OUAT vs. Other Fairy Tales: Compare & Contrast

[Guest]

24 minutes ago, Rumsy4 said:

I haven't watched the whole series. Half-way through, the political angle got a bit boring for me. So, I ended up sampling here and there, and just watching season premieres, finales, and key episodes. I just wikied the episode summaries to make sure I was following the story. I never understood why people were pissed at how it ended. It seemed fine to me. At least with LOST, I get why people were upset and unhappy.

I thought BSG held together until the finale.  Most others didn't like the last season, but my problem was the finale.

One big problem was that the credits every week promised that there was a plan.  People believed them on that one. But the podcasts revealed little by little that there was no plan and they were flying by the seat of their pants a lot of the time.  So, in that way, it was a bit like Lost in that the mysteries were unresolved.  Or were resolved, but it turned out any "clues" along the way were meaningless because they picked their answer when they got there.  I'm still pretty sure they found Earth twice and I still don't understand how the hell that is possible.

Some people are turned off by the stupid in the decisions made when they made it to Earth.  I was one of those because I felt it

Spoiler

ditching technology

 was done so Moore could do a guest appearance ala Hitchcock.

Although I've never seen anyone admit it, I think that no one really getting a happy ending and not really being allowed to continue being a "family" also contributes to the dissatisfaction.  Everyone who lived basically went their separate ways.  It would be like ending OUAT with Hook dying and Snow dying and Charming deciding he was go stay on a farm to wait for death while Emma went off on her own for inexplicable reasons.

[Rumsy4]

9 hours ago, ParadoxLost said:

Or were resolved, but it turned out any "clues" along the way were meaningless because they picked their answer when they got there. 

That would certainly piss people off. It's like writing a murder mystery, and the author not knowing who the killer was until the final chapter. Which apparently what happened in The Mentalist. They had no idea who Red John was, and just made someone up in the end. I get that it was more of a MacGuffin. Still... It seems a lot of TV writing suffers from this kind of thing.

9 hours ago, ParadoxLost said:

I think that no one really getting a happy ending and not really being allowed to continue being a "family" also contributes to the dissatisfaction

That was the other thing that kept me from being fully invested in the Show. I started watching it a while after it ended, and some of the plots were spoiled for me. It seemed like a lot of hardships to slog through for them to end on a note that wasn't really hopeful.

Spoiler

Especially with the whole "everything is cyclical" theme. They were essentially suggesting that humanity would keep repeating its failures, which is more like some of the more misanthropic episodes of the Twilight Zone. The whole series was leading to idea that cylon DNA was now intermixed with that of humans; shouldn't that have made a difference? Otherwise, what was the point? They wanted the "gotcha" ending, and so they went with it, even if it didn't make any sense.

Edited February 13, 2018 by Rumsy4

[daxx]

Yeah, I’m one who hated the finale so I might end my rewatch before I get to the last episode. Although I’ve made my peace with the stupid in the finale by now. Which is why it took so long for me to be able to rewatch it. I am remembering how much I enjoyed these characters though.

Why can’t all series have a Black Sails style ending where it’s so satisfying and complete.

[Shanna Marie]

12 hours ago, ParadoxLost said:

Although I've never seen anyone admit it, I think that no one really getting a happy ending and not really being allowed to continue being a "family" also contributes to the dissatisfaction.  Everyone who lived basically went their separate ways.

That was the only thing that really bugged me about the finale. People who literally were family and who had spent the whole series developing a healthier relationship just wandered off on their own after their respective partners were gone rather than pulling together. I'd have been totally okay with the finale with just that one change.

I have the first three seasons on DVD but didn't keep up with buying the discs after that. The first season is utterly brilliant, but I did feel like it tapered off after that.

I started watching season one of The Good Place last night. I've decided to just ignore the theology and treat it as an alternate world fantasy, and in that respect it really works. The world building in just the first few episodes is quite well done, like you can tell the writers thought through how this world works (and I'm guessing there's some underlying stuff that will come out later). The cast is quite fun, and boy, do they know how to throw in an end-of-episode hook that makes you desperate for the next episode. I'm kind of glad I didn't watch this week-by-week as it aired. It's nice to be able to just go on to the next episode.

[Rumsy4]

1 hour ago, Shanna Marie said:

I've decided to just ignore the theology and treat it as an alternate world fantasy, and in that respect it really works.

I tend to do that with most fantasy shows, movies, or books. But with OUAT, that doesn't work, because there is no internal consistency in the morality. It's so obviously skewed towards certain characters. I don't like being thought stupid. :-p

[KingOfHearts]

1 hour ago, Shanna Marie said:

That was the only thing that really bugged me about the finale. People who literally were family and who had spent the whole series developing a healthier relationship just wandered off on their own after their respective partners were gone rather than pulling together.

That's kind of what happened on OUAT with S7. At the end of S6, everyone was living happily together at the dinner table. Then in S7, Rumple and Belle ran off to the Edge of Realms, Gideon went to Hogwarts Community College, Zelena and Robyn moved to a secluded farm in another realm, Henry went on his journey to self-discovery, and Regina later joined him.

[Camera One]

The script for the sequel to "Enchanted" has finally been finished, and it's likely going to be called "Disenchanted".   No relation to the Disenchanted Forest.

https://www.cinemablend.com/news/2300071/whats-happening-with-enchanted-2-according-to-its-director

Edited February 14, 2018 by Camera One

[KingOfHearts]

I'm kind of excited for that. Although, I always hoped the sequel would be Patrick Dempsey stuck in the animated world.

[Guest]

On ‎2‎/‎13‎/‎2018 at 8:02 AM, Rumsy4 said:

That would certainly piss people off. It's like writing a murder mystery, and the author not knowing who the killer was until the final chapter. Which apparently what happened in The Mentalist. They had no idea who Red John was, and just made someone up in the end. I get that it was more of a MacGuffin. Still... It seems a lot of TV writing suffers from this kind of thing.

The Mentalist was another of those show that did something very bold and then took it back.

They revealed who Red John was (the Bradley Whitford fake out) and got all kinds of accolades for being so daring as to reveal the identity of their MacGuffin before it became an old and boring retread and turned the series on its head.

The idiots that ran that show should have paid attention over that summer and pretended that was their plan all along and gone with it.  As it was, I was so irritated with the direction they took instead that I dropped the show.  If the response to a change in direction is so strong, you should go with it and not try to revert to the norm.

It was about the same feeling I had when OUAT redid the curse and Hook found Emma and Henry without memories after everyone else was cursed back to the EF.  They unknowingly hit on something that really got the fanbase excited and then never made use of it.  Maybe it was too late to course correct that season since it was a mid season development, but they should have filed it away for later that there was something they weren't doing that a lot of the audience was really energized about.

[KingOfHearts]

@Shanna Marie I'm pretty sure that song between Rebecca and Nathaniel about everything being their parents' fault was OUAT's anthem.

Edited February 17, 2018 by KingOfHearts

[tennisgurl]

@KingOfHearts I literally came here just to post about that song, thats hilarious! The whole time I was like "did A&E write this song?" throughout the whole thing? "Nothing is ever anyone's fault, we`re all victims of jerk parents...." or something, ending with Rebecca and Nathaniel saying that the Big Bang was to blame for everything because he was a bad dad to God. 

Except that show was being ironic, while Once would have been 100% earnest. 

[Shanna Marie]

6 hours ago, tennisgurl said:

I literally came here just to post about that song, thats hilarious!

And I composed that post in my head before I went to sleep last night, planning to see if they had the clip on YouTube to post here, saying it's the anthem of the writers' room. Y'all just beat me to it because I was out all day. And Once would never have ended up going where CEG did. At least, not with Regina or Rumple. I could see Hook going that way.

[Rumsy4]

I watched the first episode of Timeless. It's not a super-original premise, but the episode was interesting enough. It sets up a huge plot MacGuffin with the whole "Rittenhouse" thing, which makes me a bit leery, but I'm thinking of giving it a go. 

[daxx]

4 minutes ago, Rumsy4 said:

I watched the first episode of Timeless. It's not a super-original premise, but the episode was interesting enough. It sets up a huge plot MacGuffin with the whole "Rittenhouse" thing, which makes me a bit leery, but I'm thinking of giving it a go. 

Love Timeless. Rewatching it now for season 2.

[Camera One]

13 minutes ago, Rumsy4 said:

I watched the first episode of Timeless. It's not a super-original premise, but the episode was interesting enough. It sets up a huge plot MacGuffin with the whole "Rittenhouse" thing, which makes me a bit leery, but I'm thinking of giving it a go. 

I watched Season 1 as well, and my concerns were actually exactly the same as yours.  It will be interesting to hear what you think of it!  

Edited February 18, 2018 by Camera One

[Shanna Marie]

I mostly enjoy Timeless for the cast and the costumes. The cast has the kind of vibe that suggests they're having fun and getting along, and that makes the show fun to watch. Plus, you've got to love the fact that all the main characters' names in a time travel show are Bill and Ted references.

[jhlipton]

On 2/12/2018 at 7:00 PM, Rumsy4 said:

I haven't watched the whole series. Half-way through, the political angle got a bit boring for me

For goodness sakes, do NOT watch The Ecpanse!!!!

[tennisgurl]

Timeless is a show where you kind of have to watch for the episodes, and not the plot, if that makes sense. The Rittenhouse stuff is pretty boring conspiracy "guys in poorly lit rooms who sit around evilly cackling about how they rule the world and do vague things vaugly, and are evil because of...reasons", cliches but the Time Period of the Week adventures are a lot of fun. The cast is good and has nice chemistry, they have lots of really great guest actors to play famous people, and the sets and costume people do great work creating a new time period every week. I think the good stuff outweighs the bad, as long as you have patience for the boring Rittenhouse stuff. 

I always recommend Legends of Tomorrow to people who like Timeless (and to most everyone else, to be honest), as it has a rather similar premises, but with more of a superhero slant to it. It takes place in the same universe as most of the other CW superhero shows, and while a lot of the main characters are established characters from those shows, they do a good job of explaining things to newcomers, and you dont have to watch the other shows to enjoy this one. Its premise is basically "bunch of people with different powers, skills, and abilities are recruited to fight an evil immortal throughout time" and it follows the gang as they travel around different time periods and country's trying to stop the bad guy from causing trouble. Like in Timeless, the overall plot is kind of lame, but the episodic adventures and the character development and dynamics make up for it, and by the second season, the show realized it, and basically redid the plot to focus on what the show does well: put likable characters in interesting settings, and let them get into hijinks. Its in its third season right now. 

[andromeda331]

I tried to get into Timeless. I watched the first six or seven episodes and couldn't get into it. I really wanted to because I liked the actors and actresses on the show. Especially Goran Visnjic who is just hot. I really like the actress Abigail Spencer but I don't like her character. The Rittenhouse stuff was boring. I did like seeing Robin Hood aka Sean Maguire and I swear you could tell he was so excited to have so many lines and really enjoying his role. But the really hard part for me is Matt Lanter. He voiced Anakin Skywalker in the Clone Wars and Rebels and it made it really hard for me to see him as Wyatt when every time he opened his mouth and sounded like Anakin.  It was just too weird I kept expecting him to bust out a lightsabre or something.   

[Camera One]

I just saw a promo for Season 2 on NBC while watching the Olympics.  I'm excited to see Season 2 despite the show's flaws.  That's different from "Once" where I'm excited to see 7B because I'm looking forward to the flaws, LOL.

[Guest]

I watch Timeless but I'm not into it.  I have a hard time with how little they care about not changing the timeline.  I get that a few people want to change a few things for personal reasons.   But overall, the lack of fear of the butterfly effect takes me out of the show.   They should at least try not to change stuff that will reshape the universe.

[Camera One]

I always watch "Timeless" with tempered expectations because I have no faith in the showrunner Eric Kripke.  I think he's even worse than A&E, and that's really saying something.  But I love time travel and historical fiction so I just have to take it like I do "Once Upon a Lost Potential".

Edited February 19, 2018 by Camera One

[Shanna Marie]

11 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

But the really hard part for me is Matt Lanter. He voiced Anakin Skywalker in the Clone Wars and Rebels and it made it really hard for me to see him as Wyatt when every time he opened his mouth and sounded like Anakin.  It was just too weird I kept expecting him to bust out a lightsabre or something.   

It's the other way around for me. I didn't watch Rebels until this fall, so every time Anakin showed up in a flashback, all I could think was "Hey, Wyatt's traveling in time and space now!" I think the effect was even stronger because they got so many of the original movie actors for that show, like James Earl Jones and Billy Dee Williams, so when there's a movie character done by a very different actor, and when that actor's voice is so familiar from something else, it's even more disconcerting.

[andromeda331]

36 minutes ago, Shanna Marie said:

It's the other way around for me. I didn't watch Rebels until this fall, so every time Anakin showed up in a flashback, all I could think was "Hey, Wyatt's traveling in time and space now!" I think the effect was even stronger because they got so many of the original movie actors for that show, like James Earl Jones and Billy Dee Williams, so when there's a movie character done by a very different actor, and when that actor's voice is so familiar from something else, it's even more disconcerting.

They did which was so cool. It was so amazing to realize that was James Earl Jones and Billy Dee Williams. Liam Neeson also voiced Qui-Gon in a couple episodes. It was so cool they agreed to be on the show. Anthony Daniels, Peter Mayhew, and Daniel Logan. Genevieve O'Reilly who had the small role of Mon Mothma in Revenge of the Sith voicing her in Rebels. 

[KingOfHearts]

On 2/13/2018 at 9:51 AM, Shanna Marie said:

I started watching season one of The Good Place last night. I've decided to just ignore the theology and treat it as an alternate world fantasy, and in that respect it really works. The world building in just the first few episodes is quite well done, like you can tell the writers thought through how this world works (and I'm guessing there's some underlying stuff that will come out later). The cast is quite fun, and boy, do they know how to throw in an end-of-episode hook that makes you desperate for the next episode. I'm kind of glad I didn't watch this week-by-week as it aired. It's nice to be able to just go on to the next episode.

I started watching it too. A few of the characters can get a little annoying with how over-the-top they are, but the atmosphere is very coherent. I like that while the flashbacks reveal a piece of a character's past, they're not required to flow through the narrative. They've been supplementary for the most part, but they're so short that it doesn't feel like they're a waste of time. There's surprisingly a lot of details in the 30-minute-long episodes.

I love Janet so much. She cracks me up.

Edited February 21, 2018 by KingOfHearts

[Rumsy4]

10 hours ago, KingOfHearts said:

I love Janet so much. She cracks me up.

I love Janet!! It's hard to say who is my top favorite character in the Show, but Janet's definitely one of them.

[Shanna Marie]

44 minutes ago, Rumsy4 said:

I love Janet!! It's hard to say who is my top favorite character in the Show, but Janet's definitely one of them.

Yes, Janet is a real highlight. That actress seems to be having way too much fun with this part. She's playing it totally straight while also being a bit over the top with playing it straight.

[KingOfHearts]

I just finished the first season of The Good Place. I'm really interested to see where it goes in S2. It's got a similar presence to Once Upon a Time, with a group of people "cursed" in an idyllic small town with their memories tampered with. The flashback/centric format is present too. It sounds like a fantasy drama, but it's neat to see it in shorter comedy form. It's all very creative.

There was this one moment where one of the characters says they can't blame their mistakes on their parents any more. Their redemption arc kind of put Regina's to shame, but then again, they weren't a mass murderer. Apples and oranges, I guess?

Edited February 22, 2018 by KingOfHearts

[Guest]

9 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

Yes, Janet is a real highlight. That actress seems to be having way too much fun with this part. She's playing it totally straight while also being a bit over the top with playing it straight.

I decided to give Barry (new HBO show) a shot just because I saw the actress that plays Janet in a scene of the trailer.

[Rumsy4]

1 hour ago, KingOfHearts said:

Their redemption arc kind of put Regina's to shame, but then again, they weren't a mass murderer.

But Regina has suffered the most and feel the mostest. That overrides everything else. 

[KingOfHearts]

26 minutes ago, Rumsy4 said:

But Regina has suffered the most and feel the mostest. That overrides everything else. 

I'm putting this under a spoiler tag, since I began watching S2.

Spoiler

So everybody gets stuck in this "groundhog day" like state, with Michael trying so many attempts at torturing people al a Storybrooke-style. It's funny, because it's almost exactly like what Regina did. She used psychological torture and mediocrity on repeat for years, but she never got quite exactly what she was looking for. Her victims united despite the odds. What I like about the Good Place is that it plays a LOT with the world it's in, showing many different angles. On OUAT, there's been so many other curses, but they never actually add anything new. In fact, they always remove factors from the equation. It's not nearly as self-aware. If we were going to get multiple curses, we needed to see the cursed identities. 

[tennisgurl]

If anything, The Good Place is the total opposite of the Once style of redemption. Its all about dealing with their own issues, taking responsibility, and moving on to become a better person. The characters have to acknowledge their mistakes before they can move on. Its not just "I had bad things happen to me, so I cant be held responsible for anything ever" Once style redemption. 

Of course, we cant forget that St. Regina has suffered more than anyone else who has ever existed in the entire history of the fucking universe, and feels so much more sadness than anyone in the entire multiverse (all fiction that has ever or will ever exist, as well as our world) has ever felt, so none of that can apply to her. I mean, her mom was mean! Her boyfriend died! And she is the only person who has ever fucking existed in any plane of existence who had crappy parents or a loved one die, so how could she NOT become a genocidal rapist and dictator? None of that could apply to our poor Regina! 

*Screams into the heavens*

Edited February 23, 2018 by tennisgurl

[Rumsy4]

I truly would have liked Regina if they had kept up the early 2A and 3A progression for her character arc. While she was still vacillating at times, she seemed to be making regular strides towards genuine redemption. It all went downhill after the Tree of No-Regrets. 

[tennisgurl]

There really were moments, here and there early on, where I was actually getting into a Regina redemption arc. I think that 2A was a start of a decent redemption arc, especially as she was forced to work with Charming and actually deal with the people she hurt, and especially the episode where we saw her mom treating her badly in the flashbacks, only to see Regina treating Henry the exact same way, and she realized what she was doing and tried to make it better. We saw some real consequences for what she did, and saw some actual regret and self awareness from Regina. Then we got to 2B and it all went down hill real fast. Who can forget Lasagna Gate, or Regina smugly siding with Cora while she murdered Snows old nanny in cold blood? Then she almost destroyed the town, and only went back on it when she realized she and Henry couldn't escape, and then she was "a hero" because she tried to stop the crap that she allowed to happen, and only stopped when it would hurt her! She had some moments in 3A, and even, to a lesser extent, in 3B, but after the Tree of No-Regrets, it was pretty hard for me to actually get into her redemption. It just became an utter mess, where it felt like Regina wanted redemption because it was convenient for her, instead of because she actually felt bad about what she did. 

I've made my peace with Regina as a good guy now, as I kind of had to just to keep watching the show, and to be fair to her, she hasn't murdered anyone in awhile (which is a big accomplishment for her), but her whole arc has been an inconsistent mess of victim blaming, and excuses. Just the worst, most incomprehensible, most totally deranged redemption arc I've ever seen. 

[KingOfHearts]

I just finished watching The Good Place and I'm all caught up. It's such a good show! I haven't seen great writing like this in a long time. I'm totally hooked now and I got so excited for every next episode. I really needed that after all the sucking we've seen recently. (*cough* S7 *cough*) I just found out that the creator of it actually met with Damon Lindelof to discuss the show beforehand, since he loved Lost's cliffhangers. The inspiration really shows.

I like that it's mostly just the characters running around in various zany situations while also hitting beats here and there. It's just a lot of fun. I think the writers on OUAT try to do that with throwing their characters into different franchises, but it doesn't really work. There's too much melodrama that's rarely relevant to any big picture. So much time is wasted on conflict that doesn't go anywhere. (Rumple betrays everyone, Hook mopes about something he did, Regina gets something good but loses it, rinse, lather, repeat.) TGP cuts a lot of the bullshit. It moves quickly but you never feel like you're missing out. With OUAT, you normally miss the good stuff but it's a slog through the stuff no one cares about.

Quote

Who can forget Lasagna Gate, or Regina smugly siding with Cora while she murdered Snows old nanny in cold blood?

I don't think Regina siding with Cora initially was bad writing or incompatible with a redemption arc. However, what should have happened was Regina deciding to betray her mother after watching her kill Johanna and finding out the Stable Boy events were all rigged. That probably would have fixed many of 2B's issues.

Edited February 23, 2018 by KingOfHearts

[Rumsy4]

6 hours ago, KingOfHearts said:

TGP cuts a lot of the bullshit. It moves quickly but you never feel like you're missing out.

It definitely works to its advantage that the Show has only 13 episodes per season. They don't have many "filler" episodes or moments.

Spoiler

In Season 2, I assumed they'd go through the new reboot for several episodes at least. But they inverted that expectation by going through several reboots in one episode. haha. 

What works for shows like TGP and LOST is that the writers are/were aware that one cannot stretch things out indefinitely in a concept show, unlike a soap opera. OUAT writers seem to have simultaneously wanted to stretch out the Show to run for years, while at the same time cramming too much irrelevant material into the 22/23 episodes they had per season. 

Edited February 23, 2018 by Rumsy4

[Rumsy4]

The Good Place spoilers below.

Spoiler

 

Quote

If we got a Season 10, we would probably go to The Better Place and it's actually Storybrooke bathed in yellow light.

This explains everything. Finally. Storybrooke was the Bad Place all along. 

 

[Shanna Marie]

I've finished season one of The Good Place, and the spoiler discussed above before I whined about spoilers turned out not to have been a spoiler because I'd figured that part out. Oddly, it was because of the contrast between the way the show was depicting the afterlife and my personal theology that I figured it out.

Spoiler

I found myself thinking fairly early that none of the people who supposedly belonged in "the good place" struck me as being very good people. They were so self-righteous that they reminded me too much of so many of the people who are very vocal about being religious but whose lives have little to do with what the Bible teaches. I said to myself then that they were probably going to find out that this was actually some kind of hell, or at the very least a purgatory. There might have been some fist-pumping when that moment came in the show.

And it's quite the contrast with what OUAT showed as the afterlife, which didn't fit into any kind of moral or ethical framework.

[Camera One]

I don't know why it was trending but I watched the TED-Ed Video on the myth of Thor's journey to the land of giants, and once again, it reminded me how much more source material "Once" could have mined.  

[Camera One]

I was reading an EW interview with two new showrunners for a show I don't watch and here were some quotes:

Quote

Thematically, what this season is about is it’s a... journey from hopelessness to hope. 

Quote

Let’s just say, without giving too much away, we’re going to be playing with expectations, we’re going to be telling stories that experiment with time.

Quote

We’re playing around with narrative structure and, hopefully, have done it in such a way that when the audience thinks they’ve figured out where we’re going, we have a way to pull the rug out from under them. 

Quote

one of the things that we love about this universe... is that there is an element of reinvention. Every season, even every eight episodes, where we find our characters in different places, facing new adversaries. 

Quote

 [Laughs nervously] Maybe? I won’t say specifically, but yeah, maybe.

Quote

I think [this] season... is going to be about taking these characters that people love and putting them into situations that really bring out some of these really emotional arcs between the characters, puts them in some larger-than-life situations. There’s a lot of fun in it. It’s very heartfelt and emotional.

Do you think Daddy A&E will be proud?  This is the interview (beware automatic video that plays).

Edited February 24, 2018 by Camera One

[Rumsy4]

It’s Fear the Walking Dead, and this had me LOL:

Quote

replaced by new showrunners Andrew Chambliss and Ian Goldberg (who worked together on Once Upon a Time)

No wonder @Camera One‘s quotes seemed familiar.

4 hours ago, Camera One said:

Do you think Daddy A&E will be proud? 

I would be very surprised if they won’t (while also thinking they’d do a better job). ;-p

Edited February 24, 2018 by Rumsy4

[Camera One]

It really reinforces how the Writers' Room for "Once" is basically a bunch of clones.

It will be interesting to read from "Fear the Walking Dead" fans whether Chambliss and Goldberg actually follow through on their assertion that it's all about the core family and not just about the new characters they're bringing in.

Edited February 24, 2018 by Camera One

[Camera One]

They just cast one of the sisters in the reboot of "Charmed".  

I did watch "Charmed" and liked it, but I just don't understand why anyone would reboot it.  It's not like there was a deep, complicated mythology to build on, and the reboot characters don't even have the same names.  It's described as "a fierce, funny, feminist reboot”... what's that supposed to mean.  One of the original cast members seem displeased about the reboot.

Having said that, they should have hired A&E.  The 7B coven storyline could be a backdoor pilot and it would be all the more fun set in the Once multiverse.

Edited February 24, 2018 by Camera One

[KingOfHearts]

42 minutes ago, Camera One said:

It's described as "a fierce, funny, feminist reboot"

I'm surprised that wasn't the tagline for S7 of OUAT!

Edited February 24, 2018 by KingOfHearts

[Camera One]

I borrowed the first season of "Outlander" from the library and watched the first episode.  I liked it.  I love time travel stories, though this one looks quite serious and doesn't have the "fun" of something like "Once".  I was actually looking for the type of show to put in the background and half-watch while I do other things, and I think this show I would want to devote my full attention to it.  But I do have a pile of work so it might have to be that way.  I was visiting Culloden earlier this year and heard someone mention this show.  I've never read the books and I usually read books before watching adaptations.  I think I might make an exception for this one.

[daxx]

I read the first outlander book after watching the tv show. They covered literally every important event from the first book and I didn’t even get through the second book because it was first person at least at the beginning and I just wasn’t in the mood.

[Guest]

On ‎2‎/‎23‎/‎2018 at 8:20 AM, Rumsy4 said:

What works for shows like TGP and LOST is that the writers are/were aware that one cannot stretch things out indefinitely in a concept show, unlike a soap opera. OUAT writers seem to have simultaneously wanted to stretch out the Show to run for years, while at the same time cramming too much irrelevant material into the 22/23 episodes they had per season. 

LOST got to opening the hatch and rewound.  There were three forking episodes where they ended and the same forking place.  I quit LOST over their stretching things out.  I honestly can't remember if I ever watched them open the hatch.  I was that irritated. I had to take a couple seasons off.

[Camera One]

Quote

There were three forking episodes where they ended and the same forking place.  

I can totally see how people would lose their patience with stuff like that.  Granted, they were pretty much making it up as they went along on that show.  But I actually enjoyed it because to me, the journey was more interesting than the destination on that show.  They were playing with the narrative and the POV and that type of thing fascinates me, when done well.  It's definitely not for everyone.

[Rumsy4]

30 minutes ago, daxx said:

I didn’t even get through the second book because it was first person at least at the beginning and I just wasn’t in the mood.

I have to ask. Why do people seem to hate first person narratives? I've never had an issue with them, but I always see people complaining about that on tumblr. 

18 minutes ago, ParadoxLost said:

LOST got to opening the hatch and rewound.  There were three forking episodes where they ended and the same forking place.  I quit LOST over their stretching things out.  I honestly can't remember if I ever watched them open the hatch.  I was that irritated. I had to take a couple seasons off.

I guess different people have different tolerance levels. I pretty much hated some of the S2 episodes of LOST, but I don't resent it the way I resent Season 4 of Fringe or Season 6 of OUAT. At least Fringe course-corrected in Season 5, while OUAT is just going out with a fizzle.

Edited February 25, 2018 by Rumsy4

[Camera One]

41 minutes ago, Rumsy4 said:

I don't resent it the way I resent Season 4 of Fringe or Season 6 of OUAT. 

It has been a long time since I watched "Fringe" (I binge-watched Season 1-4 on DVDs and live-watched the final season).  I don't even remember what happened in Season 4 but I don't recall anything that made me dislike the show (I came away thinking it was a solid show, with some flaws).  What did you resent about Season 4?

The only season of "Lost" that I hated was Season 6, and maybe the backhalf of Season 5.

Edited February 25, 2018 by Camera One