OUAT vs. Other Fairy Tales: Compare & Contrast

[legaleagle53]

Has anyone heard of this? It looks hilariously bad:

Avengers Grimm

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

 

So now Isaac's taken to writing screenplays!

[Serena]

Looking at that preview image, magical powers isn't the only thing they're endowed with.

[Writing Wrongs]

LOL. I just noticed that it is on Netflix streaming. I may have to check it out.

[legaleagle53]

Looking at that preview image, magical powers isn't the only thing they're endowed with.

 

Come to think of it, Snow does look a bit more like Evil Queen Regina here (if you know what I mean), doesn't she?

[Camera One]

Yeah, she does.  None of the princesses' costumes seem at all connected to their Grimm stories, except for Red Riding and her hood.  They're fighting Rumple in this one too?  Talk about originality.

[Shanna Marie]

Looks like a Saturday-night SyFy channel movie. They've been short on the genre I call "fantasy cheese" lately, so this actually looks like it could be fun, in the "get drunk and snark on it" kind of way.

[legaleagle53]

Yeah, she does.  None of the princesses' costumes seem at all connected to their Grimm stories, except for Red Riding and her hood.  They're fighting Rumple in this one too?  Talk about originality.

 

At least this Rumple is hot, though (with all due respect to Robert Carlyle.  It's not that he's not handsome, but he's really not my type)!

 

Anyway, I'll have to see if I can watch this online.  It really does look like something Isaac would have written in one of his fouler moods, so it definitely has some snark potential.

[Mari]

Has anyone heard of this? It looks hilariously bad:

Avengers Grimm

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

That's a real thing?  It's not a parody ad?  Because . . .bwahhahaha.  :)

 

If someone actually watches this, maybe you could tell us what connection the characters had with their actual original counterparts?

[Camera One]

The description said the princesses got pulled into the portal that Rumple created which brought him to our world.  Hmm... sounds familiar.  Wonder if they had magic eggshells to keep their youthful complexion.

Edited June 15, 2015 by Camera One

[legaleagle53]

That's a real thing?  It's not a parody ad?  Because . . .bwahhahaha.  :)

 

If someone actually watches this, maybe you could tell us what connection the characters had with their actual original counterparts?

 

I just watched it (it's available on YouTube, and it's only 71 minutes long), and yes, it's about what you'd expect from the trailer.

 

I will say that this Team Princess beats the hell out of the one that OUAT gave us.  Red in particular is an even bigger badass.  It's also interesting that two of the princesses have a limited form of magic that relates to their respective origins: 

Aurora can cast a sleeping spell, which she uses to great effect, and Snow evidently has Elsa's power to generate super-cold.

 

The ending is a bit of a WTF for me, and it makes me wonder if a sequel may be planned.

 

It's definitely not a bad way to spend 71 minutes, and there's plenty of snark potential (plus Casper van Diem is always a good thing!)  As I said before, it's something Isaac would write while on crack.  I'd recommend it.

[Camera One]

Thanks for the tip.  I watched 27 minutes of it and will continue another day.  The acting is truly atrocious, but there are some things that I wish "Once" would do, starting with the Princesses working together to defend their kingdoms and being powerful.  Though I still can't tell which princess is which after half an hour.  

I find it interesting that Rumple is the mayor and has infiltrated all levels of society, especially the police force. This would have been an interesting concept if a future villain on "Once" tries to take over the real world.

[legaleagle53]

Thanks for the tip.  I watched 27 minutes of it and will continue another day.  The acting is truly atrocious, but there are some things that I wish "Once" would do, starting with the Princesses working together to defend their kingdoms and being powerful.  Though I still can't tell which princess is which after half an hour.  

I find it interesting that Rumple is the mayor and has infiltrated all levels of society, especially the police force. This would have been an interesting concept if a future villain on "Once" tries to take over the real world.

 

Snow has black hair and looks like Regina; Cinderella has blue/purple hair and fights like Xena; Aurora is blonde and apparently learned a certain spell from Maleficent; Rapunzel is a redhead and has the braid that can be used as a lethal weapon; and there's no mistaking Red with that hood.

 

As for Rumple,

I was also struck by the fact that he became Mayor (I wonder what could have inspired THAT?) and managed to take over the city as a prelude to world domination.

 Regina's got nothing on him, that's for sure!

[Writing Wrongs]

Maleficent sequel in the works:

http://deadline.com/2015/06/maleficent-sequel-angelina-jolie-linda-woolverton-disney-1201443162/

[HoodlumSheep]

^ How is that supposed to work? Would the content stray into more...original territory then?

[Camera One]

Agreed.  I was already bored halfway through the first movie.  No thanks on more.  Maybe Aurora will encourage her to wear bright colors.

[tennisgurl]

Uggggggg. Reminded me so much of Regina and her "she`s just misunderstood!" bullshit. Plus, it ruined the good fairies, three of my favorite Disney characters, just so Mal could look better! Bullcrap! 

[KingOfHearts]

This is one of those movies that did NOT need a sequel. Every single character from the original fairy tale and even the Disney animated movie was ruined. I agree that Maleficent was way too sympathetic and not nearly as evil as she should have been. The ending left nothing to explore or to be desired. To make a sequel, they'd have to pull something out of a hat... unless another Disney villain needs to be reformed and Maleficent starts a villain rehab. Please no.

Edited June 17, 2015 by KingOfHearts

[Camera One]

I know there are some minor direct-to-video things, but it would be fun to see a full-out animated movie with mashups like the animated versions of the Evil Queen and Maleficent causing problems for the Princesses.  

 

All I could say for the "Maleficent" movie was that Angelina Jolie looked like Maleficent.  That was my only takeaway.  I have zero understanding of her character or character motivations despite watching the entire movie, and as KingofHearts said, it pretty much ruined every other character.  It wasn't even much of a twist from the original.  They basically just made Stefan evil and crazy... no nuance at all.  The worldbuilding was weak.  I'm disappointed at that screenwriter considering she helped write the animated Beauty and the Beast and The Lion King.

Edited June 17, 2015 by Camera One

[KingOfHearts]

Jolie's performance (particularly in the scenery chewing scenes) was really the only good thing in the movie. She nailed it. Aurora's acting wasn't horrible, but the writing doomed the character beyond what the actress could fix.

I wish we could have gotten straight up live action Sleeping Beauty with Jolie playing the villain instead.

Edited June 17, 2015 by KingOfHearts

[Rumsy4]

I liked the movie well enough, but it was impossible not to see that Angelina Jolie was playing Maleficent. It wasn't really innovative. Just a straight up inversion of heroes and villians, and pretending it's nuanced. Something like S4B of OUAT, lol.

[legaleagle53]

I liked the movie well enough, but it was impossible not to see that Angelina Jolie was playing Maleficent. It wasn't really innovative. Just a straight up inversion of heroes and villians, and pretending it's nuanced. Something like S4B of OUAT, lol.

 

Maybe Isaac helped write the screenplay but was just never credited.

[Faemonic]

I'm disappointed at that screenwriter considering she helped write the animated Beauty and the Beast and The Lion King.

Maybe it was a Hail Mary pass to pay the mortgage, kind of movie. Definitely not one written by somebody with a story that they were bursting to tell. More like trying to repeat the Wicked formula with somebody other than Elphaba.

Which is sometimes how I feel about This Show, except that at least in the first season I thought the "oh but Bad People still have understandable motivations!" was between believable and tolerable...if repetitive. Now it's just Seriously You've Got To Be Kidding Me and repetitive.

[jhlipton]

Has anyone heard of this? It looks hilariously bad:

Avengers Grimm

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

 

From "The Asylum"!!!!  These are the folks behind the Sharknado movies and are totally unaware just how bad their movies are: http://www.cracked.com/personal-experiences-1698-5-ugly-realities-making-mockbusters-like-sharknado.html

 

Now I have to watch it!

[legaleagle53]

I did, and despite the laughable acting and overall production quality, it was 71 minutes of my life that I don't mind having given up.  The only issue I really had with was the WTF ending that makes me wonder if they're planning a sequel down the road.

 

And from what I've heard, The Asylum is where movie careers go to die.  Poor Casper van Dien (even if he does make for one deliciously HOT Rumpelstiltskin here!).

[LizaD]

 

What this story tells me so far is that the heroes will forever get the Starks treatment on this show.

 

I think for this to be true, you'd have Sansa running around after Roose/Ramsey, begging for their love and friendship and Sansa saying she is just as bad as those 2. Sansa talking smack to Ramsey would be seen as, "Damn what a bitch. No wonder Ramsey is so mean when no one is nice to him." GoT presents the heroes as true heroes but that those heroic attributes can be one's downfall. Some of those heroic attributes are just down right dumb and the situations are too complex for that kind of rigidity in right vs wrong. Once doesn't do that. They present stuff like "heroes don't kill or lie or do anything but be doormats. If they don't follow these rules they are THE EVIL."

 

While Once presents sacrificing yourself and an entire realm of people to save the one person who wanted to kill them all as righteous and heroic, on GoT those  "heroes" would all be dead ala the Starks. In GoT's world, that would be the wrong and stupid move diots and that's why you're now dead. Snow killing Cora was bad and evil and wrong and made her the same as all the villains but on GoT that would be seen as a  smart and necessary move. When Dany watch her husband kill her brother, burn the witch, or let her dragons go after the slave master, those moments were all "You go girl! What a bad ass!" Or at the very least, it allows room for debate. On Once, the heroes would get ripped to shreds for that and they've already gotten that for much less, no question, no debate, just a simple black and white presentation of heroes are evil and villains are victims.

 

Snow and Charming would be a million times better treated as characters if they were Ned and Catelyn, dead corpses and all. Can you imagine Ned and Catelyn licking the Lannisters/Boltons/Frey's asses after the Red Wedding and they didn't die, only Robb and Talisa or the opposite if Ned/Catelyn died and Rob and Talisa survived and ran around sacrificing their kingdom to save those people? That would be the closest equivalent story if GoT was Once.

Edited June 22, 2015 by LizaD

[Shanna Marie]

I have frequently said that OUAT makes Game of Thrones look like Sunday school. GOT may show a lot of horrible things, but the morality makes sense. Good guys are allowed to do what's necessary to save themselves and save others. Heroes can and do kill. Having a difficult childhood isn't a mitigating factor when it comes to high-level villainy. The most a difficult childhood or a sad incident in the past lets anyone get away with is a mildly bad attitude and a little sulking. Someone with a difficult past who does bad things is a bad person with a difficult past, not a misunderstood woobie whose sins are ignored and forgiven. There are shades of grey between hero and villain. It's not a toggle switch.

 

If the OUAT writers were writing GOT, Sansa would have been required to put her own life on hold to try to help Cersei find happiness, ignoring what Cersei and her family have done to Sansa and her family and ignoring the fact that most of Cersei's unhappiness comes from making bad decisions, being a raging bitch and generally being dissatisfied with life. When the surviving Stark children are finally reunited, the OUAT writers would focus on Cersei or Roose Bolton looking sad for not being invited to the celebration.

[Faemonic]

I actually haven't kept up with Season 5 of Game of Thrones because that writer's room has literally lost the plot. They have run out of book to adapt.

 

One of my favorite reviewers mentioned that it was devolving into formulaic TV Writing instead of a well thought-out story structure that plays with expectations, and some line producer or something kept butting in with, "But they've only got two weeks to figure it all out! Of course they'll fall back on the old tropes!"

 

Umm...so an audience isn't allowed to aim higher?

 

But I think that's the problem with Once. The first season didn't have decades of book canon to fall back on so that they wouldn't fall back on the TV Writing tapdance...but season one still subverted so many expectations in such an enjoyable and compelling way. The following season? It's like their novelist consultant pulled out, except that Once never had one.

 

If I'm honest, when the magic came back to Storybrooke then the magic of the series left.

Edited June 28, 2015 by Faemonic

[KingOfHearts]

 

But I think that's the problem with Once. The first season didn't have decades of book canon to fall back on so that they wouldn't fall back on the TV Writing tapdance...but season one still subverted so many expectations in such an enjoyable and compelling way. The following season? It's like their novelist consultant pulled out, except that Once never had one.

Replying in Writers.

Edited June 28, 2015 by KingOfHearts

[Shanna Marie]

I saw this and remembered some of the TWOP discussion in the first season about Emma's long, bouncy blond hair, with Cindy defending it due to the fact that of course she'd have princess hair because she's a fairy-tale princess, even if she didn't know it yet.

 

If Disney princesses had realistic hair

 

Though OUAT does get Ariel closer to realistic. She actually has wet hair when she's been in the water. Jasmine's volume is only unattainable if it's dry. When it's humid, I can achieve that.

[Dianthus]

I thought this might be of interest:

www.fakelore.the-back-row.com

It's a podcast discussing folklore and pop culture.

[OnceUponAJen]

I saw this and remembered some of the TWOP discussion in the first season about Emma's long, bouncy blond hair, with Cindy defending it due to the fact that of course she'd have princess hair because she's a fairy-tale princess, even if she didn't know it yet.

JMo seriously needs to endorse a hair care regimen and/or hair care products. Whatever she uses, I'd be willing to try. That would probably involve a personal stylist every day, so I might be out of luck.

I agree with Cindy, though. I totally buy into that explanation.

Edited July 4, 2015 by OnceUponAJen

[Camera One]

For "research", I watched "The Sword and the Stone" for the first time today. I liked it more than I thought I would, considering sometimes I have little patience for movies geared towards the very young.

 

(spoilers below if you haven't watched it before).

 

Merlin was whimsical and it was funny how he was able to travel to the future.  The whole education-is-important message seemed to go nowhere at the end, but I thought Merlin turning into a microscopic pathogen to defeat Madame Mim was a nice touch.   I thought Young Arthur was very likeable.  I had to laugh when he started singing while scrubbing the pots and pans à la Cinderella scrubbing the floors.  

 

I doubt that "Once" could make much use of the this movie for 5A, but it'll be nice to have an Easter egg or two.  I guess I can imagine a Wizards Duel at some point in the season.  I completely expect Merlin will be twisted and destroyed beyond repair, which he already has been considering how idiotic The Sorcerer is.

[Camera One]

I just went to the library and cleaned out all the books about King Arthur and Merlin I found in the Childrens' section.  I borrowed "The Sword in the Stone" book by T.H. White.  I was hoping for his entire series together in one book.  

 

At the very least, "Once" Is motivating me to learn more about Camelot, LOL.  Only to see them use nothing, I'll bet.

Edited July 5, 2015 by Camera One

[KingOfHearts]

 

For "research", I watched "The Sword and the Stone" for the first time today. Only to see them use nothing, I'll bet.

 

Psh, who needs Morgana? They're totally going to reveal Madam Faustina was Madam Mim who got sucked into a portal to our world after Merlin attempted to throw his darkness into it.

Edited July 6, 2015 by KingOfHearts

[Faemonic]

I actually feel torn about next season because I adore Arthurian legend so I might like S5 just because it had those elements in it, but at the same time I know that it's going to get the magpie treatment and it's highly likely that the characters are going to have such contrived motivations.

There's also the question of how much in the real world they're going to set this. Some people are annoyed that Blackbeard is a fairy tale pirate because he comes from the Land Without Magic (and Long John Silver is right there in the Peter Pan book! The authors knew each other and wrote subtle crossovers!) And Mulan could have been a real historical figure, too, but Disney's more to blame for disrespecting her origins than AH&EK.

I guess they can shrink King Arthur's role to "King of Camelot, A Very Silly Place (in The Enchanted Forest)" from "King of the Britons" when there's no Britain in Misthaven.

I watched a documentary that explained how the historical period where somebody like King Arthur would have fit in...was not a good time to be writing stuff down. The Roman colonists had just up and left for Rome because the Empire was falling or something, and everybody left behind was warring. So, only when the dust settled around the 6th century did monks and historians start writing about this magnificent warrior king.

Mot of the early sources are Welsh because invading Saxons pushed the front lines all the way down over there. It's a funny thing about history that nobody writes down what is obvious at the present time. So, surviving documentation was written for a reader who already knew what happened at so-and-so something or other. More than a millennium later, historians can't figure out what they meant, but the opinion would seem to be about some vaguely Arthurian figures. His sister Morgan wasn't evil yet, and Gwynhwyffar (Welsh for "white like the snow", more popularly known by the French spelling Guinevere) was apparently Arthur's second wife.

In the 12th century, The History of the Kings of Britain by historian Geoffrey Monmouth went into publication, and I gather that used to be almost a standard medieval history textbook for kids privileged enough to be taught to read. Arthur is in that book, and I think Merlin and the Round Table (or was that in the ballad?) but I'm not sure if Morgan is evil yet or if she even got a mention.

When this fandom expanded to France, the 14th century writers answered back with the original Mary Sue: Sir Lancelot du Lac, who is such a hottie that Elaine Ascalot would pull an Ophelia for him after a lifetime of being so careful with that curse she had, and he ruined the marriage of the main power couple of this giant body of work but nobody really hates him for it. He must be more of a hottie than the entire male cast of OUaT combined. Thank you, France.

At this point, though, it became pretty unabashed fiction instead of passing it off as history. German writers joined the fandom and created one of my personal favorite knights, Sir Lohengin. I think The Ring of Nibelunglied was supposed to have influenced the tragedy of Tristan and Isolde because both had love potions and triangles or something, but if I recall that got adapted into just general English folklore before it got nommed by Arthuriana. I've even read a version of Tom Thumb that had him joining the Knights of the Round Table before his tragically fatal duel with a mouse. I think he was engaged to King Arthur's daughter. It's not the size of the boat, it's the motion of the ocean.

So, even though these were generally written documents, they had the fluidity of mythology or folklore passed on by oral tradition, with different storylines being developed across Europe...although the Tom Thumb one might have been post-Mallory and post-White.

The predecessor to a consolidation of all of these stories was Thomas Mallory's Mort D'Arthur, who favored the French versions and shaved off anything that rendered this iteration of King Arthur's life not internally consistent. I had a copy of the unabridged version, a doorstopper that I couldn't actually finish, with commentary by Moore (forgot the first name) something about how Thomas Mallory was a knight and then imprisoned for crime. Apparently, historians found more than one guy named Mallory who could have written this, but one was a rapist so he couldn't possibly also be a writer of chivalrous tales. It had to be the other Mallory who had never gone to prison. Moore wrote in his commentary that perhaps the entire Mort D'Arthur was indeed authored by the criminal, and meant to be ironic, flowery professions of chivalraic ideals and all.

In any case, T.H. White's stuff is further polished and I think that would be the best go-to resource about Arthurian legend.



Peculiar trivia of tropes that characterize modern retellings of Arthurian legends:

1. Knights in shining plate armour! 5th century armor was likely to have been leather, not even chain mail, but I doubt that most of the audience to developing Arthurian legend (let alone developers) had the visual vocabulary that we have? Only because during the Elizabethan age, Shakespeare staged plays in long-ago Athens but didn't costume the actors in togas (source: my drama teacher). If that didn't strain suspension of disbelief, then like fairy tales, "long ago and far away" was enough of a framing device.

For this reason, I do enjoy The Mists of Avalon by Marion Zimmer-Bradley, because she pays a lot of attention to what the clothes are spun out of and how they're dyed or styled with Roman influence and all that. Like the enigmatic Mallory, however, this author has been accused of physical and sexual abuse, of a child, of her daughter, so...how the character of the author conveys anything to the work can continue to be something for fans to grapple with.

The Mists of Avalon also gets into a lot of details about the wars and battles, why they're being fought and how. By contrast, a collection of Arthurian legends in a picture book that I had as a kid was basically more about guys taking road trips on their horses to escape the ennui of nobility--the knight errants. The other stories were romantic subplots.

I guess with the Knights of the Round Table, there's some conservation of badassery going on. It's like they can either be part of an organized military force that charges into a battlefield, or we can get to know their names and solo errant adventures. I don't exactly mind the random dragons and rescuing distressed damsels, that's all romantic, but I'd much prefer stories of royals that actually do stuff. War keeps monarchs busy. Although I guess it begins to make a King look bad if there is never any peace time for his knights to go errant out of ennui, or the Grail Quest. The Historium Brittonum by Nenninus had King Arthur fighting twelve great battles, where did they gooo??

Apparently, to The Mists of Avalon (though more like a general wartime feeling than actual heat-of-battle stuff) along with a New Agey magic system with Atlantic origins and feminist goddess superpowers--that, T.H. White didn't have. I guess it's like OUaT what with villainous Morgan Le Fay getting to tell her side of the story, except with outright incest and no Eowyn or Brienne like characters. The Strong Independent Women are basically limited to magic and (in the case of Arthur's aunt Morgause or the Nimue-Merlin ship) flirting. Or having politically important babies, although Guinevere fails.

This book also has criticisms against it for portraying 5th century Christians as imperialistic and the Pagans as wise and magical people, but I think it fairly captured spirituality as a mysterious force that humankind has always attempted to harness with politics.

2. Giant castles with turrets! I watched the TV show Merlin, and I didn't like it. The script was awfully clumsy, the cast was decent but not scintillating in any of their roles (sorry, Anthony Stewart Head, I loved you in The Genetic Opera), and it all just came off as so campy. When it comes to campy shows I will watch and re-watch, I draw the line between OUaT and Merlin and I will stand on the side of OUaT.

The sets were magnificent, though, or at least the castle was.

Historically, King Arthur might have just lived in a hut in some outpost where people weren't getting killed as often or as horribly as everywhere else in the country. Lancelot's camp in Cora Dome would make for a more historically accurate Camelot.

Fairy tales can convey the image of a lowly commoner coming into the royal court to complain about commoner things. This would have been accurate at a time where those small villages in some outpost were ruled by a chieftain who was considered a king. With retellings, all kings retroactively get better clothes and proper stonemasons. Imagination lets the castles grow huge, and turns them into luxury palaces instead of strongholds for times of war. Kingdoms become nations.

And somebody usually forgets to edit the part where the commoner gets an audience with such a king. The commoner might bow, kneel, or remove their hat, but there's no dress code, no security, no bureaucracy? I actually like that. It's very fairy tale like to so obviously have no bureaucracy in an expansive kingdom. It's magic.

3. All adventures in inland territory! Isn't Britain an island? I know that it isn't a cartoon island with a single palm tree in it, there would be moors and woods and lakes to go adventuring in without the ocean anywhere in sight; and, yes, humans are land mammals, so that all makes sense that knights would seek errant adventures in those places instead of sailing across the narrow sea for a princess and a bottle of contraband love potion...Sir Tristan...

But one of the main reasons I enjoyed Sam Llewellyn's retelling, The Well Between the Worlds was because of how maritime it was. Although, that Arthur was battling Lovecraftian horrors, man-made climate change, and the supernaturally corrupt politics of the ruling monarchy...not Saxons. Yet. I haven't read the sequel, maybe he gets around to the Saxons.

Edited July 6, 2015 by Faemonic

[Souris]

Disney is planning a Prince Charming live-action movie.

[jhlipton]

Giant castles with turrets! I watched the TV show Merlin, and I didn't like it. 

 

I didn't watch much of it, but I loved the fact that the darkest actress played "White like the snow"!

 

There's a Gwen..something or two in the Mabinogion -- the book of Welsh mythology that some minor author stole Rhiannon from so Stevie Nicks could call her a Welsh "witch" -- but I ramble.

 

The Mabinogion -- a fun read if you like that sort of thing -- also mentions Arthur and his 12 battles.

 

There's a version of Le Morte d'Arthur with an introduction by Helen Moore http://booklikes.com/le-morte-d-arthur-thomas-malory-tom-griffith-helen-moore/book,497939 -- is that the one you had?

[HoodlumSheep]

Disney is planning a Prince Charming live-action movie.

Lol. I love how they seem confused about whether or not the prince is from Snow White or Cinderella. I woder if Once is to blame? I've always considered the prince in Cinderella to be Charming (with the exception of Once).

[Shanna Marie]

I love how they seem confused about whether or not the prince is from Snow White or Cinderella.

Well, those two were pretty bland and interchangeable. The prince didn't really get a personality until Sleeping Beauty, with the delightfully snarky Philip.

[Camera One]

I think the Prince in the animated Cinderella was against having all the women come to the castle to have a chance with him, and I thought that was funny.

 

It's really unclear what the Prince in Snow White is actually thinking.  He clearly just loves singing.

[scarynikki12]

The average Disney search lists animated Prince from Cinderella as Charming and the one from Snow White as Florean (or something, not sure of the spelling). The only other place I've seen Charming listed as Snow White's prince was Fables, where he was the cheating ex to her, Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty (a really fun bit of story by the way).

[Writing Wrongs]

In the kids series of books The Sisters Grimm: Fairy-tale Detectives, Charming is ex to Cinderella, Sleepy Beauty and Snow. But Snow is his true love. It's a fun set of books.

 

"The Grimm Sisters soon find that they are living in a town of Everafters, live characters from fantasy and fairy tales. Their family business is working as detectives, who solve mysteries that might be connected to the disappearance of their parents. Unluckily for them, an evil group of Everafters, called The Scarlet Hand, are determined to find a way out of the barrier created by a witch and take over the world; they also have to deal with Puck the fairy boy that lives with them. This barrier stops the Everafters in Ferryport Landing from leaving. The only way to destroy the barrier is if all the Grimms leave the town or if they all die."

[Faemonic]

I didn't watch much of it, but I loved the fact that the darkest actress played "White like the snow"!

 

Me, too! I thought AHEK would steal her and Merlin for the cast of S5, only because they said they wouldn't do their spin on Sherlock unless Benedict Cumberbatch said yes, so it's not as if they're limited by network politics in their character casting pool.

 

(Also, it took forever for me to figure out that Benedict Cumberbatch, Nicholas Hoult, and Colin Morgan, are not the same actor at different stages of pubescence.)

 

 

There's a Gwen..something or two in the Mabinogion -- the book of Welsh mythology that some minor author stole Rhiannon from so Stevie Nicks could call her a Welsh "witch" -- but I ramble.

The Mabinogion -- a fun read if you like that sort of thing -- also mentions Arthur and his 12 battles.

There's a version of Le Morte d'Arthur with an introduction by Helen Moore http://booklikes.com/le-morte-d-arthur-thomas-malory-tom-griffith-helen-moore/book,497939-- is that the one you had?

The cover of mine was closer to this: http://www.amazon.com/Le-Morte-DArthur-Unabridged-Illustrated/dp/1844030016but it doesn't mention any foreword by Moore so I might be wrong.

Edited July 8, 2015 by Faemonic

[Camera One]

How about a mash-up of "Swan Lake" and Camelot in 5A? (beware spoilers for Swan Lake)  If they want to go for the tragic ending of "Swan Lake", they could have Dark Emma find out that the Dark One spell could be broken if a man who has never asked anyone to marry him asks her.  This is her only chance, or she would stay the Dark One forever.   Emma goes to Hook to tell him this.  But evil villain (let's say Morgana, who has turned Arthur, Lancelot and Genevieve into swans) impersonates Dark Emma and gets Hook to ask for her hand in marriage first.  Betrayed, Dark Emma and Hook have a final meeting at the edge of the Lake.  Morgana appears and says Hook must fulfil his promise.  Dark Emma and Hook jump into the lake and drown so they could be together in death, breaking the spell that Arthur, Lancelot and Genevieve are in, and they become human again.  5A ends with the Ladies of the Lake helping Emma and Hook to ascend to heaven, and before they leave, they use Excalibur to crown Regina the new Savior, so she could go defeat Morgana in 5B.  

[Curio]

If they want to go for the tragic ending of "Swan Lake", they could have Dark Emma find out that the Dark One spell could be broken if a man who has never asked anyone to marry him asks her.

I've also read an interpretation where the prince just has to profess his love to her, so maybe the Once writers have been deliberately careful with not having Hook say the words "I love you" to Emma's face yet.

 

Dark Emma and Hook jump into the lake and drown so they could be together in death

...but then they're surprisingly saved at the very bottom depths of the water by none other than Davy Jones, setting up Season 5B: Atlantis. (Sorry, this isn't the wishes thread, is it...)

Edited July 9, 2015 by Curio

[Camera One]

Or Snowing could go to the Underworld to fight Hades and revive Emma and Hook from the dead .  But this breaks the rule of magic, so they are punished by being turned into stone as they look back at Emma/Hook, like the story of Orpheus.  This would allow Emma and Hook to continue on the show while smiting the wicked.

Edited July 9, 2015 by Camera One

[MedievalGirl]

Dying to break a spell or curse and then being brought back by modern medicine would be apropos for Once. It's been long enough since Prophecy Girl, right? 

[HoodlumSheep]

I didn't see this posted here, so here's a short update about the Pinnochio movie.

http://variety.com/2015/film/news/paul-thomas-anderson-pinocchio-robert-downey-jr-1201532521/

[Camera One]

I just borrowed and watched "Brave".   I'll put my thoughts in spoiler tag in case anyone hasn't seen "Brave", though it has been out for several years now.

 

It was okay. I was a little bored with all the silliness geared towards children and people who liked action moments.  Then again, I wasn't too impressed with "Frozen" nor "Tangled" either.  I think I liked "Brave" a little less than those, even.  I liked Merida somewhat but not fully.  I mean, she didn't even apologize until the end.  I did like how the story was about the bond between Merida and her mother.  I don't get why people say "Frozen" was so innovative with the spell being broken by a sister, when this one was also based on family and not romantic love.  The music was really forgettable.  I did like the legend about the four brothers, though I'm not sure what the point was by the end of it, other than the parallel with Merida and her mother.   To entertain myself, I imagined the Wisp was the Blue Fairy being so cryptic and basically putting everyone in danger, and in the end, the Wisp's machinations ended up with everyone being where they were supposed to be and of course learning the lesson the hard way.  It's funny how I would never even have bothered watching "Frozen", "Tangled" or "Brave" if not for "Once Upon a Time".  I just don't like these new age animated movies as much.  

Edited July 13, 2015 by Camera One

[HoodlumSheep]

Brave was okay. The mother/daughter bond was the strongest aspect of the movie though. I thought it lacked a certain spark though. Still like Tangled the best out of the newer princess movies.

Edited July 13, 2015 by HoodlumSheep