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

[Camera One]

5 minutes ago, Rumsy4 said:

I'm wondering if we should rewatch the series in reverse chronological order. 

I'm pretty sure if we suggested a Season 7 rewatch, we'd be down to 4/5ths of a person.

[Rumsy4]

And by the time we got to Season 6, the remaining 4/5ths of a person would vanish.

[Camera One]

I liked the concept that when you entered a portal, a compass is needed to direct you to a specific destination.  That would have made realm hopping more dangerous, for both heroes and villains alike.  

We never really learned why the Storybook appears when you need it and why it's such a powerful memory trigger.  I think a better origin story for the books would have explained that.

I was thinking about how one of the easiest solutions to make this show better would have been to NOT bring magic back to Storybrooke in Season 2 to increase the contrast of no-magic in the present-day storyline so characters had to use real-world strategies to defeat the villains.

But this approach didn't make the Hyperion Heights storyline any better (though they also cheated by bringing in magic when it was convenient).  The magicless Weaver, Roni, etc... overall, they stood around doing nothing.  I'm trying to remember when they did anything intelligent.

Edited May 24, 2018 by Camera One

[KingOfHearts]

There's this exchange between Midwife!Zelena and Snow that caught my attention when it aired.

Quote

Zelena: "Babies are stronger than you think. You’re Snow White aren’t you?"

Snow: "I'm Mary Margaret here, actually. This must be your first time in Storybrooke?"

Zelena: "I've missed the last curse. So, everything in this world is still a bit new."

Snow: "Don’t worry. You’ll get used to it. Who were you back in our land?"

Zelena: "Oh, no one you’d remember. Not everyone is famous like you."

Snow: "I don’t know if I’d say famous."

Zelena: "You were a princess. And some of us were just supporting players. Oh, it’s okay. I loved who I was and what I did."

I really love Zelena's passive aggressiveness here, because it's actually pretty meta. The Charmings and their groupies are all famous and control most of the major events that happen in Storybrooke, even though there are other rulers just as sovereign as they are. There's plenty of nameless redshirts and peasants that the main characters constantly don't give two flips about. The writers should've played up Zelena's role as an outcast instead of Regina's sister. She's that green witch everyone finds repulsive. What if royalty screwed her over? What if she were oppressed by a society ruled by prejudice against "wicked" dark magic? Zelena had many possible grievances to be upset with, but Regina "being born" was not a strong one.

I'm very fond of the idea of some characters being put off by how famous people like Snow White are.

Edited May 24, 2018 by KingOfHearts

[andromeda331]

3 hours ago, KingOfHearts said:

 

There's this exchange between Midwife!Zelena and Snow that caught my attention when it aired.

I really love Zelena's passive aggressiveness here, because it's actually pretty meta. The Charmings and their groupies are all famous and control most of the major events that happen in Storybrooke, even though there are other rulers just as sovereign as they are. There's plenty of nameless redshirts and peasants that the main characters constantly don't give two flips about. The writers should've played up Zelena's role as an outcast instead of Regina's sister. She's that green witch everyone finds repulsive. What if royalty screwed her over? What if she were oppressed by a society ruled by prejudice against "wicked" dark magic? Zelena had many possible grievances to be upset with, but Regina "being born" was not a strong one.

I'm very fond of the idea of some characters being put off by how famous people like Snow White are.

 

Very true.

Snow White: Regina murdered my father, stole my throne and tried to murder me several times, cast a curse that separated me from my husband and my daughter.  Framed me for Kathryn's murder. Gave me a fake curse identity      

Graham: Regina stole my heart and raped me for 30 years and made me do other things too.                                                                                                                                                

Rumple: Locked up Belle for 28 years and told me she was dead                                                                                                                                                                                              

Henry: Gaslight me my entire life. Tried to murder my bio mom. Murdered my stepgrandpa and bio grandpa, told me she was going to murder my entire family and kidnap me.           

Villagers: Slaughtered our village and murdered us all                                                                                                                                                                                                              

Bride: Murdered my groom                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        

Ariel: Tricked me and then stole my voice when I foiled her plan. 30 years with no voice!                                                                                                                                                        

Aurora: Helped Maleficent get her grove back. Thanks bitch                                                                                                                                                                                                    

Belle: Locked me up for 28 years to get back at Rumple. Gave me a fake curse identity to screw with him too                                                                                                                       

Archie: threatened and tried to force him to treat Henry how she wanted him to be treated. Made him call the police and help set up Emma                                                                    

Kathryn: Plotted to kidnap me with Rumple where I was locked up for weeks while everyone thought I was dead.                                                                                                                 

Maleficent: Kept in a cage for 28 years as dragon. Stole the curse from me in the first place                                                                                                                                                   

Hansel and Gretel: Made them go into the blind witch's house who killed children to get back and apple. After we did that separated us from our father even further when we declined to live with her. Spent 28 years alone                                                                                                                                                                                                                          

  Others: sent other child to die in the witch's home. Stole millions of hearts.                                                                                                                                                                             

Zelena: She was born!

Really which one of these sounds worse? Which one sounds like they got off really easy? Or lucky? No A&E you are not allowed to vote.  

Edited May 24, 2018 by andromeda331

[KingOfHearts]

35 minutes ago, andromeda331 said:

Really which one of these sounds worse? Which one sounds like they got off really easy? Or lucky? No A&E you are not allowed to vote.  

Sounds like Maleficent's grievances. Eggnapping is definitely something she should be pissed about, but that's hardly the only thing on the list. You can't just handwave being trapped underground for 28 years. In those three decades, she was prevented from finding her daughter. It should tie together but it doesn't.

[KingOfHearts]

My current ordering of the season finales: S3  > S1 > S2 > S4 > S7 > S5 > S6.

While I have fonder memories of the game changer that is the S1 finale, S3 is more well-rounded and functions exceedingly well on its own. S2 has some really stupid stuff in it, so it's a toss-up between that one and S4's. I don't think S4's is terrible per se, but it's not good either. S7 is slightly above S5 and S6 because it never once made me pull my hair out. It had a little bit to salvage, especially in the first half. S5 is only above S6 because it's got the awesome Land of Untold Stories adventure with Wicked Hero.

[Inquirer]

I'd put S1 ahead of S3 (although only be a slim margin since both are fantastic), and S5 ahead of S6...the Land of Untold Stories adventure is not enough to negate its awfulness, IMO, in fact it arguably makes it worse since we know how much of an absolute waste the Land of Untold Stories turned out to be in the following season.

The S6 finale at least had some good character interactions, and IMO a fitting conclusion to Emma's story. It was weighed down by the tedium of the S1 rehash, the ultimate pointlessness of the heroes' actions in the EF, Rumple surviving and treated as redeemed when he wasn't, and the forced S7 lead-in scenes.  But I still take all of that to the SQ-pandering S5 finale that had next to nothing to do with the season itself and featured the infamous fountain speech scene. "The Final Battle" is at least conclusive to S6.

In fact, you agreed with my stance just last year, KingOfHearts.

Edited May 25, 2018 by Inquirer

[Camera One]

I watched some Season 6 clips out of context, and they seem better when watched that way.  Some actors' performances I felt went downhill in the later seasons, like Ginny, but I still enjoyed watching snippets of the flashbacks in "Heartless".  It seems like she was more energetic playing Snow in the flashbacks than Mary Margaret in the present.  The message that life is made up of moments fits this whole show.  It's basically a bunch of moments, a few really good, many of them average, a lot of them contradictory, and they don't fit together as a cohesive whole.

I also watched some Season 7 clips, and the Victoria scenes were as bad as ever, even worse than the Jacinda ones.  

Edited May 27, 2018 by Camera One

[KingOfHearts]

10 hours ago, Camera One said:

I also watched some Season 7 clips, and the Victoria scenes were as bad as ever, even worse than the Jacinda ones.  

I don't know. I thought she was fine in her centric (7x09), but horrible everywhere else. I just hate characters who are supposed to be heroes but act like jerks. Victoria was straight up on her own team, unlike Jacinda.

Edited May 27, 2018 by KingOfHearts

[Camera One]

5 minutes ago, KingOfHearts said:

I don't know. I thought she was fine in her centric (7x09), but horrible everywhere else. I just hate characters who are supposed to be heroes but act like jerks. Victoria was straight up on her own team, unlike Jacinda.

I meant more the acting rather than the characters.  They both sounded very stilted and unnatural, but Victoria even moreso in many of the scenes.  

[KingOfHearts]

2 hours ago, Camera One said:

I meant more the acting rather than the characters.  They both sounded very stilted and unnatural, but Victoria even moreso in many of the scenes.  

Victoria is the fashionista alpha bitch starring in a student film parody of the Devil Wears Prada.

Edited May 27, 2018 by KingOfHearts

[tennisgurl]

I always found the Victoria stuff to be pretty poorly thought out, and I dont think the acting could have saved the terrible writing. She really makes no sense as a character, really doesn't seem like the Evil Step-Mother, even less so than the actual evil step mom we met, and, in the end, had nothing to do with the overarching story. I know this show always splits things up into two mini arcs, but this one seemed especially sloppy.

You know, its funny. I've said this before, but it bears repeating, Once is one of the few shows where the bosses interfering is usually a good thing instead of a hindrance. Going all the way back to season one, you had Damon Lindelof keeping them focused on the actual plot, and ABC telling them not to off the male lead right away just to be shocking. Things went to crap when A&E were totally in charge and they could make the whole show about their favorites, and start throwing everything at the wall to see what would stick, and getting distracted by shiny things. The proof continued when the Frozen arc went down, and you had Team Disney actually paying attention, and seemed to get them to actually focus and do a real plot and make some good characters, because Disney didnt want them screwing up one of their biggest movies by making Elsa a serial killer or some crap. Because A&E are idea guys, not show runners. They need more focused people to direct their many ideas into an actual story. 

[andromeda331]

12 hours ago, tennisgurl said:

I always found the Victoria stuff to be pretty poorly thought out, and I dont think the acting could have saved the terrible writing. She really makes no sense as a character, really doesn't seem like the Evil Step-Mother, even less so than the actual evil step mom we met, and, in the end, had nothing to do with the overarching story. I know this show always splits things up into two mini arcs, but this one seemed especially sloppy.

You know, its funny. I've said this before, but it bears repeating, Once is one of the few shows where the bosses interfering is usually a good thing instead of a hindrance. Going all the way back to season one, you had Damon Lindelof keeping them focused on the actual plot, and ABC telling them not to off the male lead right away just to be shocking. Things went to crap when A&E were totally in charge and they could make the whole show about their favorites, and start throwing everything at the wall to see what would stick, and getting distracted by shiny things. The proof continued when the Frozen arc went down, and you had Team Disney actually paying attention, and seemed to get them to actually focus and do a real plot and make some good characters, because Disney didnt want them screwing up one of their biggest movies by making Elsa a serial killer or some crap. Because A&E are idea guys, not show runners. They need more focused people to direct their many ideas into an actual story. 

It really does. Its amazingly rare for it to be a good thing. A&E needed this and should have had it all seven seasons. The show would have been much better and probably still be on the air. 

[Inquirer]

20 hours ago, tennisgurl said:

because Disney didnt want them screwing up one of their biggest movies by making Elsa a serial killer or some crap.

I still maintain that they were forced by Disney to do the Emma/Elsa friendship, and that their natural instinct was to do an Elsa/Regina friendship.  Because in their twisted minds, Elsa and Regina are exactly the same kind of "misunderstood villain", whereas the folks at Disney recognized the difference between someone who is legitimately misunderstood due to magic powers she can't control and understandable mental issues, and someone who massacred innocents without remorse and then cried about how she doesn't understand why people hate her. Elsa is like Emma: a highly flawed but relatable and well-intentioned person, whereas Regina is just an unstable psychopath.

Edited May 28, 2018 by Inquirer

[october]

45 minutes ago, Inquirer said:

I still maintain that they were forced by Disney to do the Emma/Elsa friendship, and that their natural instinct was to do an Elsa/Regina friendship.

 

I wouldn't be surprised. As far as I can recall, apart from Snow (who wasn't around much because of Ginny's maternity leave), Regina was the only one of the core cast who had no significant interaction with the Frozen characters. Emma, Charming, Hook, Rumple and Belle all got notable one on one scenes or entire episodes with Elsa, Anna or Hans. It's impossible to imagine Adam and Eddy letting this happen by choice.

I hope the person who intervened has a good day today :)

21 hours ago, tennisgurl said:

Because A&E are idea guys, not show runners. They need more focused people to direct their many ideas into an actual story. 

No idea on the veracity of this next tid-bit, but I've also seen some people name check Adam and Eddy's former assistant and leader of their production team, Felix Hernandez who did stick with the show up to S6, but in the less directly involved role of Producer in A&E's shows from 3B of OUAT onwards. He also worked as production staff on OUATIW. Some theorise that Hernandez was one of Adam and Eddy's bts babysitters until he moved into a more hands-off role after the Neverland arc.

Edited May 28, 2018 by october

[Rumsy4]

40 minutes ago, Inquirer said:

I still maintain that they were forced by Disney to do the Emma/Elsa friendship, and that their natural instinct was to do an Elsa/Regina friendship.  Because in their twisted minds, Elsa and Regina are exactly the same kind of "misunderstood villain", whereas the folks at Disney recognized the difference between someone who is legitimately misunderstood due to magic powers she can't control and understandable mental issues, and someone who massacred innocents without remorse and then cried about how she doesn't understand why people hate her. Elsa is like Emma: a highly flawed but relatable and well-intentioned person, whereas Regina is just an unstable psychopath.

That's likely what actually happened. I remember A&E's pre-S4 interviews focussing on Regina and Elsa's similarity because they were both "misunderstood". I bet Disney learned about that and stamped it out quickly. 

[superloislane]

5 hours ago, october said:

As far as I can recall, apart from Snow (who wasn't around much because of Ginny's maternity leave), Regina was the only one of the core cast who had no significant interaction with the Frozen characters.

You know I did notice this and I thought it was interesting how Regina was completely off to the side with her Robin plot that half. I don't think she spoke two words to any of the Frozen characters even though everyone else had relationships with them and flashbacks. Snow had far more interaction with them even though Ginny might have had reduced time. There's no way A&E wouldn't have planned a Regina flashback with the Frozen characters but there was none. I do remember Adam and Eddy saying how similar Elsa and Regina were because they are 'misunderstood' after the season 3 finale but then at Comic Con they completely changed their tune and started talking about Elsa and Emma being similar (which they are far more than Regina anyway but I doubt they realised that themselves). I have always wondered if someone stepped in from Disney because didn't A&E say there were a lot of controls over it?

Edited May 28, 2018 by superloislane

[KingOfHearts]

Who could forget Regina sitting at the door like Elsa in Do You Want to Build a Snowman? Oh, the criiinge. Emma even said, "I know you're in there."

Edited May 29, 2018 by KingOfHearts

[Inquirer]

8 hours ago, october said:

No idea on the veracity of this next tid-bit, but I've also seen some people name check Adam and Eddy's former assistant and leader of their production team, Felix Hernandez who did stick with the show up to S6, but in the less directly involved role of Producer in A&E's shows from 3B of OUAT onwards. He also worked as production staff on OUATIW. Some theorise that Hernandez was one of Adam and Eddy's bts babysitters until he moved into a more hands-off role after the Neverland arc.

 

That WOULD certainly check out - 3B was pretty much the turning point for the show's quality, even if it wasn't until after 4A was over and Disney no longer intervening that A&E really got crazy with all their "wouldn't it be cool if?" ideas, ADHD and Plot!Plot!Plot! style of writing.

And wow, I just realized that the 3A finale had Pan in the body of Henry, A&E's author avatar, thank his head Lost Boy FELIX for always standing by him before ripping his heart out and crushing it. A&E wrote that episode - there's no way they didn't know what they were doing there.

Quote

Emma, Charming, Hook, Rumple and Belle all got notable one on one scenes or entire episodes with Elsa, Anna or Hans. 

Er, you mean Kristoff.  No member of the core cast ever met Hans, the only OUAT characters he interacted with were Ingrid and Blackbeard.

Quote

I have always wondered if someone stepped in from Disney because didn't A&E say there were a lot of controls over it?

Yes. Disney's fine letting A&E toy around with (and possibly ruin) any character from any film prior to OUAT - but with Frozen, their recent mega-hit which has become a brand unto itself, they are understandably protective of it and had to take a more direct oversight role to make sure nothing A&E does damages that brand.  That's why literally every Frozen character on the show are faithful replicas of their film counterparts rather than any sort of OUAT twist put on them...except maybe with Elsa and Anna's mother seeing as A&E gave her two sisters and a tragic backstory shared between the three of them, but she was hardly a character in the movie anyway so Disney must have let that slide.

Edited May 29, 2018 by Inquirer

[KingOfHearts]

Just recently purchased the book, "The Emotion Thesaurus" from Amazon. It's a collection of body language cues, internal sensations, and thought patterns for expressing different emotions from characters in writing. (As opposed to resorting to excessive dialogue or generic telling like "she's happy".) A section of the prologue briefly touched on backstory and how it can explain a character's actions or attitudes. However, it warns that sometimes writers rely too much on it and end up boring the readers. Audiences don't need a play-by-play. They're not stupid. It immediately reminded me of OUAT. The more I learn about good writing practices, the more I realize that the OUAT writers seem to break every rule. They tell instead of show, they don't give their characters believable arcs, they don't plan their worldbuilding, and they rarely convey emotion naturally. Constantly, the characters explain point-blank what the writers are trying to convey. 

It's ironic that I've learned so much about writing from this show. Specifically, it's a textbook example of what NOT to do. I've absorbed much better lessons from those on these boards. 

[Shanna Marie]

5 hours ago, KingOfHearts said:

A section of the prologue briefly touched on backstory and how it can explain a character's actions or attitudes. However, it warns that sometimes writers rely too much on it and end up boring the readers.

That was one of my complaints about Lost, and one of my concerns about this show. Backstory is not the same as character development. It's part of character development, but you can show all the events of a character's past and still have a poorly developed character. In something with a format like this, it's tempting to just consider that you've developed the character because you've given him a history. It becomes a crutch. Then there's also the confusion of contradiction with complexity. Having a surprising past compared to the present can be an indication of a complex, layered character, but if it's not done well, it can just be a mess. There's a flow from one phase to another when it makes sense. When it doesn't, it doesn't even seem like the same character.

These writers have a bad habit of relying entirely on the backstory to develop the characters, and they make that backstory surprising compared to the present in order to make it a shock. The result is that there's no flow from past to present, and since the characters' reactions and actions in the present are purely plot-driven rather than coming out of character, there's no actual character development. You get a character like Snow, who in the present is pretty much undefined. She says and does what the plot needs her to do (or what's needed to prop up Regina), and that may mean switching back and forth between polar opposite views. There's no real connection between present Snow and the Snow we see in the season one flashbacks, and the Snow we see in later flashbacks has nothing to do with the Snow in season one flashbacks.

[companionenvy]

7 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

That was one of my complaints about Lost, and one of my concerns about this show. Backstory is not the same as character development. It's part of character development, but you can show all the events of a character's past and still have a poorly developed character. In something with a format like this, it's tempting to just consider that you've developed the character because you've given him a history. It becomes a crutch. Then there's also the confusion of contradiction with complexity. Having a surprising past compared to the present can be an indication of a complex, layered character, but if it's not done well, it can just be a mess. There's a flow from one phase to another when it makes sense. When it doesn't, it doesn't even seem like the same character.

These writers have a bad habit of relying entirely on the backstory to develop the characters, and they make that backstory surprising compared to the present in order to make it a shock. The result is that there's no flow from past to present, and since the characters' reactions and actions in the present are purely plot-driven rather than coming out of character, there's no actual character development. You get a character like Snow, who in the present is pretty much undefined. She says and does what the plot needs her to do (or what's needed to prop up Regina), and that may mean switching back and forth between polar opposite views. There's no real connection between present Snow and the Snow we see in the season one flashbacks, and the Snow we see in later flashbacks has nothing to do with the Snow in season one flashbacks

Fantastic post. Thinking about it, the thing that all of the most successful characters on the show have is that there is clear continuity between their backstory and their present. That doesn't mean those characters can't evolve in surprising ways; at the point at which we get our first Hook flashback, it is unexpected to see him as a straight arrow naval lieutenant, and there's of course a massive contrast between past villain Hook and reformed hero Hook. But through it all, he's a consistent character. I can buy his turn to villainy, and I can also buy his turn back to good. The same is true of Emma and (with some missteps) Rumple. One of the signs of this, I think, is that almost every time we got further backstory for these characters, even when it contradicted previous assumptions about them or introduced surprising new information, I found it plausible. Post-prison, pre-series Emma turning back to theft, running from the law, looking for information on her past, and then being shaken enough by Cleo's death to start turning herself around made perfect sense to me given everything we knew about Emma's character. Ditto for Rumple having sold his second son, or Hook having killed his father (killing David's father is a different matter, but I did say almost every time). 

By contrast, for failed characters, there was little continuity between past and present. I know that Bae went through quite a bit of trauma, but at the end of the day, I have nothing more than a vague and speculative idea of how he went from the Bae we saw on the Jolly Roger to cynical thief Neal Cassidy, who was willing to let Emma, who he supposedly loved, take the fall for his crimes on teh flimsiest of pretexts. I then have no idea how that man apparently became a successful businessman of some kind years later. I have no idea why Snow White would wind up as someone who had no apparent sense of responsibility to her supposed subjects, content to allow Regina to be mayor and then queen. Conversely, I didn't at all buy that Snowing would have done what they did to Lily, and even the throwaway episode in which Anna teaches David to be a hero didn't really seem consistent with his character. Regina's problem was less her development than the way people reacted to her and bought into her self-pitying bullshit, but even there, I didn't find it psychologically plausible that the Regina of The Stable Boy would have turned into the EQ, nor that the EQ would have ever really been capable of meaningful change.

[Mitch]

On 5/24/2018 at 12:43 PM, KingOfHearts said:

There's this exchange between Midwife!Zelena and Snow that caught my attention when it aired.

I really love Zelena's passive aggressiveness here, because it's actually pretty meta. The Charmings and their groupies are all famous and control most of the major events that happen in Storybrooke, even though there are other rulers just as sovereign as they are. There's plenty of nameless redshirts and peasants that the main characters constantly don't give two flips about. The writers should've played up Zelena's role as an outcast instead of Regina's sister. She's that green witch everyone finds repulsive. What if royalty screwed her over? What if she were oppressed by a society ruled by prejudice against "wicked" dark magic? Zelena had many possible grievances to be upset with, but Regina "being born" was not a strong one.

I'm very fond of the idea of some characters being put off by how famous people like Snow White are.

I would have loved that..and it would have tied in with Wicked as A & E like to "refer" to other properties so much.  She should have always been green..not that dumb envy thing and everyone thought she was a freak...she escapes to the EF finds no one there to rule...and does so..not in an Evil Way but as a tough no b.s. kind of ..a happy medium between the Charming idotic reign and Regina's reign of terror.  People accept her finally as they need someone to take charge with everyone else gone...Regina and Snow come back and claim the throne...Zelena says "Screw You"  and Regina and Snow have a reason to team up to try to take down the ugly green thing not realizing she is a better ruler then all of them

[Shanna Marie]

13 hours ago, companionenvy said:

Thinking about it, the thing that all of the most successful characters on the show have is that there is clear continuity between their backstory and their present. That doesn't mean those characters can't evolve in surprising ways; at the point at which we get our first Hook flashback, it is unexpected to see him as a straight arrow naval lieutenant, and there's of course a massive contrast between past villain Hook and reformed hero Hook. But through it all, he's a consistent character.

I think a lot of that is because he has a strong character trait that remains consistent through all his phases: he's emotionally impulsive. At his worst, he has a hot temper and a tendency to act out of rage. At his best, he goes all-in for love. We see both sides of this in the backstory with Milah and Rumple. We see his enthusiasm for Emma but also his rage when she doublecrosses him. It's his rage that drives him toward revenge with Rumple, but it's the impulse to honor the memory of Bae that gets him to turn his ship around and then offer it to help save Henry. It's that emotional impulse that turns him from upright naval officer to pirate, and it's also what makes him trade the Jolly Roger for the magic bean that will help him reach Emma. The rage makes him betray Ursula, but it's the positive impulse that makes him face up to her again to set things right. Both the rage and the love are key to his Dark One experiences. The rage impulse is what leads him to kill his father. When he's in full hero mode, he still has to fight the temper, but he's gained some wisdom in learning to deal with his worst impulses. It even works with Whook, where he gives up piracy and revenge to raise his daughter. The less successful bits of backstory are the ones that forget this trait. I could have imagined him losing his cool with the captain and getting in trouble that way before I imagined him getting drunk and gambling away all their money, and him killing David's father coldly rather than in a fit of rage doesn't mesh with anything else we've seen of his character.

As much as we mock Emma's WALLS, at least that trait was consistent for her.

On the other hand, I'm not sure I could come up with a defining trait for Snow. As many hope speeches as she gave, she also tended to be quite the pessimist when the plot needed her to be. The person who gave all those hope speeches wouldn't be the person who assumed her daughter would be a villain if she didn't put all the darkness into some other child. The person who stood up for her people wouldn't let the person who tormented her people go. The person who dove through a portal because she wasn't being separated from her daughter again wouldn't have outsourced dealing with her daughter to Hook. She's so all over the map in such a contradictory way that there's no actual character there. The only consistency is the actress, and I'd bet that if you just read the scripts, it would come across even more inconsistent.

David is a lot of the same way. I can't think of a defining trait. They said it was courage, but then they had him have to learn courage from someone else, not too long before all the story events. He agreed with the "heroes don't kill" idea, but he did kill without a qualm. He kept reversing positions on Hook, trusting him and even seeming to like him at times, but then hating him at the start of the annual Captain Charming episode.

[Camera One]

2 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

On the other hand, I'm not sure I could come up with a defining trait for Snow. As many hope speeches as she gave, she also tended to be quite the pessimist when the plot needed her to be. The person who gave all those hope speeches wouldn't be the person who assumed her daughter would be a villain if she didn't put all the darkness into some other child. The person who stood up for her people wouldn't let the person who tormented her people go. The person who dove through a portal because she wasn't being separated from her daughter again wouldn't have outsourced dealing with her daughter to Hook. She's so all over the map in such a contradictory way that there's no actual character there. The only consistency is the actress, and I'd bet that if you just read the scripts, it would come across even more inconsistent.

David is a lot of the same way. I can't think of a defining trait. They said it was courage, but then they had him have to learn courage from someone else, not too long before all the story events. He agreed with the "heroes don't kill" idea, but he did kill without a qualm. He kept reversing positions on Hook, trusting him and even seeming to like him at times, but then hating him at the start of the annual Captain Charming episode.

Snow made hope speeches but in many of the flashbacks, she was the one who was really discouraged and needed someone to help her see the positive (often David).  They also had her give up and just hand her heart over to The Evil Queen, or go to the diner to accept their impending deaths, or lock themselves up in prison during another Curse. 

On top of that, it was basically whiplash to have that "I don't want to be Mary Margaret anymore" pronouncement in 5B and then "I want to be Mary Margaret for the rest of my life" in 6A.  I really don't see how a team of writers can actually completely forget or ignore what they wrote the previous arc.

Snow and David's voices are so nebulous that it's almost impossible to figure out who's saying what if you look at a script without the names.  One says something and the other acts as the devil's advocate.  And this is supposed to be two core characters, one being a "strong" female lead.

Edited May 31, 2018 by Camera One

[KingOfHearts]

2 hours ago, Camera One said:

I really don't see how a team of writers can actually completely forget or ignore what they wrote the previous arc.

It's not like they're incapable. The writers remembered the "boy will be your undoing" prophecy from S2, Wish Rumple, etc. I do think these writers can provide consistency when they want to. The problem is that they're more interested in whatever piques their excitement for the given week. 

Completely random, but I doubt anyone will remember that Hook has a half-brother. Gideon turned out to be equally inconsequential. I don't understand why the writers add familial connects then proceed to forget they exist. 

4 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

As many hope speeches as she gave, she also tended to be quite the pessimist when the plot needed her to be.

Snow is a hollow tree. She puts up this front as a goddess of hope and optimism, but she has a poor understanding of her own philosophy. It's an ugly word, but she's often a hypocrite without even realizing it. To me, she's someone who desperately wants to appear as an image of perfection she can't possibly reach. Like Emma, she believes that if she isn't seen as a righteous hero, she has nothing to live for. Of course, this is all headcanon and was never explored on the show. The pieces are there but they're never explicitly stated.

Edited May 31, 2018 by KingOfHearts

[Rumsy4]

After the Underworld arc, the morality of the show became even more murky. Why do any of them care about being loved or seen a hero? If a person feels they have no unfinished business, they go to heaven, not matter if that person was a rapist or a mass murderer. Is there any religious system in the magical realms? Do the people of Agrabah go to the Greek version of afterlife when they die? If so, why? 

Other than Ariel, we haven't seen anyone make prayer or supplication to a god. What defines Zeus, Poseidon, and Hades as "gods"?

Edited May 31, 2018 by Rumsy4

[andromeda331]

7 minutes ago, KingOfHearts said:

Snow is a hollow tree. She puts up this front as a goddess of hope and optimism, but she has a poor understanding of her philosophy. It's an ugly word, but she's often a hypocrite without even realizing it. To me, she's someone who desperately wants to appear as an image of perfection she can't possibly reach. Like Emma, she believes that if she isn't seen as a righteous hero, she has nothing to live for. Of course, this is all headcanon and was never explored on the show. The pieces are there but they're never explicitly stated.

There was a lot they could have explored with her. Was the negativity how she really felt or was what she thought first because basically everything in her life always went wrong. Both of her parents were murdered, she ended up on the wrong end her stepmother's rage which for years she didn't even know why and later learned it was something that wasn't even her fault. She's had everything taken from her and lived on the run. Is she really hopeful person and optimistic or is she trying to live up to the ideals placed on her by her parents? Both were murdered which makes it even more important to her to try and live up to it or trying to make things be the way they would have been had both lived. Maybe she uses it to cover up her insecurity because she doesn't feel like she's doing as good of a job as they did as rulers.   

[andromeda331]

8 minutes ago, Rumsy4 said:

After the Underworld arc, the morality of the show became even more murky. Why do any of them care about being loved or seen a hero? If a person feels they have no unfinished business, they go to heaven, not matter if that person was a rapist or a mass murderer. Is there any religious system in the magical realms? Do the people of Agrabah go to the Greek version of afterlife when they die? If so, why? 

Other than Ariel, we haven't seen anyone make prayer or supplication to a god. What defines Zeus, Poseidon, and Hades as "gods"?

It really was. Why would anyone bother to be a good person after learning Cora got into Heaven? What would be the point then? How does say a farmer hear that and wonder why their bothering to grow food and not just go steal food instead? Why he's working so hard to sell crops when he could be out there doing whatever he wanted? Rob, steal, rape, kill and none if it matters?  Why bother doing things because its the right thing to do?  

[Camera One]

5 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

As many hope speeches as she gave, she also tended to be quite the pessimist when the plot needed her to be.

I was just thinking about this... when was the first "hope speech" that Snow gave?  I don't really remember any from Season 1. 

In the series finale episode, Snow referenced War Councils they've done before, but in the pilot, at that War Council, Snow was actually the one who said "There is no point" (in fighting back against Regina).  It was Charming who gave the rousing speech.  

So when did Snow become the go-to for empty hope speeches?  Was it that horrible speech in the Season 2 finale which kicked things off?  

In which case being saddled with hope speeches was a sign of the Writers' declining interest in her rather than an original defining feature of the character.

Edited May 31, 2018 by Camera One

[Free]

1 hour ago, Camera One said:

So when did Snow become the go-to for empty hope speeches?  Was it that horrible speech in the Season 2 finale which kicked things off?  

In which case being saddled with hope speeches was a sign of the Writers' declining interest in her rather than an original defining feature of the character.

S2 I think, back during the killing Cora/darkening her heart nonsense when she was reduced to being a spineless cheerleader for Regina who begged her to kill her for daring to protect her family, that was the point of no return.

[tennisgurl]

19 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

He kept reversing positions on Hook, trusting him and even seeming to like him at times, but then hating him at the start of the annual Captain Charming episode.

Yeah, I always found that to be a particularly annoying reset button. It would be Charming and Hook bonding and he realizes that Hook isnt a bad guy...only for all that to be thrown out for whenever the plot needs Charming to be all "ewwww icky pirate creep!" even if its totally erasing their character development. Which is always especially hilarious when known mass murder or Regina is standing right next to them. 

And its too bad, because both Snow and Charming did used to have more defined traits and personalities. Snow was a sweet sheltered girl who went through a lot quickly, and struggled with balancing her natural sweetness with a more tough side she developed. Charming also struggled with being a ruler, but less so, and seemed to find a decent balance between being good, and being a pragmatist. He was also very protective of his family, and his people. At least, thats what I remember, its been awhile since season one, so maybe the re-watch will show something different? But by around season three, basically everyone had lost their actual personalities, and just became cut out dolls spouting platitudes or plot points. And telling everyone the good news of their lord and savior Regina, of course. 

[Inquirer]

19 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

It really was. Why would anyone bother to be a good person after learning Cora got into Heaven? What would be the point then? How does say a farmer hear that and wonder why their bothering to grow food and not just go steal food instead? Why he's working so hard to sell crops when he could be out there doing whatever he wanted? Rob, steal, rape, kill and none if it matters?  Why bother doing things because its the right thing to do?  

Rumple said it in the series finale: "You don't do the right thing for a reward. You do it because it's right."  If you're only doing good to get into Heaven, you're doing it wrong. Srsly, the notion that "you shouldn't bother being a good person if you can get the reward of Heaven either way" is just as morally troubling as anything on the show, IMO.

Also, Cora was evidently tortured by Hades for a long time if a remark of his in 5x16 is to be believed, so it's not like she never suffered after death. And I don't think that Cora would have gotten into Heaven if she tried it any time before she actually did - she got in because she reconciled Zelena and Regina with herself and themselves, and also seemed repentant of all her evil, outright saying that if she does go to Hell than it's what she deserves after the things she's done (it was the same thing with Liam in 5x15).

Edited May 31, 2018 by Inquirer

[Shanna Marie]

20 hours ago, Rumsy4 said:

Other than Ariel, we haven't seen anyone make prayer or supplication to a god.

Hook didn't mention gods, but he did talk about wanting to die to be reunited with Milah in the afterlife (and then he didn't get to even see her when he did die), and he also talked about needing time to prepare his soul for death. That sounds like he had some kind of spiritual/religious beliefs, but anything beyond that would have required actual worldbuilding.

19 hours ago, Camera One said:

So when did Snow become the go-to for empty hope speeches?  Was it that horrible speech in the Season 2 finale which kicked things off?  

This is something to watch for in the rewatch, but my impression of season one Snow was that she was cynical and snarky, though still essentially a kind person. Her labeling of Charming was a bit of snark because she believed his actions were the exact opposite of charming, and it only became a pet name later (which they seem to have forgotten when they apparently put "pet name based on person's most obvious characteristic" on their checklist for Epic True Love). To some extent, Season One Snow has a lot in common with Hook with that mix of bitterness and capacity for love, only much less extreme. Their stories even track, somewhat. Hook was about the same age when his father abandoned him as Snow was when her mother died and Cora tempted her. Hook may have been about the same age when Liam died as Snow was when Regina murdered her father and kicked her out of the castle. Hook may have been about the same age when Milah was killed and he lost his hand as Snow was when the curse was cast. Which makes you wonder what Snow would have been like after the curse if A&E had got their way and killed off Charming in the pilot. Would Snow still have become besties with Regina, or would she have become the villain because she wanted revenge for her husband's death?

I imagine that they started doing the hope speeches because they had this vague idea of Snow White being some kind of sunny optimist, even though that's not really a part of either the fairy tale or the Disney movie. Yeah, she talks to birds and is sweet, but she's also a child. When they portrayed that version of Snow in season one, it was part of a joke, where she'd taken the potion that removed her capacity for love, so she was acting like Disney Snow, but twisted. And it was brilliant because it was like a satire of that image. And then later they seem to have decided that this was what Snow really was.

[Camera One]

3 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

Which makes you wonder what Snow would have been like after the curse if A&E had got their way and killed off Charming in the pilot. Would Snow still have become besties with Regina, or would she have become the villain because she wanted revenge for her husband's death?

Without Josh Dallas, the flashback story in Season 1 would also have been very different, unless they planned to bring him back for guest appearances.  They wouldn't have been able to do that much, or it would have been too sad to constantly see in flashback the husband she loved and lost.  

[tennisgurl]

It is actually interesting to think that the show planned on Charming not being a character in the Storeybrooke part of the show, and would probably just be there in flashbacks. It would make their romance incredibly sad, and if she still became Regina's cheerleader and BFF after that, it would be even more impossible to swallow. Its bad enough that Regina killed her father, tried to kill her, and killed and terrorized her people, but killing her husband? The father of her child? Her one true love? I just cant imagine they would have planned for a Regina/Snow BFF relationship while also having Regina's men killing her beloved husband? I mean, yeah knowing these guys, I bet they would, but I think it could even be too much for even the most loyal of the Regina fans. Maybe she could forgive her, but be friends, and telling her how great she is? It just never could have been.

[Free]

1 hour ago, tennisgurl said:

It is actually interesting to think that the show planned on Charming not being a character in the Storeybrooke part of the show, and would probably just be there in flashbacks. It would make their romance incredibly sad, and if she still became Regina's cheerleader and BFF after that, it would be even more impossible to swallow. Its bad enough that Regina killed her father, tried to kill her, and killed and terrorized her people, but killing her husband? The father of her child? Her one true love? I just cant imagine they would have planned for a Regina/Snow BFF relationship while also having Regina's men killing her beloved husband? I mean, yeah knowing these guys, I bet they would, but I think it could even be too much for even the most loyal of the Regina fans. Maybe she could forgive her, but be friends, and telling her how great she is? It just never could have been.

It's sad that it took network interference just to avoid that.

The writers wouldn't care, we've had countless examples of Regina straight up killing people left and right without anyone batting an eye and the same would've happened here.

[Shanna Marie]

2 hours ago, tennisgurl said:

I just cant imagine they would have planned for a Regina/Snow BFF relationship while also having Regina's men killing her beloved husband? I mean, yeah knowing these guys, I bet they would, but I think it could even be too much for even the most loyal of the Regina fans. Maybe she could forgive her, but be friends, and telling her how great she is? It just never could have been.

The other possibility would be turning Snow into the villain and Regina as the poor, persecuted victim. After all, it was Snow who got Daniel killed, so everything Regina did was actually Snow's fault, then Snow would be truly evil when she vowed revenge on Regina for Charming's death.

I wonder where in the process the network said they couldn't kill Prince Charming in the pilot. Was it during the pitch process, when the networks were like "the idea's interesting, but we think the audience might be turned off by killing Prince Charming in the pilot" and they had the good sense to revise before doing more pitching, or did they get pretty far into talks with ABC when someone told them they had to change things? And wasn't Mary Margaret going to be a nun initially? I guess they brought in Kathryn instead.

Really, I'd love the see the various versions of the pilot script and the pitch and how it changed along the way, and why. The way the series came across, I got the sense that their first version might have truly been about the Evil Queen being misunderstood, but then that failed and they had to come up with a heroine, so we got Emma, but then they wanted to kill Prince Charming, and then they changed that, but then they wanted to make Mary Margaret be a nun, and then they had to change that. And it was only after the first season was a success and they had a little more leeway that the writing abruptly shifted back to the misunderstood Evil Queen who's the true heroine.

[Camera One]

After watching the pilot, I was reminded of several things that I was expecting but never came to be.  One would think A&E would have rewatched the pilot before writing either of the series finales in Season 6 and 7.  

Firstly, way back when, I was sure the wolf would be explained.  But it was never addressed again.  Was the wolf related to Graham?  Was it a manifestation of the Savior clause in the Curse, making sure Emma stayed in Storybrooke?  The second was the "I can tell when anyone is lying" superpower.  That became a total joke, when it should and could have been Emma's "power".  Emma mentioned she was with a foster family until she was 3 and then they had their own kid and sent her back... I always assumed we would see that, but I don't think we ever did.  In the flashbacks, I loved the line "the animals are abuzz with the Queen's plans" but they never built on that.  Snow should have had the animals on her side.  That should have helped her as Bandit Snow.  I also expected more of Rumple "owning the town", as Granny put it.  All he owned was a pawnshop and collected everyone's rent.  They could have done more with that, and the town's anger at him should have been WAY greater after the Curse broke and Rumple shouldn't have been able to hide behind magic right away.

I also think they should and could have done more with Rumple's power over someone when he knows their name.  That was an offshoot of the fairy tale, but the pilot was their only real reference to it.  Who was that guard telling Snowing how to defend themselves with the Dark One, anyway?  This was the first instance of something I really hated - the "heroes" needing to go to Rumple for help.  What if Snow had ignored Rumple's "price" and didn't tell him Emma's name?  Did Rumple help Emma enough in Season 1 to justify his early "awakening"?  If Emma had stuck around, Regina could have baked her poisoned apple turnovers earlier with or without Emma becoming the Sheriff.  

Another weakness was the storybook - having Regina find/see it and give it back to Henry.  I think Regina should have found it later in the season.

I did think of Cleo in the first scene with Emma and the wheel locks.  

So Graham was the first to utter "Madame Mayor".

Why build an entire wardrobe with the magical tree, when a few pieces of the tree (in burned ash form) could open a portal?  They could have had enough tree material for a thousand portal trips.  

I don't understand why Mary Margaret linked Henry finding Emma, to giving Henry the storybook.

I did like that Emma's line about how she made a wish on her birthday and then Henry showed up.  Awake Regina knew the possible power of a wish.  I was able to NOT think about how everyone and their horrible green sister eventually got a birthday cupcake.

As others have said, this pilot episode implied the Enchanted Forest was filled with Happy Endings.  But really, it was an ultra depressing medieval place with zero justice and senseless death everywhere, with most people unhappy and making deals with opportunistic jerks like Rumple.

[CheshireCat]

12 minutes ago, Camera One said:

I also think they should and could have done more with Rumple's power over someone when he knows their name. 

I think they could have done a lot more with Rumple, period. After all, he was the mastermind behind it all and manipulated everyone to get what he wants. So, he was basically the villain they all had in common. I felt they never used that enough/explored that enough. At one point I started to wonder if they wanted or didn't want to let go of Rumple as the villain. They seemed to be clear of wanting to let go of Regina as a villain, but with Rumple they went back and forth and it drove me insane. I didn't feel like they wanted to keep us guessing, I felt like they didn't know themselves and I just wanted them to make up their minds. And then, in S4, it seems that Carlyle had wanted to work fewer hours, so we got to see less of Rumple and his story sort of went downhill.

I think it's a pity because if they had just kept Rumple as the villain, as this big great dark one that was part of the final battle, it probably wouldn't have felt like they didn't know what to do with the characters anymore once Regina had moved over to the good side. They wouldn't have had to bring in a ton of outside characters because they would still have had a deliciously evil character right in their midst that they could have spun the stories around. And Rumple could still have had a happy ending because he was really just a tortured soul as well and even villains can do the right thing very once in a while especially those who were once human.

 

12 minutes ago, Camera One said:

That was an offshoot of the fairy tale, but the pilot was their only real reference to it.  Who was that guard telling Snowing how to defend themselves with the Dark One, anyway?  This was the first instance of something I really hated - the "heroes" needing to go to Rumple for help.  What if Snow had ignored Rumple's "price" and didn't tell him Emma's name? 

Snow was supposed to be honest and pure and lead by example, so, I guess, she couldn't have made a deal and then not fulfill her end of it morally.

[Rumsy4]

1 hour ago, Camera One said:

I did think of Cleo in the first scene with Emma and the wheel locks. 

Me too. and I hated it that I did.

Quote

As others have said, this pilot episode implied the Enchanted Forest was filled with Happy Endings.  But really, it was an ultra depressing medieval place with zero justice and senseless death everywhere, with most people unhappy and making deals with opportunistic jerks like Rumple.

Seriously!! 

Edited June 2, 2018 by Rumsy4

[profdanglais]

Rumple's powers just needed to be defined, full stop. The Dark One was just too powerful in the end, like all the villains really, they had this strong magic and seemingly no limits on how they used it. so why did they just wait around for the heroes to foil their plans instead of just killing them? It's like they took lessons from the Batman villains. 

The name thing was taken directly from the actual fairy tale, but I think the tale itself didn't really elaborate on why Rumplestiltskin wanted the baby's name. There was so much they had to work with, and S1 Rumple was great, menacing and creepy but you still got the sense that he was manipulative because he needed help and couldn't see his plans through on his own. That would have been such an interesting limitation for his magic, if he couldn't act directly but had to coerce or bargain others into doing his dirty work. 

Did we ever find out how they got Rumple into that cell and why he couldn't escape it? I can't recall. 

Ultimately, I think what ruined Rumple as a villain was Belle. When they decided to make him the Beast they had to provide some reason for Belle to love him, so they came up with this "good heart" nonsense, which they then had to reconcile with his continued villainy (because Peak Rumple was a great villain and they didn't want to let that go) so we got this back-and-forth of is Rumple a villain or is he a hero. 

[Guest]

25 minutes ago, profdanglais said:

 That would have been such an interesting limitation for his magic, if he couldn't act directly but had to coerce or bargain others into doing his dirty work. 

At one point, I thought this was true.  I don't know if the show ever held this belief or I invented it in my head.  But magic had consequences and Rumple's approach to that was to make deals so he got power and someone else had to agree to take the consequence.

They really should have written "Rules on how magic works". 

Then they should have written and addendum that reminded them if that they broke those rules then they were creatively bankrupt and needed to just end the show.

[Camera One]

The conception of "The Dark One Curse" and to what extent it affected Rumple's actions was nebulous for a long time, so it excused Belle's assertions that deep down, he was a good man.  The 5A arc basically told us that Rumple could have resisted it and there was no reason for a lot of the minor atrocities he committed.  After that arc, the flimsy reasons for Belle sticking by him evaporated.

[KingOfHearts]

14 hours ago, Camera One said:

Was the wolf related to Graham? 

I thought it was Graham's wolf mom/dad. But it turned up again in 4x19 when Emma went to go find Lily, so who knows.

Quote

As others have said, this pilot episode implied the Enchanted Forest was filled with Happy Endings.  But really, it was an ultra depressing medieval place with zero justice and senseless death everywhere, with most people unhappy and making deals with opportunistic jerks like Rumple.

Westeros has more decency. 

Edited June 2, 2018 by KingOfHearts

[Shanna Marie]

16 hours ago, Camera One said:

I also think they should and could have done more with Rumple's power over someone when he knows their name.  That was an offshoot of the fairy tale, but the pilot was their only real reference to it.

That's also something that comes from folklore, where the fae (and it's implied in some versions of the fairy tale that Rumpelstiltskin is some kind of fae creature) have power over a being once they know their name, but also they fear others will have power over them once they know their name, so they're very reluctant to share their names. That's why it would have been unlikely for anyone to know Rumpelstiltskin's name, but once the miller's daughter did, she had power over him. I'm still a little irked that they didn't use this when they actually did the Rumpelstiltskin story with Cora as the miller's daughter. We hadn't seen a lot of Rumple in the time period between him becoming Dark One and Cora's era, so they could have played it out like the fairy tale, with his real name being unknown. It would have made sense for him to put his Rumple identity behind him, since "Rumple" was a weak coward nobody, and just be known as the Dark One. It would have shown how clever and tricky Cora was if she was able to figure out his name, and that was part of what attracted him to her, or if she was getting romantic with him as a way of getting his name.

16 hours ago, Camera One said:

As others have said, this pilot episode implied the Enchanted Forest was filled with Happy Endings.  But really, it was an ultra depressing medieval place with zero justice and senseless death everywhere, with most people unhappy and making deals with opportunistic jerks like Rumple.

Yeah, it wasn't exactly a place where villains don't get happy endings, given that Regina was living in a castle and ruling a kingdom. Up until the Charmings caught him (and then only because he actually kind of wanted to be caught before the curse), Rumple had lived a century or so in a castle and had great power over everyone. Cora lived as a princess for years. The villains were doing pretty well. It's not as though every time a villain arose, they were quickly foiled due to some bizarre stroke of luck.

[Camera One]

I was reading an old interview, and I just re-read a few quotes I had forgotten: 

Quote

KITSIS: I would say that this is a show about hope. As we will see in this Sunday night’s premiere, although it seems Gideon wants to kill Emma, he is having the effect of bringing out the best in Rumple, and bringing Rumple and Belle closer together. Sometimes a shared goal can remind us of who we really want to be.

Uh, too bad he's trying KILL an innocent person, but at least it brings Rumple and Belle closer.  LOL, what type of reasoning is this?

Quote

KITSIS: Like everything we do, hopefully it’s not what it appears. Tiger Lily and her backstory and why she appears, we think is a fun twist on what people are expecting. She’s going to come into the story in a couple of unexpected ways, but she’s going to have a big part in the second half of the season.

I seriously cannot remember anything significant that Tiger Lily did.

Quote

At the start of these episode, Snow is still sleeping. When might that change, and what role will she play, in these remaining episodes?

KITSIS: Snow is the heart of the show. We’ve known, since the beginning, that the belief in a happy ending can be very powerful. Her absence and David not waking her up is going to set him down a dark road to find out who killed his dad.

None of these questions are answered.  He's asked what role she plays and he talks about her absence.  Yeah, that's the "heart" of the show right there.

And let's finish off with this one, which requires no comment:

Quote

KITSIS: Even when the show is at its darkest or most intense, we always find the hope and we always find the fun. The entire show started with a wedding that was interrupted by the Queen, and today, they’re all best friends. That’s what we do.

[Inquirer]

On 6/1/2018 at 4:44 PM, Shanna Marie said:

Really, I'd love the see the various versions of the pilot script and the pitch and how it changed along the way, and why. The way the series came across, I got the sense that their first version might have truly been about the Evil Queen being misunderstood, but then that failed and they had to come up with a heroine, so we got Emma, but then they wanted to kill Prince Charming, and then they changed that, but then they wanted to make Mary Margaret be a nun, and then they had to change that. And it was only after the first season was a success and they had a little more leeway that the writing abruptly shifted back to the misunderstood Evil Queen who's the true heroine.

There was an early version of the pilot put online where Emma was named "Anna", and a big change is that Mayor Mills does not have the same persona that the Evil Queen does - she's shown as a nicer, more relatable person, with A&E (in their usual writing style where they tell us how we should be feeling) write "unlike her fairy tale counterpart, we find that we REALLY LIKE THIS WOMAN."  Basically, she'd be more like how Fiona portrayed herself as the Mayor in "The Final Battle".  Whether this was just an act, a cursed personality, or if it was meant to be Regina's "true self" and the Evil Queen persona was just a false front all along thus making her a misunderstood heroine, I do not know.

Quote

Did we ever find out how they got Rumple into that cell and why he couldn't escape it? I can't recall. 

They got him into it when Cinderella tricked him into paralyzing himself with Squid Ink (or at least, she thought she did), and he couldn't escape because it was made from magic-restricting materials.  Of course, we later learn that he COULD have escaped it because he had Squid Ink hidden on him that could've dissolved the bars, but he didn't because he actually wanted to be in that cell, and thus Team Princess was able to use the Squid Ink to dissolve the bars instead when Cora and Hook had them trapped there.

Quote

Uh, too bad he's trying KILL an innocent person, but at least it brings Rumple and Belle closer.  LOL, what type of reasoning is this?

Also, why should we feel happy that Belle is being brought back together with her abusive husband? And no, it does NOT "bring out the best in Rumple" since he ends up betraying everyone and joining his mother to help cast the Dark Curse.  Which he is then nonsensically absolved of just because he turns on her after she doesn't live up to her end of the bargain, and does something solely for the benefit of his own wife and kid, not for anyone else he's harmed.

Quote

I seriously cannot remember anything significant that Tiger Lily did.

Tiger Lily's main significance was inadvertently causing Fiona to become the Black Fairy because she was a dumbass.

Also, her origin was literally a carbon-copy of Tinker Bell's: was once a fairy, but now isn't and lives in Neverland. So "unexpected".

Quote

Yeah, that's the "heart" of the show right there.

A&E have said that Snow, Emma, Regina and Henry are "the hearts of the show" at various points. So, which is it, guys? It can only have one heart.

Quote

Even when the show is at its darkest or most intense, we always find the hope and we always find the fun. The entire show started with a wedding that was interrupted by the Queen, and today, they’re all best friends. That’s what we do.

The first part of that statement is an insultingly blatant lie. I can name a number of character deaths, from Graham's and onward, where they never "found the hope and the fun" afterward.  And yeah, they find it "hopeful and fun" that now everyone is best friends with the person who caused so much irreparable harm on their lives. Of course.

Edited June 3, 2018 by Inquirer

[Camera One]

8 minutes ago, Inquirer said:

 write "unlike her fairy tale counterpart, we find that we REALLY LIKE THIS WOMAN."  

Oh, I really laughed out loud at this one.