Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
“I would say that if you’re telling a real story … and you think about any classical story it’s like the ending will have both triumph and tragedy in it. You know what I mean? Like I think if you’re just telling a story that just has a sad ending, then well that’s a bummer. At the same time if it is just happy then it really feels like the story doesn’t have any weight or consequence. And so I think that it’s always got to be a mixture of those two.” This is a quote from the creator /head writer of Burn Notice.
Isn’t it funny how Neal’s death is more or less resolved by the season’s end, done in a way to minimize all the tragedy of it? Emma gets a “go move on”, Hook gets told effectively “We’re cool, you changed dude!”, Rumple “You were an awesome dad!” and to Henry “Hey, I died a hero, ’nuff said.” It’s not like we see these characters moving in ways they wouldn’t have but for that death. It’s hard to tell with Rumple, but if Neal’s death sort of undid his “reform”–as evidenced by the lie and killing Zelena–it might have some weight but I’m not sure yet that the writers would actually write a ripple effect. I’m think it will be rug swept just like everything else. This just has been a pattern so it is what I expect. As for Emma, well it removed conflict from the story to take Neal out of the equation. Same with Regina, dealing with one less co-parent, and one against dark magic to boot. Hook of course never had much of a relationship on screen with Neal but well, one less problem without him there.
In the finale, a lot of problems are just wrapped up zippity-doo-dah–not a single monkey we knew got killed! Wouldn’t that have added some weight to find out they killed Aurora when getting trigger happy? It’s just the tonal shift in this story from “huge consequence and tragedy” to “come on no one really gets hurt, its Disney” that was so flipping off, combined with all the things we DO know about BTS stuff, that just do not add up.
Of all the narrators for 3b, how’d they pick Dan Stevens, the guy who gained notoriety for quitting the popular Dowton Abbey despite his character just having gotten married? Why did the twitter account not follow MRJ, then when called on it start to follow him only to drop him the INSTANT the death thing went down? Why release the Season 3A cast photo with him photoshopped out (why not just do the 3B that didn’t include him!?). How come that account didn’t’ wish him a Happy Birthday, but did the other cast members who had them around that time in December? Then there was that Postergate, with the Second Chances thing being released, then not confirmed, then being issued anyway. Oh, and how the twitter account was quick to assure fans it wasn’t official–but didn’t respond to those asking where the real one was. There are of course more things, but ultimately it comes to this: Neal /MRJ was not treated the same way in S3 as he had been in S2–nor were fans of his treated the same way. I remember those podcasts where fans called in asking about Neal and Emma, and got assurances to “keep their hope”–and then there was that day Adam told people not to hope, and went weird on twitter replying “Handsome” to everything.
Anyway just a few random odd thoughts in a spare moment.
[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
I honestly don’t see the point for me to participate in other threads because my point of view is just so “Tent of Doom” that I feel I couldn’t possibly have anything to write about OUAT that people outside this thread would honestly want to read, that they’d find amusing or interesting because they probably would not get my mocking sense of humor at this point, nor want to examine the logical flaws of the show and its premises quite so clearly.
For example, I almost wrote this thing on the Return of Baelfire thread about how if they bring him back, it better be as undead Zombie Bae, along with his mommy Undead Zombie Milah. Then Hook had to burst out in song, turning to Emma as they see those zombies (a musical episode naturally)–with that Killers Song “Somebody told me”. See that lyric “somebody told me you have a boyfriend that looked like a girlfriend I had in February of last year” takes on a new meaning in this context of a couple looking at their undead zombie exes who are related.
So about the whole soul-mate thing–here I don’t mind pointing out that if it were so important a concept. shouldn’t we’d have heard about it in more contexts than Corumple, perhaps even when Tinkerbell tried to talk Regina into meeting Robin she could have said “This is better than True Love–its your SOULMATE–guaranteed happy ending if you just go talk to him. True Love can come and go, but soulmates–you only get one and it is the most powerful connection! Also totally cool that you’re already married since its a political marriage but even if it weren’t, SOULMATES baby, it trumps a silly old, meaningless vow!” So tell me again why its a big deal for Rumple and Belle to get married? Soulmates or nothing…luckily Rose doesn’t seem likely to sign up for OUAT as a series regular, so that’s really why no one gets concerned.
“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
Here, a gift basket to get through it all. It has buffalo shaped pasta, cookies, and other things. I can’t remember if I’m doing the source code right, so I hope it works. Source
I came across it when trying to find a gift basket for a friend moving away to a new home clear across the country and of course, I thought of the folks of this thread.
Puck is just too adorable, and seriously, with such a sweet little puffball as that to adorn this thread, it is a much happier place.
“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
Oh, RG. See, we wrote these things when we thought the writers cared about more than just the villain characters, but we’ve learned differently from then. The “heart” of the show is “misunderstood” villains now.
Remember when the writers used the term “soul-mate” for Cora and Rumple? The fandom, at least the Rumbelle/Dearie part, kind of sputtered and fumed and I think A&E walked it back. If I actively followed things, I’d be bracing for more double-talk/tap dancing about that. My guess is their first approach will be the “misquoted/mispoke” approach, but maybe they’ll try the “hypertechnical” distinction thing. Or they could just pretend they didn’t see/hear anyone asking the questions–that worked for them too, after all, the kinds of fans who notice things like this have a tolerance level and will give up eventually right?
“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
Happy Saturday everyone! It’s funny a few weeks ago I was in San Diego, right next to the Convention Center. We stayed in a neat hotel that’s literally next door for the fireworks on 4th of July. As I looked out over the boats and the booming lights, I spared absolutely zero thoughts for this show.
I did have a fleeting thought about it when I saw Comic Con posters on the way to the airport. The posters read “celebrating popular arts” or something like that, and I had this vague thought of “sell out” or something like that, and it kind of connected to OUAT in a way. What OUAT started out as is not what it is now. It’s perhaps more commercially viable or popular, but for me, the original spirit has been lost in a wave of “isn’t this cool!?” stuff that doesn’t seem to fit or belong as much with the original vibe.
More specifically, to talk a bit about OUAT now is to see its become another “asset” in the Disney media chain, with more emphasis paid to the characters that can help cross-sell. That’s why Ariel winds up on the calendar, but other secondary characters that played larger roles do not. Neal and MRJ obviously could have been featured, but as his character won’t be an ongoing force in the story, so I don’t really blame them for leaving him out–but what of OTHER secondary characters? There’s some kind of network “casting team” politics at work–and I know from interviews that MRJ was not “talent” that ABC’s casting execs found for this show because A&E sought him out. It’s no coincidence Joanna Garcia who played Ariel also has another deal with ABC and previously starred in some things for the network. There’s some sort of “networking” at the Network.
I found MRJ’s gratitude towards his old castmate from Terriers interesting as well. He tweeted Donal Logue something just around the time when Neal’s fate wasn’t entirely clear to be revealed and he hadn’t yet said he’s moving to a new project. Donal starred on something for the History Channel (Vikings). Did he put him in touch with someone for the Paul Revere gig? Seems like ABC and A&E didn’t help him out quite the way they did Ory with her project when their plans “shifted” from whatever they had in mind when they upped her to a regular than didn’t have an idea “where to put her” as the actress described it. It’s not hard to imagine they found themselves in the same situation with Neal/MRJ. Originally they might have had more to explore with Tamara/Greg/Home Office, but the Pan being Rumple’s dad, the relative unpopularity of Tamara & Greg and the desire to truncate all that–perhaps there were story lines the writers scrapped and that left MRJ with lot less to do.
It’s not fair to give A&E a pass and assume A&E’s hands were forced with either Ory’s or MRJ’s situation. They made choices that put them in a certain situation. As a fan, all you can do is say “ok, is the show still well-written enough to make up for the obvious sense of a shift in the direction of the show?” I feel that’s just happened too many times, and there’s too many things in the story that break my suspension of disbelief. I can no longer treat this as a show for discussion of moral questions or character motivations– its just too silly a world now. Stuff happens, then more stuff happens, don’t ask why seems to be the way to go.
To get to PoM’s question about “should they mention Neal or not? being a “can’t win” for the writers–that’s entirely the wrong question and framework, and you’re already selling the audience short. The AUDIENCE is the one that should win, with an engaging well-told story. I bet you dollars to doughnuts that any mentions of Neal will be as likely lame as the mentions of Granny. The characters enter and exit the scene in exactly the same frame of mind about the name-dropped character–we learn nothing really knew about their feelings, or the character from the mentions.
So the audience loses, whether they mention or not. It reminds those of us who hoped for something more that nothing more will happen, and becomes wasted space in a story that’s already short on character development. The actors talk about “fighting” for scenes –GG and J.Mo said it about Snow and Emma, then Lana said it about Regina and Henry. It’s NOT like the show has time to spare or squander –look how Belle’s relationship with her father was handled. Oh that’s right–off-screen. We had time to see Hook talk to Smee about “letting him down easy” far as the piratey life (before ordering Smee to sail Henry to NY, go figure) to shore up the “Hook’s devoting himself to Emma” story, but we don’t have time to see Belle reconcile with Mo and explain precisely how /why both of them could change their previous feelings. We also don’t have time to see what Hook plans to do with himself besides you know, be with Emma. He doesn’t want to pirate, fine, but it could have been a story and probably won’t be one because it will just be plot, plot plot. At least Belle is nominally a librarian.
I’ve watched other shows that fall into roughly the same genre of action/adventure and what I’d call “unusual reality” , one written in part by Jane Eppenson (wharehouse 13)–where recurring/regular character deaths had real impact. They don’t just get name-checked, but there were whole plots and character arcs that stemmed from the death. Even seasons later, the mentions kick off some change in the way the characters relate to each other, whether that be a minor softening or increasing of tension or something. It’s not just like name-dropping Granny and Lasagne or Diner–it’s not a throw-away reference.
Burn Notice, for example killed off a recurring character that was the brother of the lead character and son of another main character. That kicked off a huge hunt to find the killer, and led to strain between the lead and his mother’s character. Down the line, two seasons later, the mother had a storyline of trying to get custody of her grandson–fall out from the death. The dead character wasn’t lionized /whitewashed in death either–the good and bad get mentioned depending on how it fits into a plot–and it was a pretty formulaic show so plot drives a lot of things. Yet it was on a network that made a tagline about “character” so, maybe that’s why the writers made the effort despite the genre feel to the show.
If the writers mention Neal /Bae in a way that causes us to learn something new (but consistent) about how the characters felt about him, the circumstances of his death (like resentment towards Zelena), or the character himself? That’s something I’d like to see, but what I’m expecting and the reason I think people on this thread sort of anticipate any such mentions as “twisting a knife”–is the sense that it’ll be either a lame throw-away thing, OR it will be a bit of a “retcon” one way or another. So when Snow mentions Eva, we see her re-evaluating her assessment of her mother’s “goodness” since her mother eavesdropped –but look how she lumped Leo in there too. He was Cora’s (and Regina’s) victim–but suddenly he’s totally getting blamed for dumping a woman who lied and stole from him ? Snow just gives Regina a pass more or less for her role in the murder of Leo, while simultaneously revealing she just cannot stop feeling guilt over killing Cora –with all the evil things Cora did (sort of, its a matter of scale) being ignored. That episode was, perhaps even more than Quiet Minds, one that kind of pushed the limits of my tolerance for Buffalo Chips on this show.
It’s like when a character dies on a show and suddenly everyone’s lost their best friend, even though prior to the death some characters barely knew /interacted with that character. Or the opposite, when a character who WAS written as a central figure departs (sometimes due to the actor demands)–and suddenly no one remembers them at all or is much affected by it. These are BOTH bad extremes.
Running out of time here, so not sure whether this rambling made sense but basically what I’m saying is: The writing /planning on the show has been uneven and what happened with Neal is but a symptom of that, so having written themselves into this hole, the writers really have a tough job but its one they gave themselves. He’s not the first actor, nor likely the last, that was playing a character that shuttled in, started some plot threads that were unceremoniously left hanging when the focus of the writers shifted to other things. Maybe their shift in focus is part of the nature of the beast of producing a TV show, or it represents some lack of talent on their part, or some high-pressure Disney media network hardball, who knows. All I know is, it is not a well-told tale with no wasted space, no inconsistencies, no fan/network influence shifting things, if the majority of the character development is about two characters and three romances. Think about it. Hook and Regina change and grow from self-absorbed to caring about others, but everyone else is kind of still the same? Henry’s the good hearted kid, Emma the tough but vulnerable reluctant hero–Charming and Snow good hearted, but naive types and Rumple a slightly shady but still good in his heart, and Belle, is still basically forgiving heroic Belle.
“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 tried to post earlier but not sure it went through so Happy Birthday Ranisha!
“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
Happy Birthday Ranisha!
“Word” to the posts in this thread, and a big “Whatever” to A&E and the ABC execs.
“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
Congrats to Lauren! So happy for you!
Hugs to the thread– so much gets said that I agree with, but no time to chime in more specifically than WORD. It’s ok though, at this point I’ve forgotten all about what could have been, and what was, and have reprogrammed and lowered my expectations to basically feel more or less the same about Hook and Emma as OQ, Rumbelle and Snowing–that is to say, I’ve not much to say, and never had much to say about those.
All this Frozen stuff scares but intrigues me. The notion that Lasseter himself sort of went to Vancouver to look things over actually reassures me because I don’t think he would have bothered going all the way up to the set if he had complete confidence after just talking to the showrunners in LA. Something prompted him to go the extra mile and fly up where he could meet cast, set designers, and directors. It’s just a bit hands-on for a show that isn’t immediately under him, let alone Disney, but the ABC subsidiary. In the end, OUAT is still its own continuity, but I don’t know, I really respect Lassiter’s point of view on storytelling so somehow it just makes me feel better.
“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 was at the museum and they had a cute toy bison, and a taxidermy preserved one. I thought of this thread! Unfortunately I was too slow to snap my baby with the toy, which would have been ultra cute, but I cannot upload it anyway, file too big. Maybe one day, so you would see an interesting angle that May or may not be a metaphor about the wilds outside. All I know is MRJ looks happier on his new project and I am happier on mine ( summer !) though I wish there were a new show worth discussing (maybe there is but I am out of the loop).
“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 keep seeing a similar refrain to people who criticize OUAT. It goes along the lines of, “Well, if you don’t like it, DON’T WATCH IT!” And granted, I’m not watching the show regularly anymore. But that doesn’t exactly erase the issues us fans are having with it. The problem with this mentality is it assumes that we’re just complainers who can’t enjoy a good thing when it comes along. I find this very generalizing. The reason so many of us are complaining about the show and are upset with the direction isn’t because we hate it, it’s because we love it. It’s because we fell in love with these characters, we got invested in their storylines, we made Storybrooke and the Enchanted Forest our escape from the confines of reality. I could go on and on about the importance of fantasy literature (and television/film) to the popular culture, but I’ll spare you that. Many of us want to be excited about the show. We want to be eager fans, to trust the writers enough to handle the complex storylines they’re throwing at us. The majority of us did that through season 2 and 3. But we got very little follow-through for that. There is a lot in season 2 & 3 that was mishandled, a complete botch up from a writing perspective. Characterization was rushed in favor of a ship. Characters were killed off for no other reason than to “get them out of the way”—this doesn’t just apply to Neal, it applies to Cora as well too. We hop-skipped from one plot to a completely different plot, because the writers were so excited to do Peter Pan, they sloppily left other loose ends hanging. As for me, I’ve been kicking myself about what’s happened to OUAT because I should’ve really seen this coming—I’m familiar with A&E’s work on Lost. The same thing happened with Lost—a complex storyline, engaging characters, twisted plots, a great setup—no follow-through. A&E have big ideas, but have absolutely no idea how to work through them or resolve them satisfactorily. They get distracted by something shiny and move on to different things. Basically, my point is, it’s fine if you’ve enjoyed OUAT thus far and just enjoy sort of mindlessly watching without thinking about it. But please don’t think that we’re criticizing the show because we didn’t get a ship we wanted or we’re just being petty—for some of us, this our frustration is born out of a love for a fantasy world that is no longer an escape.
This post for all the cookies in the world. If people think I’m happy that I won’t be watching OUAT anymore, then they clearly haven’t spent enough time actually talking to me to understand where I’m coming from or WHY I’m giving the show up. Maybe if those people who keep calling anyone who criticizes the show a hater would just stop for a minute and actually LISTEN to some of their criticisms, then they would understand our decisions better and stop calling us names. /end slight rant And now that I have my latest rant out of the way, good morning fine people! *waves*
*waves* YES, this. I drop by sometimes, and with limited time can’t begin to put so many different thoughts I have into words, but THIS post covers a lot and Heather’s follow up as well.
When people complained about Season 1, saying they didn’t watch it really or didn’t get invested in it until Season2 or without Hook it didn’t really do much for them, I never said they aren’t “true fans” or that they were “haters”-or should stop watching-in fact, I said rather the opposite, that its a roller coaster and who knows, if its fun keep going and if not, get off, no need to make yourself upset. I’m taking that advice for now–I may watch again, may not, but back then, I did feel this disconnect between what some fans wanted the show to be about (or rather WHO), and what I wanted it to be about (not Who). I don’t mind MRJ and Neal not being there because I liked the show before he came along or was seriously featured in it. Yet what I did like, that sense of a complex story of a family and good characters to root for, rather than mock as being stupid (hello Charmings and your driving lessons for 12 year olds!) –that feels washed away for the villain’s fairy tale. I like the villains, the redemption but it feels all being written at the expense of portraying the “good” characters as less good or admirable, a kind of grey-washing of everyone.
Oh there’s more I’d say but time you know.
*hugs*
“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
