- This topic has 65 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Really disagree with you here. I think Regina’s story from evil queen to redemption might be the only arc they have done well. Is she better evil? Maybe. But her struggle on screen, (and Lana Parrila’s acting) I’ve actually really enjoyed, and would not loop into the jumping the shark conversation at all.
I am not saying that Regina’s redemption arc is jumping the shark. I am saying that it is the bad writing that led to the decline. I understand if you disagree, people like her arc. That’s fine. I just think a lot of people at the time were talking about Regina crying and the silliness of scenes such as them showing Regina about to cry because she wasn’t invited with the family to diner after Snow and Emma finally got back to or the scene in flashback when Owen ran across the town line and behind Regina Kurt is being arrested by the controlled Graham, later who Regina both murders, and Regina cries and we are supposed to feel sorry for her. I didn’t feel sorry for Regina during either of these moments and those are not the only moments. It is terribly bad writing, in my opinion. I am not alone in that opinion.
And I also disagree with this. I think Hook was compelling up until he became Emma’s love interest. Colin O’Donoghue was so good at playing an evil pirate, and the he got so soft in season 4. It was tough to watch. what compelled me the most about Hook was trying to figure out where he stood and sided with. He was a mystery but also had very obvious intentions. And he knew he had to walk a tight line with working with Cora and getting his own revenge on Rumple when he himself possessed zero magic and could get screwed in a second. And yet, he talked his way out with words. And then, he fell in love with Emma and his character became bland and awful. The struggle didn’t feel real like it was with Regina. He just became boring and decided he was done being all revengy and what not. If you’re going to say the show jumped the shark before season 4A, the point where they made CS shippers happy by putting Emma and Hook together was it.
We are not disagreeing. I thought Hook was fine as a villain, my point was his character was awful, he was an evil villain up until they flipped a switch at the end of Season 2/the beginning of Season 3 and all of the sudden out of nowhere he was a love interest. I do think he became pretty bland near the end of Season 2, but Colin broke his leg so they wrote him out of a few episodes. I never thought he was that exciting, but he was funny. Cora was way more interesting to me and was still the major villain for the season and her arc was more connected because it was connected to Regina, Snow, and Rumpel.
I do believe though the creation of a triangle, making Hook a love interest out of nowhere, was the first big jump the shark moments. There have been others since that moment, but i think that Hook being a love interest, creating the triangle, was the moment the show was irrevocably changed and it has never recovered from it.
[adrotate group="5"]The way Regina was written in season 2 was horrible, however they managed to fix it with 303 and 309. I don’t recall that the heroes hung out with her except the awkward dinner in 210 that no one paid any attention to her, and Emma kind of invited her as an obligation, and they never forgave her until 3B.
I do agree that they have made the problems with Regina’s redemption arc better over time. I still don’t really forgive the horrible writing of it in Season 2 as well as some problems in Season 3. Also she still waffles back and forth from ripping threatening Pinocchio as a child one moment, to worry about the adult Pinocchio being murdered by Rumpel the next. To taking Belle’s heart one moment, to yelling at Emma for ripping out a girl’s heart the next. Though she has at least in recent seasons expressed some regret for the wrong things she has done. That’s something. Still i think the writing was just bad in Season 2 with regards to Regina though it is amazing compared to now, it was still the first real problem with the show and the first decline.
A lot of times people who are angry with OUAT and the writers get labeled as bitter shippers and nothing more. Sure, I don’t like that SF didn’t work out but my main complaint has always been that change in tone and thesis. From a show that was fresh by virtue of strong women, female focused, and centered on family love (and thus a deconstruction of most modern day fairy tales) to one that makes women all about the men they are dating/love/married to and centers on romantic love it went from fresh to cliche.
This, is the fairest thing I’ve seen you post haha. No argument from me on this one. There is no doubt that all the themes you listed above, have changed over the course of the show. And it’s super fair to criticize the writers for moving away from these themes for whatever reason that we all feel they have. Can they bring the show back to what made it great even with the loss of Neal? I still think they can. But it is a blind hope at best.
I just think a lot of people at the time were talking about Regina crying and the silliness of scenes such as them showing Regina about to cry because she wasn’t invited with the family to diner after Snow and Emma finally got back to or the scene in flashback when Owen ran across the town line and behind Regina Kurt is being arrested by the controlled Graham, later who Regina both murders, and Regina cries and we are supposed to feel sorry for her. I didn’t feel sorry for Regina during either of these moments and those are not the only moments. It is terribly bad writing, in my opinion. I am not alone in that opinion.
I absolutely don’t blame you here. For a few reasons, I had zero problem with the way Regina was written in season 2 and I actually remember feeling really bad for Regina. At the end of the day, I always felt she has been misunderstood. With Owen, you could genuinely tell she loved the companionship and grew fond of the kid. And when you feel alone in the world, and you find something that fills that void, you try to hold onto it for dear life. Unfortunately for Regina, she was not on the path of redemption during the time of the flashback, so she acted selfishly when Owen and his father wouldn’t stay. And it really wasn’t until Owen’s father found out that some weird magic was going on, that she felt she had to stop him from leaving. However, still deep down, she knew she had to at least let Owen go. She could have kept the kid against his will. But at that point, I can’t really blame her for killing the dad. I know, that seems harsh, but she couldn’t let the world find out about Storybrooke.
I also thought this was a good time for the flashback. Season 1 was all about evil Regina. Season 2 was laying down the framework for redemptive Regina. So she’s not just going to pull a 180 and be good. It’s going to tough. Dark magic is a crutch for her. So in the transition, we should see Regina start to do some good things, like treat Henry better and let Emma into his life willingly, and still see some bad habits (which we also see throughout the season). To me, it made sense.
I know a lot of people agree with you on this too. But I’m glad we both agree that this at least was not the shark jump.
Can they bring the show back to what made it great even with the loss of Neal? I still think they can.
Well, of course they could; they’re writers who create a fantasy universe where magic happens on a weekly occurrence. They can do just about anything with their pens/keyboards. It’s not all about Neal. Killing Neal was a symptom of the change and the best example anyone can point to in order to demonstrate the sort of change that took place, but not the change itself. I’d agree with something @Gautheria said in another thread that Neal was a node in network that worked together. They may have killed the node but that doesn’t mean the network can’t still work; but on top of killing the Neal-node, the writers dismantled the network. What took the networks place is the creature that I keep calling OUAT version 2.0 and that version has no place not only for Neal but for version 1. It’s not the same show anymore and while you could make a case that you can always fix something that is broken, I could counter it with the fact that in doing so would fracture the show even more. S3B-5A might be thematically disconnected from S1-S3A, but 3B-present at least work together in its clumsy, morally bankrupt way. To suddenly revert back to Version 1 would give everyone whiplash.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"There’s another turning point I’d like to bring up in relation to what’s been discussed in this thread. One of the biggest changes to the story was when the writers decided that Snow and Charming secretly transferred Emma’s potential for darkness into Lily, which also caused Lily to be sent to the Land Without Magic. Many of us felt that this resulted in character assassination for the two characters. They kidnapped a baby, doomed said baby with Emma’s darkness, sent said baby to another land, and kept lying to Emma to hide their shame in present day Storybrooke.
The writers likely came up with this idea because they had been struggling to do anything interesting with Snow and Charming for a while, thus this twist was created to mix things up a bit. This also may have been an attempt to further emphasize the grey area between heroes and villains. While making the viewers further sympathize with the villains, they also wanted to show that heroes aren’t quite as pure as traditionally led to believe. Ultimately, I felt like this particular twist backfired, and it leaves a rather bitter taste in my mouth.
Many of us felt that this resulted in character assassination for the two characters. They kidnapped a baby, doomed said baby with Emma’s darkness, sent said baby to another land, and kept lying to Emma to hide their shame in present day Storybrooke. The writers likely came up with this idea because they had been struggling to do anything interesting with Snow and Charming for a while, thus this twist was created to mix things up a bit.
Yes. And I would argue that this is a larger problem in media, not just OUAT. In order to be interesting, to have your story told, you have to be a darker/grey sort of character. It’s the rise of the antihero (and sometimes straight up villain) who are made out to be, yes, sympathetic but also designed to get the audience to empathize with said character. Not only do we feel bad for said characters but we begin to believe that their actions were necessary and that we would take the same course of action. I mean, how many times have we seen someone justify Regina’s slaughter of an entire village or try and rationalize Graham’s rape? But in order to get your audience to have both sympathy and empathy, you have to tear down the heroes and morally upright individuals. You cannot have them be the epitome of all that is fair and just and good whilst you’re trying to convince your audience to be moved by the antihero/villain.
Since the end of S1, the focal shift moved from a story about the heroes in which the villains find redemption through family and forgiveness to a villains tale in which the heroes are to blame for everything and, like Matt said, not as heroic as everyone believes. As I sit here typing, I can’t quite figure out if the focal shift (from heroes to villains) goes along with the thematic shift (from family to romance) but I do think they work together. A and E and the rest of the writers began to focus more on the villains (probably in large part to their popularity) and decided that the best way to redeem them would be through a romantic partner who saw past their dark past, thus enter OQ and CS. (I have no idea what to do with Rumbelle at this point because I would have included them in that list but…then S5A finale happened).
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"They kidnapped a baby, doomed said baby with Emma’s darkness, sent said baby to another land, and kept lying to Emma to hide their shame in present day Storybrooke.
This was charcter assassination no doubt. But didn’t the author make them do this by changing the story? It’s vague, I know. But that’s sort of what I was going with so that I didn’t feel the arc was total crap. It was the manipulative author behind it all.
This was charcter assassination no doubt. But didn’t the author make them do this by changing the story? It’s vague, I know. But that’s sort of what I was going with so that I didn’t feel the arc was total crap. It was the manipulative author behind it all.
Isaac steered them in that direction, but Adam and Eddy have said that Snow and Charming were completely responsible for their actions otherwise. Not to mention, Snow and Charming were still trying to deceive Emma from the truth in present day Storybrooke, while Isaac was still trapped within the page of the book.
It was the manipulative author behind it all.
Matt already gave the in-universe explanation but what you pointed to–the manipulative author–is maybe one of the most meta commentaries about the show possible. Issac, the author, was a total stand-in for Adam and Eddy (right down to the famous #NoSpoilers line from Isaac in the AU). He was, essentially, a writer who changes the fundamentals of a character to fit the sort of story they want to tell. The finale of S4 was so self-aware that it makes me think that A and E are actually more aware of what they’ve done to their story than I have previously credited them with.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"
The topic ‘Did Once Upon A Time Jump the Shark?’ is closed to new replies.