Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
That’s what I think too. For fun crack thinking though–his father was a flying monkey that fell in love with Dorothy and is named George, and “Its a Curious Thing” will be his backstory 😛
[adrotate group="5"]“If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?” -- Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland & Through the Looking-Glass
It is, but I saw this thing on Tumblr that made me laugh–the “Social Media” Intern’s perspective isn’t apparently the only official perspective either.
I have noticed that the official descriptions of things tend to be off from the “fan online” view. Take a look at the press release for the next episode too. I’m copying only the actors names and the characters they play so its not really a spoiler for those who like to avoid them. Here it is cut and paste (sorry if it gives gibberish code around it) “Snow White/Mary Margaret, Jennifer Morrison as Emma Swan, Lana Parrilla as the Evil Queen/Regina, Josh Dallas as Prince Charming/David, Emilie de Ravin as Belle, Colin O’Donoghue as Hook, Michael Raymond-James as Baelfire/Neal Cassidy, Jared S. Gilmore as Henry Mills and Robert Carlyle as Rumplestiltskin/Mr. Gold.” It kind of stood out to me that whoever typed it up diligently put the alias for every single character that has and uses one EXCEPT Hook and Belle (Lacey). Does it mean something? I don’t really think so but I’ve encountered fans who get very upset at people who refer to Hook rather than Killian Jones, implying that in certain scenes he’s “not Hook, but Killian”. Well…there’s the credits for the episode. Killian Jones isn’t how they bother to list the character–it’s not a secondary identity important enough for the person writing this up
“If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?” -- Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland & Through the Looking-Glass
I definitely think these writers are well aware of the patterns of storytelling, and of course reference it in their approach but they clearly want to reinvent things too, while maintaining a story that will be appealing and not off-putting for the viewers in the target demographic.
So we have a lot of uncertainty, but just as I feel no one in the general audience would be happy about Rumple or Regina being happy at Emma’s expense–I do not think anyone out there is going to be happy about Hook being made happy if it seems like its undermining Emma’s progression as a character in some way. Neal unfortunately, just like Hook, is a secondary character–but Hook is the one being promoted as if he were the central character. So either the writers are changing their whole concept here, OR…..Hook’s getting the “guest star” promotion treatment because he’s about to be written out–and I have no idea what it is. It’s all or nothing I kind of feel.
When Voyager added the character “Seven of 9”–a lot of fans were upset that she was just there to be useless eye-candy, and as well that she displaced several other characters to more secondary roles. Other fans were all too happy to have her there. I started watching it on reruns but I remembered the controversy, so I hadn’t really become attached to the character she essentially replaced (I can’t even remember that one’s name). I thought she wasn’t that bad, and had some good episodes towards the end with some depth but I did kind of feel she was over-used (doesn’t hurt to be married to one of the writers/producers I guess). Hook gives me that same vibe.
He could be basically a “Seven”–and he’s here to stay and like it or not for all the other actors, no matter how it scuttles things that were hinted or not. If you read anything about that character and reactions from cast/crew and all that, it does kind of feel a similar thing could be happening here.
I just don’t know.
“If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?” -- Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland & Through the Looking-Glass
Darkest before the dawn!
You’re right, technically what I’m describing isn’t an archetype in the sense we’ve got a classic name for it, but we are talking about a television show, though that show is about fairytales that do have archetypes. So its confusing, but as we saw with Whale, the writers are NOT drawing influence solely from classic fairy tales or literature–they are as well taking things from classic or popular cinema as well. The very name Neal Cassidy, while a fun Peter Pan nod in itself, referenced a historic character with quite a life. There’s some MODERN cultural mythic things happening with Neal, I suppose is my point.
Consider what influences these writers have. They wrote a sequel for Tron. Jane E. has done many sci-fi type shows, Buff, BSG, Wharehouse 13 I think. We know A&E love Star Wars. I don’t know about the other writers, but odds are, they’ve got similarly geeky sort of backgrounds and just might be familiar with the kind of character I’m talking about even if there’s not a name to it.
If Neal is intended as a love interest, then his development makes perfect sense as it is in keeping with how they in general, develop Charming, Henry and Belle. Charming supports Snow, and in the first season Snow received more development but then quickly became (especially to online fans) the obstacle in Regina’s way.So then the question is, but why do they spend time on Hook? Well, they spend time on characters like Jefferson and August, and Cora. They need to have antagonists, and to show their points of view for their actions. I believe Hook was brought in with one idea, that they morphed and stretched for various reasons, reconstituting and recyling the ideas they’d pushed aside for Jefferson, August and Mirror. You can see elements of all their stories repeating in how they approach Hook. He’s got the costume, the looks the style of Jefferson–and the transport element. He’s got a rocky history with Rumple but we’re not sure what it is exactly. Like August, he’s now in the “guide” role, the mysterious, do you trust him “friend” trying to get her to break the curse. Like Mirror, he’s got a crush, he’s sincere about it, but he’s perhaps not entirely aware or just doesn’t care about the feelings of his target as he’s so inside his own point of view about things.There’s more going on of course, as they did have some things in mind for Hook as an original character they brought into the story too, with NL and Pan, but I’m just saying they’ve grafted a few things on there to expand the storylines. We’ll see I suppose whether that means they’re working him into long term plans or they’re just burning off things they’d had to sideline before due to not securing actor contracts.
“If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?” -- Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland & Through the Looking-Glass
Heather hope you feel better.
Neal actually IS an archetype–but as with Emma, we aren’t used to seeing it subverted. He’s the plucky damsel in distress type with a mix of 80’s action hero to make him tough. Think Bruce Willis in most of his movies but particularly in Unbreakable crossed with the usual damsel role. (Funny because “Neal’s” true first appearance is “Broken”, NOT Tallahassee!). I’m so tired of people saying his first appearance is where he’s breaking Emma’s heart, though obviously it is what people took away.
We haven’t had enough scenes of Emma smiling at Neal, or being grateful to him in some way. She’s shown a touch of sympathy here and there but it wasn’t the focus of the scene. Instead, her hurt was. I feel this is part of the journey they’re going on, to make it seem believable when they resolve those problems. It wouldn’t have worked, to go faster, and people said as it was a touch rushed for Neal to forgive Rumple as is. On the other hand, to online fans? They expected Neal to trust Rumple the moment they reunited.
I hope that means there’s more to come because that is the story, how they work things out. How they learn to trust again, just as that’s the story between Emma and the Charmings. The midseason finale usually leaves things in a “low point” state, so the upward journey can begin in the second half of the story. The reversal should come, and things will look more hopeful!
“If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?” -- Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland & Through the Looking-Glass
It’s funny, I wrote a similar thing quite awhile back if you remember, talking about the reasons Neal gets disliked, and Screwball, wonderful as she is, didn’t really acknowledge the biggest reasons: He’s in the way of two ships.
A few Rumbellers were NOT happy that Rumple was all “You’re my Happy Ending” to Neal. Screwball seems to be annoyed at Neal for not comforting Belle–yet, its funny because I haven’t seen anyone annoyed at Belle for not comforting Neal. That tells you something right there.
I do agree with some of her points far as lack of story/reaction/focus and the taint of “Nikki Palo” storytelling with Greg and Tamara. Yet those are systematic problems for these writers as Charming, Snow, Henry and even Hook who received a lot of screentime, seem to be curiously underdeveloped for all that. Instead of developing certain existing things the writers invent new problems (dreamshade, a brother…). We could have had a scene of Charming, who’s all super-protective Daddy mode, questioning Hook about his deals with Pan. We could have learned more about Tink through Snow–perhaps chit-chatting about treehouse care and keeping, while they hunt a boar to help them survive, with Mama Snow doing the same thing Charming’s doing–getting the 411 on Hook if that’s the way the writers wanted to develop the whole “Charmings bond with Hook”. We the audience could have filled in more substantial things about his time in NL, or perhaps had dialog about Neal /Bae from Hook or Tink. The writers chose to keep those things obscure so we didnt’ get that. Even then, if they wanted that fuzzy for future mysterious reasons/triangle building, they could have worked a theme of Emma learning about her parent’s pasts as they learn about hers.
It’s like the choice to use Shadow Belle, rather than the magic mirror idea to have real Belle talking to Rumple.
Anyway, it is what it is, and before Neal came along, much of the “fandom” online apparently hated Henry, Emma and Snow the most!
“If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?” -- Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland & Through the Looking-Glass
I think Pan worked diagonally with OZ inhabitants or they with him–somehow someone used someone else basically. Whether it was Pan stealing away agents of the Home Office or what, but maybe there is a missing link.
“If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?” -- Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland & Through the Looking-Glass
“Buckle up for safety? Nah we have magic. I’ma stand in the back of this truck. That won’t backfire.”
Actually for some reason I’m reminded of the movie twister. Might we see a flying cow? Twisters of course go with Oz.
“If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?” -- Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland & Through the Looking-Glass
At one point when we had that “family tree spaces increasing” spoiler, I thought David might have an aunt or grandmother on his father’s side perhaps. Or maybe Ruth and Daddy Charming made ANOTHER deal they didn’t tell him about ;P and he had a sister too (they were triplets!).
Let’s see how messed up a wreath we can make….let’s see so Glinda’s David’s father’s side relation and she’s got a relation to WWW who relates back to Cora.
Once Upon a Messed Up Family Tree.
“If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?” -- Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland & Through the Looking-Glass
There’s so many ways for them to skip forward into the story given their usual nonlinear style of story-telling, that they could just start with Glinda and suddenly out of nowhere, there’s Bae in the scene.
“If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?” -- Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland & Through the Looking-Glass
