelena fans are saying this even after Zelena herself said she killed him?

2 hours ago, Camera One said:

Yep, that was another prime example of retroactively making Regina less responsible because they "chose" to not reunite.  The Writers ensure that the "heroes" are often given choices so they're partially at fault, since that apparently automatically makes the show grey and complex.  As Shanna Marie said, they're often portrayed as hypocrites, so many people actually end up disliking Emma or Snowing.  Which was quite rampant when I read the comments from Youtube clips.

And it made no sense because the original plan was for Snow to raise Emma to be the Savior, so why couldn't the two of them do it? But this is the same show that has a major continuity error with the circumstances of Aurora's sleeping curse as shown in "Enter the Dragon" versus what was said in "Broken".

[KingOfHearts]

It's in Zelena's character to take credit for crimes she wouldn't be totally responsible for. She was intentionally trying to get under Emma's skin. These are the same writers who thought what Regina did to Graham wasn't rape, and killing in self-defense is dirty rotten murder that taints the soul.

[Noneofyourbusiness]

23 minutes ago, KingOfHearts said:

and killing in self-defense is dirty rotten murder that taints the soul.

And yet killing untold numbers of mooks is just fine.

Though if you're referring to Snow killing Cora, I agree with that tainting Snow's heart because she didn't have to add the candle curse to Cora's heart. If it had just been restored as is, she would have stopped what she was doing. It had more to do with revenge after learning Cora poisoned her mother. I wouldn't necessarily call it murder, though.

[KingOfHearts]

Quote

Though if you're referring to Snow killing Cora, I agree with that tainting Snow's heart because she didn't have to add the candle curse to Cora's heart. If it had just been restored as is, she would have stopped what she was doing. It had more to do with revenge after learning Cora poisoned her mother. I wouldn't necessarily call it murder, though.

There's also Emma murdering™ Cruella. Belle felt so horrible about throwing Gaston into eternal damnation, while David felt bad about James for about 8 seconds. (And it was never mentioned again.)

Edited November 27, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[Shanna Marie]

22 hours ago, Camera One said:

Though David's inconsistent treatment of Hook didn't bother me that much.  If anything, that actually made me like Hook more, since that took awhile for me, and now I'm fully behind his character. 

I was annoyed by the way they wrote David's treatment of Hook not so much because I felt like poor Hook was being so badly treated as because David was one of my favorites and I thought it was a disservice to his character to turn him into such a jerk (even as it wasn't really acknowledged that he was being a jerk -- it wouldn't have been so bad if that had been a consistent character trait, though I'd have liked him less). Plus, the writing of it was dishonest in general. There were plenty of perfectly valid reasons for David to be wary of Hook, but instead they had him criticize him for things that were obviously not true or in really inappropriate situations, which made it come across like it was unfair to criticize Hook, which wasn't true, and it meant that although Hook did get a lot more grief about his past than certain other villains did, he never was truly called to account for the things he actually did wrong.

I would have liked it a lot better if David had been allowed to criticize Hook for things that were valid, in situations where David didn't look like an ungrateful jerk for being awful to Hook, and in a somewhat consistent manner. He didn't have to act like a pouty teenager in ignoring Hook's advice and warnings about things in Neverland. Yeah, he had reasons to dislike the guy, but Hook survived at least a century in this place, and he just put himself and everything he owned on the line and returned to a place he thought he escaped in order to rescue David's grandson, so that wasn't the time to go all "I'm not listening to any pirate." Then he didn't have to go from hate to BFFs in one episode. He could be grateful to Hook for saving his life and even give him credit while he's giddy with his survival, but he could still be wary of him. Meanwhile, he could have reacted as strongly to Neal, who got Emma pregnant as a teenager and then abandoned her to jail, as he did to his suspicions of Hook doing things to help Emma. If he'd punched Neal out or at least had strong words with him, then his attitude toward Hook wouldn't have come across as so obnoxious. But naming his kid after Neal, who hadn't done much of anything to help Emma and who'd done a lot to mess her up, while still being a jerk to Hook after Hook ended up doing so much for them, was weird. If he's going to be overprotective Papa Bear, he needs to do it across the board. They could have kept the antagonism on a low key level, gradually fading over time as Hook kept proving himself. And they needed to have dropped it after the end of season 5. When David greets Hook coming back from the dead -- after he died saving them -- with a big hug, the ship has sailed on the annual "David hates Hook until Hook proves himself yet again" episode. By season 6, it was just contrived conflict for the sake of contriving conflict. They could have done the episode about tracking down David's father's killer without the animosity from David, with it just being the two of them working together as friends and with Hook's insecurity at work as he tried to find the courage to ask David's blessing, and the surprise twist could have been that Hook wasn't involved, like we were all expecting would be the case. Then do like I suggested before and make it look like Hook was killed to get Savior tears from Emma, and meanwhile Hook's just desperate to get back to her because he knows what she must be going through thinking he's died again, and it doesn't change any of the plot at all.

I think that's what annoys me most about most of these contrived Shocking!Twists. They end up meaning nothing. A big twist should change everything going forward. It should have mattered that Emma's parents had her darkness taken from her in utero. It should have mattered that Hook and Emma spent time as Dark Ones. It should have mattered that Hook died and was brought back to life by Zeus. It should have mattered that Hook killed David's father. It should have mattered that Emma let herself believe Hook never loved her. But they throw these huge things in, and they only matter for a moment or two, then it's totally resolved way too easily, and usually offscreen -- if it's ever even resolved instead of just being forgotten.

10 hours ago, Camera One said:

One common insistence is that Zelena didn't kill Neal because he chose to resurrect Rumple.  While he did ultimately pull the trigger, Zelena's role was so huge that to me, she was still the main murderer without any doubt. 

I would say that Zelena is to blame because she set the trap and she intended to kill Neal. But Neal also shoulders a lot of blame -- not taking any blame from Zelena, but extra bonus blame -- for walking into what he knew was a trap for no good reason, and thereby handing their enemy a pet Dark One. He's a victim, but not a hero for that. It would have been different if he was so desperate as to go through with it in spite of knowing the risk because he knew there was a threat to Emma and Henry -- like if they'd learned Zelena had sent one of her agents after them -- but he just wanted to get to them because, and his plan consisted of 1) Revive Dark One, 2) He'll figure something out, eventually.

[andromeda331]

13 hours ago, Rumsy4 said:

I think this is the first time I've been counted as a Zelena-apologist. lol. I certainly am one of the people who place the blame on Neal for resurrecting his father, despite Belle's warning, and his own previous experience with his father's Dark Magic. If Zelena had, let's say--threatened to kill Belle if he did not comply, then I would have accepted that she killed Neal. He bullheadedly went ahead with it, even after Belle's warning, convinced that his father would find a way to work around whatever price was required. As such, I believe Neal bears responsibility for what he did.

That flashback of Neal attempting to resurrect his father in order to reunite with his son was clearly chosen as a parallel to what Rumple did, and ultimately, to get Neal to "understand" his father's actions and narratively justify Rumple by comparison. Nevermind the thousands of lives Rumple ended or upended in his quest. They also had a dying Neal tell his father that he was the one who had taught him the value of sacrifice (presumably when he killed Pan and himself to save Neal and Belle), when we have seen young Baelfire sacrifice himself for the Darlings. Again, this was in part to paint Rumple as merely a flawed man, whose mistakes could easily be replicated by others under similar circumstances.

Don't forget throwing more dirt on Bae by that later flashback of Bae forcing Rumple to murder a man. Sure, the one who hated his father's powers, actively tried to find a way to get rid of them and yelled at his father every time he murdered someone would totally do that. Its ridiculous we already saw exactly what Neal would do in the situation when he was looking for Emma. In the third season when he used that globe at his father's castle to locate her and knew how to get to Neverland. There's no way Neal would have chosen the option he did unless Belle was threatened or something. He would look through his father's stuff first to find other ways back to the LWM. He would never chose bring back the dark one. 

[superloislane]

On 27/11/2017 at 3:45 AM, Camera One said:

Though David's inconsistent treatment of Hook didn't bother me that much.  If anything, that actually made me like Hook more, since that took awhile for me, and now I'm fully behind his character. 

I'm the same actually. I liked that Hook wasn't immediately trusted and taken in by the family because he actually really was a horrible villain who did horrible things and he shouldn't be trusted until he proved himself again and again and that's how it should be. It's the total opposite of how Regina was treated - she was accepted instantly with the Charmings all defending her and apologizing TO HER with some hanging out with her more than with their family members and giving her pep talks and I don't think I have to say how much that made me hate her (along with her overall character). For some reason the scene in 4b always enters my mind when I think of this where Regina was 'undercover' with Cruella and Ursula (what was the point of that again? I can't remember) and Hook was off dealing with Ursula but Snowing were talking about how Hook could be turned evil again by being around Ursula but they didn't think for one moment that Regina would turn evil again (despite the fact that Regina was literally doing the exact same thing as the villains and Hook never wanted to rewrite the universe but whatever!).

They occasionally treated Rumple like he should be treated but then sometimes they would enrage me by treating him like some woobie - I'll never get over Henry saying how Rumple had changed in 5a whereas Emma was totally evil! He hadn't even done anything to prove he'd changed at all! UGH. Or that awful Savior thing in season 6 which I somehow made myself forget because it's so awful.

But coming back to my point, I liked that Hook wasn't accepted and it did make me root for him more. I liked that there was a feeling even up until season 6 that the only reason he's even accepted as being in the group is because Emma wants him there - I thought that was very clear in season 3 and 4 in particular. The second he does anything they don't like they talk crap about him and oust him from the group. Emma invited him to all these places with the group and no one else really did. They always thought he would be evil again no matter what he did. But that's how a redeemed villain should be treated and I never hated any of the other characters for doing this and it just made me like him more.

[Camera One]

The only time post-Season 3 that I remember where they had realistic doubts about Regina was in the Season 4 premiere when Marian came back from the past.  Even Henry was saying that he hoped she wouldn't turn evil again.  But of course, all that was to make us feel sorry for her to get the scene where Regina/Emma were Elsa/Anna on either side of the door (or did I mis-remember and it was Regina and Henry on either side of the door?).  I don't think David fully trusted Regina or saw her as his friend.  

None of them really treated Rumple like their friend either, but his acts even in the later seasons were so despicable that everyone even tolerating him in their presence was ridiculous.

Edited November 28, 2017 by Camera One

[jhlipton]

On 11/25/2017 at 3:49 PM, Rumsy4 said:

I agree, but they took it too far with him killing David's father in a completely OOC manner.

On 11/27/2017 at 6:22 AM, Rumsy4 said:

I need to actively ignore Season 6 in order to retain my good opinion of even my favs.

I don't need to ignore the whole season, but I do need to ignore the scene of Hook killing David's father.  It was so dumb, so out of character and meant so little in the end.

On 11/27/2017 at 7:30 AM, Camera One said:

Which was quite rampant when I read the comments from Youtube clips.

Never Read The Comments!!!!

[Noneofyourbusiness]

15 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

Meanwhile, he could have reacted as strongly to Neal, who got Emma pregnant as a teenager and then abandoned her to jail, as he did to his suspicions of Hook doing things to help Emma.

Good point. But Neal was a designated good guy, never mind what he actually did.

15 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

I would say that Zelena is to blame because she set the trap and she intended to kill Neal. But Neal also shoulders a lot of blame -- not taking any blame from Zelena, but extra bonus blame

Exactly.

10 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

Don't forget throwing more dirt on Bae by that later flashback of Bae forcing Rumple to murder a man. Sure, the one who hated his father's powers, actively tried to find a way to get rid of them and yelled at his father every time he murdered someone would totally do that.

Another "wouldn't it be a twist if we upended this established fact for shock value" twist.

[andromeda331]

6 hours ago, superloislane said:

I'm the same actually. I liked that Hook wasn't immediately trusted and taken in by the family because he actually really was a horrible villain who did horrible things and he shouldn't be trusted until he proved himself again and again and that's how it should be. It's the total opposite of how Regina was treated - she was accepted instantly with the Charmings all defending her and apologizing TO HER with some hanging out with her more than with their family members and giving her pep talks and I don't think I have to say how much that made me hate her (along with her overall character). For some reason the scene in 4b always enters my mind when I think of this where Regina was 'undercover' with Cruella and Ursula (what was the point of that again? I can't remember) and Hook was off dealing with Ursula but Snowing were talking about how Hook could be turned evil again by being around Ursula but they didn't think for one moment that Regina would turn evil again (despite the fact that Regina was literally doing the exact same thing as the villains and Hook never wanted to rewrite the universe but whatever!).

They occasionally treated Rumple like he should be treated but then sometimes they would enrage me by treating him like some woobie - I'll never get over Henry saying how Rumple had changed in 5a whereas Emma was totally evil! He hadn't even done anything to prove he'd changed at all! UGH. Or that awful Savior thing in season 6 which I somehow made myself forget because it's so awful.

But coming back to my point, I liked that Hook wasn't accepted and it did make me root for him more. I liked that there was a feeling even up until season 6 that the only reason he's even accepted as being in the group is because Emma wants him there - I thought that was very clear in season 3 and 4 in particular. The second he does anything they don't like they talk crap about him and oust him from the group. Emma invited him to all these places with the group and no one else really did. They always thought he would be evil again no matter what he did. But that's how a redeemed villain should be treated and I never hated any of the other characters for doing this and it just made me like him more.

I agree in the beginning the Charmings should have been suspicious or distrusting of Hook. After everything he did in season two it would make sense that it would take awhile for David and Snow to trust Hook dating their daughter. He should have to earn their trust. But that should also begin in season three. Hook offered them his ship. You can accept that while still keeping an eye on him. Is he going to stab us in the back? It would be normal to still be suspicious at that point. Then saved David's life which should count a lot. Learning he trade his ship for Emma should also make a huge difference. Hook earned their trust. We shouldn't still have a episode a season of David not trusting Hook at that point. He worked hard to change. I love that it wasn't completely for Emma. He stabbed Rumple and it didn't feel like he thought it would. I love his remark to Regina about wasting their lives. He seemed to really be realizing then that he wasted his life. He was alive for a couple centuries and he wasted it all on revenge.

[superloislane]

4 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

We shouldn't still have a episode a season of David not trusting Hook at that point. He worked hard to change.

Oh I know - honestly that should have been a long-running development where bit by bit David comes to really trust him but instead we got David saying he doesn't Hook, Hook does something to make him trust him, David gives him a nod/pat on the back and then ten episodes later the exact same thing happens again.

I always felt that Charming had something against pirates in particular. He always brought up the fact that Hook was a pirate even in season 6 and it got to the point that I genuinely thought they would give Charming a flashback episode where something bad happened to him because of a pirate (like his father could have been killed by a pirate who WASN'T HOOK). That actually would have explained his animosity towards Hook far better and explained why he wouldn't want his daughter with a pirate.

[KingOfHearts]

S6 still remains to be my least favorite season. IMO, all it has going for it over S7 is the presence of the old characters and Storybrooke. S7 has a stronger storyline and the conflict is shared between more characters. 6A had some interesting setups with the Evil Queen, the LoUS people, and the Storybrooke citizens trying to aim for some "normal" lifestyles. However, it all fell flat. Regina's clone was just Edgy Queen, the LoUS people were glorified name cameos for the most part, and Snow's "I want to be Mary Margaret again" phase was short-lived. I hated the Emma death prophecy and Aladdin plots. The Gideon arc was just okay. I don't think it's entirely fair to compare S7 to 6B, since we haven't gotten to the second half of it yet. However, I will say the Black Fairy was a weak villain and I hate the 6B plots just as much.

One of the main problems of S6 was the lack of urgency or greater conflict. The concern over Emma dying and the Evil Queen running around was intermittent at best. Halfway through 6A, integrating the LoUS people became a non-element. While S7 does have some pacing issues, the overarching plot is a little more interesting. There's definitely a lot more going on. The mystery does help for now, even if it's a cheap way to keep up the audience's attention. S6 was so predictable and bland for its entirety. Even though S7 is retreading old ground, the writers seem to be at least putting a fresh coat of paint on it. At the beginning of the season it was like they were writing it in their sleep, but after the last couple episodes there seems to be a bit of excitement drumming up. I never saw S6 ramp up, even up to the season finale.

One thing I'm glad S7 hasn't done much of is character assassination. Regina isn't bitching about how no one accepts her, Rumple hasn't waffled, and WHook has really held up as his own entity. As much as I hate Jacinda, I don't believe she really ruins the show. An annoying pest is more tolerable than your favorite characters worshipping the person who repeatedly try to kill them.

I'm part of the "I'd rather forget S6's existence than S7's" camp.

Edited November 29, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[Rumsy4]

51 minutes ago, KingOfHearts said:

An annoying pest is more tolerable than your favorite characters worshipping the person who repeatedly try to kill them.

Well said!! It's sort of easy to emotionally detach from the Show this season, while Season 6 was very "table flippy". 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Rumsy4 said:

Well said!! It's sort of easy to emotionally detach from the Show this season, while Season 6 was very "table flippy". 

I think a lot of this, for me, is that S6 was frustrating.  It was frustrating because they had all the pieces they needed to make a good show and wasted them.  Now, a lot of those pieces (actors) are gone so I don't get caught up in what they could have done better.  I take it as it is or don't finish watching.  The highs are not as high.  The lows are not as irritating and can be shrugged off because I just don't care.

[KingOfHearts]

3 hours ago, Rumsy4 said:

Well said!! It's sort of easy to emotionally detach from the Show this season, while Season 6 was very "table flippy". 

S7 is less offensive, which is not say it isn't at all. If the new characters disappoint you - who cares? It's not like you've been invested in them for the past six seasons. 

S6 was setup to be the show's "final chapter" and a conclusion to the characters' arcs. In that regard, it sucked. The Captain Swan wedding was rushed, Regina's big revelation had no connection to the rest of her character's journey, Snowing's arc had a very underwhelming resolution, Zelena got demoted to Regina's punching bag, and Rumpbelle's reconciliation was as half-assed as you could get. I would argue that S7 is doing a better job at tying up loose ends, though that doesn't make it a masterpiece. Emma's pregnancy, while brief, was much more pleasant than "oh I'm gonna die the day after my wedding... just kidding!" I wasn't a big fan of Rumpbelle's montage, but at least it tied their arc up with a neat little bow. Regina is probably the only character I've been really disappointed with so far. She's just gotten so little to work with. I'm hoping that will change in 7B. (please dont hit me)

What I like about S7 is that there is new material. It's not as tired as the previous season.

Edited November 30, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[Guest]

1 hour ago, KingOfHearts said:

S6 was setup to be the show's "final chapter" and a conclusion to the characters' arcs. In that regard, it sucked. 

The problem with S6 is that it was all about S7.

It was fairly clear from around mid season, at least, that they were hoping to continue on with another season with a reduced cast (and I'm convinced they never thought JMo would agree to come back) and plotted out the season to try to manipulate the audience to miss them less when they were gone by not using them well or at all when they had them.

[Rumsy4]

15 minutes ago, ParadoxLost said:

plotted out the season to try to manipulate the audience to miss them less when they were gone by not using them well or at all when they had them.

Absolutely. It's their usual tactic. They did the same with Neal and Robin in Season 3B and 5 respectively. They continued that trend with Emma and Snowing in 6B. 

[Camera One]

They started off Season 6 like it was just any other season.  They didn't begin talking about the "final chapter" until midway through.  This is despite them knowing that several contracts were about to expire.  They were thinking more about the shiny beacon of the re-quel in the far distance than wrapping up the arcs of the exiting characters.  I was thinking about "Song In Your Heart" and here's a sobering thought... if the composers didn't take initiative and help to make the musical episode a reality, we would have had ZERO episodes that felt like actual closure.  

Edited November 30, 2017 by Camera One

[Camera One]

Ever since Season 2, I expected that at some point, maybe in the final season, they would re-create Storybrooke within the Enchanted Forest, and they could go back and forth between modern and medieval, or have a blended life.  

I also expected them to copy the final season of "Lost", in which they would do something huge (like detonating the bomb on "Lost") that would make the Curse not happen, and the question would be whether it worked or not.  In flashsideways, we would see what life would have been like for all the characters if the Curse hadn't happened... not just the main characters, but also the supporting characters who got centrics in Season 1.  

Another interesting what-if which would have given Ginny/Josh something to play would have been to send them to a world where they had both been able to go into the wardrobe to raise Emma.

I also thought maybe we would get a final season with something like Mickey's House of Villains, where all the big bads would get together and scheme against all the heroes, with a huge cameo-fest all season.

Edited December 1, 2017 by Camera One

[KingOfHearts]

Quote

I also thought maybe we would get a final season with something like Mickey's House of Villains, where all the big bads would get together and scheme against all the heroes, with a huge cameo-fest all season.

I have a feeling the writers were going for something along these lines in 4B, except A) there was very little villain-villain cooperation, B) the villains were too in and out, and B) too much woobifying. The Queens of Darkness working with Rumple and Zelena was a great idea, but it never came together. 

Quote

I also expected them to copy the final season of "Lost", in which they would do something huge (like detonating the bomb on "Lost") that would make the Curse not happen, and the question would be whether it worked or not.  In flashsideways, we would see what life would have been like for all the characters if the Curse hadn't happened... not just the main characters, but also the supporting characters who got centrics in Season 1.  

I had similar thoughts, but I also thought the final season would be a new Curse. Of course, that was before we had several other curses and the concept got worn out. I guess my prediction came true, except I thought it would be in Storybrooke with the same characters. Perhaps it could have been a "soft continuation" of S1, like a skip for the cursed personalities to make up for the time difference. e.g. Mayor Mills and Emma have settled a shared custody agreement, David and Mary Margaret have gotten together, etc. Hook and Zelena would be new residents in town, and Belle would be Lacey. "Happy ending flashes" in the Enchanted Forest would be the contrast.

I guess we are getting a Curse for the (presumably) final season, but it doesn't match the "flash sideways" idea at all.

Edited December 1, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[Camera One]

18 minutes ago, KingOfHearts said:

Perhaps it could have been a "soft continuation" of S1, like a skip for the cursed personalities to make up for the time difference. e.g. Mayor Mills and Emma have settled a shared custody agreement, David and Mary Margaret have gotten together, etc. Hook and Zelena would be new residents in town, and Belle would be Lacey. "Happy ending flashes" in the Enchanted Forest would be the contrast.

Maybe in the present-day, the formerly Cursed characters could have woken up in Storybrooke in a New Curse, and The Black Fairy (or a better villain) would be the Mayor.  They could revisit Season 1 again by having Emma (this time, she believes, and comes with Henry with a cover story).  They wake up people one by one (the person they wake up will get the "what might have been" flashsideways).  Emma and the Awakened people build an underground resistance, which is successful because the villain doesn't have magic.

It's hard for me to see Season 7 as an actual final season, since it's written to be the beginning of this reboot/requel.

Edited December 1, 2017 by Camera One

[Shanna Marie]

10 hours ago, Camera One said:

I also thought maybe we would get a final season with something like Mickey's House of Villains, where all the big bads would get together and scheme against all the heroes, with a huge cameo-fest all season.

My idea of a final season involved some villain in the Enchanted Forest world who moved into the Enchanted Forest (since it's currently vacant) and took over, then in order to get full power, cast a curse reverse that sucked everyone back from Storybrooke to the Enchanted Forest, mostly because that was the only way to get the Dark One and dagger. Our characters all got scattered because they weren't all conveniently standing together at the town line when it happened, and they'd have to find each other again. Hook was with Henry and got the bright idea of throwing him into the hold of the Jolly Roger, on the assumption that if being in an enchanted tree got Emma to our world in the first place, being surrounded by enchanted wood when the Jolly Roger was sucked back to that world would bring Henry, even if he was born outside the magic bubble. Besides, Hook wouldn't want to risk being separated from his ship again, so he'd ride it back the moment he noticed something odd happening and a curse cloud coming. The villains who had been defeated but not killed in Storybrooke and all the generally semi-bad people would be free and join up with the new ruler. Meanwhile, our characters would be having to go underground, living in the dwarf mines to hide from the bad guys, and forming a resistance movement (I'm pissed that they're using this part in season 7, since it's such a lame shadow of what I imagined). Since Hook on his ship is outside the realm, he's able to get help from Ariel, Ursula, and Elsa (and I guess Nemo and Liam 2.0, but we didn't know about them when I first came up with this) before sneaking into the land under cover to find Emma and team up with her. The final result would be them re-establishing their own kingdom in that world, with a blend of cultures, bringing in ideas from Storybrooke -- Ye Olde Tavern would look like a diner and serve burgers, etc. And Emma would get a real princess fairytale wedding in a castle, with Hook now the admiral of the Mysthaven navy, in full dress uniform.

Really, though, anything other than a hasty wedding when they know something's about to happen, during which everyone sings in a choreographed group number for no good reason, followed by a short amount of curse reverse, during which nothing that really matters happens because it's immediately undone due to nothing they did, and culminating in a brief non-fight with a character we barely know, solved by a cursory "true love" kiss -- that doesn't involve the person Emma just married.

[Mabinogia]

15 minutes ago, Shanna Marie said:

My idea of a final season involved some villain in the Enchanted Forest world who moved into the Enchanted Forest (since it's currently vacant) and took over

That would have been a cool idea for this season. The abandoned Enchanted Forest under new management. Tremaine could have been the new "Evil Queen". Henry and anyone but Murderella could be the new Snowing. They could have stuck with the idea that Rumple was behind it, this time trying to find his happily ever after with Belle. Ivy could have been the unsuspecting hero of the story. The daughter of evil who, while also capable of some pretty bad things, realizes that she can't let her mother run the EF the way she is because Ivy's true love, Henry, will never be with her under Tremaine's rule.

Then the shocking twist, Tremaine is really Rupunzel and the REAL big bad is Gothel. They try to redeem Tremaine (which they love doing) and, with the help of the daughter she never truly loved, Tremaine learns the power of appreciating what you have and letting go of what is lost (her favorite daughter).

I honestly would have preferred a season that was dominated by Enchanted Forest plots and storylines than Hyperion Heights, oddly of this world but not really. They could still have used Whook. He could have come either looking for his daughter or looking for Emma thinking, erroneously, that she was in the EF. Alice could be there doing whatever it is Alice does. It just would have been a much cooler, and more interesting setting than what we got.

[Souris]

5 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

My idea of a final season

Can I live in the world where this actually happened?

[Shanna Marie]

Just now, Souris said:

Can I live in the world where this actually happened?

I do. I used to play with "mental fanfic" for this show when I was bored or trying to fall asleep at night, fleshing out the current season or speculating on what happens next, but I've given up on playing with what they've given us and play out this scenario in my head, instead. It's more or less set after season five, ignoring the finale, but possibly with more stuff happening in what would have been season six before they get sucked back home. Oh, and Hook has a left hand because it makes no sense for Zeus to have been able to revive him after he'd been dead for months and heal unhealable wounds but not restore his hand -- if his body was revived -- or for him to get a new body for his soul to go in and have it not have a hand (really, his corporeal underworld soul should have had a hand).

[Camera One]

R.I.P. Buttercup‏ @I_Love_Lana_Bex  20 hours ago

@AdamHorowitzLA Does this statement still hold true? Cause' I'm confused about the practically of a certain flashback. Would you mind explaining it to me?

Quote

Adam Horowitz @AdamHorowitzLA

@rapid_rar one person's "retcon" is another person's careful planning

March 19, 2015

Adam Horowitz @AdamHorowitzLA

@AdamHorowitzLA  Replying to @I_Love_Lana_Bex   IMO, statement still holds

[Rumsy4]

I'm confused. What's this exchange about?

[Camera One]

16 minutes ago, Rumsy4 said:

I'm confused. What's this exchange about?

The person dredged up that 2015 quote from Adam to ask about how the Rumbelle scene from "Going Home" can possibly be consistent with the scene from "Skin Deep".  Also in reference to the two scenes in two different episodes where Regina asks Hook to kill Cora.  Adam replied with "IMO the statement still holds" before he realized what they were referring to specifically.

Edited December 3, 2017 by Camera One

[jhlipton]

8 hours ago, Camera One said:

Adam Horowitz @AdamHorowitzLA

@rapid_rar one person's "retcon" is another person's careful planning

March 19, 2015

Adam Horowitz wouldn't know "careful planning" if it bit him on the ass.  Shows that have "careful planning" don't need retcons -- flashbacks explain current situations without contradicting canon.

[Shanna Marie]

Bringing a couple of things over from the Other Fairy Tales thread because it was getting away from the "other tales" thing.

On 12/2/2017 at 0:35 PM, oncebluethrone said:

 If this episode wasn't a musical episode, then the singing and dancing might have been a bit weird, but it was a musical episode. They characters were simply celebrating their current happiness and their belief that they will get through the upcoming danger just as they always have. It's not dumb or idiotic in any way. The characters have always had some threat hanging over them. They were choosing to live in the moment and not let the bad things get in the way of their happiness.

The problem was that the rationale for the musical didn't apply to the wedding scene. This wasn't a show in which people customarily broke into song. It was a spell. We hadn't seen these people sing at all before, and they acted surprised when they found themselves singing, then they had their memories of the experience wiped, so they didn't remember bursting into song. And yet in this scene, they're all bursting into a choreographed song and dance number, with no surprise at all. As with so many things on this show, it would have been an easy fix. Just show that the spell coming to fruition so that all the songs in Emma's heart came out had a spillover effect with residual musical numbers that lasted through the wedding. Or show Blue at the wedding, giving a sly little grin and waving her wand so that everyone started singing. Then have everyone surprised initially to find themselves singing, before they end up just going with it. As for whether they looked like idiots, the problem there was that they had a previous episode in which they decided not to get married right away, to wait until things settled down before they even made plans. Then all of a sudden, they're getting married the next day, and then they got married knowing a curse was about to hit.

Really, a lot of the problem is structural. The wedding should have been the finale, the culmination of Emma's story, after she'd won the final battle, and the song in her heart thing should have mattered in that final battle. As it was, it was weirdly anticlimactic, as the major battle Emma's family and the people who would become important to her later had unknowingly armed her for ended up being a minor skirmish that didn't actually defeat the villain and didn't change the status quo. They should have had the Black Fairy cast the curse, had something the group stuck in the Enchanted Forest did matter (like Hook throwing the bean as he fell off the beanstalk, so he went through a portal back to Emma instead of crashing), and then her use the song to defeat the Black Fairy. Gideon could have been the "serial killer isn't dead yet!" moment, where he continues the Black Fairy's orders after her death. And then do the wedding, with the song spell spilling over to the wedding, followed by the "how things end up" montage.

But then there's this problem ...

On 12/1/2017 at 6:31 PM, KingOfHearts said:

The Final Battle on OUAT, though, was just Rumple deciding not to let Emma die. Like, okay? Regina casting the curse, which started this whole thing, was a non-element in that? Was the show all this time secretly just about Rumple's redemption and Emma's willingness to die? I get Emma had a role as the Savior, but that didn't have anything to do with fighting Gideon until S6. Her enemy was meant to be Regina or Rumple. Wouldn't it have more sense for her to fight Clone Queen, Rumple, or even the Black Fairy? Oh, that's right - "only light can snuff out light". Silly me.

Structurally and thematically, it makes a lot more sense for Rumple to have been Emma's Final Battle foe to end her arc, especially if they're then going to claim that Storybrooke got a happy ending and became a peaceful place after they'd been dealing with supervillains every two weeks or so. Just about every villain they faced could be traced back to Rumple's involvement in some way, so defeating Rumple really might have stopped the strife, or there's the possibility that having a Dark One in town created some kind of evil magnet (I guess him leaving town may have accomplished the same thing, but it's less satisfying). Rumple basically created Regina's evil. Hook and Cora came to town because of him. Pan was his father. Zelena was his protege. He had an effect on Ingrid's past and worked with her in the present. He brought the Queens of Darkness to town and wanted to turn Emma dark. It was his overload of darkness that made Emma the Dark One. He was scheming with Hades. He let the Untold Stories people into town. The Black Fairy was his mother. You can also trace most of the crappiness in Emma's life back to Rumple -- his need for the curse and for her to be the Savior left her growing up alone, his idiot son got her pregnant and left her in jail (and if Rumple hadn't failed his son, his son wouldn't have been there), and then there was the Dark One stuff. So it would have been fitting for the Savior he helped create to defeat him. They could even have tied in some of the things that happened to her, so that the fact that she had the fetal evilectomy and had been a Dark One created a loophole that allowed her to defeat a Dark One without becoming a Dark One.

I just hate that they made Emma into such a passive character that her big moment of triumph was letting Gideon "kill" her (or whatever happened there). She was either the bystander or winning by being passive way too many times -- frozen while Rumple dealt with Pan, rendered powerless to fight Zelena, frozen while Rumple nearly killed Hook and standing by while Anna dealt with Ingrid, more or less helpless while Hook dealt with the Dark Ones and took the darkness from her, having to leave Hook behind and left helpless on the outside while Regina and Zelena dealt with Hades. And then her climactic final battle, the thing so important that she couldn't cut her Savior destiny, was to let herself be killed, and it was so lame, she barely hits the ground, no one has time to react, and then Henry gives her a perfunctory peck, and all's well.

[oncebluethrone]

7 minutes ago, Shanna Marie said:

I just hate that they made Emma into such a passive character that her big moment of triumph was letting Gideon "kill" her (or whatever happened there). She was either the bystander or winning by being passive way too many times -- frozen while Rumple dealt with Pan, rendered powerless to fight Zelena, frozen while Rumple nearly killed Hook and standing by while Anna dealt with Ingrid, more or less helpless while Hook dealt with the Dark Ones and took the darkness from her, having to leave Hook behind and left helpless on the outside while Regina and Zelena dealt with Hades. And then her climactic final battle, the thing so important that she couldn't cut her Savior destiny, was to let herself be killed, and it was so lame, she barely hits the ground, no one has time to react, and then Henry gives her a perfunctory peck, and all's well.

Emma's moment of triumph wasn't passive at all. She wasn't simply letting Gideon kill her, she was choosing to sacrifice her life so that Gideon wouldn't darken his heart. The dialogue in the show made it very clear that Gideon killing Emma would cause darkness to win, but that Emma killing Gideon (who was innocent in this situation), would darken her heart causing darkness to win anyways. Emma chose to make her "death" a sacrifice instead of a murder so that Gideon could be saved. I don't see how a character choosing to do something heroic is passive. I don't think her fight was Gideon was lame at all and it is one of my favorite moments of the entire series, but to each their own.

Emma's played an active role in the defeat of a lot of the villains, so I don't think it matters that she hasn't directly defeated all of them. In the cases of Zelena and the Black Fairy, their threats were still ongoing even after they had been defeated and Emma was the one to ultimately save the day. 

[Rumsy4]

1 minute ago, KingOfHearts said:

Thing is - Regal Believers weren't asking for Clone Queen. They were probably still miffed about Robin's death. As for Gideon, I'm not sure what Rumpbelle shippers thought about that. They probably like the fact Gideon brought Rumple and Belle back together, but after 6x09 Belle became a glorified mannequin. 

Oh, I know. A&E almost universally misread the audience in S6. Or maybe they intentionally ignored the fans, thinking the Show probably wouldn't get renewed, and they might as well write what they want. So, they wrote with themselves in mind. They wanted to give Regina all the wins--so she got her original goal fulfilled--killing Snow and Charming (it wasn't Clone Queen who crushed Wish!Snowing's hearts). One Regina got to be with Robin, while the other got to be with Henry. Clone Queen got to play the hero in the EF and is living in Knifingham palace with her soulmate. Regina had Emma grovelling at her feet. Even the dwarfs paid obeisance to Regina. And Emma's Love Interest was reduced to her level (killing one of Emma's grandparents). 

Rumple got everything he wanted with minimal effort, but maximum results. He got to kill his mother who had abandoned him. Belle (once again) forgave everything and went back to him. He got a do-over baby in Gideon, and got a do-over with the do-over baby. In all this, he was still the Darkest Dark One of them all. And the heros accepted him back into their fold as usual. 

Season 6 was all about the original villains of the show--Regina and Rumple. 

[Camera One]

2 hours ago, Rumsy4 said:

Clone Queen got to play the hero in the EF and is living in Knifingham palace with her soulmate.

Clone Queen even got the big sacrifice in the final Season 6 episode (out of nowhere), as if the whole season was about her.   Oh wait...

Edited December 5, 2017 by Camera One

[Shanna Marie]

On 12/3/2017 at 9:53 PM, oncebluethrone said:

Emma's moment of triumph wasn't passive at all. She wasn't simply letting Gideon kill her, she was choosing to sacrifice her life so that Gideon wouldn't darken his heart. The dialogue in the show made it very clear that Gideon killing Emma would cause darkness to win, but that Emma killing Gideon (who was innocent in this situation), would darken her heart causing darkness to win anyways. Emma chose to make her "death" a sacrifice instead of a murder so that Gideon could be saved. I don't see how a character choosing to do something heroic is passive.

In some respects, you could consider that choosing not to act is an active choice. It's like Luke in Return of the Jedi, switching off his lightsaber and choosing not to attack the Emperor (probably where they got the idea -- they certainly seem to have been inspired by the morality in which the good guy attacking a villain in order to save himself and the galaxy is an evil act that will turn him dark, but the bad guy attacking a villain in order to save his son is a good act that redeems him).

Except ... That was actually set up. Luke's weakness through the whole trilogy was that he tended to be an impulsive, impatient hothead. He'd failed in his previous conflict with Darth Vader because he'd rushed into things when he wasn't ready. Him not rushing impulsively at the Emperor showed how much he'd grown as a character. It was the culmination of his character arc. But Emma's problem wasn't shown to be that she was impulsive. She hadn't failed to sacrifice before. In fact, she'd done it before. This wasn't a last minute moment of truth for her. She'd spent the whole season being fatalistic about her fate, knowing she was likely to die. That's what made it all so anticlimactic -- something we'd known all season would happen did happen, and it didn't show any growth or change on Emma's part, wasn't the climax or culmination of her character arc. A more fitting Final Battle for Emma would have been one in which she dropped all her WALLS! and asked for help, so her friends and family joined her as a team and helped her in the fight (that's where making the musical the finale and using the song in her heart spell could have come into play -- their song coming out through her, and then them joining the chorus would have provided the most powerful magic that could have either defeated the Black Fairy or healed Gideon's heart). Instead, we had the character who's been criticized through the whole series for having WALLS! going into what should have been her climactic story moment alone. Meanwhile, the Return of the Jedi thing worked because Luke was playing tug of war with the Emperor over Vader's soul, while the Emperor thought he was playing for Luke's soul. The only way Luke could win was to not play the Emperor's game and instead force Vader to make a choice, taking a leap of faith that Vader had enough good left in him not to let his son be killed. There wasn't any of that setup here. The Black Fairy was already dead, so she didn't care what happened to Emma's soul. She'd only wanted to fight Emma because of prophecy (which didn't end up happening, since the Final Battle was with Gideon, unless you're considering him a proxy of the Black Fairy). Gideon was only in the fight because the order on his heart wasn't canceled by the Black Fairy's death. He didn't actually care about killing Emma or turning her dark. Luke's passive resistance forced Vader to take action and choose a side. Emma's didn't have the same thematic or story impact. She didn't change anyone's heart or actions.

Plus, we've got the same kind of situation as the rape issue, where the latest rape by deception does work as an evil act committed by an evil person, but it becomes problematic if you take it in the context of all the other rape by deception or mind control that has happened on this show without the writers seeming to realize or own what they were writing. If they've written the same thing over and over again without acknowledging what they were doing, then it's hard to believe the "it was evil!" this time. In this case, it's hard to buy Emma choosing not to fight as being an active choice rather than her being passive when she's been shut out of the action and forced to be passive for just about every big showdown following season two. She was frozen while Rumple dealt with Pan, had her powers stripped while Regina dealt with Zelena, was a bystander while Anna dealt with Ingrid, was frozen while Belle rescued Hook from Rumple, was a bystander while Regina and Henry saved them from the Wishverse. She made herself a sacrifice in dealing with the Darkness, then was saved from that by Hook sacrificing himself. She had nothing to do with saving Hook from the Underworld, was outside for the showdown with Hades, had nothing to do with fighting Clone Queen or Jekyll/Hyde. So by this time, Emma standing there and letting herself be struck down by Gideon looks like more of the same rather than like a courageous choice.

[Rumsy4]

2 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

She hadn't failed to sacrifice before. In fact, she'd done it before.

Agree. She leapt in front of Snow to keep Cora from taking her heart. She jumped off the Jolly Roger in Neverland to stop the team from fighting and killing each other. She took on the Darkness to save Regina and/or Storybrooke, thinking she was going to die. For all the times Emma has advised Ella Prime to punch back at fate, the culmination of Emma's arc was actually to--passively accept fate?? The whole arc for Emma ended up being about how she never had any choice in who she was and what she would do. She just had to play the fate the gods or Rumple or whoever had decreed for her. Great message! 

2 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

She was frozen while Rumple dealt with Pan, had her powers stripped while Regina dealt with Zelena, was a bystander while Anna dealt with Ingrid, was frozen while Belle rescued Hook from Rumple, was a bystander while Regina and Henry saved them from the Wishverse. She made herself a sacrifice in dealing with the Darkness, then was saved from that by Hook sacrificing himself. She had nothing to do with saving Hook from the Underworld, was outside for the showdown with Hades, had nothing to do with fighting Clone Queen or Jekyll/Hyde.

That's a huge list indeed. I'm curious as to why the writers felt obligated to consistently render Emma powerless and unable to save the day in climactic moments. I'm going to try and list the number of times Emma has won a victory: all of Season 1 was sprinkled with Emma getting little victories over Regina. The climax was her slaying Maleficent and then, the TLK that woke Henry. In Season 2, she teamed up with Hook and got the compass. She defeated Cora by a show of "love is strength". She stopped the Fail Safe by adding her magic to Regina's. She got Pan's map to work in Neverland. She defeated the Shadow and trapped it in a coconut shell. She realized and proved that Henry wasn't Henry. She killed (?) Walsh. She stopped Zelena from hurting/kidnapping Henry at the mid-season confrontation at the docks. She saved Hook from Ingrid. She took on the Darkness before it destroyed Storybrooke. She saved Robin's life in Camelot. She got Merlin out of the tree. She got the spark-thing from Nimue. She teamed up with Hook to get inside info on how to kill Hades. She rescued Cinderella Prime from Tremaine. I have blocked out most of season 6, so I can't remember what else she may have done in S6. She healed Whook in S7, and inspired him to change his life, just like she used to in S1.  

So--Emma has done a lot of saving the day stuff, but almost never in the plot climax. So, it tends to feel like Regina and Rumple have the upper hand over Emma in saving the day. I'm curious as to why on the earth the writers thought this was a good idea, other than to diminish her significance. Over and over, the writers have elevated Regina over Emma, and Rumple over Hook when it comes to the big stuff. As for Snowing, they were almost completely written out of the narrative before the charatcers made the official exit. Henry is obviously a self-insert. That shows where their priorities lie. 

2 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

A more fitting Final Battle for Emma would have been one in which she dropped all her WALLS! and asked for help, so her friends and family joined her as a team and helped her in the fight (that's where making the musical the finale and using the song in her heart spell could have come into play -- their song coming out through her, and then them joining the chorus would have provided the most powerful magic that could have either defeated the Black Fairy or healed Gideon's heart). 

Oh man! This would have been magical, and actually like a fairy tale. The epilogue would be the CS wedding--not the Last Supper. Someone fic it, for the love of Merlin!

[Shanna Marie]

56 minutes ago, Rumsy4 said:

So--Emma has done a lot of saving the day stuff, but almost never in the plot climax. So, it tends to feel like Regina and Rumple have the upper hand over Emma in saving the day. I'm curious as to why on the earth the writers thought this was a good idea, other than to diminish her significance. Over and over, the writers have elevated Regina over Emma, and Rumple over Hook when it comes to the big stuff.

I think this is yet another case when each individual incident makes sense, but it comes together in an alarming pattern. For most of those times when Emma was a bystander for the big conclusion, the person who saved the day was the appropriate one. Snow was the appropriate one to take out Cora, since Cora was the root cause of most of Snow's problems. Rumple needed to be the one to defeat Pan because Pan was his father who abandoned him. Regina needed to defeat Zelena because she was her sister. Anna had to be the one to reach Ingrid, since she was a nonmagical family member. It was great that Belle was the one to stop Rumple (too bad her gumption didn't stick). It was meaningful that Hook saved the day with his sacrifice, and I liked that he got himself out of the Underworld. Zelena needed to be the one to deal with Hades. Regina needed to be the one to deal with her own dark side.

The problem is that they wrote too many situations or villains where Emma was irrelevant while at the same time making it an ongoing theme that Emma was the Savior and never got a break. That meant that she was considered responsible for dealing with everything, but then to get the proper conclusion to the arc, she had to be taken out of the equation. All her victories after season two were the minor skirmishes earlier in the arc that were ultimately meaningless. Each one taken individually makes sense, but when it's an ongoing pattern, it gets weird. It also wouldn't have been so bad if they'd left her as just being the Savior for the one curse rather than responsible for everything. Then it would have been more appropriate for the battles and victories to go to other people, with her playing a supporting role and helping because she's a good person rather than being under some kind of cosmic obligation. But when they were constantly hammering on the "you're the Savior, you have to do something!" thing and making it seem like she wasn't allowed a break, ever, and then making her irrelevant in the grand scheme of things, it got frustrating. It reached peak inanity in season 6, when it was a big deal that she couldn't cut the Savior destiny and not face death -- and yet she hadn't really contributed all that much as a Savior. They probably would have been better off if she had cut her Savior destiny. The Black Fairy only targeted Storybrooke because the Savior was there. She might not have taken Gideon, might not have done any of the stuff she did, if Emma hadn't been the Savior (though, knowing this show, Regina would have become the new Savior, and it all would have happened the same way).

The ones that could have gone to Emma, but didn't, were the AU, maybe some of the Dark One stuff, and bringing magic back (another one where she was mostly stuck being helpless). There was no reason it had to be Regina being the light Savior who helped save the day. Emma was the one who was conscious of who she was and able to make changes. Regina saving the day might have worked if she'd actually learned something from the experience, but it doesn't seem like she did. She didn't gain any empathy for Snow after living her life, didn't say anything about being wrong to have wanted to have the Author write her into being the hero. If you're not going to take that approach, then it makes more sense for Emma to get to save the day. While I liked Hook being able to save them from the Dark Ones he conjured, it would have been nice if Emma had been allowed some role there. I still believe that they could have used the loophole of her having no innate darkness, thanks to the fetal darkectomy, to make her experience as Dark One different, maybe giving her more power to resist. She could have helped Hook. And since she was shown to have magical power in the World Without Magic, I would have liked it if she had been the one to find a way to bring magic back after Henry screwed up, something less embarrassing than "clap if you believe in fairies" in the middle of Manhattan.

If Emma had been given those victories and if she hadn't been considered an all-purpose Savior who had to do everything, it wouldn't have been so bad.

[Noneofyourbusiness]

On 12/3/2017 at 10:53 PM, oncebluethrone said:

She wasn't simply letting Gideon kill her, she was choosing to sacrifice her life so that Gideon wouldn't darken his heart.

It wouldn't have darkened his heart regardless; he was a people puppet.

[Noneofyourbusiness]

1 hour ago, Shanna Marie said:

The Black Fairy only targeted Storybrooke because the Savior was there. She might not have taken Gideon, might not have done any of the stuff she did, if Emma hadn't been the Savior (though, knowing this show, Regina would have become the new Savior, and it all would have happened the same way).

And because Rumple was there and this was some twisted way of becoming a family again. I think. It was never completely clear.

 

1 hour ago, Shanna Marie said:

I still believe that they could have used the loophole of her having no innate darkness, thanks to the fetal darkectomy, to make her experience as Dark One different, maybe giving her more power to resist.

Well, they didn't specifically say it, but she did resist a lot better than Rumple or Hook. In fact, she could have gone a lot darker for my tastes, or at least not have her whole experience as the Dark One never be mentioned again in our return to Status Rumple.

And yet, they weirdly had Hook say to Emma, "You defeated Pan, you defeated the Wicked Witch". What show was he/the writers watching?

[Camera One]

I was thinking about Isaac because of the other thread, and how A&E sure love their decoy villains in the backhalf of the season.  The most egregious example was in Season 6 when The Evil Queen was defeated in Episode 14 and Gideon was a threat for awhile, before The Black Fairy became the biggest villain of all villains for a whopping five anticlimactic episodes.  

But they also pulled a similar pattern in 4B, when we had the decoy trio of Queens of Darkness (who fizzled out halfway) before Isaac became the "big" pathetic villain for 2 episodes (along with Rumple).  

In 2B, we also got Cora "defeated" in Episode 16, paving way for the lamest big bad duo of Greg and Tamara for 5 episodes.

The first half wasn't immune either, with 6A starting with The Big Bad Jekyll who was killed by Episode 4.

Edited December 8, 2017 by Camera One

[Noneofyourbusiness]

7 hours ago, Camera One said:

egregious

Take a shot in the TV Tropes "egregious" drinking game.

[Shanna Marie]

21 hours ago, Noneofyourbusiness said:

And yet, they weirdly had Hook say to Emma, "You defeated Pan, you defeated the Wicked Witch". What show was he/the writers watching?

Hook looks at things through his Emma Love Goggles, I guess. He gives her credit for everything. I bet he also thinks that she defeated the Dark Ones and saved herself and him from the Darkness and got him out of the Underworld.

14 hours ago, Camera One said:

I was thinking about Isaac because of the other thread, and how A&E sure love their decoy villains in the backhalf of the season. 

It wasn't the back half, but I did think it worked pretty well with Ingrid and Rumple. I guess she wasn't so much a decoy threat because she really was a threat, but I liked the way she was the threat everyone was aware of and scrambling to deal with, all while we knew that Rumple was also up to something and causing a lot of trouble, and no one knew about it but Hook, who couldn't tell.

Too bad the outcome of that arc was so anticlimactic (that should be a word in this forum's drinking game), with the super-deadly and serious Shattered Sight spell that played out like a Marx Brothers movie, no one ever actually putting together all the clues about what Rumple was up to until Belle and Emma apparently figured it out offscreen due to things that just fell into their laps, and the "here's your heart, gotta run help Regina set up the B arc, bye" emotional payoff.

[Rumsy4]

1 hour ago, Shanna Marie said:

"here's your heart, gotta run help Regina set up the B arc, bye" emotional payoff

I think a lot of us are never going to get over that one. lol

And #JusticeForGraham 

[Camera One]

9 hours ago, Noneofyourbusiness said:

I never thought Jared was a bad actor. Lucy's lines are more on the nose than Henry's. It's like trying to summarize everything.

 

5 hours ago, CCTC said:

I thought he was very natural the first season or two.  He then suffered the same fate that a number of child actors face when hitting the teen years, they go from being natural to where you can see them trying to act. As far as child actors losing their naturalness when they get older, he was actually not too bad.  He ended up doing much better than I thought he would when he and Pan switched bodies, and many of his more cringeworthy moments were more due to writing. 

Still he was not a compelling actor in later years, and episodes or scenes that featured him tended to not exactly keep me glued to the screen.  I am still a little bitter that with all of the regulars who were known to be leaving the end of last season, HenryJared is the one who got the most screen time.

 

2 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

Henry also got twisted into a cheerleader for Rumple and Regina and A&E's mouthpiece. Henry was better in season one and two. Yes, he believed in the Curse, but he was also an unhappy child. When he tells Emma in his sad voice that Regina doesn't love him, she only pretends too I felt for him. Same when he realized Nicholas and Ava were using him. For a moment he was so happy kids were talking to him and being nice to him, only to learn it was a trick. The way he believed in Emma that she was going to fix everything. How happy he was when he learned Emma was staying and the clock moved. When he listened to Emma talking to Ashley and told Emma she didn't have to stay. How happy he was when Emma told him, she'd see him tomorrow. How sad he was when he over heard Emma saying he was crazy or Archie crushed him in that therapy session. There was so much to Henry then just being a kid who knew about the Curse. Henry was afraid of Regina. His talk with Regina in the second episode of season two. He wasn't fooled by her. He made Regina realized she had become her mother. How happy he was when he learned she was trying to quit magic and do good. But then they turned him into a cheerleader for Regina and Rumple. Gone was any memory of how Regina treated him, his fear, and knowing what she did. He became an idiot lecturing Emma all the time for anything she did and never once lectured Regina. His reaction to Marion was horrible. His stupid plot to run away and destroy magic? A&E destroyed Henry's character.

Bringing this over from the Media thread.

Henry was one of my favorite characters in Season 1, and I think he did a great job of portraying emotion, beyond the cuteness factor.  

While I think that some of that acting range was lost and he doesn't exhibit some of the natural aptitude that some teen actors display, I do believe that the performance may be deeply intertwined with the destruction of Henry as a character.

In Season 1, Henry was confident in some ways, but he was emotionally vulnerable and desperate for love.  That made him a character that one could easily sympathesize with.  That vulnerability was lost when he insta-bonded with Regina and began to defend her unconditionally.  He ceased to have the characteristics of a real person, and I don't think an actor can play that.  Heck, one would conclude from Season 5 and 6 that Ginnifer Goodwin was not a good actress, mainly because it was impossible (for me) to buy any of the stuff she was saying, especially to Regina.  She tended to do better in her scenes with Josh maybe because at least her character had more of a personality, and was not used as a prop to tell the audience what they're supposed to think.

Lucy as a character lacked any vulnerability that Henry had in Season 1, so all we can see is a character who is perennially perky with no depth.  With that, I'm not sure there was much the actress could do.  Unless she had an underlying sad quality to her eyes or something like that, which she doesn't.  Right now, Lucy could be one of the children on Sesame Street, since there is nothing to the character, and that doesn't work in a drama.  

[Mabinogia]

I loved Henry in season 1. I agree he had a vulnerability and a sort of sadness behind his unfailing belief. It made his belief make more sense. He wanted desperately for Emma to be his mom, the savior, for all the fairytale stuff to be true because he just felt so alone surrounded by people. I immediately understood why he would believe so strongly in the book. 

Lucy doesn't seem to have any of that. Sure, she doesn't have a dad in her life, but she really doesn't seem too bothered by it. Her mom and grandmother are in a custody battle over her, but she doesn't seem too bothered by that. She just doesn't seem to feel anything. She is a Sesame Street kid. lol That's a great description. She's cheerful and plucky and completely empty of any emotion or depth. 

We also had young Henry trying to work out who everyone else was. He seemed excited about the whole thing, not just finding his mom, but that his teacher was Snow White and his shrink was Jiminy Cricket and his adopted mom was the Evil Queen (I think every kid has had that fantasy at some point lol). He was the heart of the show at the beginning. He connected everyone. Lucy doesn't feel like that. She feels like a plot device more than an actual character. 

[Noneofyourbusiness]

2 hours ago, Mabinogia said:

Lucy doesn't seem to have any of that. Sure, she doesn't have a dad in her life, but she really doesn't seem too bothered by it. Her mom and grandmother are in a custody battle over her, but she doesn't seem too bothered by that.

Yeah, she's a little too confident that it'll all work out from having read what happened with young Henry.

[KAOS Agent]

Henry was integral to the story in S1.  Take away Henry and there's no story. Lucy is largely irrelevant in S7. You could easily remove her from the story and you wouldn't miss anything.

[Shanna Marie]

I think part of the problem with Henry is that he was perfectly developed for the season one story, but almost all of his key character traits became irrelevant after that, and they didn't develop anything new for him that was at all consistent, and they kept writing the character the way they did in season one, even as he grew out of that phase. Season one's Henry was the perfect mix of old soul and childlike wonder and innocence -- he was an only child of a single parent and most of his social interactions were with adults (he seemed to have no child friends), which made him a lot older than his years, but he was also very sheltered, growing up in a small town that didn't interact with the outside world, and his belief in fairy tales was his lifeline. That was probably easy to play for a child actor because that fits the way a child actor's life works -- he's older than his years in some respects because he has a job and interacts mostly with adults, but he's also in a kind of a bubble, and his job is playing let's pretend, which might make him younger than his years. Continuing to write the character that way as he grew up made it a little creepy, and they kept forgetting how old he was. His age would jump years while time didn't pass for the rest of the show, sometimes they kept writing him as a ten-year-old even when he was taller than some of the adults, but then they'd have him going on dates and kissing his girlfriend on the mouth. There was no progression of growing up and maturing. No life lessons he learned seemed to stick and be built upon. He just did what the plot needed him to do.

Meanwhile, his key trait of belief was a big deal when no one around him believed and he had no evidence other than a storybook, but when everyone is aware of who they are and magic is happening all around, being the person who believes in fairy tales and magic is no big deal. They occasionally touched upon his desire for family, but then forgot about it (especially with the setup for season 7 -- would the kid who longed for more than two place settings at the holiday dinner table leave behind parents, grandparents, two baby uncles, an aunt, a baby cousin, and a younger sibling he might never see?). After Henry's belief was validated, Truest Believer became a meaningless title and was never replaced with anything else. They didn't develop his wistfulness about not knowing his father (other than retconning a lot of lessons and information we never saw), never had him follow up with Hook to learn more after the conversation before he got his memories back, never had him talk to Rumple about his father, never asked Emma for more information. They never bothered to really develop any relationship with Hook as a potential father replacement/stepfather, just lurching from trust to dislike to trust with no arc. They dropped the relationship he had with David as a father figure in season two, and there was no real arc to his restoring his relationship with Regina. He got turned into a plot device. With no consistent threads, no real arcs, no development of anything, he was a character who'd be impossible to play even for an experienced actor. Actually probably harder for an experienced actor because there would be nothing to work with in doing all the interior work a trained actor would do to prepare.

The problem with Lucy is that there isn't even that much. Lucy doesn't do things because she has any kind of established character traits and this is what she would do for this reason. She does things because they were what Henry did in season one and the writers think they're clever for having parallels. She comes to Henry's place and tells him his family needs him, since that's what Henry told Emma, but Lucy doesn't know that the family consists of anyone other than her and her mother. She doesn't know that Roni is actually Henry's adoptive mother, that Weaver is his grandfather, that Rogers is his stepfather (or stepfather's alter ego). We don't know why she thinks her mother is Cinderella, why she thinks Henry's book is true. She just has this belief because season one Henry did, and history is repeating.