OUAT vs. Other Fairy Tales: Compare & Contrast

[FurryFury]

I think Cordelia was ruined as a character back in season 3 to prop the ship, so I was personally glad that she was written off and then killed. I like seasons 4 and 5 much more because of that (especially 5 which was all-around great, imho). As for CC, well, I do think her behavior wasn't really all that professional, I mean, first Cordelia had to be written off for a few episodes because of her honeymoon, and the next season, a big arc centered on her character had to be completely scrambled and reworked because of her pregnancy. 

 

That said, it was still not as badly written as much of stuff on Once. Of course, it stung harder because the show was overall much better, but hey. 

[Shanna Marie]

I think Cordelia was ruined as a character back in season 3 to prop the ship

Yeah, they started turning her into Buffy Lite in order to justify a relationship with Angel. Which should be a sign that it was a bad idea -- if you have to morph a character beyond all recognition in order for that character to consider getting involved with another character or for the other character to be attracted to her, maybe you shouldn't go there. It took a literal lobotomy for Cordelia to want anything to do with Angel romantically. She was always way too conscious of the fact that Angelus was inside him and could be unleashed. She'd seen what that was like, and "real" Cordy never would have gone anywhere near getting herself in that situation. What's funny is that while they were transforming her to prop up the relationship, they kept writing plots that went in the exact opposite direction, so it was like on one level they knew it was a bad idea. They were just stuck in the mentality that someone in the main cast -- particularly the male lead and the female lead -- had to be in a romantic relationship. We couldn't have an entire main cast who were all just good friends and like a family.

 

I do have to give them points to be willing to go there with the retcon. I think the scene in which the demon laughs at them for believing her ascension may be one of my favorite, ever.

[Dianthus]

FurryFury, on 22 May 2015 - 1:11 PM, said:

I think Cordelia was ruined as a character back in season 3 to prop the ship, so I was personally glad that she was written off and then killed. I like seasons 4 and 5 much more because of that (especially 5 which was all-around great, imho). As for CC, well, I do think her behavior wasn't really all that professional, I mean, first Cordelia had to be written off for a few episodes because of her honeymoon, and the next season, a big arc centered on her character had to be completely scrambled and reworked because of her pregnancy. 

 

That said, it was still not as badly written as much of stuff on Once. Of course, it stung harder because the show was overall much better, but hey. 

Maybe JW wasn't being too professional here either. Look at The X-Files. Gillian Anderson's real-life pregnancy was a turning point in that show's evolution.

[Shanna Marie]

I think the issue with Cordelia Carpenter's pregnancy was that they weren't given a chance to plan for it because she didn't tell them. If she'd told them when she first knew, they could have written around it. But they'd planned a big arc for Cordelia and had even filmed the episodes setting up that arc before they knew she was going to be out of commission. That was why they were upset with her. There are a lot of cases of producers being willing to work with actresses when they have advance warning in time to plan for any limitations or absences. But it puts them in a difficult situation when they don't know until it's already obvious. I think there had already been some issues with her doing drastic hair style and color changes without warning, and the no-warning pregnancy was a final straw.

 

Though at that point I think they'd already destroyed the character beyond the point of repair. Let's hope the Once producers learn from their mistakes and never take Regina too far down the redemption path. And let's really hope they don't pull an Illyria on us (though it would be interesting to see how Hook would handle the situation Wes found himself in -- I think Hook is saner and more stable than Wes to begin with, so I doubt he'd go quite as off the deep end).

[FurryFury]

I think the issue with Cordelia Carpenter's pregnancy was that they weren't given a chance to plan for it because she didn't tell them. If she'd told them when she first knew, they could have written around it. But they'd planned a big arc for Cordelia and had even filmed the episodes setting up that arc before they knew she was going to be out of commission. That was why they were upset with her. There are a lot of cases of producers being willing to work with actresses when they have advance warning in time to plan for any limitations or absences. But it puts them in a difficult situation when they don't know until it's already obvious. I think there had already been some issues with her doing drastic hair style and color changes without warning, and the no-warning pregnancy was a final straw.

 

Yes, exactly. 

Though at that point I think they'd already destroyed the character beyond the point of repair. Let's hope the Once producers learn from their mistakes and never take Regina too far down the redemption path. And let's really hope they don't pull an Illyria on us (though it would be interesting to see how Hook would handle the situation Wes found himself in -- I think Hook is saner and more stable than Wes to begin with, so I doubt he'd go quite as off the deep end).

 

Oh they'll never do something like that, and even Illyria wasn't meant to be permanent, the cancellation did it (I did enjoy the hell out of her character so I didn't mind TBH).

 

As for Regina, personally, her character IS beyond repair for me at this point, but so is Rumple too, TBH. As long as they are treated as heroes and, for Regina, basically martyrs and saints, it's hard to take the show seriously.

Edited May 23, 2015 by FurryFury

[Camera One]

Whedon is a better storyteller and has more evidence of being able to structure a season-long arc, but even he wasted the entire final season of "Buffy" (where even the title character became unlikeable), so I don't have too much faith that we'll get a good final season on "Once Upon a Time" with A&E.  It seems like the same old pattern in almost every show.  The supporting characters in "Buffy" like Xander hardly got anything of substance by the final season.  If characters got something to play, it was through turning evil or "dark".  The characters were sacrificed on the altar of plot, and a really bad plot at that.  By mid-series, they even created annoying retcons like Buffy having a sister (not as bad as Regina having Zelena, but Dawn was annoying for a very long time).  

 

Even with my favorite shows, I feel the writers lost steam by the fourth, or on better shows, the fifth season at the latest.  More commonly, things start to fall apart on the third or the second.  A lot of it is the major character struggles introduced in the pilot are usually resolved by the end of the first or the end of the second seasons.  Then, the writer doesn't know what to do with the protagonists, and especially the protagonists' friends and family (the supporting characters).  The antagonists tend to have a longer shelf life, since their redemption arc usually takes longer.  On "Once", the axe fell on Snow and Henry first, by 2B.  Charming wasn't as much of a focus at the beginning, so he peaked later than Snow, and then fell again by 3B.  A&E's backflopping resulted in Regina's arc becoming a mess by 2B.  Rumple lasted longer, to 4A.   The only good thing is, as a main character, perhaps through being used less, Emma is still viable.  Hook as well.  So the main hope is that 5A is kind to them.

Edited May 23, 2015 by Camera One

[KingOfHearts]

 

so I don't have too much faith that we'll get a good final season on "Once Upon a Time" with A&E.  It seems like the same old pattern in almost every show.

 

Lost S6 assassinated every single character. None of them were in a good light for me. Jack, Sawyer, Hurley, and Kate went totally bland and became pure plot devices. It was like they were high the whole way through. The secondary characters, who were supposedly important, were either totally forgotten or became background scenery. Even the new characters all died. With Once, I'm expecting a story similar to the Author explaining the deepest mythos and all the other characters getting sidelined or drugged up in order to fit the plot.

 

A&E have plenty of precedence both from Lost and this show.

Edited May 23, 2015 by KingOfHearts

[Dianthus]

I seem to remember that CC asked for more money too (which makes sense if you're having a kid). Imagine, thinking she can get married and start a family on her own timeline, just because her boss is Joss Whedon: World's Greatest Feminist.

[FurryFury]

Yeah if she considers her marriage more important than her work to the point of messing up her show she shouldn't deserve that work. Plenty of actresses got married and pregnant without so many issues.

[Faemonic]

So, there's this guy called Bruno Bettelheim, who is a child psychologist that became famous for his study on the impact of fairy tales on troubled youth. I thought this excerpt from The Uses of Enchantment could be relevant:

 

It is characteristic of fairy tales to state an existential dilemma briefly and pointedly. This permits the child to come to grips with the problem in its most essential form, where a more complex plot would confuse matters for him. The fairy tale simplifies all situations.  Its figures are clearly drawn; and details, unless very important, are eliminated. All characters are typical rather than unique.

 

Contrary to what takes place in many modern children’s stories, in fairy tales evil is as omnipresent as virtue.  In practically every fairy tale good and evil are given body in the form of some figures and their actions, as good and evil are omnipresent in life and the propensities for both are present in every man.  It is this duality which poses the moral problem, and requires the struggle to solve it.

 

Evil is not without its attractions—symbolized by the mighty giant or dragon, the power of the witch, the cunning queen in “Snow White”—and often it is temporarily in the ascendancy.  In many fairy tales a usurper succeeds for a time in seizing the place which rightfully belongs to the hero ... It is not that the evildoer is punished at the story’s end which makes immersing oneself in fairy stories an experience in moral education, although this is part of it.  In fairy tales, as in life, punishment or fear of it is only a limited deterrent to crime.  The conviction that crime does not pay is a much more effective deterrent, and that is why in fairy tales the bad person always loses out. It is not the fact that virtue wins out at the end which promotes morality, but that the hero is most attractive to the child, who identifies with the hero in all his struggles ...  The child makes such identifications all on his own, and the inner and outer struggles of the hero imprint morality on him.

 

The figures in fairy tales are not ambivalent—not good and bad at the same time, as we all are in reality.  But since polarization dominates the child’s mind, it also dominates fairy tales.  A person is either good or bad, nothing in between ... Presenting the polarities of character permits the child to comprehend easily the difference between the two, which he could not do as readily were the figures drawn more true to life, with all the complexities that characterize real people. 

 

Ambiguities must wait until a relatively firm personality has been established on the basis of positive identifications.

 

This helped me sort of bridge the personality change that Henry undertook between the end of Season 1 and the beginning of Season 2. In Season 1, he knew that The Evil Queen had "won" and Regina herself thought so too...but that this would only be a temporary victory, as the stories say. When that arc is finished, Henry then had developed "a relatively firm personality".

 

So, when he catches sight of an angry mob out for Regina's blood, he says, "Please help her. She's still my mom." Even though he still had Regina's gaslighting and emotional abuse to confront. He's ready for ambiguity. I as a viewer was also ready for that ambiguity as a concept (as Regina had cleaned every diaper, endured every tantrum, and soothed every fever)...but not ready for how it came out. Henry led the storyline from a child's perspective, the Charmings from the more mature and developed perspective, but at some point the unambiguous and the ambiguous had crossed the streams.

 

But that's just in-show. I think the real muddle came in with having the unambiguous fairy tale structure playing out, and some ambiguity, and a vocal fanbase that identified with figures not polarized towards virtue...which Bettelheim also addresses.

 

a child’s choices are based, not so much on right versus wrong, as on who arouses his sympathy and who his antipathy. 

 

...

 

Amoral fairy tales show no polarization or juxtaposition of good and bad persons; that is because these amoral stories serve an entirely different purpose.  Such tales or type figures as “Puss in Boots,” who arranges for the hero’s success through trickery, and Jack, who steals the giant’s treasure, build character not by promoting choices between good and bad, but by giving the child the hope that even the meekest can succeed in life.  After all, what’s the use of choosing to become a good person when one feels so insignificant that he fears he will never amount to anything?  Morality is not the issue in these tales, but rather, assurance that one can succeed.  Whether one meets life with a belief in the possibility of mastering its difficulties or with the expectation of defeat is also a very important existential problem.

 

So, in a strange way, there's a hierarchy of (emotional/psychological) needs thing going on...but it's not a solid pyramid. The sort of moral ambiguity that comes with beloved tricksters like Jack and Puss In Boots is meant to remedy an existential crisis. Without security on that existential level, the psyche is unable to aspire to heroism. Yet, heroism is defined in unambiguous contradiction to villainy, which develops the firmness of personality, which can then in turn produce a psyche equipped to explore ambiguity. Ambiguity can't come first but it must.

 

...I suspect one problem with this show is that it's trying to play all the levels at the same time, and it almost worked, it even sometimes worked...but then it didn't, and then it really really didn't. There's the letters of the word h-e-r-o, but then there's the spirit of the definition wherein everybody is the hero of their own story and the villain of somebody else's story. The letter and the spirit had a lot of inbetween that, rather than create a dynamic and profound story, just became a mess that robbed both points of alignment of any meaning.

Edited May 25, 2015 by Faemonic

[Shanna Marie]

...I suspect one problem with this show is that it's trying to play all the levels at the same time, and it almost worked, it even sometimes worked...but then it didn't, and then it really really didn't.

I think that's a big part of the problem. On the one hand, they're doing the fleshed-out fairy tale, where the characters are supposedly characters rather than archetypes. The conceit is that these storybook characters we know are actually real people in their own world, and therefore they're more ambiguous. The heroes have flaws. The villains are human enough to love. It's not just black and white.

 

But then they make the Evil Queen even more evil than she is in the fairy tale. In the story, the only person she torments is Snow White. I don't even recall a suggestion that she murdered her husband or that she punished the Huntsman for his deception. Regina arranged the murder of her husband, ripped out hearts left and right, slaughtered villages, and cursed the whole kingdom. That's making things less ambiguous, not more. And then they go less ambiguous with the idea of a "hero," where "heroes don't kill" and a hero can't be a hero if there are any flaws -- unless it's Regina, who is absolved of all sin because she stopped sinning (mostly). They got really crazy with that whole "villains don't get happy endings" routine, where the villain's current situation apparently doesn't matter, once you're a villain, you're doomed. Except not because you make your own happy ending. I kind of like the idea of self-aware fairy tale characters who are aware of the tropes, and I've read some fun stuff that plays with that concept (Mercedes Lackey's 500 Kingdoms series, in which the magical system is based on the Tradition that keeps trying to make the tales play out, and they have to know the tales in order to subvert them), but again, they lost the thread and it ended up a muddled mess where we're still not sure what point they're trying to make, other than that they're obsessed with Regina.

[Faemonic]

they lost the thread and it ended up a muddled mess where we're still not sure what point they're trying to make, other than that they're obsessed with Regina.

Since I'm still on a Bettelheim psychoanalysis kick, I wonder if it's a combination of the power fantasy that Lily never got to live (flying around with her mother, both being scary-awesome dragon bitches and breathing fire on everybody who did them wrong) but Regina did, combined with maybe a grief-and-forgiveness fantasy. You can't have both, though, because the fantasy fulfillment of having everybody gracious enough to forgive you necessitates admission that the power fantasy fulfillment was a wrong-bad thing that wielded damage worthy of being taken to task for. Regina is an attempt at a cake that people can have and eat, too.

[Dianthus]

There's an interesting article over at io9 on books about fairy tales:

http://io9.com/10-books-that-will-change-how-you-think-about-fairy-tal-1706949752

[Writing Wrongs]

New Descendants trailer:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3440298/?ref_=ext_shr_tw_vi_hm_hp#lb-vi2513219609

 

Looks fun.

[HoodlumSheep]

^ I'll probably end up watching it. Disney Channel is on Hallmark Channel cheesiness levels (okay, maybe not quite), but I still check out their original movies. They're usually entertaining to some degree.

In other news, concerning that Little Mermaid live-action:

https://twitter.com/ew/status/605496413804503040

Sofia Coppola dropped out.

Edited June 2, 2015 by HoodlumSheep

[HoodlumSheep]

Good news!

We're getting a Tangled series in 2017!

https://twitter.com/disney/status/606113782910320640

[Curio]

That makes me ridiculously happy! (I'm one of few people who thinks Tangled is a way better movie than Frozen.)

[legaleagle53]

I'd smell a cross-over coming if this show and these writers hadn't already so badly botched Rapunzel.

[FurryFury]

That makes me ridiculously happy! (I'm one of few people who thinks Tangled is a way better movie than Frozen.)

You and me both. Frozen had better music and the less conventional story, but Tangled was overall a much better plotted movie with stronger characterization. That said, I doubt I'll watch this show. I'm happy with the way things ended and I don't really see any loose ends that are begging to be explored. Frozen actually has more potential for a continuation.

[HoodlumSheep]

I too, thought that Tangled was superior to Frozen, and I personally enjoyed it's music better than Frozen's. Tangled songs are good, happy-feeling songs, and they always make me smile.

Congrats to Tangled though. First they had announced the broadway-ish show that will be on the cruise lines, and now it's own show!!!

[Shanna Marie]

I also loved Tangled, probably more than Frozen, but I can't really think of what room there is for a series. When would it take place? I know one of the follow-up made-for-DVD Beauty and the Beast movies was set during the time Belle was living in the castle while the Beast was still a beast, but there doesn't seem to be room within Tangled to do that sort of thing because that whole story took place in a couple of days. If it's a prequel, then Rapunzel is stuck in a tower and Flynn hasn't met her yet and they don't interact. If it's a sequel, then Rapunzel no longer has prehensile hair, they're an established couple, and Flynn probably isn't still a thief. I guess since they left it open to suggest it was a while before they got married, they could still have some adventures and be working on developing their relationship, but it still doesn't seem like there's much room to play with there.

 

The big question is, will they have the original voices? I'd hate to hear imitation Zach Levi, and his geeky charm (adorkable smolder) was a big reason why the movie worked.

 

Maybe with Once they could do like with Ursula, where the Rapunzel we met turned out to have been named after the famous heroine Rapunzel, and she had the long hair because once she felt stuck in the tower, the magic herb was making her manifest the fears in her head that came from the name.

[HoodlumSheep]

https://twitter.com/disneyinsider/status/606113360493576192

Both the leads are set to return.

I'll take a guess and say it takes place after Tangled but before they're married.

As for the long hair, apparently the Rapunzel in the Disney Parks answers that question by telling guests that she had enough magic tears left to grow out her hair again (so she has magical tears instead of hair now). But that could just be a rumor, I don't really know. If that's the case she could just decide to cut it again before the wedding??

Edited June 3, 2015 by HoodlumSheep

[Curio]

I also loved Tangled, probably more than Frozen, but I can't really think of what room there is for a series. When would it take place?

Variety says it will take place after the events of the original movie and before their wedding.

 

“Tangled” on Disney Channel is set between the events of the original film and the start of “Tangled Ever After.” The series follows the long-locked Rapunzel (Moore), as she acquaints herself with her parents, her kingdom and the people of Corona, and realizes there is much more she needs to learn before she can truly accept her royal destiny, causing her to put her crown and put her marriage on hold to seek out epic adventures, much to the dismay of her father, the King. Accompanying Rapunzel on her journey will be the charming bandit Eugene (Levi); the plucky chameleon sidekick, Pascal; the no-nonsense horse, Maximus; the Snuggly Duckling Pub Thugs; and newcomer Cassandra, a tough-as-nails handmaiden, who becomes Rapunzel’s confidant.

Edited June 3, 2015 by Curio

[HoodlumSheep]

Ooh, thanks for the new info Curio! So Rapunzel gonna get a new friend named Cassandra?

[KingOfHearts]

So glad it's not a Frozen series. Tangled is better suited for the small screen than the residents of Arendelle, imo.

[Serena]

I think the issue with Cordelia Carpenter's pregnancy was that they weren't given a chance to plan for it because she didn't tell them. If she'd told them when she first knew, they could have written around it. But they'd planned a big arc for Cordelia and had even filmed the episodes setting up that arc before they knew she was going to be out of commission. That was why they were upset with her. There are a lot of cases of producers being willing to work with actresses when they have advance warning in time to plan for any limitations or absences. But it puts them in a difficult situation when they don't know until it's already obvious. I think there had already been some issues with her doing drastic hair style and color changes without warning, and the no-warning pregnancy was a final straw.

Yes. Just look at Josh and Ginny, who told A&E when they started thinking about trying for a child. That way they were able to set it up. Now, did they do it well? No, because they're A&E, but imagine how much worse it could have been if they hadn't been warned!

[Shanna Marie]

Okay, if we're getting Zack Levi and Maximus, I'm in. Maximus may be a horse, but he reminded me so much of a white German shepherd I used to have that if I get another German shepherd, his name will have to be Max.

 

Gee, I think I'm going to have to rewatch Tangled again. I saw it twice at the theater and I'm an adult with no children.

[Camera One]

As for the long hair, apparently the Rapunzel in the Disney Parks answers that question by telling guests that she had enough magic tears left to grow out her hair again (so she has magical tears instead of hair now). 

 

LOL, maybe A&E writes her lines too.  

[FurryFury]

I saw it twice at the theater and I'm an adult with no children.

 

Me and my husband are both adults with no children and we watched it twice. It's just an awesome feel-good movie with relatable characters and great humor. So no wonder!

Edited June 4, 2015 by FurryFury

[HoodlumSheep]

^ You all should see my airline luggage. It's Disney; more specifically it's plastered with Mickey and Minnie and rainbows and clouds that look like cupcakes. So basically it looks like luggage for a 7 year-old. I'll be rolling it around in the afterlife.

I love Tangled. It's so...happy! I just love the characters and everything. And I don't know if a confirmation has posted yet, bit Claire Keane (who's helping with stuff for the series) says that the pic we've seen is what they are sort of aiming for, artwise.

https://twitter.com/claireonacloud/status/606169238185705472

[Curio]

And I don't know if a confirmation has posted yet, bit Claire Keane (who's helping with stuff for the series) says that the pic we've seen is what they are sort of aiming for, artwise.

https://twitter.com/claireonacloud/status/606169238185705472

 

Oh, I hope this is true! I've been hoping for a 2D animation resurgence for years now. (Don't get me wrong, 3D can be beautiful, but there's so much emotion and personality that gets lost from the 2D animation.) I just hope they have the time to make is look more like Paperman and not half-ass it.

[Spartan Girl]

So excited for the Tangled series, but Rapunzel had better have her short brown hair. She can't have her original hair in the TV series and then go back to brunette in Tangled Ever After! Even younger viewers will know something is up!

[ABitOFluff]

My niece and nephews adore Tangled. Funny thing: my hair is brown, and I wear it in a short, layered bob, so they often refer to Rapunzel as having "Aunt Karen hair".

 

There's a fun Easter Egg in Frozen too. You can spot Rapunzel and Eugene briefly when they open the gates during "First Time in Forever".

 

As for me, I think Mother Gothel is a great villain. I can see her being played by Bebe Neuwirth, Carol Kane or Andrea Martin on Broadway.

Edited June 5, 2015 by ABitOFluff

[Shanna Marie]

As for me, I think Mother Gothel is a great villain. I can see her being played by Bebe Neuwirth, Carol Kane or Andrea Martin on Broadway.

Or, you know, Donna Murphy (also a big Broadway star, complete with Tony Awards). In fact, that might be one of the few Disney films in which almost all the voice cast could actually play the same roles in live action without it being weird. Mandy Moore would just need a wig, and Donna Murphy would need makeup for "old" mode, though she won one of her Tonys for a role in which she was supposedly an ugly woman in a love affair with a handsome younger man.

[KingOfHearts]

Tangled has a charm to it that comes with not being a huge success like Frozen. It had its own unique humor and feel, which I could appreciate it. I agree that Mother Gothel was an excellent villain. She was conniving and manipulative like a good baddie should be. Plus there's that "overbearing mother-in-law" persona she covered so well. The story was simple but still enjoyable. It deserves a TV series more than Frozen.

[Writing Wrongs]

The first time I saw Tangled I couldn't believe how handsome Flynn was. I was mesmerized. What a hottie. :)

[Shanna Marie]

It's the smolder. That's hard to resist. :-)

 

Now y'all are making me want to watch Tangled again, and I have a project I need to finish that will require working most of the weekend.

[kitticup]

if you like CS and tangled, then you'll love this video: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GqfKYS-gAFk

They did a great job.

[legaleagle53]

I don't want to alarm anybody, but Galavant is apparently going to show us its own Enchanted Forest during its second season.  Now, I'm not saying that there's necessarily going to be a crossover with Once, but it does make me go "Hmmmm."

[ParadoxLost]

I don't want to alarm anybody, but Galavant is apparently going to show us its own Enchanted Forest during its second season.  Now, I'm not saying that there's necessarily going to be a crossover with Once, but it does make me go "Hmmmm."

 

Alarmed? Why would I be alarmed.  Have you not seen this

 

 

or this (the first one is better done... but... land pirate)

 

[legaleagle53]

Hmm.  Maybe it's not the worst thing ever (see what I did there?).

[Shanna Marie]

I so desperately need Galavant on DVD, and Amazon doesn't seem to have it even as a distant pre-order.

[Serena]

I think they're possibly gonna wait for S2 to put Galavant on a DVD. They only have 8 20-minute episodes, which is the equivalent of 4 episodes of Once. They probably would need to charge a lot more than people would reasonably pay for 4 episodes to make a profit on those DVDs. 

[SilverShadow]

So watching the Tonys last night, in Finding Neverland's performance, Kelsey Grammer's Captain Hook says,"A man who is not willing to fight for what he wants, gets what he deserves." Which is almost exactly the same as a Once!Hook quote.

 

https://youtu.be/X-bl00nw3v0

 

Now I'm wondering if it's a line from the original book. Anyone recall?

[Serena]

I googled that and got pretty much all OUAT results.

[FurryFury]

A quick keyword search in the text of Peter Pan also didn't give any results.

[Shanna Marie]

I don't think Book Hook came off as particularly bold. He was so very emo and kind of whiny. I can't imagine him having the life philosophy of having to be willing to fight for the things he wants. Though I guess we only saw him after he'd been defeated by Pan for however many years. He might have been worn down and given up. Immediate post-Neverland Show Hook wasn't in great shape, himself, mostly just sulking and drinking and not exactly doing a lot of fighting for the things he loves. Who knows what he was like in his late Neverland days? (We don't, because they didn't bother giving us a lot of Neverland flashbacks during the Neverland arc.)

[Amerilla]

Pretty sure the"gets what he deserves" line is from the 2004 Finding Neverland movie and adapted to this new stage version. I don't think it's original Barrie.

[pezgirl7]

I did a keyword search in the movie transcript, and nothing came up. So I don't think it was taken from either the book or the movie. Hmmm I call plagiarism! :P

[Writing Wrongs]

Has anyone heard of this? It looks hilariously bad:

Avengers Grimm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZrgTBEfS4Y

 

 

When Rumpelstiltskin destroys the Magic Mirror and escapes to the modern world, the four princesses of "Once Upon a Time"-Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, Snow White, and Rapunzel-are sucked through the portal too. Well-trained and endowed with magical powers, the four women must fight Rumpelstiltskin and his army of thralls before he enslaves everyone on Earth.