- This topic has 25,813 replies, 124 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Well, the reason I asked this is because of what we talked about Jane. Is the money worth being on a show that has problematic messages and portraying problematic characters?
Given the amount of $$ actors make (and even show runners and writers for major networks) then I’d say yes. But I’m also in a ton of student debt and mostly living in the straight middle class. It’s really up to each person, though. Bobby has talked about how OUAT is a steady job (read: money) whereas movies aren’t. Ginny and Josh now have one kid and another on the way, and neither of their careers are going blockbuster. Emilie is about to have her first kid and her situation is largely the same. OUAT is steady, reliable, good paying work. It might have a host of bad messages, morals, and tawdry storylines but…so do soap operas and look how long actors stay on those.
[adrotate group="5"]"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"Well, the reason I asked this is because of what we talked about Jane. Is the money worth being on a show that has problematic messages and portraying problematic characters?
Was reported last year i think, that for example Andrew another right arm from A&E signed a deal for 2 year with ABc worth 6 million dollars, so yeah, writers especially these ones, like Andrew and Jane that are the right arms of adam and eddy win a lot.
"I offended you with my opinion? Ha, you should hear the ones I keep to myself".
Yep. I think Bae-gel is actually a pretty cute pet name.
though zumpie started calling him “deadfire” because of this. she is really easy to sway. she hates me. she calls me leg spready for some reason lol and she blocked me bacause I support swanfire and I got on her nerves.
HAPPY BIRTHDAY @JOSEPHINE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I couldn’t decide on which cake you’d like best, so I’ll just post both!!!
Life is just a cabaret old chum!!!! Live, laugh, and love it all!!!!!!!!!!
Happy happy happy birthday!
"If you go as far as you can see...you will then see enough to go even further." - Finn Balor
I’m watching the commentary for Manhattan so I might post some of my thoughts in here (I hope it’s okay).
So first thing is Adam said that they have been building to that episode since season 1 and that Baelfire was always supposed to be Henry’s father so I don’t understand why they can’t admit what was their intial plan? Why they avoid telling the truth about who was planned to be Emma’s main love interest when it’s so obvious?
"All your questions are pointless"
So first thing is Adam said that they have been building to that episode since season 1 and that Baelfire was always supposed to be Henry’s father so I don’t understand why they can’t admit what was their intial plan? Why they avoid telling the truth about who was planned to be Emma’s main love interest when it’s so obvious?
Because A&E sold out their original vision when (1) ABC executives said to include Hook in as many scenes as possible and (2) when they said to make Hook the main love interest. If they admit they changed things, then they risk alienating their overlords and alienating CS fans who like to maintain otherwise. Why do you think A&E stopped doing their podcast after S2? It’s because they were blatantly pro-Swanfire in S2, and ABC put a stop to it. I think the line, “You killed a man for a ship? Who does that?” is A&E’s meta commentary about what really went down in S3b.
"That’s how you know you’ve really got a home. When you leave it, there’s this feeling that you can’t shake. You just miss it." Neal Cassidy
Eddy said that they wrote Rumple to be nice to Henry in their scenes cause Henry reminded him of Baelfire.
RC said that Emma and Neal bar scene is one of the best scenes JMO did on the show.
"All your questions are pointless"
Eddy: “He let her go because he wanted her to find her destiny but he’s always felt the guilt of letting her go and the way he let her go”.
"All your questions are pointless"
So first thing is Adam said that they have been building to that episode since season 1 and that Baelfire was always supposed to be Henry’s father so I don’t understand why they can’t admit what was their intial plan? Why they avoid telling the truth about who was planned to be Emma’s main love interest when it’s so obvious?
Because A&E sold out their original vision when (1) ABC executives said to include Hook in as many scenes as possible and (2) when they said to make Hook the main love interest. If they admit they changed things, then they risk alienating their overlords and alienating CS fans who like to maintain otherwise. Why do you think A&E stopped doing their podcast after S2? It’s because they were blatantly pro-Swanfire in S2, and ABC put a stop to it. I think the line, “You killed a man for a ship? Who does that?”is A&E’s meta commentary about what really went down in S3b.
I just hope yhat when the show is done, they would be able to tell the truth for once (I doubt it).
This makes me wonder if people are too harsh with A&E. I don’t think they wanted the show to turn out like it did and perhaps after abc demanded they would make Hook the main love interest, they just didn’t care anymore and give abc whatever they want (Hook, Regina, Disney) in order to keep their job and not burn their bridges with abc. I can’t say they are bad writers cause they gave us season 1, then I thought they were just lazy, but now I think that they lost all their passion for this show and that just makes me sad, because the way they talk in the commentary just seem that they cared too much for this story to make it all about ships and Disney.
I always complained about them, but now I just feel bad for them.
"All your questions are pointless"
The topic ‘Emma + Baelfire = Swanfire’ is closed to new replies.