OUAT vs. Other Fairy Tales: Compare & Contrast

[myril]

I haven't been following it myself, but I was just reading about Jessica Jones over at Tor.com. The baddie is a master manipulator and was/is gaslighting the protagonist. He also plays the victim card. Couldn't stop thinking of Reggie.

You're not the first thinking of OUaT when looking at Jessica Jones, see comments earlier. The baddie Kilgrave made me though less think of Regina but as much of Rumple as Dark One and the Dark One. Regina less because of his power but more because in some ways they both were put initially into a bad place not by own choice, at least when accepting that Regina was manipulated pretty much since birth by Rumple and her mother. Regardless Jessica Jones makes it pretty clear, that it doesn't excuse what Kilgrave made out of that situation, of the powers he had. I could feel sympathy for the kid Kligrave had been, but didn't have to feel sympathy for the adult he became. It is never about others failing at forgiving him and standing in the way for a happy ending, it's still all on himself. His powers and manipulations of people, and how Kilgrave constantly claims, he did nothing, they were happy to please him, or they killed others or themselves - that reminded me very much of Rumple and his constant lament that they had a choice.

 

If you want to see grey, a fight of dark and light inside of a soul (a number of souls), a great reflection on facets of responsibility and control, then watch Jessica Jones. They manage something that I think OUaT barely even could dare to dream of doing. Warning though, it is a dark show and can be a challenge to watch, not so much because of being graphic (I found it not that graphic, but might not be a good judge of this for average U.S. viewership) but of what it tackles. It's no Disney fluff, thankfully, but a fantastical drama show with a huge touch of Noir, gritty, dark and not shying away from difficult issues. 

Edited December 1, 2015 by myril

[KAOS Agent]

One of the things that I liked about Jessica Jones was that it actually addressed the multiple options available when taking an action. Once so often tells us that one action is the only "right" choice and there's little examination of other options. On Once, Emma asked Merlin about how she wondered if it was possible to use her dark powers for good. This was brushed off and Merlin said they should just get rid of it altogether. No discussion that balance might be necessary, no consideration of a power that might be necessary or helpful to the world. Compare that to Jessica Jones, which at one point very clearly considers all the good Kilgrave's powers could do if harnessed for good. We get a scene that shows him doing a good thing - extrapolate that out and you could save millions of people. What if you could set Kilgrave on someone like Hitler? We get a full conversation between Jessica and Trish where they evaluate the possibility of trying this. They look at positive and negative consequences. They assess the cost of doing so and measure how wrong it could all go. Obviously, a choice is ultimately made by the characters, but the narrative itself never tells you that it was the only choice or even the "right" one. It's left up to the audience to think about.

Edited December 1, 2015 by KAOS Agent

[myril]

Jane Espenson lend a helping writer's hand to Marvel's Jessica Jones!

She talked about the show and working on it in an interview with Indiewire : Getting Personal With The Stars and Creator of 'Marvel's Jessica Jones'

 

Well, who would have thought that. I've missed it too at first, but she is indeed in the credits of the last episodes, look for "special thanks".

 

Espenson did a bit of polishing and rewriting, saying herself, she is good at dialogue but not so with structure and story, but thankfully the writers of JJ had already given structure and story.  It's noticeable on OUaT, her skills with dialogue but weakness in structure and story, just that on OUaT unfortunately structure and story are a problem IMO of the writers' room as a whole.
 

Espenson says in the interview as well, that she's never seen "such positive Twitter energy" on other projects, mentioning that there were some negative reactions to shows like Firefly or Buffy (yes, there were) and she thinks, if there had been Twitter, those shows would have seen a lot of negative tweets (I agree with her). She doesn't mention OUaT, but we here do know, that Espenson might know something about the dark sides of fandoms on Twitter (she's active there, don't know how much an of them takes note of what is going on on Tumblr). 

Edited December 5, 2015 by myril

[Dianthus]

As a fan of Humphrey Bogart movies,I thought knew Noir (The Big Sleep, Key Largo, The Maltese Falcon). Then I saw In a Lonely Place at a local Noir festival. Damn was that movie a bitter pill to swallow. It starred Bogart, and it was excellently made, but ultimately devastating.

[Camera One]

I don't watch "The Walking Dead", but I clicked on a link about how "The midseason finale was a failure to fans".  It made me wonder if all internet fans are overly critical of the shows they watch.  In that article, they listed five reasons why the midseason finale "failed".  It could very well apply to any show, I guess, if you fill in the blanks.  I'm curious whether we'll have the same "problems" tomorrow with the "Once" midseason finale.

 

1) The ________ Plot was just Silly

2) Not Much _______________ (insert a character)

3) A Slightly Insignificant Character Death 

4) It Exposes the Show's Flawed Logic

5) Not Much Actually Happened

 

In the poll beneath, 51% said "It was OK", 30% said "It was bad", and 14% said "It was great".

 

http://www.designntrend.com/articles/65791/20151205/walking-dead-season-6-amc-midseason-finale-failure-fans.htm

Edited December 6, 2015 by Camera One

[tennisgurl]

There is something to be said about internet culture and fandom, and a slight tendency to feed into itself when it comes to strong feelings towards a work, whether it be positive or negative (but a lot of the times its negative). Things tend to be either "The BEST thing ever!" or "The WORST thing ever!", without much room in the middle. I do watch the Walking Dead, and I thought the final episode was...ok. Midseason finales are tough to do, and I think a lot of fans are extra harsh on them. Theres a hiatus to follow, what else are they going to do but go on and on about what they most recently saw? And some parts of fandom do turn a bit Hive Mind, where something goes from just ok, to bad to terrible to insult to all good writing going back to cave drawings.

 

I can see something similar happening with Once, especially if fans think certain characters are being pushed aside, or written out of character in service of the plot.  

Edited December 6, 2015 by tennisgurl

[Camera One]

Just reading an article on the next Avengers' movie why the writers say certain superheroes can't be in it, because they're "too powerful".  Yet I'm guessing they will have no problem making the villains all-powerful.

 

Reminds me of "Once" and how they avoid giving any screentime to heroes with magical powers like Blue, Merlin, Glinda, or render them completely useless.  More careful worldbuilding and logical limitation of powers could allow the participation of such powerful individuals.  I think Tolkien did a good job with using Gandalf's power where appropriate and explaining well why/when he's absent or unable/unwilling to act during the Lord of the Rings trilogy.  Rather than just neuter him completely or assume the viewers just forget he existed.

Edited December 6, 2015 by Camera One

[LizaD]

I cannot believe A&E just straight up bastardized Whedon's material. Not content with just fucking up Disney's materials, or Baum's, they've now moved on to see what other materials they can turn into pure crap.

 

You want to know why A&E will forever be amateurs? Because on Buffy, after that episode when Buffy had to stab Angel, that show and its characters were never the same again. Buffy and Angel were never the same again. It was a real emotionally manipulative moment from the writers and they followed through with the consequences. This show? Back to status quo in 2 seconds. They are downright allergic to change or consequences.

 

 

Jane Espenson lend a helping writer's hand to Marvel's Jessica Jones!

 

I hope her role is minimal, so minimal as to be nonexistent. Her work on this show has really turned me off, big time.

 

Jessica Jones is too good to be messed up by crappy writers. I'm loving that show and most of its characters, and now I can dump this show and stop wasting my time when there are superior shows out there.

[HoodlumSheep]

Rumplestiltskin movie involving Andy Serkis.

https://twitter.com/nerdist/status/675404872959815680

Edited December 11, 2015 by HoodlumSheep

[Faemonic]

You want to know why A&E will forever be amateurs? Because on Buffy, after that episode when Buffy had to stab Angel, that show and its characters were never the same again. Buffy and Angel were never the same again. It was a real emotionally manipulative moment from the writers and they followed through with the consequences. This show? Back to status quo in 2 seconds. They are downright allergic to change or consequences.

I agree with this, because so much of what I've been seeing is, "Uh-oh! Haha never mind," when it comes to the character developments. At the same time, even though season one was like a completely different show (they killed Graham and it meant something! it meant All The Things!!!)...they've changed a lot since season two, so I can't say that the writers never change things up. Mary Margaret lost her Bandit Snow swag in favor of a dark heart that was retconned into probably always having been there due to eggnapping, and she and Emma aren't even really that close anymore. (I weep for memories of the Hatter episode when Emma called MM family.) Regina's willing to co-parent, has a new boyfriend after Daniel, and has a problematic family member that she can actually grow a spine against--major developments since S2! Rumple will no longer defy hell and highwater for his loved ones, he just wants power for power's sake and just doesn't ever learn to use it empathically or responsibly. Belle stopped calling Rumple out, and always comes back like a boomerang. Captain Hook is a lover, not a fighter (anymore). Ruby disappeared. Nealfire's dead. Lily, umm, existed with some impact?

 

The only things they really want to keep for some reason is the Town Line limit and Memory Wipe that let them do their flashback shuffles.

 

Those aren't changes that were executed well, nor are they interesting now that they're there, but those are changes.

 

I do agree, though, that these changes appear to be driven more by lack of creativity causing fallback on quick-fix tropes, or even audience demand (even fear of losing viewers maybe?) rather than having a story to tell and emotions or concepts to explore through that story. 

[Camera One]

The actress of The Little Mermaid remake confirmed she will be blonde, and not red-haired.  She said, "It's "a modern, revisionist tale" that will be "progressive for young women in this day and age,".

http://www.etonline.com/movies/177479_chloe_grace_moretz_reveals_she_won_t_have_red_hair_in_live_action_little_mermaid/

 

This writer looks forward to a "feminist" version of The Little Mermaid.

http://www.bustle.com/articles/128395-chloe-moretz-isnt-playing-ariel-in-the-little-mermaid-that-might-actually-be-a-good

 

I was interested in an adaptation of the Hans Christian Anderson story, but it's certainly not "revisionist" and "progressive".  So now I wonder what this movie is going to be like.  

Edited December 13, 2015 by Camera One

[Writing Wrongs]

You see, they keep trying to redo these movies in a modernist theme, but I think the success of a movie like Cinderella was because it stayed pretty close to the original Disney version. I even find myself not enjoying Maleficent as much as I originally did. But that's just me.

Edited December 13, 2015 by Writing Wrongs

[myril]

I would welcome it, if they stay closer to the original story of Hans Christian Andersen and forget mostly about the fluffy Disney version and its royal happily married ending. The original is a story about a young woman willing to give up her previous life, family, identity for getting a human immortal soul through love. It's not just her crush on the prince driving her, it is as much if not more the wish to have a human soul. No, that is not simply being happily married to your prince charming, that is more. The prince marries someone else in the original (and might do so happily, not really part of the story), the mermaid's heart breaks but she still succeeds and gets what she was looking for in the end, the chance on her own immortal soul. It's a tragic story but still has a happy ending of sorts, quite a different one from the usual Disney happy romantical endings. The animated Disney movie had reduced the story to just a romance. If they go back to the original, make a movie showing that a happy ending can be as well something different for a woman than always that happily married one, then that could be progressive and modern.

Edited December 13, 2015 by myril

[KingOfHearts]

 

You see, they keep trying to redo these movies in a modernist theme, but I think the success of a movie like Cinderella was because it stayed pretty close to the original Disney version.

I think if the live action movies fleshed out the characters more than the originals, they'd be decent and not just remakes. I heard Lady Tremaine was given more characterization in Cinderella. There are plenty of 2D characters in Disney films, especially the older ones. Maybe if we were given a different point of view, like the Prince's in Snow White for example, a movie would be worth it because it would add on to the classic we're familiar with. Maleficent desperately tried to go for this angle, but it diverged way too much from the source. The new elements were not good or enjoyable. It was just very badly written and acted. (Except for the titular.)

 

Maleficent took many liberties and did not make good on Sleeping Beauty. That fairy tale did not need its core elements ripped out. What was lacking from the original Disney film was a believable romance and a decent explanation for Maleficent's evil deeds. What we got was no romance, a TLK that ripped off Once and Frozen, and Maleficent whitewashed into a heroine. It's not a retelling as much as it is a different movie plagiarizing a classic. Disney's goal must be finding a balance between preserving the source's spirit while also bringing something new to the table.

[Camera One]

I was surprised how the Maleficent film had zero interest in world-building.  The fairies were an afterthought.  The entire focus was on trying to make Maleficent into a misunderstood victim, while pretty much destroying King Stefan in the process.  The second half felt like a mindless action movie.  The plot didn't even make sense.  Overall, the main flaws of "Once Upon a Time" were very evident in this movie, except even worse because there were no likeable characters.  It was entirely lacking in humor and was completely depressing.

 

The Kristen Stewart "Snow White and the Huntsman" made Snow White into a strong female character, but she might as well have been a generic video game action hero.  I find it a little ridiculous they found the Huntsman so interesting they feel he needed a sequel.    This movie was really depressing as well and pretty much sucked all joy out of the fairy tale.

[Shanna Marie]

I heard Lady Tremaine was given more characterization in Cinderella.

She was, as were her daughters. The prince became an actual character, and his relationship with his father was fleshed out to the point that it was one of my favorite parts of the movie (and made me cry). They also showed the process of Ella becoming "Cinderella" and the way that it was a slippery slope, not a drastic thing. Plus, the best explanation I've seen yet for why the slipper only fit Cinderella, with it not being about her shoe size (and if you read between the lines of the Grimm version, it's kind of there, but I've never seen that come out in most of the adaptations).

 

The live-action wasn't a revisionist take, it was a fleshing out and intensifying of the original story.

[Camera One]

The animated version of Lady Tremaine was pure evil.  I think she could have been great on "Once", and now, in hindsight, I understand why A&E have no interest in her, since the woman has no magic.  She could have been a major adversary if Storybrooke had no magic.  She and Rumple could have been a power couple.  Though I think A&E partially gave her characteristics to Cora.

[ParadoxLost]

You see, they keep trying to redo these movies in a modernist theme, but I think the success of a movie like Cinderella was because it stayed pretty close to the original Disney version. I even find myself not enjoying Maleficent as much as I originally did. But that's just me.

 

The problem isn't so much that they keep trying for modernist themes.  The problem is they keep trying to recreate Wicked over and over again.  The villain having a tragic back story that makes them at best sympathetic and at worst victimized by the heroes is what I have a problem with.  And frankly, I think its irresponsible when included in movies and TV aimed at kids.  Movies like Ever After that focus on 'the Princess can rescue herself' are modern/feminist themes, without hammering on the trope that a bad childhood is an excuse for heinous acts, are ok with me as long as done well.

Edited December 14, 2015 by ParadoxLost

[Spartan Girl]

I watched the making of Disney's Snow White on ABC tonight. It was very interesting. The movie itself was not one of my favorites, but hey, it was the first one.

I forgot how dark the original fairy tale was: Snow White's MOTHER was the one that wanted her dead before the Grimm version changed it to stepmother. Man, could you imagine what OUAT could have been like if they went down that road?

[Shanna Marie]

I forgot how dark the original fairy tale was: Snow White's MOTHER was the one that wanted her dead before the Grimm version changed it to stepmother.

And in the original Grimm version of Hansel and Gretl, it was their mother who wanted to leave them in the woods, not their stepmother. Also, in their version of Cinderella, her father was still alive while her stepmother was using her as a servant.

 

There's been a relatively recent new translation of the first edition of the Grimm tales, and it's an interesting read (I'm in the middle of it). It's not so much that they changed things like this after the first edition, although they did add some moralizing, but the writing style is so much more direct -- much more like a transcript of an oral tale. In the later editions, the writing gets a lot fancier, so instead of transcribing an oral tale, they were trying to turn the stories into literature. The stories aren't all that different in content, but they read more like Romantic-era fiction, very florid. I'm finding the first edition much easier to read. There also seems to be more humor than in the later editions that are the ones that became popular and that were more likely to be reprinted.

[formerlyfreedom]

I watched the making of Disney's Snow White on ABC tonight. It was very interesting. The movie itself was not one of my favorites, but hey, it was the first one.

I forgot how dark the original fairy tale was: Snow White's MOTHER was the one that wanted her dead before the Grimm version changed it to stepmother. Man, could you imagine what OUAT could have been like if they went down that road?

 

And in the original Grimm version of Hansel and Gretl, it was their mother who wanted to leave them in the woods, not their stepmother. Also, in their version of Cinderella, her father was still alive while her stepmother was using her as a servant.

There's been a relatively recent new translation of the first edition of the Grimm tales, and it's an interesting read (I'm in the middle of it). It's not so much that they changed things like this after the first edition, although they did add some moralizing, but the writing style is so much more direct -- much more like a transcript of an oral tale. In the later editions, the writing gets a lot fancier, so instead of transcribing an oral tale, they were trying to turn the stories into literature. The stories aren't all that different in content, but they read more like Romantic-era fiction, very florid. I'm finding the first edition much easier to read. There also seems to be more humor than in the later editions that are the ones that became popular and that were more likely to be reprinted.

You can discuss that special more over here - a topic was created for it!

[KingOfHearts]

The animated version of Lady Tremaine was pure evil. I think she could have been great on "Once", and now, in hindsight, I understand why A&E have no interest in her, since the woman has no magic. She could have been a major adversary if Storybrooke had no magic. She and Rumple could have been a power couple. Though I think A&E partially gave her characteristics to Cora.

She actually made a brief appearance in Once: Wonderland as Anastasia's coldhearted mother. I wish she would be in Storybrooke though. Ashley has some family issues to work out.

[Camera One]

I remember her from that too, but she didn't make much of an impression.  Very bland.

[Faemonic]

The problem isn't so much that they keep trying for modernist themes.  The problem is they keep trying to recreate Wicked over and over again.  The villain having a tragic back story that makes them at best sympathetic and at worst victimized by the heroes is what I have a problem with.  And frankly, I think its irresponsible when included in movies and TV aimed at kids.

The thing about Greg Maguire's Wicked was that it told Elphaba's downfall from her point of view without removing the downfall bit. I think he really had a story to tell, some perspective to explore.

 

It might have had the side-effect of urging people to reconsider their prejudices.

 

Once...doesn't have that, so it doesn't do that. I can't even pinpoint what's missing.

[Camera One]

I thought Maguire's book was a convoluted mess.  I do think he put a lot of thought into trying to create his own version of Oz, though I didn't enjoy the world he created.

 

He seems to have built a career on taking existing stories and putting his own "spin" on it.  He also wrote "Confessions of an Ugly Stepsister"

Edited December 14, 2015 by Camera One

[Camera One]

It's a shame "The Force Awakens" won't feature the "Once Upon a Time" Characters.  I think it could have been done as a satisfying sequel to the Star Wars movies.

 

The movie opens and we see Emma and the Gang.  They think it's the Underworld, but it's actually another planet.  Emma feels The Force flowing inside her and she seeks to find Yoda, but he's trapped inside a Tree.  Someone recognizes Robin Hood, and he turns out to be Luke Skywalker's son.  Jabba the Hut makes friends with Snow and Charming, who sadly fall for his tricks.  Emma and the Gang must use the Force to rescue Snowing.  Meanwhile, they continue to look for Hook.  They find out that everyone who dies ends up becoming a Stormtrooper.  Stormtroopers can only open their helmet if it touches The Sweat of the Truest Believer.  Luckily, Henry is with them, and they could wipe a Stormtrooper, who gives them a lead... they need to find NIMUE.  Suddenly, the Wicked Witch of the West flies across the sky.  Or is it Nimue.  They both have a green face.  One of them has Hook on the Death Star III, with her new friend Darth Vader, also known as Merlin's twin brother.  Luckily, there are spies aboard the Death Star III.   You've guessed it... Merida!

Edited December 16, 2015 by Camera One

[Camera One]

I was reading the newspaper today and there was a short blurb about the upcoming movie "“Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon: Sword of Destiny" which "centres around the protection of a legendary sword."  

 

I had to laugh.  I can't take legendary swords seriously anymore.

[Spartan Girl]

Since sn adult Dorothy has been cast, has anyone read the Dorothy Must Die books by Danielle Paige? It's a fun dystopian take on Oz.

[Camera One]

Would you like "Once Upon a Time" to make a standalone Christmas movie?

 

Emma and friends need to go to the North Pole to save Christmas.  Power-hungry Mrs. Claus with her evil sidekick Frosty the Snowman has taken over Santa's workshop and she has trapped all the Elves in their underground workshop.  It's up to Emma and Regina to give the bullied Grinch the confidence he needs to save Christmas!  But oh no, suddenly they're all in Storybrooke and somehow everyone has amnesia!  Will Christmas be saved?  Or will everyone be having a Very Merida Christmas?  

Edited December 20, 2015 by Camera One

[Writing Wrongs]

I re-watched Once Upon A Time In Wonderland this weekend. I really want to know what happened between Will and Anastasia.

[Curio]

I re-watched Once Upon A Time In Wonderland this weekend. I really want to know what happened between Will and Anastasia.

 

Obligatory Adam & Eddie Comic-Con quote:

 

Eddy: Well, he...you know...I will say this: Are we going to get to it this year? You know, we'd like to tell you, but we did hint to it last year. It seemed like he was brought back from uh...Wonderland, or Victoria, for something that...

Adam: There is...

Eddy: There seemed like a, uh...

Adam: For fans of Will and of Wonderland, there is more we want to tell about his relationship with, with, uh...

Eddy: Anastasia.

Adam: Anastasia, the Red Queen. And um, and uh, and also how he wound up in Storybrooke and all that. Hopefully we'll be able to get to some of that this year. We love Michael Socha.

Eddy: Love Socha. Love everything. It's just, you know, there's just so many...there's just so many people that it's like, it's sometimes hard to do that story and sacrifice Regina's story. That's just showbiz.

[KingOfHearts]

Good to know they sacrificed a good redemption story (Anastasia) for the Author plot.

[Writing Wrongs]

At the end, an older Alice was reading her daughter the story of Wonderland and how Will and Anastasia were the White King and Queen. So did that happen right after Alice returned to England and married Cyrus or is that from later on in the future? Something must've happened if he was ready to move on with Belle.

Edited December 21, 2015 by Writing Wrongs

[Rumsy4]

Probably even A&E have no idea. I just pretend Will's appearance in S4 of ONCE never happened. It was some doppelganger.  

[Camera One]

It astounds me though how A&E couldn't know yet they made him into a series regular?  As Will would say, bloody hell.  

[Shanna Marie]

I've been rewatching Galavant and I find myself picturing Regina as Madalena (or vice versa) -- we've got the woman who seemed to be forced to marry a king she didn't love, only she actually had the choice and did it anyway, and then she schemes to get rid of her husband. There's even one episode where she wears a dress and crown very similar to the way the Evil Queen is depicted in the Disney Snow White cartoon.

[YaddaYadda]

When Magdalana was given the choice between Galavant, and fame and fortune, she straight up chose fame and fortune, so I don't know how similar she and Regina are.

 

It astounds me though how A&E couldn't know yet they made him into a series regular?  As Will would say, bloody hell

I've been wondering how much of this had to do with Michael Socha's contract. No one can blame the Frozen arc on this because they knew by the time they wrote the last episode they would be doing Frozen, and they hadn't started writing anything until July. 

[Shanna Marie]

When Magdalana was given the choice between Galavant, and fame and fortune, she straight up chose fame and fortune, so I don't know how similar she and Regina are.

The parallel I was seeing was that Magdalana was seemingly forced into marriage when she was kidnapped, but when Galavant showed up to rescue her, she decided she'd rather be a queen and went through with the marriage.

 

Regina was being forced into marriage with Leopold, but when she sent her mother to Wonderland and was free to decide for herself, she went through with the marriage, I guess because she wanted to be queen or wanted to be in a position to get revenge on Snow. At any rate, both of them started out being forced into marriage with a king they didn't love, both ended up having the choice not to go through with it, and both chose to go through with it because there was something they wanted out of the marriage.

[Curio]

When Magdalana was given the choice between Galavant, and fame and fortune, she straight up chose fame and fortune, so I don't know how similar she and Regina are.

 

Regina did the same thing when she turned her back on choosing love when she ran away from the tavern/Robin and straight up chose to continue living in lavish fame and fortune for years.

[Camera One]

I was at the grocery store and had a laugh when I saw in the discount rack a DVD for an animated movie featuring a red-haired girl called "Kiara the Brave Warrior":

[Shanna Marie]

Galavant got in what seems to be at least one little dig at OUAT this week, when they referred to "the Enchanted Forest" that was ruled by "an evil queen" as a place they didn't want to go (it turned out to be a gay tavern run by Kylie Minogue).

 

There was also a bit about a fist-sized stone that was mentioned as an amulet that Isabella wore every day -- something we'd never seen before and that would have been really obvious -- with various characters disagreeing about whether this was the first time they'd seen it or whether they knew all about it. The really important personal item that appears out of the blue and that was never seen before but that was supposedly there all along has happened on other shows, so maybe that wasn't a direct dig at this show, but they are awfully bad about it. Like Liam's ring that we never saw before with Hook, or all those personal items that turn up in Gold's shop out of the blue right when they're needed that no one thought about or mentioned previously.

Edited January 6, 2016 by Shanna Marie

[Faemonic]

Bwah! I've got to catch up with Galavant, if Kylie Minogue plays an evil queen in it!

I don't believe I even saw Liam's ring on Liam. And Hook's pirate cleavage had left very little to the imagination before, Ursula bless him.

[Shanna Marie]

Bwah! I've got to catch up with Galavant, if Kylie Minogue plays an evil queen in it!

It looks like it was a one-shot role centering around a musical number called "Off With His Shirt." And she's more of an evil tavern owner than queen. But it was still amusing.

[Rumsy4]

It looks like it was a one-shot role centering around a musical number called "Off With His Shirt." 

 

That was a good number. ;-)

[InsertWordHere]

I too thought of Once during Galavant's amulet gag. It's a trope seen elsewhere, but it's really glaring on Once, especially with Hook, because the man has around 7 other pieces of clearly visible jewelry that could have easily been used. I was hoping for the Survivor's I Love You Clip-on Earring myself. 

 

 

And she's more of an evil tavern owner than queen. But it was still amusing.

Did Galavant just give us the answer to who founded the Ye Olde Fairytale Tavern chain? Does this mean she hired Daddy!Hook and Robin to run her franchises? I wonder if their interviews required shirt-ripping. 

[YaddaYadda]

I too thought of Once during Galavant's amulet gag

 

They sort of did that in Neverland with the mirror. It wasn't transrealm communication, but it was communication, and it did not freeze!

 

I wonder if their interviews required shirt-ripping.

I hope so?

[Writing Wrongs]

Emma Stone in talks to play Cruella de Vil for live action movie:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/emma-stone-talks-play-cruella-852693

 

Ugh.

[Souris]

Well, at least Cruella isn't Asian.

[Trini]

A Cruella origin story?? I might have hurt myself from the eyeroll I just did. After that Maleficent movie, this gets a big 'NO' from me.

[Spartan Girl]

I love Emma Stone, but I second the Hell No, with a No Fucking Way. WTF is Disney thinking?! This was a woman that murders PUPPIES. There's no redemption from that!

Edited January 7, 2016 by Spartan Girl