A Thread for All Seasons: OUaT Across All Realms

[Guest]

What would have improved the pixie dust reveal is if more than one person had that tattoo. If Robin is a fake out, they could still make 4A work and have Regina fall for Robin and lose him to Marian's return (and no silly Zelena reveal!), but have her learn that the tattoo is something all members of the Royal Roundtable of Random Storybook Heroes have and Robin was not in fact her fated soulmate. Robin could be less of a jackass, Regina retains her self-respect, Marian is not dead and still awesome and someone whose wife had not been murdered by Regina in a different timeline could be her new love interest.

 

I was so sure that it was a fake out and all of King Richard the Lionheart's men had that tattoo.  As much as I rag on Regina, what I really want is for her to have a love interest that challenges her. I thought King Richard was it.  In my mind, Regina's love story would be like the The War of the Roses (Douglas/Turner).  It would end badly, but what an entertaining ride.

[Shanna Marie]

I've thought since the pixie dust thing and the official Outlaw Queen start, that the most interesting thing that could happen with the Robin/Regina relationship would be for them to discover that since Tink stole the pixie dust, it didn't work properly. It would open the relationship up to all of the issues you mentioned, and give the show a chance to rebuild the relationship in a more organic way.

I think in general that a predetermined outcome for any story element is a really, really bad idea unless there's some kind of twist to it, like a misinterpreted prophecy or the things done to try to prevent a prophecy from coming about turning out to be what made the prophecy happen. If it's just that they're told a thing will come about or is true ... and then it comes about or it's true, that's just boring.

 

And so it appearing that the pixie dust ordained Robin as Regina's soulmate, and then later they meet again, and presto, they really are (apparently) soulmates is just weak plotting, no matter how many random obstacles they throw in the way and then remove. It only becomes interesting if it turns out that the pixie dust was wrong or Regina misinterpreted the tattoo or didn't realize there was more than one man in that tavern with that tattoo.

 

That's another reason I hate the Author plot and all this villains and heroes nonsense. It makes for a boring story if it's a given fact that villains can't get a happy ending or that heroes always win, and it's too easy an out to have someone who can change the outcome with the stroke of a pen. The outcome should be solely determined by the actions of the characters themselves.

[Zuleikha]

It only becomes interesting if it turns out that the pixie dust was wrong or Regina misinterpreted the tattoo or didn't realize there was more than one man in that tavern with that tattoo.

I'm still hoping for a tattoo fake out. The writers have emphasized at least once that Regina never saw the man's face. I know it's unlikely, but I've been in fandom for a long time. I'm experienced at hoping against all odds and logic. :)

[Serena]

For some reason (don't ask me why), I'm also rooting for a King for Regina's ultimate endgame (yes, I know it's gonna be Robin). Not necessarily King Richard, I'd be okay with King Arthur too. That would be an iconic character who doesn't actually have a "soulmate" like Robin does (I don't count his wife, because she's with Lancelot - and hey, they could have even done the married man cheating storyline with the twist that the wife cheated first and is in love with another). Maybe the reason Arthur can't leave his wife is not some sort of "code", but because Camelot would become unstable. As a plus, Arthur wouldn't live in the woods (still not buying Regina would be into the roughing it lifestyle) AND Arthur could have an actual kingdom to run and shit to do so they woulnd't need to add a new character to the regular cast. They could live separately because they each have things to do, then in the series finale when Henry is grown and off to college Regina can join him in Camelot. 

 

I don't know why I just wrote a fanfiction about a character I don't even like.

Edited April 23, 2015 by Serena

[FurryFury]

and hey, they could have even done the married man cheating storyline with the twist that the wife cheated first and is in love with another)

 

So, basically, Grey's Anatomy.

 

Not sure I'd want King Arthur for Regina, I just don't see anything in common there, just like with Robin Hood. 

I'd prefer an actual wizard. They'll need someone to replace Rumple eventually, after all - bring back Jafar, write a hot Merlin, make Frollo a wizard, I dunno.There really are so many interesting ideas over Robin.

[stealinghome]

Lost Girl and The New Neverland flashbacks can both take a hike. I'm fine with Ariel. If it were the only Snow vs. Regina flashback of the arc, it would have been less overdone.

No way--The New Neverland is one of my favorite all-time episodes. Don't touch a hair on its precious head. :) Agree that I like the Ariel flashbacks--Ariel shanking Regina with a salad trident is always, ALWAYS worth the price of admission. Do agree that we could have dropped the Lost Girl flashbacks, though. They kind of contribute to the "Snow is an awful ruler" tendency the show has. (Though I wouldn't have substituted Emma flashbacks...I don't really care about Emma's backstory, sorry.)

 

I'm thinking this show could use an executive showrunner. The creators could still run all the ideas and be the headwriters, but someone more removed from things could keep things from getting so convoluted and stop the shiny new toy syndrome. We know the head of creative at Disney was a part of 4A and note that the Frozen portion and for the most part everything else was fairly organized. Minor plots were dropped or not used (Will), but the overarching story was pretty cohesive. Contrasted with the chaotic nature of 4B, it seems that perhaps having someone else at the helm providing a bit more direction helped immensely.

I have said for YEARS that TPTB would be well-served to basically put a watchdog on Adam and Eddie. A&E are actually quite good in coming up with the Big Ideas, but it's when they have to get more specific than "I know! We'll cast a curse that takes everyone back to Storybrooke, only they won't remember the Missing Year!" that things fall apart...horribly. If you had someone there forcing them to just execute better and plan better, this show would be 500% better.

 

Not sure I'd want King Arthur for Regina, I just don't see anything in common there, just like with Robin Hood.

Agreed. King Arthur, much like Robin Hood, is supposed to be all anti-tyranny and all people are equal and stand up for the right thing to do and whatnot. It would be just as illogical for King Arthur to get with a mass murderer as it is for Robin Hood to be with someone who stood for everything he opposes.

[YaddaYadda]

It would be just as illogical for King Arthur to get with a mass murderer as it is for Robin Hood to be with someone who stood for everything he opposes.

 

Although, Robin is just a shell of a person.  His principles and code are completely manufactured and he pulls that stuff out of his ass to justify weird stuff.  My code says I have to stay with my wife, my code says, I have to break into a store to help Gold, my code says...dude, fuck your code.  Hey, I know, new ship, Robin and code.

 

Regina would be more in the Uther Pendragon category.  Them, I could see.  Both a tad crazy, both with the whole mantra of the end justifies the means, he doesn't give a shit, she doesn't give a shit...they wouldn't listen to each other, they would probably yell and scream at each other.  She would throw things at his head, he would leave the room and slam the door behind him to make his point.  It would be a volatile, but awesome relationship where neither characters would have to change too much for the other.

[FurryFury]

Nah, if anyone would be with Uther, it's Zelena. They are both really love that "rape by fraud" trope. Match made in hell. 

[YaddaYadda]

Oh, those Mills sisters!  They have so much more in common than they care to acknowledge.

[Guest]

Regina would be more in the Uther Pendragon category.  

 

Nope.  Regina would be Morgana le Fay, one time apprentice to Rumpel's Merlin.

[jhlipton]

I'm thinking this show could use an executive showrunner. The creators could still run all the ideas and be the headwriters, but someone more removed from things could keep things from getting so convoluted and stop the shiny new toy syndrome. We know the head of creative at Disney was a part of 4A and note that the Frozen portion and for the most part everything else was fairly organized. Minor plots were dropped or not used (Will), but the overarching story was pretty cohesive. Contrasted with the chaotic nature of 4B, it seems that perhaps having someone else at the helm providing a bit more direction helped immensely.

 

That's why I voted for Arendelle in the poll -- 4A was one of the best half-seasons, and the Frozen characters were he best part.

 

====================================================

 

I'm not sure where this goes, so I'm going to hang it here...

So I'm thinking of a timeline for The Evil Cleavage:

 

Ursula has her run-in with dad and loses her singing voice.

Cruella murders a bunch of people and then is stopped by The Author

Both somehow come to the Enchanted Forest.  How?  Why?

 

Rumple brings the three together for a mission -- they know of each other but only have disdain for each other.  (Note Rumple -- the most powerful wizard ever -- needing these three is Just Plain Dumb)

The mission makes them decide to band together

 

They get kidnap Belle to get the Gauntlet from Rumple and later are forced to give it back

 

Mal has her egg-baby; the EB, Cruella and Ursula fall through the portal

 

The Author is locked in the book (how?)

 

Rumple has a heart attack, but gets better, finds Ursula (how?) and crashes at her place (why does she let him?)

Rumple and Ursula find Cruella (how?) and convince her to come with them.  NOTE: Cruella knows the Author but doesn't tell any of the gang anything about him.

 

How does this timeline make ANY sense????

Edited April 25, 2015 by jhlipton

[MostlyC]

Hello Once Upon a Timesters!

 

This is just a nudge to remind that is the thread for All seasons, and All places.  Not Just Season 4.  In fact, there are character threads, and episode topics (for season 4).

 

Let us try not to "Cross the Streams" while we cross over into different OUAT places and discuss all the seasons..

 

 

 

 

Great.  I just crossed the streams by going off topic to quote Ghost Busters while still talking about UOAT.  Pardon me while I go warn myself.

[Camera One]

I was rewatching "Enter the Dragon" and "Poor Unfortunate Souls" with my friend who's back in town.  These episodes aired relatively recently, but I went "huh?" a lot.  Like when Gold told the Queens that they were going to start a war and everyone in Storybrooke will need to choose sides.  What happened with that?  Regina did a sleeping spell on Gepetto and Pinocchio in that episode, and yet we have Maleficent a few episodes later touting how useful she was in putting the town to sleep, so it's nothing special.  Cruella can enchant a car to drive itself?  Are cars animals now?  Why were they even riding around in a car when they could poof?  The whole transportation issue of the villains, especially Rumple, were just annoying overall.  Like why were he, Maleficent and Regina walking from the Sorcerer's mansion?  Why was he telling Regina to go find the papers, when he could poof over with her to the loft, freeze everyone, and get that page immediately?  Ursula told Hook that "The Author can't just change things in this world because he didn't give everyone their happy endings here. Emma did. She's the savior.  And as long as there's a savior, The Author can't give the villains what they really want."  But Emma didn't give everyone their happy endings.  She just broke the Curse and gave everyone their true memories/identities back in Season 1.  And what does that have to do with the Author writing the villains their own happy endings?  Emma has the copyright on that in this world?  Why was the Author able to write whatever he wanted in Cruella's world?  

Edited April 26, 2015 by Camera One

[KingOfHearts]

I'm just gonna say it... no matter what happens in the finale, 2B is better than 4B. 2B was main-character-focused, the plot was more centered, the flashbacks were more interesting, the character development went further, and even the horrible pacing was superior. It didn't go off in totally other shows to tell its tale. (Except for the August episode which will not be named.) It knew where it was going, and most importantly it still felt like Once. The spirit of the original premise was still there underneath everything. Now it's not even recognizable.

 

Back to my different shows comment, it really does feel like four different TV shows going on at once. There's Rumple's Angels, Zelena in the Hood, Lily's Crazy Life, and then the Charming Family Scandal. Don't forget the made-for-television movie, Running with the DeVil. I did not sign up for this.

[Guest]

You know what is weird about 4B.  In the past, Grumpy et. all have been 'kill the outsider' every time some random person shows up in town before they have even done anything nefarious.  Now they've let in Cruella and Ursala and nothing.  It stretches incredulity to think the townsfolk that have been turned into flying monkeys are going to be ok with her coming back because she's pregnant.  Robin is not part enough of the community to overcome that. 

 

If Emma doesn't tell them that pregnant women get locked up all the time I call shenanigans.

[Mathius]

I'm just gonna say it... no matter what happens in the finale, 2B is better than 4B. 2B was main-character-focused, the plot was more centered, the flashbacks were more interesting, the character development went further, and even the horrible pacing was superior. It didn't go off in totally other shows to tell its tale. (Except for the August episode which will not be named.) It knew where it was going, and most importantly it still felt like Once. The spirit of the original premise was still there underneath everything. Now it's not even recognizable.

Quoted for truth.

It's sad that 2B has been topped in badness so much that it looks GOOD by comparison!

Edited April 27, 2015 by Mathius

[Shanna Marie]

It is sad that I'm actually getting nostalgic for season 2.

 

At least that season was just the Regina Mary Sue effect kicking in, with poor characterization for her, unrealistic reactions from everyone else, and wonky morality, plus the mostly harmless Home Office plot (it was so sketchy and brief that it didn't affect the show too badly and mostly amounted to a way to move things into position for Neverland). This is a total disintegration, with a side of retcon and plot holes you could sail an armada through.

 

For instance, what happened to Lily when the curse was reversed? The way it was presented mid-season 3 was that everyone from the fairy tale world got sent home when the curse was reversed, whether or not they were brought by the curse. Hook and Neal had to go, even though they had nothing to do with the curse and weren't affected by it. At the same time, they said that Ashley's baby would have gone back because it was conceived in the fairy tale world, even if it was born in Storybrooke. That would suggest that everyone from the fairy tale world -- including Lily, Cruella, and Ursula -- should have been sent back, wherever they were. If it was merely a case of being in Storybrooke, then couldn't Hook and Neal have piled into the bug and left town with Emma? Or if the key was Storybrooke being "undone" so Emma wouldn't remember them, why couldn't they have jumped on the Jolly Roger, sailed outside Storybrooke waters, and escaped, and then Neal could have run into Emma elsewhere, not as Rumpelstiltskin's son but as Neal, Henry's father?

 

And, you know, that would have made for a really, really cool flashback that would have neatly paralleled Emma's experience if a woman who grew up in our world suddenly found herself in a world where magic existed, and that was how she learned what had happened -- and then suddenly she was sucked back to Storybrooke. Or better, she was outside curse 2, so finding Lily required a quest to the other world, not just heading out of town.

[LizaD]

We've got enough of a sample size to say the writers' Woegina Mary Sue fanfiction sucks ass. It's because they go into straight up fanfiction mode anytime they center a plot around her that is to blame for the suckery, regardless of whether she's actually driving the plot or not. None of the "heroes" ever drive plot. And now that Woegina's all hero-ing she's not really doing anything but it's still about her. She's the one with the most screentime, most centrics and LP did the most PR for the show this half-season.  Let's take a look:

 

2B: The Greatest Victim Story Ever Told-The one in which lasagna is rejected making Woegina the biggest victim ever and Snow's Dark Heart-cause heroes suck ass

3B: The Greatest Light Magic Ever-The one in which Woegina becomes a hero and Snow's dark curse and everyone else is useless-cause heroes suck ass

4B: Title pending-But the one in which Woegina the hero/victim searches for her happy ending and Snowing's Dark Deed and Emma's Dark Heart cause heroes, besides Woegina the hero-victim, suck ass

 

All of their Woegina arcs have 1 and ONLY 1 theme: heroes vs villains and that's their most problematic area because their morality is just plain fucked up and dishonest. They have never told an honest story, outside of S1, when they get on their soapboxes and try to be all deep about good vs. evil.

 

None of the other arcs, which are not Woegina focused, deal heavily with good vs evil even though a villain figures most prominently in them and drives most of the action. 3A had Pan but rather than direct good vs evil it was bout abandonment and parental issues. 4A had Ingrid but it was more about family acceptance and loving yourself than good vs evil. And that arc had the word "monster" repeated a million times each episode and it still isn't heavy handed on the good vs evil stuff. 2A introduced Hook and Cora and it still didn't have that theme. The element was there of course but it was in an organic way that came about from the stories going on. It wasn't THE actual story like in the "B's" arcs where it's so ham-fisted.

[stealinghome]

I'm just gonna say it... no matter what happens in the finale, 2B is better than 4B. 2B was main-character-focused, the plot was more centered, the flashbacks were more interesting, the character development went further, and even the horrible pacing was superior. It didn't go off in totally other shows to tell its tale. (Except for the August episode which will not be named.) It knew where it was going, and most importantly it still felt like Once. The spirit of the original premise was still there underneath everything. Now it's not even recognizable.

Yes. For me the key difference is: while the execution was awful (sometimes beyond awful), 2B and 3B had big ideas that were good in theory. The concepts and major storylines behind those halves were mostly solid, it was just the execution that was problematic. Whereas the ideas behind 4B are just utter shit. The show could be executing them wonderfully (haha I just made myself crack up), and this half would still blow because the ideas behind major storyarcs are terrible. Like "how does ABC pay people money for this???" terrible.

 

Also, LizaD, your posts literally never fail to make me smile. :)

Edited April 27, 2015 by stealinghome

[Rumsy4]

Whereas the ideas behind 4B are just utter shit. The show could be executing them wonderfully (haha I just made myself crack up), and this half would still blow because the ideas behind major storyarcs are terrible. 

 

Exactly! The whole basis of this arc--that Rumple wants to corrupt Emma because she has the greatest potential for darkness--doesn't hold water, considering Snow and Charming cast a spell to remove that potential from her in utero (!). Add to that, Emma has never been portrayed as the type who always did the Right Thing, or was the epitome of goodness. Besides, they have now backpedalled on their favorite axiom that "evil isn't born--it is made". We have characters acting OOC, and some of them outright ruined. Main characters are treated as props, while the random villain of the week gets to chew the scene.  And there is very little "lightness" to balance out all the heavy stuff. 4B feels like an incoherent mess.

[scarynikki12]

I think what the show is trying to prove with Lily's dark influence would work better if she had negative fallout from her actions, no matter how innocent.  Why not have her on the run because she made her parents dinner for their anniversary but accidentally caused a fire that quickly spread and her parents ended up in the hospital to be treated for burns and smoke inhalation?  I could see a teenager being so traumatized by such an event that she runs away.  Or, just have a bunch of examples of bad luck throughout her childhood that increase in severity until she's convinced that her family is in danger by being around her.  The final straw could even be that a seemingly minor accident causes the death of one of her parents or a sibling.  Then, upon learning about magic, the Curse, and what the Charmings did, it would make all the sense in the world for her to lose it and want revenge.  Say she did accidentally cause the death of her parents.  I would feel a lot of sympathy and understanding if she believed that they would be alive today had the Charmings not imbued her with guaranteed darkness.  Logically, they may very well have died from the same accident but learning that she was magically disposed to be unlucky and have bad results from her choices?  I can easily see such a person going dark.  It could even parallel Emma's journey to darkness as both would be coming from a place of love.  Lily could give into the darkness while Emma finds away to resist and figure out a way to stop her without killing her (since heroes never kill and all that). 

 

I still don't like the current trend of Emma and/or Snow calling out Regina when they're in a somewhat altered state of mind.  Snow stood up for her ten year old self under the influence of the Shattered Sight spell but has no backbone when unaffected by magic.  Emma calls out Regina for holding what has to be a 50ish year grudge against ten year old Snow for Cora's actions (the Curse was 28 years long and I think Snow was in her late twenties when it was cast, with Regina being unaffected, so she held that grudge a very long time) and points out that Regina planned to go to New York and attack Zelena much like Emma did with that guy at Lily's old apartment yet both times Emma's clearly shown to not be in her right state of mind.  I wouldn't be surprised if we do see Emma bring up Regina burning Snow at the stake before she returns from her Skywalker cosplay, and then none of this will ever get mentioned again.  I'd much rather have seen Snow and Emma be allowed to rant and rave at Regina for everything she's done, getting it out of their systems, and then forgiving her rather than putting them under spells or going dark before they're allowed to acknowledge it.

[Mari]

I still don't like the current trend of Emma and/or Snow calling out Regina when they're in a somewhat altered state of mind . . . I'd much rather have seen Snow and Emma be allowed to rant and rave at Regina for everything she's done, getting it out of their systems, and then forgiving her rather than putting them under spells or going dark before they're allowed to acknowledge it.

I completely agree with you.  However, the impression I have is that Snow and Emma's acknowledgement is mean to be proof they are darkened;  if they weren't, they would automatically forgive and forget.  I'm not so sure we're supposed to cheer them standing up for themselves.  I think we're supposed to see it as them haranguing poor, reformed Regina.

[Shanna Marie]

Logically, they may very well have died from the same accident but learning that she was magically disposed to be unlucky and have bad results from her choices?

One problem with this whole arc is how they don't seem to have truly defined "darkness." With Lily, they treat it like bad luck -- no matter what choice she makes, it turns out to be the wrong one that gets her into a bad situation. It's bad fortune rather than real darkness.

 

I would consider darkness to be more like Rumple -- a selfishness so intense that it's all-consuming, so that he doesn't care what happens to anyone but himself and killing people doesn't give him so much as a twinge. In fact, it's fun. He'd shoot his own mother to get what he wants. He'd burn the town down in order to destroy a document that might inconvenience him. He wants power above all, and he doesn't care what he has to do or who he has to hurt to get it.

 

Or like Regina -- slaughter a whole village and laugh about it because they didn't love her. Be so twisted that instead of killing her enemies, she instead curses them to a life of misery that she gets to watch. Or Maleficent, inflicting curses on innocent people she doesn't even know just to punish the parents of one of them for some wrong we still don't know about (and probably never will because they don't seem interested in telling the part of the story where Maleficent is a villain) or leveling a village or two to make her nest.

 

If Lily were really dark, she wouldn't just be a spoiled brat screwup whose bad decisions always bite her in the ass. She'd be the kind of kid who'd pull wings off flies, throw rocks at cats, and bully other kids, then run home to her rich father in tears and convince him that they were the ones tormenting her so he'd come up to the school with his lawyer. She'd gaslight other kids until she almost had them convinced that they really were the ones tormenting her. She'd psychologically torture the weaker kids until their self esteem was utterly destroyed. She'd turn her parents against each other subtly until their marriage was in shambles, and then she'd enjoy the custody battle in which they'd both try to curry her favor against the other parent.

 

That would be the opposite of what we've seen in Emma, which is that she has a backbone that makes her stand up for what's right, even when it hurts her. She hates hurting other people and feels responsible for making their lives better. She was probably the kid in foster care who looked after the younger, weaker kids and hated feeling like a burden on her foster parents. She's so full of love, so capable of love, that one of the tragedies of her childhood was not having anyone she could bestow that love on. She thinks of others before herself. When she gets angry, it's about how other people are treated, not how she's treated. She's currently mad at her parents because they did something awful to an innocent child, not so much because of their lies to her.

 

Snow and Charming were warned about darkness, not bad fortune or bad luck or even bad decision making ability.

[Camera One]

As you said, the concept of "darkness" initially seemed to be referring to good vs evil.  But from the two teenage flashbacks, "darkness" became running away from home, stealing and getting in with the wrong crowd.  Now I'm imagining a high-school assembly where the principal implores the students to shun giving in to their dark side.  Even if darkness = bad decisions, we also saw no evidence that Lily's decision-making ability improved when she was with Young Emma.  

Edited April 28, 2015 by Camera One

[Rumsy4]

From the episode thread:

 

It's such a ridiculous dichotomy where the villains always deserve second chances even when not really demonstrating change or remorse, but the heroes are vilified for one action and that villainy is such that they cannot ever achieve grace despite endless remorse and efforts to change.

 

One of the worst moments (and there were many) in the 3B episode Bleeding Through was Regina calling Snow out as Cora's murderer, and... nobody responds. They all look embarrassed and remain silent. Regina throwing that word out is understandable, as she seldom forgets real or imaginary wrongs people have done to her. But there's no "That's enough, Regina," from either Charming or Emma. 

 

Snow's murder of Cora is still repeatedly brought up, but has anybody mentioned Regina's murder of Snow's father, like ever? I'm not saying that these people should accuse each other all the time, but the repeated badgering of the "good guys'" is wearing me down. I literally cringe every time Emma says she pushed Lily away, or when Snow's dark spot is mentioned. If Regina's crimes were brought up as many times, it would look even more ridiculous that she thinks she deserves a Happy Ending, and that Emma and Snow are pandering to her. 

 

What Snow and Charming did to Mal's baby was really bad, but what about Mal's own actions? What restitution has she made for cursing Aurora and her mother, or all the innocents she incinerated? She will soon be reunited with her daughter and presumably go off to have her Happy Ending. But what about all her victims? This is just disingenuous storytelling.

Edited April 28, 2015 by Rumsy4

[KingOfHearts]

 

One of the worst moments (and there were many) in the 3B episode Bleeding Through was Regina calling Snow out as Cora's murderer, and... nobody responds.

Didn't she just state that to explain how the seance worked, though? I didn't sense spite in her voice. Probably just my interpretation.

Edited April 28, 2015 by KingOfHearts

[Camera One]

Yes, but she said it with particular glee and was clearly needling Snow.  

[Mathius]

I literally cringe every time Emma says she pushed Lily away

As I said before, Emma would have been correct if 4x05 was all there was, but this additional piece of retconned backstory in 4x19 makes the whole thing ridiculous as it makes it look more like Lily pushed Emma away, rather than the other way around.

[Camera One]

I guess the writers meant that Lily did not intentionally try to push Emma away (eg. she intended the stolen vacation money to sustain her and Emma living together), while Emma did blatantly reject Lily.

[jhlipton]

Except for the August episode which will not be named.

 

Is that the one where the "ancient and powerful dragon" gets killed by Tamara?  @ years later and I'm still rolling my eyes over that.

 

Snow's murder of Cora is still repeatedly brought up, but has anybody mentioned Regina's murder of Snow's father, like ever?

Heck, just one or two episodes (at most), Regina and Cora murdered Johanna just to spite Snow.  I guess we're not supposed to remember that either.

[YaddaYadda]

As I said before, Emma would have been correct if 4x05 was all there was, but this additional piece of retconned backstory in 4x19 makes the whole thing ridiculous as it makes it look more like Lily pushed Emma away, rather than the other way around.

 

I agree, but I think that this comes from two things.  Elsa called Emma prickly and then in 4x13, Emma told Hook that she tended to just see the worst in people because she's been let down so often during her childhood.  I can see Emma feeling like she pushed Lily away based on her reactions which were absolutely legitimate.  I can sort of see her going back to that time and being like well, I pushed her away because I'm prickly and I saw the worst in her instead of trying to see the best in her,

[KingOfHearts]

Taking the core characters vs. new characters conversation from the Ratings thread...

 

Once does best when it mixes one-offs with core characters. The key is keeping side stories relevant to the main storyline. For example, S1 we had Hansel and Gretel. The flashbacks explored a little bit of Regina's taste for children, and the present gave us deep insight into Emma's foster childhood. Not only that, but the episode also took the time to even show a fraction of Emma's relationship with Neal. The writers didn't abandoned the Storybrooke characters to show us how awesome the blind witch's cottage looked.

 

Another example is in 2A. We were shown Hook, Lancelot, and Dr. Frankenstein. Hook explained a major development in Rumple's life and later became a main character. Lancelot assisted in Snowing's wedding and even Emma's birth. We didn't go to Camelot or get Lancelot's life story - we saw how he affected who we cared about. Frankenstein played a part in Regina's grief over Daniel and he was also involved in many present threads because he was a secondary character since S1. Some characters were introduced out of nowhere, but back then the show didn't forget everything else in order to explain them. 

 

3A had this concept down as well. Neverland's backstory tied into the lives of several mains. When it didn't, such as for Emma and Snowing, they were still relevant in the present day because it took place in the same setting with the same people. Problems, however, arose in 3B.

 

The focus of that arc was Zelena. She was someone who had only met one of the main characters, and even that was brief. The only other two connections she had were with Cora and Regina, but they had never even met her. She never had to exist for the timeline to make sense. When we saw Oz, it was strictly about Zelena and characters we'd never see again. Rumple was cornered off with her, yet he could do nothing. Talk about boring. When Zelena was with the rest of the cast, she was cackling and it was extremely one-sided. There were no deep connections or interactions affecting the characters' motives.

 

In 4A, it was all about Frozen. A&E inserted a few attempts to intertwine the Storybrookers into the Arendelle plot, but in my opinion, they failed miserably. Anna teaching Charming to have courage was unnecessarily shoehorned, Belle and Anna's adventure was pointless, and Emma had no reaction whatsoever to her foster days with Ingrid. The only real connection was Emma and Elsa, but even that relationship was squandered. Everyone else, especially Regina, got dumb side plots that went nowhere until 4x11 and into 4B.

 

4B started out okay with keeping the cores relevant. Ursula's flashback at least involved Hook to some degree. It went straight down the toilet after Best Laid Plans, though. Heart of Gold, Sympathy for the DeVil, and Lily - all of them about characters in totally other worlds. Yes Lily shared the spotlight with Emma, but I don't think it did Emma any favors. It simply wasn't about her - it was about Lily, her rotten life, and the friendship she had with the person who turned away. Regina's been reduced to a plot device, Snowing has resorted to saying "Emma!" and being upset every episode, and Hook just stands there in the background looking pretty.

 

New characters are great, but they and their backstories shouldn't be irrelevant to the core cast.

Edited April 29, 2015 by KingOfHearts

[Camera One]

I think the well has dried for interest in Snowing, Rumpel/Rumbelle, and Regina--but I believe the show is also at a point where new characters turn off the base viewers who have been watching from the beginning and don't want to invest in anything not related to the old characters. That's why I personally feel that the current ratings drops, while somewhat story-related, are more due to the show's age putting it between a rock and a hard place. Either you're drawing in new viewers while turning off old viewers, or you're not interesting new viewers by catering to the old viewers. I'm not sure there's anything they can do to interest new viewers and old viewers simultaneously, so I'm expecting 5 will likely be the final season.

 

I don't think base viewers are averse to investing in new characters unrelated to the old characters.  Most people here were very open to the Frozen characters, and enjoyed them.  Most people enjoyed the Ursula and Cruella backstories.  This is one of the few shows where the original viewers expect and enjoy cameos from other fairy tales and stories - as long as they are integrated into the show in an organic fashion.   The writers are the ones bending over backwards to the point of being contrived, in making unconvincing and blatantly unnecessary connections between the main characters and the guests.  

 

I also don't think drawing in new viewers and keeping old ones are necessarily mutually exclusive.  They did a good job of introducing Elsa and having her become friends with Emma.  New viewers got to see Elsa, and old viewers enjoyed seeing Emma find someone who could understand her and they grew together.  This was successful because it didn't take away time from the main characters, this complimented the main characters.  

Edited April 29, 2015 by Camera One

[KingOfHearts]

 

I don't think base viewers are averse to investing in new characters unrelated to the old characters.  Most people here were very open to the Frozen characters, and enjoyed them.  Most people enjoyed the Ursula and Cruella backstories.  This is one of the few shows where the original viewers expect and enjoy cameos from other fairy tales and stories - as long as they are integrated into the show in an organic fashion.   The writers are the ones bending over backwards to the point of being contrived, in making unconvincing and blatantly unnecessary connections between the main characters and the guests.

 

4B hasn't broken up the guests with main character stories well, either. Robin/Zelena, Cruella and Lily were all one after another. The writers aren't touching home base often enough to keep things stable. One-offs are fine, but don't go so far off the field that it feels like a whole other show entirely. Don't give the mains crappy plots while you give the guests thought-out ones, either. I can tell a lot more effort and consideration was put into Cruella's story than the entire main plot of 4B.

Edited April 29, 2015 by KingOfHearts

[Mathius]

The focus of that arc was Zelena. She was someone who had only met one of the main characters, and even that was brief. The only other two connections she had were with Cora and Regina, but they had never even met her. She never had to exist for the timeline to make sense. When we saw Oz, it was strictly about Zelena and characters we'd never see again. Rumple was cornered off with her, yet he could do nothing. Talk about boring. When Zelena was with the rest of the cast, she was cackling and it was extremely one-sided. There were no deep connections or interactions affecting the characters' motives.

Not to mention the three new non-Oz characters (Rapunzel, Lumiere & Blackbeard) barely had any backstory and characterization, and thus they didn't leave much of an impact.

In 4A, it was all about Frozen. A&E inserted a few attempts to intertwine the Storybrookers into the Arendelle plot, but in my opinion, they failed miserably. Anna teaching Charming to have courage was unnecessarily shoehorned, Belle and Anna's adventure was pointless, and Emma had no reaction whatsoever to her foster days with Ingrid. The only real connection was Emma and Elsa, but even that relationship was squandered. Everyone else, especially Regina, got dumb side plots that went nowhere until 4x11 and into 4B.

Yeah, they should have left all the core cast except Rumple out of the Frozen flashbacks and backstory altogether, while at the same time gone even further connecting Elsa and Ingrid with the core cast in the present day...meaning no dumb side plots for anyone. That way we'd have a mostly pure Frozen story that Frozen fans could enjoy with the flashbacks, but also a relevant story for the core cast that longtime fans could enjoy with the present day.

[Mari]

4B hasn't broken up the guests with main character stories well, either. Robin/Zelena, Cruella and Lily were all one after another. The writers aren't touching home base often enough to keep things stable. One-offs are fine, but don't go so far off the field that it feels like a whole other show entirely. Don't give the mains crappy plots while you give the guests thought-out ones, either. I can tell a lot more effort and consideration was put into Cruella's story than the entire main plot of 4B.

Yes.

 

Plus, make the guest-spot episodes more timely.   For example, if we were supposed to care about Robin, we should have had a decent Robin-centric a year ago, when he was being introduced as significant to the overall story.  Then, when we focus on Robin and Zelarian, it would have had more people invested. 

[YaddaYadda]

Blackbeard sort of had a small impact, but he was brought in to support Hook's story and what he got for screentime is beyond fine in my book.  I didn't need them to overextend the story.  He's a rival pirate, they really don't like each other, Hook has more of a code than Blackbeard does, he is more of a mercenary.  And they brought him back twice and I thought his cameos served their purpose.  So that's pretty much it with him, I guess, he serves his purpose.

 

Rapunzel, that episode was so very bad.  And it's too bad...but maybe I was expecting Tangled's Rapunzel, so I don't know and I really didn't care for Lumière.  I thought it was kind of lame.

[Guest]

Yes.

 

Plus, make the guest-spot episodes more timely.   For example, if we were supposed to care about Robin, we should have had a decent Robin-centric a year ago, when he was being introduced as significant to the overall story.  Then, when we focus on Robin and Zelarian, it would have had more people invested. 

 

Where they failed miserably was deciding not to follow through on the 3A finale.  They had an opportunity to build a history between Robin and Regina that they could have revealed through EF flashbacks of the year after the curse.  Instead everyone got amnesia and most of the flashbacks were Oz related.  So Regina and Robin's relationship seemed superficial and based solely on Regina's belief in pixie dust and wanting a happy ending and had nothing to do with Robin himself.

[Camera One]

Speaking of flashbacks and where they succeed or fail with guest characters, I remember throughout Season 2 and Season 3A, I was wishing for a Charming flashback since he hadn't gotten a proper one since "The Shepherd".  But both the Rapunzel one and the one with Anna were total duds.  "The Tower" was a total bore, and "White Out" was borderline offensive, suggesting that Anna gave him his courage (of course, at that time, we didn't know about the real kicker they had planned for 4B).  

 

There were so many aspects of Charming to explore, and they came up with those two piles of garbage.  Though with this show and low expectations, "The Tower" was almost worth it for that heartbreaking dream sequence of taking Emma to her first dance.  The idea that Charming lacked confidence in becoming a father was not a bad idea, but the follow-through was dismal.  I think this struggle could have been transplanted to 4A, after the baby was born.  It would have been more organic to devote "The Tower" to both Snow and Charming dealing with being apart from Emma, since Regina already two episodes of scenes about missing Henry and Snowing got nothing.  Charming's flashback about how he gained confidence as a Prince should have occurred in Season 2.

 

If you look at those two episodes, "The Tower" had Charming helping Rapunzel, but Rapunzel was given zero personality or backbone.  Was the point that in helping Rapunzel, Charming realized that he could be a good father?   That wasn't really portrayed well in that scenario.  "White Out" was almost the opposite, in that Charming felt like a prop for Anna's motivational skills.  I don't feel that Charming gained any growth in the present-day, while the flashback was so ham-fisted that I could not buy a second of it.  

 

So what are the makings of a good flashback story which deepens exploration of character and allows for their growth, while utilizing a guest character in a way that doesn't make them pointless, or make them so overpowering the main character becomes a prop?  

Edited April 29, 2015 by Camera One

[Camera One]

Eergh, this storyline was such a horrible idea. I feel like with most of the WTF moments of the show, I at least got why the writers thought it would be a good idea. On this one, I don't understand how the Zelena pregnancy ever made it past the initial pitch. 

 

Because it creates another obstacle which will prevent Regina and Robin from immediately getting together with one another.  Because it allows more fun times with Zelena.  And most of all, because it creates more plot.  It results in an already existing problem for the next half-season, so they don't need to invent something completely new.  If A&E decides to use their bag of recycled tricks, we'll see another fake-out of Regina being tempted by the dark side, when she tries to kill Zelena or the baby.  By the time Zelena reveals there was no baby, Regina would have done something she regretted.  New secret which will sustain another half-season.  

Edited April 29, 2015 by Camera One

[Serena]

I'm gonna guess because they need Regina to be miserable and in search of an happy ending until the finale. If she finds Robin, revels the Zelena deception, and that's it, then Regina is happy and her whole season long quest is over in episode 19. So they use this to delay, but the problem is that it's making Robin, a character who has been hugely criticized for just this problem (being unfaithful), look even worse. Now the people who were against him for being unfaithful to Marian can also add being unfaithful to Regina. Yes, he and Regina were technically "over", but when it's Epic Pixie Dust True Love, you'd expect a guy to mourn the relationship for at least a few months. 

Edited April 29, 2015 by Serena

[YaddaYadda]

I'm gonna guess because they need Regina to be miserable and in search of an happy ending until the finale. If she finds Robin, revels the Zelena deception, and that's it, then Regina is happy and her whole season long quest is over in episode 19.

 

I really didn't think they would go there with Regina.  I thought yes, she's on this quest for the Author and even when she realized that he was on the loose, finally, she was all, I'm going to NYC to save Robin, she didn't even care that the Author was with Gold who wants his happy ending to be written as well.  And that made absolutely no sense to me.  Why would she be okay with the Author being with Gold after he just had his suspicions realized that Regina was moonlighting as a double-agent?  Isn't he going to want to screw her over as well?  He already has leverage over her and is ready to use it!

[HoodlumSheep]

Blackbeard sort of had a small impact, but he was brought in to support Hook's story and what he got for screentime is beyond fine in my book. I didn't need them to overextend the story. He's a rival pirate, they really don't like each other, Hook has more of a code than Blackbeard does, he is more of a mercenary. And they brought him back twice and I thought his cameos served their purpose. So that's pretty much it with him, I guess, he serves his purpose.

I love Blackbeard! Charles Mesure has a fun time playing him too. And I like seeing that.

You're right that he serves his purpose. To finterfere and be a pest. I like that he pops up once in a while, and like how we get small doses of him.

Jumping into the flashback/secondary (?) character/main character discussion (or at least trying to):

4a's flashbacks were more of the case that it wasn't Snow's/Charming's/etc's flashback with Anna or whoever inserted in, it felt like it was more Anna's/etc. flashback guest starring some one from the main cast. i didn't mind it, but I can see why some people wouldn't be fond of it.

3b's and what appears to be 4b's flashbacks are a bit more over the place; one or two character centrics thrown in between the villain (or shared with) centrics. With no one really getting equal-ish screentime.

I appreciated 3a's flashback style because it was like bam! Regina centric! Rumple centric! Hook centric! Etc. centric! Another Regina centric! One involving Belle! some out of place Snowing/excalibur FB! another Rumple centric! all right in a row With Pan making small appearances when necessary. Each character got focus for the most part (whether it was good or bad focus...) Screen time felt more equal in terms of giving characters something to do.

Whereas 4b, you have half of the main cast regulated to merely standing in the background not doing anything for what feels like most of the season.

[stealinghome]

4a's flashbacks were more of the case that it wasn't Snow's/Charming's/etc's flashback with Anna or whoever inserted in, it felt like it was more Anna's/etc. flashback guest starring some one from the main cast.

I don't disagree but I think that has been a problem for the show as far back as 3A (think Tink's introductory episode). ITA that part of the problem is that the central characters have become props for the secondary characters instead of vice versa, but I don't think it's a new problem at all. I think we're all just hitting our boiling point with it after at least a season and a half of it, because we're tired of seeing the main characters be shafted for a season and a half.

[Shanna Marie]

I think one of the problems with the flashbacks (and even some of the present-day episodes) is that they are treated like "centrics" as opposed to being treated like critical bits of the story. Sometimes the two coincide, but not always. When an episode is a "centric," it ends up only focusing on that character, even if there are things in that story that are relevant to other characters or even if there are things the other characters should be doing. It's like all the other characters are put on ice while the episode focuses on this one character. The best flashbacks have been of the "here's some information you need to know about something that happened in the past, and it's better to show you than to have a character monologue about it" variety. Or even of the "here's something you need to know, and not even all the other characters know about this" variety. They get into trouble when they make it thematic instead of plot-driven, unless the theme and the plot are tightly woven together. My test for a flashback is whether the episode would make sense without it and whether it adds something critical to the overall plot -- both past and present.

 

So "The Tower" fails because the only plot-relevant item that comes up is the plant that Zelena drugs David with in order to steal his courage. I'm not sure we really had to see the flashback to understand seeing her put something in his tea and him later hallucinating. We already know that Snow's pregnant, so we don't need to see them getting the news. This doesn't really tell us anything about the Missing Year. It doesn't even really give us much insight into the fear of parenthood, aside from the dream within the flashback of Emma going to a ball. We don't get any tie between the past and present with the characters -- Rapunzel doesn't show up in the present and seems to have no relevance to the story. It was a wasted opportunity to show something critical from the missing year or for introducing a character who ended up being useful or relevant. It's a David centric, but he doesn't actually do anything, doesn't grow or change, isn't really all that affected. And meanwhile the other characters are left to wander around, not really accomplishing much of anything other than finding the trap door.

 

"Poor Unfortunate Souls" works because the stolen voice becomes critical to getting some key information in the present and leads to a pretty big plot twist of having Ursula depart Team Evil, with her departure also helping Regina's position because it looks like Ursula and not Regina was the mole all along. Meanwhile, it does a lot of character development for Hook, showing us how he was in the past and giving him a chance to atone for what he did in the past in the present. The present-day part of the story, which wouldn't be possible without what happened in the past, is what gives the Jolly Roger back (not that this has yet been relevant). It's a much weaker episode if you remove the flashback because the information in the flashback is critical to understanding what happens in the present, and it would be a boring episode if we just saw Hook telling Emma what happened and saw Ursula telling someone else her side of the story. Without actually having seen Poseidon, we'd lose the emotional impact of him showing up. Meanwhile, the flashbacks on their own tell a story. You could remove the present-day part of the story and still have something with a beginning, middle, and end. In a sense, the flashback is part one and the present is the sequel, with its own beginning, middle, and end. It's very much a Hook-centric, with no other regular character in the flashbacks, but in the present August is interrogated and spills about the door, the others find and rescue August, they all learn about Rumple, and later they learn about the Author in the book. Just about every character gets a moment and has something to do. Even Will is useful. So while the backstory is Hook-centric and he has a central role in the present, this may be one of the most "ensemble" episodes they've done in the present. I guess it was sort of that way for "Good Form," one of the other Hook-centrics. He was the only main character in the flashbacks, but the present story was very much an ensemble piece, with just about everyone having something to do (wasn't that the one where Snow, Regina, and Emma were trying to communicate with Henry while the guys were off curing David, or am I remembering incorrectly?).

[KingOfHearts]

The purpose of centrics should be to explain why a character is acting in such a way. It should give us some backstory to show why they intend to do whatever they do. For example, in The Miller's Daughter, we see how Cora's humble beginnings made her obsessed with climbing the ladder of society and also her relationship with Rumple. It explains why she's so desperate for power and what her true intentions were. Likewise, Think Lovely Thoughts showed Rumple's daddy issues that sprung up his attachment to Bae. These were all things that affected the present in some way.

 

What's bothersome is when the flashbacks are a glorified repeat of what's going on in the present. Heart of Gold - Rumple charges Robin with stealing something from Zelena. Darkness on the Edge of Town - magical witches are tricked by Rumple and must take down the Chernabog. You can call them parallels, but for a parallel to work, both instances have to standalone in their own right and be just as enjoyable. 

[Curio]

Flashbacks are the best when they show the audience something that has already been hinted at before on the show (so it doesn't seem like a complete retcon *cough*egg baby*cough*) but still has some mystery surrounding it - which makes the audience want to see it instead of being referenced in a conversation, gives the character a whole new dimension or shade we haven't seen before, and moves the plot along.

 

For example, I would love to see a flashback of Emma during her days as a bail bonds person. It checks off those three points: 1) The show has already established that Emma has worked that job in the past, but there's still a lot we don't know about that part of her life. We don't know how she got the job, how long she had the job, or what special skills she had to pick up to be efficient at her work. 2) It would give Emma a new shade we don't get to see often because literally the only scene we've been shown of her being on the job was the beginning scene in the Pilot. 3) We could be shown a past job she had that parallels a fantasy case in the present timeline in Storybrooke, so it would help move the plot along.

 

Yet another reason why they should have shown Hook's adventure to get the magic bean. 1) It was being hinted at all season long, so the writers were purposely building up this huge reveal that the audience wanted to see, only to wimp out at the end and not show it. 2) It would have given us more dimension to Hook's character because we could have seen the personal transition he had to make from being an aimless pirate with no ambition to a character with a new driven purpose in life. 3) It would have driven the plot because it explained how Hook got to the real world and who he traded his ship to, which ended up being a plot point in Season 4. I'll forever be a bitter bitch about the writers not showing this flashback.

[Shanna Marie]

It would have driven the plot because it explained how Hook got to the real world and who he traded his ship to, which ended up being a plot point in Season 4.

I think this is where we run into the problem of the writers valuing surprise over everything else. It was more important to them to have the big "aha!" of revealing that Blackbeard was captain of the Jolly Roger than to show the flashback.

 

Never mind that if we'd known Blackbeard had the Jolly Roger, we could have had a moment of suspense or tension in knowing the significance of Anna running into Blackbeard. We'd have known she was on the Jolly Roger without that klunky bit of dialogue from Hans, and we might have hoped that it would mean something (not that it did). They sacrificed something potentially good and skipped an important flashback in order to get a surprise that wasn't and that amounted to a weak bit of dialogue. Which explains a lot about the plotting on this show.

 

I don't really mind the echo or parallel flashbacks if they're used to show some kind of change or growth. Like in "Poor Unfortunate Souls," we did have parallel situations, with Hook swearing not to take Ursula's voice but then resorting to violence in the flashback and him swearing to restore it but then resorting to violence in the presence -- but this time he gets help from Ariel, gets nudged by her voice of reason, figures out what he needs to do to fix things, and makes it right. The echo shows how he's changed and then ends up completing the story that started in the flashback. Or there's mirroring, like in "Good Form," where the past story shows Hook's first trip to Neverland and how that sent him down a dark path, while the present story shows his latest trip to Neverland as he's coming out of darkness, plus he's using the information he gained in the first trip to avoid making the same mistake, since he now knows how the water works as a cure. Liam died in the past, but he's able to save David in the present.

 

The way they've been writing lately, they'd have a flashback of a guest character using the water and not knowing about how it works, and then the present story would be the characters running into the same situation and not knowing anything. Like with the Chernabog. Or that Nightroot stuff from "The Tower."

[Mathius]

The purpose of centrics should be to explain why a character is acting in such a way. It should give us some backstory to show why they intend to do whatever they do. For example, in The Miller's Daughter, we see how Cora's humble beginnings made her obsessed with climbing the ladder of society and also her relationship with Rumple. It explains why she's so desperate for power and what her true intentions were. Likewise, Think Lovely Thoughts showed Rumple's daddy issues that sprung up his attachment to Bae. These were all things that affected the present in some way.

 

What's bothersome is when the flashbacks are a glorified repeat of what's going on in the present. Heart of Gold - Rumple charges Robin with stealing something from Zelena. Darkness on the Edge of Town - magical witches are tricked by Rumple and must take down the Chernabog. You can call them parallels, but for a parallel to work, both instances have to standalone in their own right and be just as enjoyable.

What's funny is that David H. Goodman once said that was a lesson the writers learned in Season 1, to make fairybacks inform the present stories instead of being "xerox copies" of them. It's a testament to A&E's lack of long-term commitment to this show that they've totally backtracked on this lesson, making fairybacks that don't inform the present story at all and are either just similar in events or in the lesson/theme.

Speaking of which, another thing that always makes me groan is the repetition of certain lines from fairybacks in the present. Sometimes it works to good effect (Rumple saying "Let's just say...I'm invested in your future" in both past and present of 1x16 was chilling given both his Seer-abilities as Rumple and his retaining of memories as Gold), but most times it's just cheesy and contrived, especially when it's about the lesson/theme of the episode. 4x02 is a blatant case of this, as Anna says TWO hokey life-lesson lines to Charming that he repeats verbatim to Elsa ("Impossible battles are the ones you need to fight the most" and "You'll only be surviving, not living!") Am I really supposed to believe Anna made such a huge impact on his life despite him never mentioning her before that he remembers exactly what she said to him, word for word, all those years ago? Also, Elsa's present situation is VERY different from Charming's in the past, so the use of this encouraging lines makes even less sense!

[Shanna Marie]

One of my favorite uses of flashbacks was in the season 2 ending two-parter. Showing Bae's entry into the Peter Pan story set up the Neverland plot arc and made that bridge to connect the stories, and the fact that he went to Neverland took care of one of those nasty nit-picks of how he was still alive (though it didn't entirely resolve the timeline issue). I think him being fished out of the water by the Jolly Roger and facing Hook was one of the better surprise/aha moments of the series, and contrary to what they seem to believe now about setup ruining the surprise, they did set it up. Neal had mentioned that he was older than he seemed, he recognized Hook, and he knew how to sail a pirate ship, so the groundwork was there, but it was still one of those "ooh!" moments when we were worried about Bae, but then he was rescued, and then it turned out to be Hook who rescued him, so we were still worried because Hook was still a villain at that time. In the next episode, the flashback helped humanize Hook a little more while we were seeing him turn around a bit in the present, showed how he still had his flaws, and then set up Hook's big turnaround at the end because we could see him making a different choice this time. The flashbacks on their own told a complete story, with the present kind of serving as a sequel.

 

I just wish, as with so many other things on this show, that it had been paid off better in the long run. Colin, bless his heart, has always gone all-out with the non-verbals to suggest that Bae/Neal meant a lot to him, but the script only sometimes remembered the relationship. Unfortunately, we never saw what happened after Bae initially rejected him. Hook's dilemma when Pan told him Neal was alive would have been stronger if we'd seen more of their relationship, and the fact that Pan knew he was presenting Hook with a real dilemma suggested that there was more that happened after what we saw, plus Hook knew how to find where Bae lived. And it would have been nice to see what happened when Hook left for good -- did he just leave Bae behind, did he give Bae a choice of coming with him, did he try to persuade him, did Pan not make it possible? Unfortunately, Bae/Neal was a human MacGuffin, so they didn't seem to care about writing him as an actual character and didn't care about showing the important steps in his life in Neverland -- how did he escape from Pan and the Lost Boys to live on his own, what kind of relationship did he eventually form with Hook, how did he know Tink, how did he escape (they told us, but that's something it would have been nice to see, along with his arrival in 20th century America)?