OUAT vs. Other Fairy Tales: Compare & Contrast

[tennisgurl]

Just watched the new episode of Supergirl, and it looks like our bad guys are going to be...a circle of women who wear black robes, and stand in a magic circle doing evil magic stuff for reasons that haven't really been explained. The Coat Hangers have returned!

[KingOfHearts]

The new trailer for Wreck-It Ralph 2 has all the Disney princesses, most of them with their original voice actors. I loved the part where they're testing to see if Venelope is a true princess. "Were you poisoned? Cursed? Imprisoned or enslaved? Do people assume all your problems got solved because a big, strong man showed up?" Somehow those cameos are probably going to do a better job at dissecting Disney princess culture than OUAT did in seven seasons.

[Camera One]

I would love a spinoff with all the Princesses in one movie.  

[Shanna Marie]

I found this interesting article by one of the writers who worked on the development of Lost, talking about what it was about Lost that worked that most people don't realize was key: an operational theme, basically, a link between the action and the protagonist's emotional need. With Lost, it was:

Quote

The operating theme of Lost is simple and applies to every character: who do you say you are when you can reinvent yourself with impunity? Every member of the Lost ensemble was living a lie on the island. These lies dictated their behavior and led them to try — either successfully or unsuccessfully — to remake themselves into their most desired version of themselves.

He goes on to say that this is why they did the flashbacks, to contrast their island selves with their past selves. But I think A&E missed this about Lost. This next quote from the article is also apt in applying to OUAT:

Quote

 

By dealing with the unknown, beguiling, and generally spectacular (aliens! robots! vampires! alien robot vampires!), sci–fi as a genre has the sneaky ability to fool otherwise extremely capable writers into believing that a nifty concept with a lot of unanswered questions is enough to carry a television series. It isn’t.

You must first put your characters in the one, singular (and preferably, for my money, science–fictional!) situation that most challenges their true self. That’s your operational theme: challenge your character’s innermost identity, do it week after week, then have your agent call my agent.

 

I think this is a lot of what hurt Once because they were all over the map. Storybrooke could have been a good place to explore who these fairy tale characters really were when they were removed from a world with magic and fairy tale rules. It could have explored our world with its gray areas vs. the black-and-white world of fairy tales. But they never truly figured out what their story was actually about. They may have said it was about the Evil Queen getting her happy ending, but that's not really a premise or a theme. You've still got to decide what that means -- is it about her learning not to be evil, about her not having been really evil in the first place, about her being from a world with rigid hero/villain rules so that she didn't stand a chance, about evil really triumphing? Season one seems to work because it was all about Emma accepting who she really was, and once that happened, everyone else found their true selves. It was about identity. The later seasons don't have any real kind of theme.

[KingOfHearts]

1 hour ago, Shanna Marie said:

It was about identity. The later seasons don't have any real kind of theme.

A&E would tell you the theme has always been "hope", but that doesn't dig into the characters. That's just a general idea. It doesn't push their characters to grow or reevaluate themselves. Yes, some of them needed to learn to have HOPE, but then what? That's like making the theme "truth", or "love", or "perseverance". In the words of Princess and the Frog, you have to dig a little deeper. You have the will, but not the way. It's too broad and generic. It doesn't pose any questions like Lost did. (Or at least, any questions A&E bothered to explore or answer.)

[Shanna Marie]

1 hour ago, KingOfHearts said:

A&E would tell you the theme has always been "hope", but that doesn't dig into the characters. That's just a general idea. It doesn't push their characters to grow or reevaluate themselves. Yes, some of them needed to learn to have HOPE, but then what?

And the big problem with OUAT is that as much as they talked about hope, how often did that actually play out on the show? Their lives pretty much sucked most of the time. I guess there was Henry's hope/faith in Emma that led to the curse breaking, but things got pretty awful from there, with most of their victories turning into some kind of defeat. There was Elsa wishing on the necklace right at the time to save Anna -- and then they went right into the Shattered Sight spell and Ingrid dying right as she learned she could be loved. I suppose Hook's miraculous revival might be a hope thing, enough to justify his daughter's name. In general, though, they just talked a lot about needing to have hope, but I don't feel like the show itself really carried out a theme of hope.

If they were going to take the Lost approach, they could have done something with how the characters were still essentially themselves, in spite of the memory curse, no matter how much Regina tried to keep them from being themselves, but that wouldn't apply after the first season.

I really can't find any kind of unifying theme in the show because it was all over the place and depended on which character we're talking about.

[KingOfHearts]

1 hour ago, Shanna Marie said:

I really can't find any kind of unifying theme in the show because it was all over the place and depended on which character we're talking about.

Or even when what episode you're looking at, because the themes and moral lessons changed week to week.

[Spartan Girl]

On June 6, 2018 at 2:01 AM, Camera One said:

I would love a spinoff with all the Princesses in one movie.  

Seconded. Hell, give them their own TV show!

Speaking of which, Tangled the Series returns for its second season June 24! Totally psyched about Rapunzel and Eugene going on adventures and encountering new characters! The only downside is that Varian will be back. My hatred of him and his victim act has only increased during the hiatus, mainly due to the rabid base of fangirls. "Oh he's so adorable, he's just a kid, he doesn't know what he's doing..." GIMME A BREAK. It's the same sob story shit we got over and over on OUAT. 

[Camera One]

5 hours ago, KingOfHearts said:

A&E would tell you the theme has always been "hope", but that doesn't dig into the characters. 

They say the show is about hope, but I don't see how that is the case.  Emma spent 21 episodes accepting that she needed to die.   More recently, we spent 20 episodes watching Adult Henry potentially kiss someone and die.  Not that we cared about him at all, but how is that hopeful?  

A&E took aspects of the format from "Lost" and plunked it onto every series they've written since then, without the deeper thought behind it.  A lot of A&E's success with "Once" can be owed to our familiarity with the characters and the stories from lore.  We're pre-disposed to be fond of Snow White, or Alice in Wonderland, etc., and we're naturally curious how their story will be different.  "Dead of Summer" showed how they find it hard to create likeable or relatable characters that are "original" (loosely speaking, since most of them were summer camp stock characters, who turn out to have surprisetwist! backstories).

Edited June 8, 2018 by Camera One

[Shanna Marie]

19 minutes ago, Camera One said:

They say the show is about hope, but I don't see how that is the case.  Emma spent 21 episodes accepting that she needed to die.   More recently, we spent 20 episodes watching Adult Henry potentially kiss someone and die.  Not that we cared about him at all, but how is that hopeful? 

I guess if you identify with the villain (and a lot of people do), then there's a lot of hope -- you can spend years being utterly awful, then change your mind, do a few moderately good things, and you become a great hero who is beloved by all and maybe even end up as queen of the universe. If you don't identify with the villain and instead identify with the heroes, it's like seeing the bully who tormented you throughout your school days become rich and successful and end up as president.

[daxx]

8 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

The later seasons don't have any real kind of theme.

Season 3 actually did have an overarching theme. It was about finding Home. Not just for Emma either. They had to find Henry and bring him home. Henry and Emma found a fake home in NY. After wanting to go back home to the EF in season 2 MM and David were forced back and then cast a curse to return to their new home in Storybrooke. Hook realized his home was Emma and Emma realized her Home was Storybrooke in the finale. I know they didn’t really touch on Oz properly but the original story was about a girl trying to get home.

[KingOfHearts]

2 hours ago, daxx said:

Season 3 actually did have an overarching theme. It was about finding Home. Not just for Emma either. They had to find Henry and bring him home. Henry and Emma found a fake home in NY. After wanting to go back home to the EF in season 2 MM and David were forced back and then cast a curse to return to their new home in Storybrooke. Hook realized his home was Emma and Emma realized her Home was Storybrooke in the finale. I know they didn’t really touch on Oz properly but the original story was about a girl trying to get home.

Season 3 was the most coherent season of the series, imo. S1 meandered too much in the middle. By the end it was like, "oh yeah, Henry is important and we still have a curse to break!" While S3 had a lot of filler, it seemed even somehow.

Edited June 8, 2018 by KingOfHearts

[Camera One]

That's an interesting point about home in Season 3.  

Season 3 was the first season they intentionally wrote two very separate arcs, and for that reason, it didn't come together for me as a whole.  So many shows (eg. "Buffy") were able to have a slow-burning full-season plot with a Big Bad at the end, but A&E wasn't capable of that.  In the end, the half-season arcs were better suited to their limited writing abilities, but the two halves of Season 3, 4 and 5 just didn't fit together.  Then again, neither did the two halves of Season 7.  Season 6 did tell that boring never-ending story of the Savior, so that was a continuous thread, but the rest of it was everything and the kitchen sink thrown in.

Edited June 8, 2018 by Camera One

[Inquirer]

10 hours ago, Camera One said:

In the end, the half-season arcs were better suited to their limited writing abilities, but the two halves of Season 3, 4 and 5 just didn't fit together. 

I think the two halves of Season 5 actually did it OK, since the second episode of 5A introduced the Underworld concept and had other Greek mythology stuff such as the Holy Grail being from the gods and the Promtheum Flame being needed to reforge Excalibur, the 5A finale led very directly into 5B (with the whole "save Hook" mission), and the last Underworld episode before the completely unrelated two-part season finale had King Arthur as a major character who found redemption.  By contrast, Season 3's halves were only connected by the "Home" theme, and Season 4's halves were only connected by the horrible Author plot which took a major backseat during the Frozen arc of 4A.

Quote

Speaking of which, Tangled the Series returns for its second season June 24! Totally psyched about Rapunzel and Eugene going on adventures and encountering new characters! The only downside is that Varian will be back. My hatred of him and his victim act has only increased during the hiatus, mainly due to the rabid base of fangirls. "Oh he's so adorable, he's just a kid, he doesn't know what he's doing..." GIMME A BREAK. It's the same sob story shit we got over and over on OUAT. 

Nah, it's not - not unless the show itself starts validating his victim complex, which I don't think it will. Its writers are smarter than OUAT's.

Quote

If you don't identify with the villain and instead identify with the heroes, it's like seeing the bully who tormented you throughout your school days become rich and successful and end up as president.

Something that many kids who were in school with Donald Trump have actually grown up to experience.  I'm sorry, I couldn't resist.

Edited June 8, 2018 by Inquirer

[KingOfHearts]

Rewatching "Galavant". I still haven't seen every episode. Karen David brings a lot more fire to her role as princess of Valencia than she did with Jasmine on OUAT, even though the characters had very similar backgrounds. Jasmine was insecure and kind of whiny. It might've been the writing and directing. Is it weird that I sympathize with King Richard? He's a casual mass murderer like Regina, but that show seems to handle it better for several reasons. For one, it's a comedy and the deaths are mostly offscreen. The characters don't crowd around him proclaiming he deserves better. One important element is that he's very naive and clueless, unable to grasp the gravity of his transgressions. Regina, on the other hand, was well-aware of how far she had fallen and knew better because of the influences in her life. (Tinkerbell, Snow, Maleficent, and even Rumple in a few fleeting moments.) She's an idiot in more of a bang-my-head-against-the-wall sort of way. There's "I was never taught morals" and then there's "I've have many opportunities to change but didn't take them". Regina's life is like sinking on a ship and refusing to board a lifeboat because you're too proud.

Edited June 8, 2018 by KingOfHearts

[Spartan Girl]

5 hours ago, KingOfHearts said:

Rewatching "Galavant". I still haven't seen every episode. Karen David brings a lot more fire to her role as princess of Valencia than she did with Jasmine on OUAT, even though the characters had very similar backgrounds. Jasmine was insecure and kind of whiny. It might've been the writing and directing. Is it weird that I sympathize with King Richard? He's a casual mass murderer like Regina, but that show seems to handle it better for several reasons. For one, it's a comedy and the deaths are mostly offscreen. The characters don't crowd around him proclaiming he deserves better. One important element is that he's very naive and clueless, unable to grasp the gravity of his transgressions. Regina, on the other hand, was well-aware of how far she had fallen and knew better because of the influences in her life. (Tinkerbell, Snow, Maleficent, and even Rumple in a few fleeting moments.) She's an idiot in more of a bang-my-head-against-the-wall sort of way. There's "I was never taught morals" and then there's "I've have many opportunities to change but didn't take them". Regina's life is like sinking on a ship and refusing to board a lifeboat because you're too proud.

Bingo. And Richard was one of the show's best characters. Way more likable than Regina.

6 hours ago, Inquirer said:

Nah, it's not - not unless the show itself starts validating his victim complex, which I don't think it will. Its writers are smarter than OUAT's.

 

No, but everyone on the show, especially Rapunzel is determined to go easy on him -- even after he tries to crush her own mother. Plus, his constant harping about Rapunzel breaking her promise is very similar to Regina's "Snow couldn't keep a secret" bitching. 

Still, the writers are smarter -- I hope.

[Camera One]

7 hours ago, KingOfHearts said:

Rewatching "Galavant". I still haven't seen every episode. Karen David brings a lot more fire to her role as princess of Valencia than she did with Jasmine on OUAT, even though the characters had very similar backgrounds. Jasmine was insecure and kind of whiny. It might've been the writing and directing.

I think it had to be something A&E were doing.  Jasmine became quite tiresome after a few episodes.  Maybe it was because she had to say "We need to save Agrabah" over and over again.  Plus I feel never really saw enough of her character's background before she met Aladdin.  

Quote

Is it weird that I sympathize with King Richard? He's a casual mass murderer like Regina, but that show seems to handle it better for several reasons. 

I did grow to like him somewhat, but he did become the Writers' favorite.  I wasn't a huge fan of Season 2 partly because it seemed to start revolving around him.  And he became the very special hero who was able wield the Sword.  It did remind me of Regina.

[KingOfHearts]

1 hour ago, Camera One said:

I did grow to like him somewhat, but he did become the Writers' favorite.  I wasn't a huge fan of Season 2 partly because it seemed to start revolving around him.  And he became the very special hero who was able wield the Sword.  It did remind me of Regina.

He's one of those characters that's hilarious in small doses. But if it were "King Richard: The Show", it would be way too much. OUAT had this problem with Rumple, Zelena and most of the Big Bads.

Edited June 9, 2018 by KingOfHearts

[KAOS Agent]

Galavant made fun of things like executions. "Dance Until You Die" cracked me up when I watched it. Making up dances to the various methods of execution lightened things up considerably. Who doesn't want to dance along to the strangulation, asphixiation and the burned at the stake? All of this made Richard's actions more of a joke than anything else and certainly made it easier to see him in a better light. Plus, he was an idiot, but he super believed in Tad Cooper and that went a long way.

[Rumsy4]

I ended up really liking king Richard. I think he had decent redemption arc. I do think the second series focussed more on him than on Galavant himself becasue the writers fell in love with their villain. 

In recent TV, Root from Person of Interest had the best redemptive arc that I've seen, though Michael from The Good Place is giving her a good run for her money. Root had psychopathic tendencies, but she gradually came to understand the immorality of her actions and genuinely made an effort to change. She was a writer's favorite character too, but IMO, that didn't negatively impact the writing for her.

I've often seen Rumple primarily as a psychopath and Regina as a sociopath. 

Edited June 9, 2018 by Rumsy4

[Shanna Marie]

I think it helped that Richard was shown as more clueless than truly mean. It was a huge wake-up call to him when he realized how awful he'd been, and he felt bad and tried to change. It also helped that he really did lose absolutely everything, so that he hit bottom, and although he frequently screwed up, he made an earnest attempt to be a good friend. Even as a villain, he was shown to actually notice and care about people, like him being the only one who actually knew the Jester's first name. I don't know how much of his becoming a bigger part of the show was due to him being the writers' favorite because they love villains and how much it was to do with the fact that the actor totally sold it. He was amazing in the role, managing to walk that fine line between villainy, pathos, and comedy, and was one of the stronger singers in the cast. I'm not a big villain person, but I think I'd have found myself centering my writing on giving that actor lots of good stuff to do if I'd been writing for that show. I think it was less "Richard is our favorite!" and more "oh, I want to see Tim do this!"

[Camera One]

2 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

I don't know how much of his becoming a bigger part of the show was due to him being the writers' favorite because they love villains and how much it was to do with the fact that the actor totally sold it. 

To me, everyone else really sold it too.  Yet in Season 2, only Richard gained substantially in screentime and became the main character.  It reminded me of "Once" because it seemed like the Writers had no idea what to do with "heroes" like Galavant or Isabella.  They basically became inconsequential and their arcs were pathetic. 

But unlike in "Once", it was a case where the writers' favorite was also the audience favorite for the most part, based on the show's forum (I don't know how the ratings were in Season 2 vs. Season 1).  I also found the cleverness of subverting fairy tale tropes was lost in Season 2, where they had to start parodying "Lord of the Rings" and "Pirates of the Caribbean". 

I think it's a problem if the enjoyment of a formerly ensemble show hinges on whether viewers find one single character funny or not (unfortunately, I personally found the humor with Richard hit and miss).  The plot also became convoluted and unconvincing.  I loved the singing aspect of the show (which was still fun), but for me, the series lost the human component in Season 2 (with the exception of the writing for Richard) and I wasn't as sad as I should have been when it was cancelled.

Edited June 9, 2018 by Camera One

[Spartan Girl]

8 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

I think it helped that Richard was shown as more clueless than truly mean. It was a huge wake-up call to him when he realized how awful he'd been, and he felt bad and tried to change. It also helped that he really did lose absolutely everything, so that he hit bottom, and although he frequently screwed up, he made an earnest attempt to be a good friend. Even as a villain, he was shown to actually notice and care about people, like him being the only one who actually knew the Jester's first name. I don't know how much of his becoming a bigger part of the show was due to him being the writers' favorite because they love villains and how much it was to do with the fact that the actor totally sold it. He was amazing in the role, managing to walk that fine line between villainy, pathos, and comedy, and was one of the stronger singers in the cast. I'm not a big villain person, but I think I'd have found myself centering my writing on giving that actor lots of good stuff to do if I'd been writing for that show. I think it was less "Richard is our favorite!" and more "oh, I want to see Tim do this!"

It also helped that Richard's season 2 story was way better than Galavant's and Isabella's season 2 story.

Not to mention that Madalenna was the boss bitch evil queen that Saint Woegina could never be.

Edited June 9, 2018 by Spartan Girl

[tennisgurl]

I think it also helped that Galavant was always a rather wacky comedic parody of fairy tales and knights and kings and such, and while it certainly had moments where things were played seriously, especially character development stuff, a lot of it was played for laughs. You could kind of forgive Richard more than someone like Regina just because of the tone. When he had villages burnt down, it was usually part of some joke about how clueless he was or something. When Regina did it, it wasn’t played as a joke or to say what a loser she was. It was quite serious, just not with any of the actual gravitas it required, or it happened for plot reasons, or, weirdly, to make us feel bad for Regina.

[Camera One]

I rewatched the first few episodes of "Charmed" and ended up rewatching the entire Season 1 (I have one more episode left).  I'm finding it quite entertaining as a fun monster-of-the-week show, with one or two continuing strands.  I liked that it was rather light, yet still did character moments.  Admittedly, the CGI was pretty bad and the DVD image was rather grainy.  They did an effective job of sustaining anticipation for the police detective finding out about the sisters' secret.  I wonder if they could have done something similar with Roni and a normal detective working at the Hyperion Heights police station, instead of that farce of a subplot with Dr. Facilier.  Last night, I watched an episode and the guest star was the actor who plays Archie/Jiminy.

Did anyone watch "The Crossing" in its entirety?   It finished airing last night, I think?  Did it end in a cliffhanger or did it have a satisfying ending?  I have it on my PVR and was trying to decide whether I should just delete the whole thing without watching it, since it got cancelled anyway.  It seemed like a combination of seen-before sci-fi tropes.  

Edited June 10, 2018 by Camera One

[daxx]

1 hour ago, Camera One said:

Did anyone watch "The Crossing" in its entirety?

I deleted it from my TiVo without watching once I saw it was cancelled. 

[Camera One]

Just now, daxx said:

I deleted it from my TiVo without watching once I saw it was cancelled. 

That's what I was planning to do too!  But for some reason, it seemed like such a shame to delete 10 episodes at once, LOL.

[KingOfHearts]

Okay, now I'm really disappointed Regina didn't get to sing Magdalena's "No One But You". It's the perfect anthem of a narcissistic queen. Seriously, it fits Regina to a tee. It would've been great during her marriage to Leopold just before she decided to kill the king and Snow White.

Quote

I think it helped that Richard was shown as more clueless than truly mean. It was a huge wake-up call to him when he realized how awful he'd been, and he felt bad and tried to change.

At least Richard realizes why he does what he does. Regina didn't intentionally confront her past until the Underworld, but it didn't change her actions. 

Edited June 11, 2018 by KingOfHearts

[Camera One]

I watched "Rogue One" (spoilers ahead).

I thought it was mildly engaging and overall it was better than "The Last Jedi".  I generally liked the characters.  I was watching while doing something else, especially during the extended battle sequences, so I missed how one or two of the characters died at the end.  I tried to rewind to find out how that pilot died, but I lost patience after a while. 

I did laugh at the Hope speeches.  I could imagine Snow popping up.  I just don't find the Star Wars world as interesting as the Fairy Tale worlds.  I'm not too fond of space age tech mixed together with archaic communities that look pre-modern era.  

[andromeda331]

2 hours ago, Camera One said:

I watched "Rogue One" (spoilers ahead).

I thought it was mildly engaging and overall it was better than "The Last Jedi".  I generally liked the characters.  I was watching while doing something else, especially during the extended battle sequences, so I missed how one or two of the characters died at the end.  I tried to rewind to find out how that pilot died, but I lost patience after a while. 

I did laugh at the Hope speeches.  I could imagine Snow popping up.  I just don't find the Star Wars world as interesting as the Fairy Tale worlds.  I'm not too fond of space age tech mixed together with archaic communities that look pre-modern era.  

Spoilers Ahead

I liked Rogue One better then I thought I would. I used to read all of the Star Wars: Expanded Universe before Disney bought the franchise and invalided all of those books. While I understand why for one thing there were tons of books, comic books and games expanding centuries its really hard for me unlearn that and remember the new stuff is how everything happened. I still don't know what I think of TFW (I haven't seen Last Jedi yet) because I'm still mostly connected to old version characters and I haven't yet connected with any of the new characters. Maybe that'll change I don't know. For Rogue One the battle at the end was really good, watching the Hammerhead slam into a Star Destroyer was awesome, and it was nice they explained why the Death Star had that flaw in the first place. I'm not sure I like how easily the Rebels wanted to give up in that meeting where Jyn gives her speech. Guys, you are the Alliance. I get being surprised at learning about the Death Star because that is a biggie but why you giving up so fast? There should have been more people on both sides.

ONCE used to tie things back to something and that's what made it fun to watch. In the beginning they took more time in telling the story, setting up the scenes and clothes. The Enchanted Forest looked how you would think it did. Storybrook looked like a depressed town but there were hints that it was more then that.  Regina's mansion with all that black and white looked fitting for her. Mary Margaret's hovel. Emma's walk to Granny's B&B looked exactly like a walk to Grandma's home. Many of the actors looked the part. Watching Emma and Mary Margaret becoming friends, roommates and more while not knowing they were mother and daughter was really nice to watch. Then it just all stopped. They'd throw up scenes that didn't really look like the Enchanted Forest. Storybrook really ended up only a being a few places. It didn't really matter since the scenes never really mattered. Nothing mattered and it showed in the writing, acting, and the scenery.   

[KingOfHearts]

I didn't care for Rogue One the first time I saw it, but after The Last Jedi, I realized it could've been much worse. Now I can appreciate how neat and clean the story was compared to the "let's throw random junk at the wall" of The Last Jedi.

[tennisgurl]

I thought the hope speeches worked in Rouge One because, unlike in the later seasons of Once, they were actually doing things beyond “having hope” and talking about Happy Endings. They actually needed that speech to prep them for their dangerous mission. There was an actual plan there beyond just the speech.

In general, I liked Rougue One a lot. It’s the best of the recent Star Wars movies, and that’s from someone who thought Last Jedi was pretty decent. 

Edited June 14, 2018 by tennisgurl

[Shanna Marie]

3 hours ago, tennisgurl said:

I thought the hope speeches worked in Rouge One because, unlike in the later seasons of Once, they were actually doing things beyond “having hope” and talking about Happy Endings. They actually needed that speech to prep them for their dangerous mission. 

I think the hope speeches in Rogue One worked because in that world, which was pretty bleak and under the thumb of the Empire, having hope was a pretty radical concept, and they'd have been doomed if they didn't strive for something better. Then they put their lives behind the concept, and they actually put together a plan and took action instead of making vague statements about there being a better way and all they had to do was have hope.

I rather loved that movie, even though it was pretty dark. I guess part of it is that it was basically a WWII movie, and I love WWII movies. I also liked seeing other aspects of that universe and seeing the story behind the story.

[Camera One]

I too thought the hope speeches worked because they made a concrete plan and carried it out with the hope that it would be successful.  On "Once", it was almost always empty words.

[tennisgurl]

10 minutes ago, Shanna Marie said:

Then they put their lives behind the concept, and they actually put together a plan and took action instead of making vague statements about there being a better way and all they had to do was have hope.

What I especially loved, and what really worked, is that they were asking them to still have hope even in dark times, and even after great sacrifices. Thats one of the reasons why the ending was so great, and was so affecting. 

Spoiler

All of the heroes were dead, as well as tons of other rebels, and they died in the hope that the death star plans could be gotten to the right people, even if that wasn't even guaranteed... and they did. It meant that they're sacrifice wasn't for nothing, and that even in such tragic circumstances, you still have to have hope, and keep trying, and you can still make a difference. Its powerful, and not half assed like on Once. 

[ParadoxLost]

@tennisgurl (because I know you watch) The Expanse reminded me of OUAT last night.  Sent me searching IMDB and re watching with closed captioning.  I really wanted to know the military rank of that Martian.  You know the one.  Sadly it was lieutenant.  I was hoping it was

Spoiler

Captain Floor

.

[tennisgurl]

@ParadoxLost That didn’t even occur to me, but now I’m dying! Good old 

Spoiler

Captain floor 

almost makes a comeback...in SPACE! 

For real though, if anyone is interested in great characters, complex storytelling, gripping space stuff, and complex world building, give The Expanse a shot! It’s amazing, and we just got a fourth season after much work!

[Spartan Girl]

Has anyone seen the Frozen Broadway musical? The numbers from the Tony awards looked pretty good...and Elsa's gown looks WAY pretty than the one on OUAT.

I know a lot of people think the Frozen arc was when the show jumped the shark, but it did have some good stuff. For one, it called Elsa and Anna's parents on their shitty parentingparenting. More importantly, Elsa learned (and taught Emma) the importance of loving and accepting herself.

However, it would have been nice if the so-called "good citizens" of Storybrooke apologized to herher for treating her like crap and falsely accusing her of the Snow Queen's crimes. She got enough of that crap in Arendelle...and even in the media with a bunch of commentators claiming that Elsa really did need to be locked up. Newsflash: Elsa was in perfect control of her powers as a child until Anna's accident and her stupid parents treating her like a time bomb.

[Camera One]

I finished watching "Pinocchio".  I remember not liking it as a child, and I still didn't like it too much.  Pinocchio was so gullible, and Jiminy Cricket was the most useless guardian ever.

As I said in "The Shepherd" thread, it was amazing how much Archie's dad and mom looked like the Fox and the Cat, respectively.  I wonder if they cast and did the hairstyle intentionally.  

I loved how cleverly they adapted the character of Cleo the Goldfish into Emma's mentor.  The fishbowl clearly represented Cleo's ARMOR and how Cleo died in the show is by injury from glass which is clearly a metaphor for her broken armor wounding her.  Cleo the fish can BAIL water while Cleo the woman was a BAILbondswoman.  Makes me want to rewatch "Firebird" to find all the other parallels.

I could see Pleasure Island as a portal gateway to Neverland. 

It was quite appalling how The Blue Fairy did nothing about all those boys being turned into donkeys.  

On 6/15/2018 at 12:55 PM, Spartan Girl said:

Has anyone seen the Frozen Broadway musical? The numbers from the Tony awards looked pretty good...and Elsa's gown looks WAY pretty than the one on OUAT.

I haven't seen the musical, but Disney has posted the entire soundtrack on their Youtube DisneyMusicVevo page, if you want to listen to the tracks.

Edited June 17, 2018 by Camera One

[KingOfHearts]

2 hours ago, Camera One said:

Jiminy Cricket was the most useless guardian ever.

Missed opportunity on OUAT to make Blue, Glinda, Merlin, and Jiminy part of a secret shady cult.

[Rumsy4]

Westworld went to a really really dark place in last night's episode. This once particular event has been building up all season long, but I never thought they'd actually do it. I got to hand it to the writers. 

I'm the opposite of how I am in this forum with how I watch the show. WW has its own writing issues, but I prefer to watch it with a less critical eye and just enjoy the ride. And at the very least the WW writers have proved that the stakes are real and they weren't just doing lip-service. And last week's episode (Kiksuya) was one of the best hours of television. It's right up close to The Constant (LOST), which is probably my favorite episode of any TV show I've seen. 

[Camera One]

I've been trying to figure out why with some shows I watch, I go to the forums here, and I have very little to say.

I tend to watch adaptations with a more critical eye, and maybe that's why I've always watched "Once" with a more critical eye, because in some ways, it was adapting existing stories.  So there's bound to be a bit of comparison and easier to see lost potential, especially when there might be 5 or 6 versions of _____ done before.

And then after the first season, there was a lot of comparisons with the characters and relationships and worldbuilding, as we saw it in the first season and comparing what we signed up for, vs. what this show eventually became, which was egregiously different.  Many shows do lose their way, but rarely do they do it this quickly, or do such a 180 in what or who the show is actually about.

Edited June 18, 2018 by Camera One

[Rumsy4]

4 minutes ago, Camera One said:

Many shows do lose their way, but rarely do they do it this quickly, or do such a 180 in what or who the show is actually about.

I agree. But maybe it's because S1 wasn't the real story A&E wanted to tell. It was the bait used to get a show and grab the attention of viewers. The real story A&E wanted to tell was about poor sad Woegina as some confused metaphor for Hollywood, which I still don't get.

[tennisgurl]

Finally saw Solo, and I really enjoyed it. I liked having a Star Was movie that wasn’t tied into the Rebellion or the endless Skywalker drama, and I liked seeing the start of Hans criminal career and his friendship with Chewie. It makes me wonder what an A&E take on Star Wars would be, when it comes to Once. It seems like a great idea, as the SW universe is so huge and ripe with potential, but...A&E have a real talent for making things that should be awesome suck, so maybe its for the best. 

What I've consistently enjoyed about the new SW movies, as opposed to the prequels, is that they finally added the grittiness back to Star Wars. I dont mean story wise, but in the sets and costumes and the general aesthetic. In the prequels, everything was so clean and sterile, and the CGI made everything look so forced and unreal, while the original and new movies have a dirty look, it seems like a real, lived in world. Things dont work, people look kind of dirty and tired when they should look like that, it seems like a real universe, not just a fancy computer program. Yeah, the prequels are set during a "nicer" era, but even that should still have a SW look, and not some kind of Trek lite vibe. Thats what made SW so unique at first, and its great seeing them get back to that.

Edited June 19, 2018 by tennisgurl

[ParadoxLost]

On ‎6‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 8:44 PM, tennisgurl said:

Finally saw Solo, and I really enjoyed it. I liked having a Star Was movie that wasn’t tied into the Rebellion or the endless Skywalker drama, and I liked seeing the start of Hans criminal career and his friendship with Chewie. It makes me wonder what an A&E take on Star Wars would be, when it comes to Once. It seems like a great idea, as the SW universe is so huge and ripe with potential, but...A&E have a real talent for making things that should be awesome suck, so maybe its for the best. 

What I've consistently enjoyed about the new SW movies, as opposed to the prequels, is that they finally added the grittiness back to Star Wars. I dont mean story wise, but in the sets and costumes and the general aesthetic. In the prequels, everything was so clean and sterile, and the CGI made everything look so forced and unreal, while the original and new movies have a dirty look, it seems like a real, lived in world. Things dont work, people look kind of dirty and tired when they should look like that, it seems like a real universe, not just a fancy computer program. Yeah, the prequels are set during a "nicer" era, but even that should still have a SW look, and not some kind of Trek lite vibe. Thats what made SW so unique at first, and its great seeing them get back to that.

Welp, you just made me realize Regina is Darth Vader. 

They both have lame flashback origin stories where love drives them to the Dark Side.

Kill a village,  Kill a planet.

And instant redemption in the end.

[Rumsy4]

But...but...Rumple is Darth Vader! 

[ParadoxLost]

Nope.  Rumple is Emperor Palpatine manipulating poor gullible Regina to the Dark Side.

If it helps, I think Emma and Hook are probably Leia and Han.

Oh, and Henry is Luke with his dippy belief that there is good in Regina, deep down.

That makes Robin Padma.

I think Snow is Obi-wan.

And Charming is Chewie.

It fits in a very frightening way that has ruined Star Wars forever for me :)P

Edited June 20, 2018 by ParadoxLost

[KAOS Agent]

To be fair to Star Wars, Darth Vader realized that he was wrong in the end (and admitted it!), sacrificed himself to save Luke and then died in Luke's arms. He did not become the King of All Space and have all of his victims cheering for him. Also, his "appearance" in The Force Awakens does not glorify him. Instead, it shows whiny baby Kylo Ren worshiping his evil ways while rejecting the light. Darth Vader is not portrayed as a good guy we should all aspire to be. 

[scarynikki12]

Henry is NOT Luke! Luke was never concerned about being A Hero. He just was one. Henry would have lectured Han and Leia for killing stormtroopers and insisted that everyone was just being mean to Vader. 

[Camera One]

Padmé had some characteristics of Belle towards the end.  Though Belle is worse, because she met Rumple when he was already a monster.  Oops, silly me.   I meant tortured and misunderstood soul.  

Yoda is like the Blue Fairy.  "Useless I am."  Or maybe he's like Merlin.  Their actions and inaction sometimes makes things worse in the grand scheme of things.

Edited June 20, 2018 by Camera One