OUAT vs. Other Fairy Tales: Compare & Contrast

[KAOS Agent]

I think it's possible that the Initiative would have been better done if the actress playing Professor Walsh had gotten back to them about her availability. Believing that she wasn't going to be around, they completely changed the story and shifted to Adam, so by the time her agent responded they had already moved on from Walsh in their plotting and it was too late to go back. Rogue scientists using knowledge gained from all the supernatural beings to create a superhybrid (and not the dumb ass machine that Adam was) could have been interesting, but that couldn't happen because Lindsay Crouse didn't commit in time  It's a bit like Once with the loss of Colin for several episodes in 2B. They had to shift gears pretty quickly and suffered for it. That's not to say it wouldn't have sucked had it played out the way they planned, just that changes had to be made really fast and that tends to lower quality in general.

S4 still had my favorite Buffy episode ever in "Hush" and I did appreciate how that creepy and totally watchable as a one off episode still fit into the overarching narrative they had going with the Initiative/Slayer secrets.

[KingOfHearts]

Quote

S4 still had my favorite Buffy episode ever in "Hush" and I did appreciate how that creepy and totally watchable as a one off episode still fit into the overarching narrative they had going with the Initiative/Slayer secrets.

I totally forgot to mention Hush. That episode was a freaking masterpiece and probably my favorite. Not only was it an amazing episode of Buffy, but a great 42 minutes of television in general. It hit the right notes for both comedy and horror. I was legitimately disturbed by the creepiness. (Of course, I watched it at like 2AM...) I thought it outclassed even the S2 finale.

Quote

I think it's possible that the Initiative would have been better done if the actress playing Professor Walsh had gotten back to them about her availability.

That's interesting. You all will have to clue me in on the meta stuff as I go.

Edited February 10, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[Souris]

1 hour ago, Camera One said:

I liked Riley but I remember he was almost universally hated.

I feel like liking Riley is the most unpopular opinion in all of Buffydom! I liked him, too, while knowing he wasn't going to be endgame for Buffy. I just appreciated his "normal guy"ness. Though I was predisposed to like him because I knew the actor from when he played ACC basketball for Wake Forest. I remember when I saw the notice of his casting and was all, "Marc Blucas is going to be on Buffy?? THAT Marc Blucas???" It was so unexpected!

I also feel like it's unusual in Buffydom not to have a side in the Angel vs. Spike ship war. Frankly I didn't ship Buffy with either of them.

15 minutes ago, KingOfHearts said:

I totally forgot to mention Hush. That episode was a freaking masterpiece and probably my favorite. Not only was it an amazing episode of Buffy, but a great 42 minutes of television in general. It hit the right notes for both comedy and horror. I was legitimately disturbed by the creepiness.

Hush, YES! My fave Buffy ep by far. So innovative, creative and creepy as hell. Those Gentlemen floating along with their creepy grins -- ::shudder::

[Shanna Marie]

On 2/4/2017 at 10:29 PM, Dianthus said:

I was so NOT thrilled to see Wes back on AtS, but he goes on to be a lot cooler on that show.

I initially resented his presence because I hated the swap out, but he really grew on me. I think they did a good job of bringing in a new character and letting the audience make up their own mind about him. A lot of shows would have pushed him down your throat and insisted how great he was, and don't you love him? But they did the opposite, having everyone else find him annoying and resenting his presence, while gradually showing how useful he could be, with the result that the audience ended up feeling like defending him to the other characters. And then I learned about the offscreen reason for the cast change, and it all made a lot of sense. I think they did a good job of scrambling to salvage something.

"Hush" was one of the things I meant when I said that while the quality of the show as a whole started a downhill slide, there were still moments of brilliance. That was pretty darn brilliant, a true classic.

[Souris]

1 hour ago, Shanna Marie said:

Meanwhile, I'm continuing with my Wonderland rewatch, and one thing I love about it is that they cliffhang on hope.

ITA, that was a lovely thing about Wonderland. It was hopeful without being overly twee or silly about it. So different from how Once is now!

[Trini]

http://forums.previously.tv/forum/221-buffy-the-vampire-slayer/

[Souris]

Wesley ended up being my favorite character in the entire Buffyverse. A really great example of character change over time that made sense and wasn't forced or bogus. (Unlike, say, Regina, to bring it back to topic). If you placed the poncey Watcher who first showed up on Buffy next to how he ended up on Angel, you wouldn't think they were the same character.

Edited February 10, 2017 by Souris

[Camera One]

23 hours ago, KingOfHearts said:

Emerald City's twists have not been great. There was one in particular tonight that was played entirely for angst and shock value. It had very, very little setup. (If you would even call it that) The show in general is very reticent in its storytelling. There's a lot of holding back to keep everything shrouded in mystery, much like OUAT. The writers there have a better grip on the world they've built, but... how can I put this -- a lot happens but at the same time very little happens. There's a lot of shocking developments that don't actually contribute much to the main plot. It moves as slow as Christmas too. Nothing interesting ever comes about until the final five minutes of an episode. 

I actually had been okay with this show, up until the episode last night, which I just watched.  7 episodes in, and it's still smokescreens.  Plus it's as bleak as hell and the characters are okay but not all that interesting.

Edited February 12, 2017 by Camera One

[KAOS Agent]

Emerald City is trying to be mysterious and complex, but it's mostly wasting time by not doing anything. It just looks pretty doing nothing. I have no idea what any character other than Dorothy wants.  Once is the opposite in that it's straightforward with little mystery, but it still wastes time doing nothing. I don't know which is worse, but I lean towards Emerald City being more annoying because it's taking too long to get to a point where I'm able to form an opinion on what I want to happen/who I want to root for. If I didn't know it was only ten episodes, I would stop watching. By episode seven of Once, Graham was murdered and the story was very clear. I couldn't wait for the show to come back from the holiday break.

[KingOfHearts]

Quote

 By episode seven of Once, Graham was murdered and the story was very clear. I couldn't wait for the show to come back from the holiday break.

Once threw the audience some bones early on, I agree. In the second episode, we learned why Regina cast the curse and how she did it. In the third episode, Snow and Charming's relationship was plainly laid out and David woke up from the coma, so there was plot movement. Even in the Cinderella episode, which was filler-y-ish, we understood Rumple's business of making deals. Once really didn't wait very long to give us a clear picture of who the characters were.

On Emerald City, nearly every character has a shrouded past of secrets we're not supposed to know about. I can't really feel sympathetic toward Dorothy's wishes to return home, since we saw so little of her life pre-Oz. Lucas's arc is about forgotten memories. Sylvie can't articulate her origins. Glinda and the Wizard are super reclusive in their motives. West and Langwidere have backstory, but we've only heard them briefly discuss them. Now, I don't think characters should all be open books, nor that we have to have long flashbacks for everyone. But, it's difficult to be engaged with main characters we know so little about. (Especially two-thirds through the first season.)

In my opinion, Emerald City is excessively vague. Just look at the main conflict - the Beast Forever. It's so ill-defined. You might as well call it "The Big Bad Thing"... or you know, Evil Vampire Bunnies.

Edited February 12, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[KAOS Agent]

36 minutes ago, KingOfHearts said:

I can't really feel sympathetic toward Dorothy's wishes to return home, since we saw so little of her life pre-Oz.

Eh, Dorothy has been tortured or almost murdered by pretty much everyone she meets. I'd want to go home too. She has gained some friends, but they are pretty new and she loves her adoptive parents in Kansas. Also, Oz sucks. If Dorothy decided now that she wanted to stay in Oz, I'd think she was crazy or under some sort of spell. Compare that with S1 Emma, whose life in Storybrooke also kind of sucked since she was forced out of the B&B and living in her car and being harassed by the mayor and her sheriff lackey. It still made sense that she'd want to stay because she had nothing to return to and a need to help a mixed up little boy. Dorothy has family, friends, a job and a significant lack of torture in Kansas. What idiot would want to stay in Oz with a war coming and the random Beast Forever looming? Dorothy is the only character I understand in Emerald City and, as you said, even she isn't very developed, but at least her motivations are clear.

[Camera One]

The Beast Forever really elevates the word "vague" to a whole new level.  By Episode 7, we still don't know where the various factions stand.  Like "Once", I think the show is aiming for complexity and shades of grey in morality, but it actually results in none of the characters being too likeable.  Before, Dorothy was a neutral party, and now they have her choosing a "side" (the Wizard's), based on incomplete information. 

Edited February 12, 2017 by Camera One

[Souris]

Sounds like I made the right choice not to watch Emerald City!

[KingOfHearts]

I completely understand why Dorothy would want to leave Oz, but I don't think it's articulated well. It took her seven episodes to admit she misses Auntie Em and Uncle Henry. I would just expect more because Oz's whole lesson is, "there's no place like home". 

[Camera One]

I too thought it was strange that Aunt Em was FINALLY mentioned.  True, Dorothy has been running around escaping death for 6 episodes, but it's weird how it has never come up in casual conversation with Lucas.  

I suppose the movie played up the whole idea of home a lot more than the original book, where Dorothy never even says "There's no place like home".  

It reminds me of how A&E concluded 3B with a "There's no place like home" message without exploring the idea at all.  You'd think the message of "The Wizard of Oz" was "I'm really jealous of my sister".

Edited February 12, 2017 by Camera One

[Camera One]

13 minutes ago, Free said:

Emerald City became too much of a watered down version of GOT and it didn't help that the characters have been splintered off into their own subplots isolated from each other throughout most of the series.

This reminds me of a problem that "Emerald City" has that "Heroes" also had.  Like that show, the characters were in completely different geographic locations until the last episode or two before the finale.  "Emerald City" only has 3 episodes left, so you'd think in the next episode, the characters better be finally coming together in one place and interacting.  In "Heroes", at least the widely separated characters all had one common goal.  Whereas in "Emerald City", many of the characters are at cross purposes.  To me, "Heroes" failed because in Season 2 (and 3, and 4), they decided to repeat the formula again, dispersing the characters across the globe yet again, after that brief teamwork in the Season 1 finale.    At least "Once" doesn't really have this problem.  The characters are together quite often.  However, when they ARE together, most of them just stand around not even interacting meaningfully with one another.  So different but just as bad, I guess.

Edited February 12, 2017 by Camera One

[Free]

1 hour ago, Camera One said:

This reminds me of a problem that "Emerald City" has that "Heroes" also had.  Like that show, the characters were in completely different geographic locations until the last episode or two before the finale.  "Emerald City" only has 3 episodes left, so you'd think in the next episode, the characters better be finally coming together in one place and interacting.  In "Heroes", at least the widely separated characters all had one common goal.  Whereas in "Emerald City", many of the characters are at cross purposes.  To me, "Heroes" failed because in Season 2 (and 3, and 4), they decided to repeat the formula again, dispersing the characters across the globe yet again, after that brief teamwork in the Season 1 finale.    At least "Once" doesn't really have this problem.  The characters are together quite often.  However, when they ARE together, most of them just stand around not even interacting meaningfully with one another.  So different but just as bad, I guess.

Definitely, in OuaT you just have characters standing around, OuaT is a very repetitive show in terms are structure and the narrative.

[ParadoxLost]

2 hours ago, Camera One said:

This reminds me of a problem that "Emerald City" has that "Heroes" also had.  Like that show, the characters were in completely different geographic locations until the last episode or two before the finale.  "Emerald City" only has 3 episodes left, so you'd think in the next episode, the characters better be finally coming together in one place and interacting.  In "Heroes", at least the widely separated characters all had one common goal.  Whereas in "Emerald City", many of the characters are at cross purposes.  To me, "Heroes" failed because in Season 2 (and 3, and 4), they decided to repeat the formula again, dispersing the characters across the globe yet again, after that brief teamwork in the Season 1 finale.    At least "Once" doesn't really have this problem.  The characters are together quite often.  However, when they ARE together, most of them just stand around not even interacting meaningfully with one another.  So different but just as bad, I guess.

I agree with your assessment of Heroes.  Season 1 was great because of the expectation of epic levels of awesomeness when all the Heroes came together.  Then I spent subsequent seasons (until I bailed) railing at the TV along the lines of you know other people with powers. call them, you dumbass.

I'm not sure that OUAT isn't worse.  If I compare the idea of Snow not knowing Emma almost died because she's off doing plot in a separate geographical location to Snow not caring Emma almost died because she wants to talk about Frozen and never even looks at Emma huddled in the corner, I think the latter would make me angrier.  Ultimately both would suck though.

[Dianthus]

Hush, Something Blue, and Beer Bad (don't judge) were/are all standouts from my POV. Watching Buffy whack Parker (talk about Angel-light) over the head with a stick was deeply cathartic.

[RulerofallIsurvey]

On 2/12/2017 at 1:11 AM, Camera One said:

  On 2/11/2017 at 2:10 AM, KingOfHearts said:

Emerald City's twists have not been great. There was one in particular tonight that was played entirely for angst and shock value. It had very, very little setup. (If you would even call it that) The show in general is very reticent in its storytelling. There's a lot of holding back to keep everything shrouded in mystery, much like OUAT. The writers there have a better grip on the world they've built, but... how can I put this -- a lot happens but at the same time very little happens. There's a lot of shocking developments that don't actually contribute much to the main plot. It moves as slow as Christmas too. Nothing interesting ever comes about until the final five minutes of an episode. 

(I couldn't find the original quote, so I had to use to Camera One quoted.  Emphasis mine.)  Thank you.  There was something bugging me about Emerald City, and I couldn't quite put my finger on it, but you nailed it.  I find myself checking to see how much time is left in the episode about 3/4 of the way through. So, although it's beautiful, and in a way, very interesting, it's also pretty boring.  (Granted, I haven't watched the last two or three eps yet.)

But I find the rest of what you said very much like OUAT.  Twists for angst and shock value that come out of nowhere?  Check.  A lot of shocking developments that don't contribute to the main plot?  Check.  Nothing happens until the final five minutes of the episode (or season, in OUAT's case)?  Check. 

On 2/12/2017 at 2:30 AM, KAOS Agent said:

 Once is the opposite in that it's straightforward with little mystery, but it still wastes time doing nothing.

Oh, I don't know about that.  I agree with @KingOfHearts that Once threw some bones early on, but this season it's been a mess.  It wasn't straightforward about what the EQ wanted.  I can't remember how many episodes it took before we finally got some answer there.  And what did Hyde really want?  We never even found out.  I guess it's been more straightforward with Gideon's motives - but it took long enough to reveal it was actually him underneath the mysterious hood.  

[Curio]

1 hour ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

It wasn't straightforward about what the EQ wanted.  I can't remember how many episodes it took before we finally got some answer there. 

Honestly, we still don't even know what the EQ wants. It's the same thing as Operation Dumbass where we (and the characters on the show) didn't know what Regina's happy ending goal was. I still don't know what Regina's happy ending goal is.

[KingOfHearts]

I'm putting my Buffy thoughts primarily in the BTVS boards now unless I'm comparing it with OUAT, that being said...

Currently, I'm at the end of S4 and there's some Once shenanigans going on. Adam can control Riley via chip, just like holding a heart or the Dagger. There was this dumb scheme where Spike divided the heroes against each other, and it took them forever to realize what he was doing. It reminded me of the Evil Queen in 6A, with her plan to split everyone up. She wasn't as successful, but she got them all to yell at each other letting the Savior prophecy "slip". The angst was really, really cheap.

Yes, even BTVS has an idiot ball. (It's often in Xander's hands...) But, Adam is so dumb that everyone has to be watered down in order for him to be intimidating. Kind of like OUAT villains.

Edited February 13, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[Camera One]

I guess I'll temporarily add "Buffy" to my customized homepage to read your thoughts.  

When I compare 4B of "Once" to 4B of "Buffy", "Buffy" as a show was still going strong, with new ideas, continued character development and the show was still mostly engaging and "fun" to watch.  Now, I never cared about "Buffy" to the extent I cared about "Once" once upon a time, but I would still consider the show to be maintaining its quality.  Whereas for "Once", the dip in quality was visible by 2B, and pretty egregious by mid-3B.  "Buffy" was still actually using all members of its cast in Season 4 and keeping them relevant.  

[Shanna Marie]

On 2/9/2017 at 11:26 PM, Souris said:

Wesley ended up being my favorite character in the entire Buffyverse. A really great example of character change over time that made sense and wasn't forced or bogus.

Same here, and that's one of the best character arcs ever. It's a complete transformation that still makes total sense. After Angel ended, I was a little worried about how S3 of Buffy would work, but the seeds are actually there even if the character is practically a different person. I wish Once had the guts to go all the way in a character arc like that, but they're so married to the status quo that they keep the characters in little boxes. Regina may have "come so far," but really, there's very little difference between S1 Regina and S6 Regina, other than scheming behind the backs of the other characters. She dresses the same, has the same job, lives in the same place, and talks to the others with the same tone she used in public. Hook's had a good redemption arc, but he isn't actually all that different, just perhaps a bit more subdued and making better choices under pressure. His wardrobe barely changes from pirate to modern pirate to Camelot guest to Dark One. S6 Hook who's turned hero, been a Dark One, died, and been resurrected isn't actually all that different from "Tallahassee" Hook, who was fully supportive of Emma, willing to put himself on the line, and talked about being the worst human who ever lived. I've found myself wondering what Hook might be like if the writers were willing to do a full Wesley treatment on him and let his experiences really affect him in logical ways. I've joked in the past in the Hook thread about how he's so 100-percent gung-ho about everything, turning into the poster boy for whatever he's doing at the moment, that current hero Hook would be going all-in on being a hero type rather than clinging to his pirate persona. If he were getting the Wesley treatment, he might have come back from the dead with a left hand, so he couldn't really be called "Hook" anymore, would stop dressing like a pirate, drop the pirate jewelry and guyliner, maybe even shave, so that there's a sharp contrast to his past and he's almost unrecognizable. But the writers of this show are so afraid to change anything that a slightly different black leather jacket is a drastic change.

As for Wonderland, I have a rather unpopular opinion: I don't find Will to be all that interesting as a character. He's sort of the standard-issue seemingly tough guy with a heart of gold (even if his heart is outside his body most of the time) who's been wounded in the past. He's mostly interesting just in that context because of the way he bounces off the other characters. His relationship with Alice is interesting because it's so purely platonic, something we don't see often on American television, and his romance with Anastasia is so painful and complex. But in and of himself, there's not much "there" there, which may be why moving him to the mother show was such a bust. Without those relationships, there wasn't enough to him to do anything with. They already had the snarky leather-wearing guy who has a casual relationship with the law, so he was redundant on that level, and there was no real story around him to tell in Storybrooke, since his whole story was off in Wonderland or in Victorian Novel World. I am starting to think that his story only makes sense if the Wonderland series takes place after season 4 instead of before it, if maybe that storm at the beginning isn't the wraith stuff, but rather the Dark One stuff happening a block or so away. There's still a timeline issue because of the curse, but that's there whether or not you move Wonderland by a year. But, say Will bails on Wonderland after losing Ana and escaping from Cora and goes back to the Enchanted Forest, where he gets caught up in the curse. Then he gets sent back to the Enchanted Forest by the reverse, and when we encounter him at the beginning of S4, he's been dragged back by curse 2, which is what sets him off on the bender/looking at pictures of the Red Queen -- he'd been trying to find a way to Wonderland during the Missing Year but got dragged back just when he was getting somewhere, and he was looking for the thing he found in Storybrooke. He starts dating Belle as an attempt to move on. Then when he vanishes from Storybrooke in 4B, that's when the Rabbit shows up to get him.

[Camera One]

I think everyone on the forum agrees That Season 4 Will would have made more sense if he was pre-Wonderland.  Unfortunately, the head honchos A&E have the last word (on Twitter, of course).  I wouldn't mind if they took it back, but I doubt they would ever admit they were wrong on anything.  I don't remember one thing they have regretted about the show except for Tamara's "taser".

As much as I liked him on the spinoff, I agree there was no story for him on the parent-show post-Wonderland.  It wouldn't have taken Dr. Jekyll to figure that out.  Yet A&E put him in the show, and gave him pointless storylines for filler since they were obligated to use main characters they don't care about like Snow and Belle.

[KingOfHearts]

It still amazes me that BTVS can tackle the same ideas that OUAT did, and churn out a much better product. I just started S5 and they did the splitting plot from OUAT 6A. Surprisingly, it worked so much better and didn't raise nearly as many questions. It wasn't too different from Regina - Xander was split into his strengths and weaknesses. I think the BTVS spin usually functions because it's usually very brief. We didn't get an arc of Split!Xander, just an episode. I can't wait to see how they fix the Author plot. ;D

One thing I am grateful about OUAT is, they didn't introduce really annoying characters later in the game. There's definitely fans who don't like Zelena or Robin, but I've seen so many shows shoehorn in awful characters in a desperate bid to breathe new life in. On OUAT, if there's a horrible character, they're usually gone by the end of the arc. You're not stuck with a Dawn for the rest of the series. (*wink wink*)

Edited February 14, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[RulerofallIsurvey]

On 2/13/2017 at 3:51 PM, Shanna Marie said:

He starts dating Belle as an attempt to move on. Then when he vanishes from Storybrooke in 4B, that's when the Rabbit shows up to get him.

What's sad - in your timeline or even in the official show time line - is that no one bothered to even look for Will after he was gone.

@KingOfHearts - you inspired me.  I tried to start watching BTVS last night.  (I remember watching it WAY back in the day, but don't remember too much about the show).  I got through an ep and a half and had to quit.  It's not the plot or the characters - although they do seem a little cartoonish right now - but I couldn't take the awful (which I'm sure were brilliant for the day) the special effects and the cheesy music any more!

[Shanna Marie]

15 minutes ago, RulerofallIsurvey said:

What's sad - in your timeline or even in the official show time line - is that no one bothered to even look for Will after he was gone.

No one even noticed he was gone, including his former girlfriend. Did Belle even actually break up with him? She was with him, and then she was telling Rumple that she didn't love Will, she loved Rumple, but I don't recall any scene that suggested she'd let Will know about this. In my timeline, maybe this was what had just happened when the rabbit showed up and why he was willing to go.

I still can't reconcile the Wonderland timeline to the original show with the curse taken into account. Is Wonderland another one of those "never aging" places like Neverland? We know that Will and Ana went to Wonderland pre-curse, since human Maleficent was at her castle when Will stole her mirror, and then Cora was still in Wonderland to be Ana's mentor. I haven't reached that episode in my rewatch, but didn't Alice steal Will's heart back from Cora while Cora was still there? And then the "present" part of the series came after the curse broke, which means that there should have been about 28 years between the visit to Wonderland in which Alice met Cyrus and her return visit to rescue him, and there were only a few months at most between her return home and Will and the rabbit breaking her out of the asylum. So did Wonderland also get frozen for 28 years, along with Victorian Story World? I know they're iffy on how much the characters look like they've aged, but I'd have thought that Alice being gone long enough for her father to remarry and have a six-ish-year-old child but not look like she'd aged a day might have been some proof that she really had gone somewhere odd. Even more so if she was gone 28 years for the whole of the curse and didn't age. If Alice was with Cyrus for years before Ana "killed" him, then that explains their bond. It wasn't just them running around for a few days, but for long enough for her father to remarry and have another kid before she returned.

[RulerofallIsurvey]

17 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

No one even noticed he was gone, including his former girlfriend. Did Belle even actually break up with him? She was with him, and then she was telling Rumple that she didn't love Will, she loved Rumple, but I don't recall any scene that suggested she'd let Will know about this. In my timeline, maybe this was what had just happened when the rabbit showed up and why he was willing to go.

I think I would prefer - and it might make more sense as to why Belle didn't bother to look for him - if Will broke up with her.  Maybe the rabbit showed up and convinced Will to leave and Will had the talk with Belle that he knew she was still in love with Rumple, and well, he was still in love with Ana and he had to go back to Wonderland to try to help her.  Since Belle knew that Will had gone back to Wonderland, there was no need to look for him.  And why bother telling anyone else, I guess?  Unless she did, but that happened in Offscreenville.  I don't know if this fits with the timelines, but I like it, so I don't care.  :)

17 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

I still can't reconcile the Wonderland timeline to the original show with the curse taken into account. Is Wonderland another one of those "never aging" places like Neverland?

Your questions are pointless, Dearie!  :D

[Shanna Marie]

I watched another couple of Wonderland episodes last night. I'd only planned on one, but the web site automatically starts playing the next one, and they had a real knack for ending episodes in a way that made you eager to see the next one -- not just wanting to see what happened next, but excited about what would be happening next. That's the difference between the "oh no" cliffhanger and the "look, things are just about to get better" cliffhanger.

Anyway, it occurred to me that there are a lot of parallels between Alice and Cyrus and Emma and Hook. We've got the badass but goodhearted blonde paired up with the guy with a checkered and tragic past who's much (in the case of Cyrus, much, much) older than he looks. When they first met, he was her prisoner (with Cyrus, in a sense, since as a genie he was in thrall to her). He has absolute faith in her. He creates/picks out a home for her, based on what he's figured out she wants. And the first half of the Wonderland arc is basically 5B: he's dead (or she believes he is), but then she learns something that gives her hope, and so she travels to a dangerous world to rescue him, while he's being held prisoner by an enemy, and ultimately he rescues himself and gets a new lease on life just as the former villain's love is lost to her. Coming where it did in the original series run, it's like the couple in this show might have been somewhat influenced/inspired by the seeds of what we were seeing with Hook and Emma at the time, but then later the main show may have been inspired/influenced by this plot when they were figuring out something to do. Or maybe the writers just have so many stories in them, and so they're bound to repeat.

One thing I wish the original show had learned from the spinoff is that limiting magic makes for better stories. The good guys don't really have magic at all. Cyrus may be a magical being, but he can't just use his magic at random. We even see in a flashback that when Alice is wounded, he can't just wave a hand and save her. He has to take her to a healer. Alice has some magic, in the sense that she has the three wishes from Cyrus, but she has to be very careful about using them because wishes can go awry, she only has three of them, and if she uses them up, she dooms Cyrus. The rabbit can create portals, but that's his only skill. They don't really have any magic on their side until Ana flips sides. As a result, they all have to be very clever. Alice is extremely resourceful and is able to use magical items and beings she finds along the way. I love how she's able to be truly good without ever being too stupid to live (unlike Snow). She frequently wins because she's caring and empathetic enough to see past the surface of others, but she's also willing to be ruthless in a fight. If she's attacked, she'll fight back without angsting in guilt because she's hurt or killed someone.

I also like how they give Jafar a woobie backstory without letting that excuse him in any way. They did something neat with the episode in which we saw how awful his father was to him by putting it up against Alice and her relationship with her father. Their fathers were equally awful (hers might not have tried to kill her, but he did lock her up in an asylum to get her out of his life), but while Jafar embarked on a lifetime of revenge, Alice was willing to save her father's life, even if she didn't really want to have anything to do with him. Meanwhile, polyjuiced Jafar posing as Alice's father seemed to show a lot more empathy toward Alice, in recognizing that she'd come from a history similar to his, even as a pure villain than Regina has ever shown while being a supposed hero. He was actually angry at Alice's father on her behalf, while it doesn't seem like Regina has yet figured out that other people have feelings.

[KingOfHearts]

Quote

I watched another couple of Wonderland episodes last night. I'd only planned on one, but the web site automatically starts playing the next one, and they had a real knack for ending episodes in a way that made you eager to see the next one -- not just wanting to see what happened next, but excited about what would be happening next. That's the difference between the "oh no" cliffhanger and the "look, things are just about to get better" cliffhanger.

I actually rewatched Once Upon a Time a year or two ago with my mom. (Who I wasn't sure would like it.) Usually we would only watch one episode at a time, but she saw the cliffhanger where Kathryn turned up alive and said, "Well, now we have to see how that happened!" Then we watched another.

Quote

 

One thing I wish the original show had learned from the spinoff is that limiting magic makes for better stories. 

Wonderland had a much better grip on the magic system, really. The genie wishes had hard rules, the villains had to play around Alice's wishes, and at one point, Cora explains the rules of magic point-blank. Ironically, the big villain scheme is to break those rules, which actually fits. In the scope of the show, there was only one exception for the laws of magic. But on OUAT, we've got like 101 exceptions. It's to the point where it's more like "The Guidelines of Everyday Magic".

Edited February 15, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[Shanna Marie]

44 minutes ago, KingOfHearts said:

Usually we would only watch one episode at a time, but she saw the cliffhanger where Kathryn turned up alive and said, "Well, now we have to see how that happened!" Then we watched another.

Yeah, that sense that things are about to get interesting because something good is happening is just as or more compelling than the "oh no, things are now horrible" cliffhanger. With the "uh oh" cliffhanger, you do want to know what happens, but you're not particularly keen to see it happen, and it's worse when the show has a habit of just making things worse and worse for the heroes. It's less compelling when you know the cliffhanger won't really be resolved, and things will be even worse at the end of the next episode. But when they end an episode showing that someone isn't dead or has escaped, or has found the magical doodad, you want to see what happens next.

46 minutes ago, KingOfHearts said:

Wonderland had a much better grip on the magic system, really. The genie wishes had hard rules, the villains had to play around Alice's wishes, and at one point, Cora explains the rules of magic point-blank.

The original show has entirely dropped the wish rules, which is weird, considering that this is a plot that crosses over with Wonderland, since we've got Jafar as the villain, they're dealing with Agrabah, and you'd think the genie rules would be the same. You didn't get wishes just because you got your hands on the genie's bottle. It was an entire plot that having the bottle did no good as long as Alice held onto her wishes. It would have been simple enough for Regina to have figured out that she also had access to the Evil Queen's wishes and just made some random third wish to use up the Evil Queen's wishes before David got the bottle and made his wishes. But they had the Reginas only make two wishes and treated it as some kind of coup that David got the bottle. Also, creating an entire alternate reality with fake people in it doesn't seem like it fits in with the way we've seen the genies grant wishes.

But it also helps that there were fewer characters with magical powers, so the good vs. evil battles didn't amount to people making jazz hands at each other. They had to think and scheme and be creative.

[KingOfHearts]

Quote

When I compare 4B of "Once" to 4B of "Buffy", "Buffy" as a show was still going strong, with new ideas, continued character development and the show was still mostly engaging and "fun" to watch.  Now, I never cared about "Buffy" to the extent I cared about "Once" once upon a time, but I would still consider the show to be maintaining its quality.  Whereas for "Once", the dip in quality was visible by 2B, and pretty egregious by mid-3B.  "Buffy" was still actually using all members of its cast in Season 4 and keeping them relevant.  

That's one that I've noticed. Into the fifth season, there are still many creative ideas. It still feels like the writers are putting their all into it and writing the art they want to write. It's still hard to believe Jane Espenson was a writer/producer, since her problems on Once, such as the Regina/Rumple-style apologism, don't seem to exist. Most shows have a clear story plan for the first, or even first few, seasons. The writers have a vision, and once they fulfill, they have to generate new material on the spot. BTVS got to that point in S4, hence the subtle drop in quality. OUAT got there much sooner in 2B, after Neal reunited with Rumple.

On the subject of centrics, BTVS has them but they're not every episode. Most episodes are pretty balanced and feature multiple characters. There's a lack of flashbacks, except in rare cases, and that's just a testament to the writers' ability to tell us about a character without flat-out exposing their past directly. We don't need to see Willow's childhood birthday parties to see her long-standing friendship with Xander, nor do we need to see Giles' occult days to understand Ethan Rayne's business. The characters explain everything very fluidly. Even on OUAT when something is self-explanatory or given by dialogue, we still get flashbacks that do nothing but waste time. BTVS doesn't resort to flashbacks unless it's absolutely necessary that the audience be clued into something.

[Camera One]

With Simba and Mufasa cast in the live action "The Lion King", A&E now has a new classic to ruin in Season 7!
http://variety.com/2017/film/news/donald-glover-simba-lion-king-remake-1201991771/

[KingOfHearts]

Quote

With Simba and Mufasa cast in the live action "The Lion King", A&E now has a new classic to ruin in Season 7!

We all know Once Upon a Time has been leading up to the Lion King for its final season.

I'm calling the #ScarQueen ship now. #LionQueen would be better, but it could be confused with Mufasa or Simba.

Edited February 18, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[Dianthus]

Not sure where this should go, but this seemed like the best fit (I guess?) - Adam has a banner (or whatever it's called) on his Twitter feed that focuses on Jar-Jar Fucking Binks. Never mind the two generally well-regarded live actors in the scene. Binks is front and center. Like most older star Wars fans I detest the digital disaster with no soul. It's really just there as a novelty. What a sadly appropriate image for someone who's both fucking up beloved childhood stories and ignoring his incredibly talented cast in favor of shocking twists and plot, plot, plot.

[KingOfHearts]

The OUAT writers probably wanted Regina to be some form of Anya or Spike, a former baddie who gets to say blunt "funny" things. But, there's some key differences. For one, Anya was rarely trying to be hurtful. She didn't realize what she said was overly blunt or offensive. With Spike, the heroes didn't have to like him. They were allowed to fight back with their own remarks. It didn't feel like he was kicking a puppy because Buffy didn't grovel and ask for him to be her BFF. By extension, his redemption arc has been more cohesive because everyone has gotten the chance to act more human about it. It's more organic.

Anya said this line that immediately made me think of Regina: "I for one didn't want to start my day with a slaughter. Which really just goes to show you how much I've grown!"

Glory is an okay villain, but she doesn't have the same gravitas as the Mayor. She's worlds better than the Master or Adam, but she's mainly just batshit insane. (Much like Zelena up through 5A.) Dawn's role as the Key is very creative, but I just can't like the character. I sympathize with her unfortunate position, but she's just too annoying to be engaging. The show would be just fine without her. I don't hate her as much as Henry, so that's a plus. At least when she's a moody preteen, people are allowed to find it contemptible. 

The Joyce hospital storyline is something that would never happen on OUAT. It's way too realistic. A&E can only handle weird fantasy deaths like getting your heart ripped out or being poisoned by Agrabahn vipers. Why does Whale still have a career when there's easy-peezy handwaves to heal almost anything? I appreciated BTVS for staying away from that.

[Curio]

Tangled is playing on ABC right now, and I can't help but feel let down by OUAT for not giving us a weekly version of their own Eugene/Rapunzel couple*. Why can't we have cute romantic adventures like this movie where it's lighthearted and funny and doesn't force characters to act OOC?

*By their own version of Eugene/Rapunzel, I mean Captain Swan.

Edited February 20, 2017 by Curio

[Camera One]

Nothing can beat the Rapunzel we saw in "The Tower".

I guess animation is expensive, but why not create a weekly series with the actual animated characters from many movies interacting?

[Curio]

8 minutes ago, Camera One said:

I guess animation is expensive, but why not create a weekly series with the actual animated characters from many movies interacting?

 

Didn't the Disney Channel try to do that with the House of Mouse series or whatever it was called?

[Souris]

There is an animated Tangled series in the works.

[Camera One]

20 minutes ago, Curio said:

Didn't the Disney Channel try to do that with the House of Mouse series or whatever it was called?

Yeah, but there wasn't much of a plot, certainly not week-to-week.  Everyone just sat around various tables like at a club or restaurant, though they might say a line or two here and there.

[Shanna Marie]

As I continue with Wonderland, I'm still amazed that this series comes from the same people as the original Once. Ana's redemption arc is so very different from Regina's. For one thing, there's the twist that she had her "come to Jesus" moment off-screen, realizing that she'd gone wrong, regretting what she did, and knowing exactly where she went wrong, and all her present-day activities were a desperate scheme to go back in time and make a different choice, undoing her evil. I guess she rationalized that the evil she did along the way would be erased when she went back and made a better choice. Then she had to really prove herself to the others, who weren't automatically willing to trust her, forgive and forget. The only one who really believed in her was Cyrus, and that was because he had actual magical powers that allowed him to see people's wishes, so he knew she was sincere. Even then, Alice wasn't totally keen to trust her. She had an onscreen "come to Jesus" moment when the people she oppressed captured her, and she was forced to face that she'd been a terrible queen and she had no friends. She was made to suffer quite a bit, being held prisoner by Jafar and tortured by the Jabberwocky. Has Regina ever spent more than an episode being rather ugly, with her hair messed up, makeup gone, and obvious cuts and bruises on her face? Instead of just telling us that Ana was an underdog who got the short end of the stick, they really tore her down and humbled her so that we ended up cheering for her being saved.

Then there was the scene of Cyrus and Alice in Storybrooke, in which we got more fun with the culture clash and trying to figure out technology than we've seen in the entire run of the original series.

I really must say that I'm become firmly Team Cyrus. I always was, to some extent. I remember that I dipped into the TWOP forum after the pilot and then bailed and didn't bother with it when, as I predicted, it was mostly people saying Cyrus was boring and wanting Alice to be with Will (I don't know if the tune changed once we learned about Ana). But to me, Cyrus was not only gorgeous (the eyes ! the wavy hair! the smile! the face! the voice!), but he was wicked smart and very practical, but also willing to trust and forgive. He was always the one keeping his head in a crisis and coming up with a clever solution. I guess he had a lot in common with Hook -- carrying around the guilt of a past bad action that made him feel worthless, loyalty to his brother(s), absolute faith in the woman he loves -- so apparently I have a type.

[Camera One]

I liked Cyrus too.  I remember that people were saying Cyrus were boring.  But I tend to like boring "good guys".

Has Regina ever spent more than an episode being rather ugly, with her hair messed up, makeup gone, and obvious cuts and bruises on her face?

She was tortured by Greg, but remember, Snow had to experience the same pain too because she deserved it just as much.  That's the messed up morality of the parent show.

[KingOfHearts]

Saw a clip from the new Beauty and the Beast movie coming out. It looks visually stunning and artistic. If the writing ends up being so-so, I'll at least watch the hell out of the eye candy.

[Mathius]

Cyrus started off kind of dull because all we had was the standard romantic hero stuff with Alice and him locked in a cage for episodes on end.  His cleverness was an interesting trait, but he himself was still mostly boring.  Once he finally got out of the damn cage, that's when things really picked up for him as a character.  He had a lot of great moments in the second half of the show, and it helped sell me and many others on Alice/Cyrus.

Edited February 21, 2017 by Mathius

[tennisgurl]

If I remember right from TWOP, most people thought Cyrus was rather boring just sitting in a cage, when his only traits were genie, smart, and loves Alice. I always liked him, but I wasn't super attached to him and Cyrus/Alice at first, but about halfway through the show, when we learned more about him, and got to see his personality and relationships more. By the end, I love Alice/Cyrus, and thought he was a really fun character. Of course, I liked everyone on Wonderland, so it was par for the course. God I loved Wonderland. I wont act like it was perfect, but it was a really good, well thought out season of TV, with likable heroes, a scary villain, a good redemption story, and creative ideas that they usually followed through with.

Also, does anyone watch Supergirl over on CW? The actor who played Cyrus was on last nights episode as a villain of the week, a super powerful reality warping alien who falls I love with Supergirl/Kara. He was a lot of fun, while also being sinister and creepy at times. He also makes some Aladdin references, which I'm choosing to believe was a shout out to his role in Wonderland!

[Shanna Marie]

5 hours ago, tennisgurl said:

If I remember right from TWOP, most people thought Cyrus was rather boring just sitting in a cage, when his only traits were genie, smart, and loves Alice.

I love Cyrus even while he was in the cage, since he spent that time playing mind games with Jafar -- and winning. He was utterly helpless, trapped in a silver cage that sapped his power, armed only with his wits and whatever he could con out of one of the guards, and he managed to not only thwart Jafar, but escape. I really loved him in those bits when you'd think he'd tried something and failed, only to learn that the "failure" was his plan all along, like the time Jafar was trying to find some danger to put Alice in, read Cyrus's reaction to see what really horrified him -- and then we learned that Cyrus had actually been playing Jafar, deliberately reacting so Jafar would send something he knew Alice knew how to deal with. I also found that his one-on-one scenes with the Sultan and with Jafar were riveting. Those scenes were decently written, were beautifully played with some excellent acting, and had a lot of tension and emotion, even if they were physically static.

In a way, I was almost sad when Cyrus got out of the cage and became a more ordinary action hero kind of guy instead of having to rely strictly on his wits. The thing that made me think of Hook was when he started a bar fight to cover for Alice stealing the compass. That seems like the kind of thing Hook would do, and his sass and joy while doing it was very Hookian.

[Kktjones]

21 minutes ago, Shanna Marie said:

The thing that made me think of Hook was when he started a bar fight to cover for Alice stealing the compass. That seems like the kind of thing Hook would do, and his sass and joy while doing it was very Hookian.

I would KILL to see Hook doing something like this. I can't remember the last time they let him be clever, sassy or joyful. 

[Souris]

1 hour ago, Kktjones said:

I would KILL to see Hook doing something like this. I can't remember the last time they let him be clever, sassy or joyful. 

Well, they haven't let ANYBODY be joyful in recent memory.