Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
So, my question then is, if these things were the writers ‘baiting’ various members of the audience — what would you have rathered seen, or not seen? Would you have NOT wanted them to include Neal in Emma’s memory box? Would you rather NOT see Emma/Regina’s friendship grow if it’s not going to turn romantic? Woudl you NOT want to see Emma did put the shoelace back on?
Many shows, even movie series, have done it, do it, the wink to the audience, to their fans (casual audience might not always see or get the wink). I have no problem with that in general, and wouldn’t call that baiting at all. Fanservice is to give fans what they want, and in the less friendly view, it is defined as giving the fans what they want without the moment having any merits for the story, not advancing the plot, not establishing anything important for the character, just there to titilate, excite the fans. The classic is to show a good looking guy shirtless whenever possible or to linger on a womans but or boobs just for the looks (which is done though even without fans wishing for it, so not just as fanservice but as well can be a general visual trope in entertainment). Having a sex scene of favorite and perhaps shipped charaters just for the naked skin is fanservice. Having someone beating up some attackers just to show some bloody fighting is fansrvice. Letting to shipped characters kiss just because is fanservice. It’s sometimes debated if a certain scene was just fanservice or did something to advance the plot or explore the character (pretty much every kiss scene of CaptainSwan in this season was discussed). But as well one can call a lot of references fanservice, like the reference to Asgard in the recent episode (not just that Disney owns the Marvel Cinematic Univers, David, Josh Dallas played in on of the movies and Asgardian). Fanservice can be nice and fun, but it can turn offensive to the fandom at times, practically turned into a joke, purposfully overdone to mock the fans, and as it is always, sometimes something might have been meant not offensive but comes across as offensive.
There is fanservice of the good kind. One of the best recent examples coming to my mind is a scene from past season Lost Girl, Lost Girl Car Wash. They used it even as promo. Did nothing for the story, was just there for the fans, but it was fun, enjoyable, and you could tell, cast and crew had fun doing it as well. It was a gift to the fans for their love. That’s how one can do good fanservice. (And it’s not like there is not some shipping fights going on there as well, for those not knowing the show – the two blonds, man and woman, staring at the dark haired washing the cars both are in love with her, have/had a romance with her, look for TeamLaura, TeamDyson, and it has become even a quadrangle with TeamTamsin)
In case of Neal the writers are walking on eggshells, and it’s really easy to come across the wrong way. They should be aware that the death of Neal, and how he died, is an issue in the fandom, for some fans more than for others, but overall an issue. Not that they have to care, but for marketing and PR it could be advisable to be aware of it. They are in the bad situation, that whatever they do could be taken the wrong way. No to mention would be as wrong as too much fanservice, bringing in the name, pictures, memory without doing anything for the plot and characters. Think they are walking a very, very fine line here at the moment. Now the pic in the recent episode of Emma and Neal, found in her box with memories – that was ambiguous. While remembering Neal was somewhat connected with the Emma flashback, another friend she made over stealing something, it still felt somewhat out of place, because this episode was about trust in friendship not so much romance. Did it do anything for the plot? Nope. Anything for the character (Emma)? Maybe. Was it any important in this moment? Don’t think so.
Now baiting is a different matter than fanservice. Baiting means to tease something you never intend to become canon, or that is how I would use it, and how it is used in the context with queer representation. Queerbaiting means to tease a same sex pairing without ever intending it to become canon. Again, it’s a fine line to walk at times, and it is often debated what is already queerbaiting and what not. The moment writers, actors, showmakers acknowledge a same sex pairing even just as fanon things get tricky. Eventually they don’t want to discourage fans to have their own imagination about characters and stories, their fanon, want to be nice and show they’re inclusive in general, but on the other hand they have their idea what they’re going to tell on the show, and that is a different one concerning these characters. Can you tell the story of a developing, close friendship of non-romantic, non-sexual nature without people nevertheless reading something different into it, and being even convinced, you did it intentionally so that they could read something different into it? Can you for sure avoid being misread? Probably not (and that is true for same sex as for different sex relationships, just that the later less often are portrayed as only friendship material).
The moment I concluded for me, that they did a bit of queerbaiting with this episode was, when the official Twitter account of the show tweeted the picture of Regina and Emma joining their magical powers to beat the Ice Viking giant – and used the hashtag #SwanQueen. I know, for a lot of people by now these portmanteaus (words, names blend together) are used for all kind of reasons and not limited to romance. The word ship, shipping is not even limited anymore to romance for some, but I am maybe old fashioned that way and still use ship for romantic pairings. While I might be someone seeing not such an exclusive line between friendship and romance though, I think that most in society still do, there is friendship and there is romance, not hundreds of shades in between. There is sexual and platonic (and always have to smirk, because if you look at Platon’s ideas about love, platonic means something bit different than as it is used for), nothing in between, we prefer it clear cut and binary in our culture. It is not that clear cut, but we prefer to see it that way. Using one and the same portmanteau for two quite different ideas of relationship is IMO, as things still are in our society, misleading and asking for conflict – even more stupid when there already has been some conflict about the character of Regina’s and Emma’s relationship, if a shipping war already revolves around this relationship. Or using the same hashtag is simply baiting. Invent a new portmanteau, it might be hijacked, but still you can try to distinguish. (some are using TeamMoms, though not sure in which way, so maybe something like Emgina) A baiting is seldom that much about just what is shown right on the show, but what happens around it, promotion, interviews.
But aside the queerbaiting in the promotion. To me not even the friendship makes much sense the way they are writing it. I get their intention, and it sounds nice and positive the way you described it, @Jenna_B, but that is not what I am seeing on the show. I agree, there are some things the two could bond over, and it is in Emma’s character to reach out, unlike Regina, whose character it is to leash out, so makes even sense, if Emma is the one trying harder to make it work than Regina does at the moment. Some see no way for a friendship between Emma and Regina seeing that what Regina did in the past (killed Emma’s grandfather, tried to kill her mother multiple times, Emma saw even how Regina put Snow on the stake and burnt her, luckily Snow could escape thanks to some dark pixie she had, and Regina tried to kill Emma, and all for no good reason) – why should the victim of a bully befriend her tormentor?
But for some, and I am one of them, the issue is not so much if there is a friendship eventually possible at some point and eventually developing, it is quite simple Emma saying, she wants to be friends with Regina. I can only take the flashback with Lily as an attempt to build up a parallel for Emma’s development, there she turns her back, walks away, here in the present time with Regina she stays and reaches out, but the problem is, Lily and Regina are very different people, and what they did to Emma are very different things, the parallel doesn’t work. Regina is far from redeemed, still struggles to admit her responsibility for the evil she did, doesn’t get yet, that it’s up to her to find happiness and not the doing of any kid, lover or higher power, she might be at a point where it would be good if there is someone not giving up on her, but that doesn’t mean to me the necessity of that someone wishing to be friends with her. But maybe that is because I have a definition of friendship that means pretty much only close friend, I care about people as well who I wouldn’t call friends, just because I know them and see they need support. There are friends, there is family, and there are acquaintances.
In real life for outside viewers people sometimes make don’t that much sense and even less seem to act any logical if it comes to any kind of relationship, so if these two were real life people, they didn’t even need to make much sense to anyone but themselves. But they’re fictional characters, and that is where fiction is never realistic, because while reality sometimes quite simply doesn’t makes sense, fiction has to make sense, it’s what it does, it tells stories making sense, giving us sense in a sometimes senseless world.
Still to make sense things have to be told in ways appearing realistic to us, we need to feel, see, that what is going on is something that could happen that very way, so it has to connect with common everyday life experience of emotions and behavior. Fiction can question that behavior, but if one feels a story is pretty much throwing all common sense over board, and that is a feeling some have with how they showed Emma and Regina here, then the connection is lost.
Good human psychology isn’t necessarily good television and that is 100% the goal here. It’s not a medical journal on psychology it’s a drama..
I am not all sure, what you mean with good human psychology, but guess you are meaning scientific psychology, in difference to common human sense and understanding and interpretation of the world, or amateur psychology, what I would call kitchen sink psychology. You’re right, this show is not a documentary about the human psych, this is entertainment, and fictional story telling works a bit different than scientific research. A good knowledge and understanding of common sense and world interpretation though is something quite important for good story telling IMO, if you want people to connect with your characters and their stories.
I’ve seen plenty of praise for the episode by fans (no idea, what casual viewers think, they seldom talk about it), but as well seen some very negative reactions. Grimmsistr is not the only fan I’ve seen saying, they’re done with the show now, that the episode was the last straw.
[adrotate group="5"]¯\_(?????? ?)_/¯
ONCE UPON A TIME – “Family Business” – The race is on to track down the elusive Snow Queen, who was once a foster mother to a young Emma – whose memories of this event have been erased – in order to discover what her ultimate end game is for Elsa and the residents of Storybrooke, and unaware that she does not possess the real blade that controls The Dark One, Belle attempts to use it to get her reluctant husband to show her where the Snow Queen is hiding. Meanwhile, back in the past, Belle travels to Arendelle and, with Anna’s help, seeks out Grand Pabbie to help her regain her lost memories in order to discover the fate of her mother, on “Once Upon a Time,” SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 2 (8:00-9:00 p.m., ET) on the ABC Television Network.
Source:Is that even the official press release? I mean, this text is one mess of a mess – if that is the official one, the original wording by ABC, then whoever let that get out should be fired, that is no professional PR work. At best someone on the spoiler site did some very bad copy and past job. (I looked on the ABC medianet site myself, interesting thing is, the last press release on there for an episode is for 4×04, but not all press material send out by companies is always accessible for all public, so still not sure, considering that the info for the recent episode was legit enough, though still wonder about where queen and king of Arendelle were, it wasn’t on there mediasite either).
So Belle goes to regain her memory about something that happened to her mother. Let us guess, a certain blonde with ice cold appearance might have been involved in that? Makes me wonder, if Snow Queen does that herself on purpose, or if it is something that kinda happens to people afterwards, a kind of convenient curse which might be not so convenient after all.
Well, since I’ve never lived with magical people, I had no idea that memory loss was such a common occurrence.
I still think that a living witch, like Zelena, cast a spell over the Snow Queen that nobody who spoke to her would remember her, thus, she would never find love, or family. This is why nobody remembers, or knows her.
But, when that witch died, the spell was broken. And now, everyone remembers only recent convos with her, but not convos from the past.
Also why she doesn’t appear in the census, yet there is that picture that indicates she’s been in Storybrooke from the beginning.So far, the only person who seems to know her from the past is…guess who…Gold.
Crack theory
Not a crack theory at all. It sounds quite plausible at this point. The only problem is, what dealings should Zelena have had with the Snow Queen back in the days? But, Zelena is a crazy witch, so everything is possible with her.
Though I think about the possibility, that it was something that was done to protect people, maybe even the Snow Queen, but backfired. Some stupid thing Grand Pabbie did.
Still musing about what the Snow Queen said about mirrors and wondering, why she is gathering mirror pieces. Which reminded me of an image from a Star Trek Next Generation episode (yeah, the miraculous ways minds can work), one of its best episodes actually, called Frame of Mind. Just in short: Will Riker kinda believes for a while to be a patient in a psychiatric ward, struggling with delusions, and with identity. There is a scene where fake, imagined worlds around him shatter like a mirror. Not exactly a new image, shattered mirror, but found it used in that TGN episode in one of the best visual ways. Shattered mirrors are a useful image for shattered identities, shattered minds, reflecting our persona (ah, did Bergman use in his movie Persona mirrors? have to take a look). So, shattered mirror -> shattered mind / identity -> part of our identity is to be recognized by other people as ourselves -> so Snow Queens identity sort of shattered and lost but less because she isn’t recognizing herself but because other aren’t recognizing her, not remembering her? To actually get a loving family you need to be remembered, recognized, visible (!). Just fractured ideas at this point though.
And, by the way, when Regina enacted the Dark Curse the first time, when it took all over, Regina standing in Emma’s nursery, Snow White on the floor, her dying husband David in her arms, it looks a bit like the world around the shattering as well. Just saying.
Elsa said, her mother never mentioned a sister – maybe because she didn’t remember she had one?
Pffft, miss the good old times of coming up with these kind of theories. The last time I really had this thrill was with Lake Nostos, the well in Storybrooke, when it turned out, indeed some of the theories coming from collective knowledge of and digging into myth, tales were dead on.
¯\_(?????? ?)_/¯
Any chance anyone can decipher the ancient futhark runes again?
Less of a symbolic meaning this time, pretty much just Futhark alphabet. Someone else did the work and looks like an okay translation to me. http://villainsdontgethappyendings.tumblr.com/post/101048791688/outofcrocodile-someones-probably-done-this
¯\_(?????? ?)_/¯
This was an episode reminding of what could have been while at the same time painfully manifesting, it’s not there. The show runners have good intentions, but they have no idea what they’re doing. Adventure, crazy geek twists is their thing but not human nature and psychology. There might be writers in the team with more sense for the latter, but the basic setup works against it. Nothing new, but it made this episode agonizing to watch. A C- at best.
I know, you were talking about getting back a more positive feeling again in the fandom, but sorry, can’t with this episode.
strongly disliked:
everything Emma – Regina. Sorry, no, no and no. It’s like Emma want’s to befriend her bully – for all the wrong reasons, for trying to get some cuddle time with a selfish ice-block, or to use a fire image, a pot of red-hot lava. I get, what they think they are telling, but that is not the story they are telling. I would be the first to cheer for friendship, women empowering each other, but not with the Regina they made the most woefull, biggest victim of victims turned evil ever. And while at least Regina was very much in her self pity wallowing, grumpy self, with the emotional “maturity” of maybe a 5-year old, Emma was butchered as character. I truly want Emma to have a friend, she needs that more than any lover, but Regina as she is is not it. There was no parallel to the flashback with Lily, aside Emma being betrayed (right, Emma being betrayed, not Regina) and lied to. I understand Lily’s motivation even, though they didn’t give us really any background, but I have an idea what it feels like to feel invisible and in the total wrong place, family, which all doesn’t change that Lily betrayed Emma, lied to her, manipulated her, exploited her vulnarability and wish for friendship, but it was such a different story and relationship than the one Emma and Regina have. Emma more or less begging for Regina’s friendship? Well, only because she has indeed hardly anyone else to turn to, aside Elsa, who we know though will very probably not stay around. So Emma wants to be friends with Regina not because a friendship with Regina would be so great but in lack of other options to find someone, who at least has something to with magic and messed up family. This is not about hope but desperation.
Swanqueen as friendship ship – really?! Saw hilarious or obnocious tweet from the official show account. Seriously, don’t think you need to be gay to get possible subtext reading when it’s served on a plate like this, but it only comes as appetizer, it will never be the real deal. And Swanqueen fans actually embrace this queerbaiting fest they made this episode? Pathetic. But go on, don’t give up hope, because this show is so about hope. (And maybe some are old enough to remember who was called Hope in Xena? Yup, right, the one who nearly destroyed Xena’s and Gabrielle’s relation, daughter of Gabrielle and evil Dahak, mother of The Destroyer. Then maybe you get my pun).
least fave:
Got it, you haven’t forgotten Neal. And while I never warmed up with that character, I would understand if Neal fans would find such fanservice, as it is, ambiguous at best.Seeing Belle babysitting Snowflake prince, I for a moment felt again the sadness, that Red went missing. But then, when we were back to Emma and Regina, the sadness turned into the happy thought, that Red’s absence means, for the time being they can’t butcher her character as well. So my new big first on my wishlist (aside that I loved Meghan Rory as Red): Please, stay away from Red. And while were at it: Please stay away from Mulan as well. My fanon no is those two in the woods, discovering a deep connection with each other, while there on some secret mission Tinkerbell sent them on. Thanks for creating these characters, but leave them alone. Hope the OUaT writers stay away from my fanon.
The ice bridge – and I am not complaining about CGI here. I liked the movie Frozen to some degree, but this blatant copy of movie moments is getting boring and worth. It’s all about playing around with the shiny new stuff, nothing but trivial, unimaginative fan fiction. Georgina Haig still makes the best of what they give her though.
meh:
Sidney set free – I knew he would betray Regina the moment she put him back into the mirror, it was just obvious, and made sense, and could be even a good story. I liked that the Snow Queen got him to do something for her, and then sets Sidney free, into a freedom Sidney has no idea how to live it. He never had, he is used to be used, as jinny, as mirror, doubt he will know now how to handle it. And remember (though we are probably meant to have forgotten), the last person, who set him free, Snow’s father Leopold, Sidney murdered, ensnared by Regina to do it. Doesn’t Look good for the Snow Queen, does it. The good news maybe for the Snow Queen, but the reason why I put this under meh: The writers are not really good in following up such interesting stories.fave:
Snow Queen. The moment she had with Elsa. But even more the scene when she was alone in her lair. The understated, cold, ambiguous Snow Queen manages to make me feel for her even for a second with just one sentence and look (scene “family that loves me”). Go figure. It’s mind-boggling that the writers, who made such a mess of Regina and a close to unbearable nuisance of Zelena (The Wicked Witch), are still able to create a character like the Snow Queen. Although at least half of it is Mitchell’s acting. And I am intrigued with what the mirror, mirror pieces could mean to her. It’s is the kind of multilayered possible meanings I like (reflection, self and others, identity building, mirror into past/ future, doorway), though with these writers I doubt they have an understanding of it going beyond playing around with shiny stuff.honorable mention
Are we getting somewhat of Bandit-Snow back? See what wonders it can do for Snow if her story his not about / involving Regina.I am sure, well I have already seen plenty of people liking this episode, Regina fans should be all cheering, but YMMV. No thanks from me for finally giving more of Emma background but doing it in such a messed up way. Way to go show, to make an episode with Emma flashbacks still pretty much an episode mostly about Regina.
Guest starring are […] Oliver Rice as King Arendelle, Pascale Hutton as Queen Arendelle…
Deleted scene maybe?
Wondering about that too.
¯\_(?????? ?)_/¯
First: I don’t think that Hook is the only divisive character in the fandom. Neal was perceived very different by different people (and that was not just a matter of Neal or Hook), Regina is seen in very different ways ( there are sometimes quite heated debates about her, which often come up in connection with SwanQueen discussions but are really not limited to it), people have very different takes on Rumple and on Belle, and on Henry as well. Even Snow is disputed. There was a bit of dicussion about Charming/David in season 1 but since then he probably is the most accepted character in the fandom. Doesn’t mean all like him, love him, but he seldom even causes anything like a slight wrinkle of people’s noses. But everybody else of the regular, core or lead characters split up the fandom in factions, more or less getting at each other, some less, some more. By now the different fandom factions have mostly sorted themselves out on different forums, and stay mostly in their circles, occasionally crossing swords and magic wands on Twitter and Tumblr.
Hook gets more attention at the moment because of shipping, because of Emma getting more attention, the finale episode of season 3, which put CaptainSwan very much in the middle of everything, and the ongoing focus on them. But more importantly: I think Hook gets in the way of more than one happily ever after ship (and we’re talking here fandom affairs, it doens’t matter at all if it’s canon or fanon), he is THE bad guy in Storybrooke shipping town, having more than one fan faction against him.
(and I will try to walk a bit in everybodies shoes now, sort of…)
a) SwanFire: Some are still mourning, and Neal was the good guy and hero, why should Emma ever feel for anyone more than for him. He had to leave so she could find her parents, he had no choice. And he came back with her and his son despite still struggling with his father clinging to magic. Even with Neal now gone, the triangle is still in a way alive. Thanks to Neal being Henry’s father it will always be an issue. Hook flirting with Emmma, maybe one can overlook that after a while, adults. But think it would heat up badly again if Hook would bond with Henry with even the slightest touch of fatherly care. Don’t think that would be taken well by parts of the fandom. Befriending Henry a bit out of guilt and for the sake of remember Neal might be okay, but daring to take a place even remotely close to fatherly – no way. It might be tolerable (not acceptable) that Emma has some needs, needs a friend, a new shoulder to rely on, but that is it. Everything going beyond that is an offense to Emma’s first love and the father of her son.
b) SwanQueen: Dashing pirate with a questionable behavior towards woman – no way this guy could be any good, or any better ever than Regina for Emma. Regina should be the strong, independent woman she is and protect Emma, shouldn’t she. Emma can’t be seriously into such a fraud and womanizer, she just was too weak and vulnerable and Hook pushed her until he had succesfully cornered and tricked her. Regina was bad, as some say, trying to kill Emma and all her family in the past (except maybe Henry), alright, but this guy is so much worse. If Regina doesn’t get a chance, such a horrible guy should even less get one.
c) RumBelle: Hook is getting in the way of these two as well. For one Hook took away Milah, which scarred Rumple for life and made him disbelief in the power of love for a while. Tough thing for lovely Belle to overcome. Second: Hook attacked lovely Belle, more than once, and came close to kill her more than once. And as just seen in most recent episode, the feud between these two old men is still burning, and poor, lovely Belle might be the victim. Furthermore when people complain, that there is something icky about Rumple and Belle in love, power imbalance, age, evilness, then Hook and Emma are icky as well, they fought each other first, Hook looked Emma up and would have left her to whatever fate in that place.
d) Outlawqueen: what? Yes, indirectly. I find it quite interesting, that a bigger number of Swanqueen shippers them to have little problem with Outlawqueen than with CaptainHook – which, sorry, tells me, they care litte about Emma, little about diversity on the show, and all they care about is happy Regina no matter how. Regina being Emma’s strong white (or is it black?) knight would be the perfect story, but at least Robin is humble and cherishing Regina as the strong, independent woman she is, so they make a second best ending? Maybe it’s, that Hook is taking Emma seemingly away, while Robin is a step for Regina to grow, so that maybe latter she still could find her way to her true soul mate? Whatever. It is faczinating and raising questions. Hook gets a bit in the way of Robin being the good looking, sharming, sassy man on OUaT now, there are just so many alphas a family can take. Rumble – grandfather alpha, David, father alpha, so they have their places secured, but Hook and Robin are direct compitition (good thing the Knave is only a guest, and likely not of any interest for any lead). At least Emma and Hook should be a bit more decent and stay in the back, after all, Regina is the queen of the show, so don’t take away her place in the main spotlight, aka take away screentime, with some fan service for the teenager faction, let an adult show you the real look and meaning of true love.
e) Rumple fans – at least for those believing, Rumple should have a good end, be redeemed, which mostly goes along with shipping RumBelle. Hook hurt Rumple – that is enough to dislike him, isn’t it. Hook tried to kill Rumple even, though Hook was the bad guy, who has stolen Rumple’s wife and mother of his son from him. And he surrendered Rumple’s son to evil Pan. And we haven’t heard him apologize for any of it, doubtful he even regrets anything.
f) Neal fans – aside of taking away Emma. Hook killed Neal’ls mother and betrayed him in Neverland. And he endangered Neal’s son, his whole family when he helped Tamara and Greg because of his obsession with taking revenge on Rumple. Maybe Neal and Hook had sime sort of odd friendship in Neverland, but he surrendered him to Pan.
Plus a few people, who maybe really just dislike Hook anyway for being a dashing pirate, and few others, non-shippers, who think the character is mostly a joke and only eye candy for anyone with teenager mind (regardless biological age).
I haven’t seen any Duckling or fans liking Emma having that huge of a problem with Hook, even though I think not all liking Emma are shipping CaptainSwan (me for example).
Interestingly, Hook as he is portrayed on OUaT, as dashing pirate, charming, sassy, but sensitive and bound to whatever code he feels bound to, but standing outside established norms, is usually in romantic fantasy the guy to get the big price, the beautiful girl and happy ending, the bad guy with the good heart, the romantic hero. Think of pretty much any Errol Flynn character (who played besides pirates and other romantic heroes one of the iconic Robin Hood versions). Normally that is the popular character in a romance, or has been. Emma and Hook are kinda the version of the romance trope of gallant but maverick thief/pirate/detective gets the princess.
Boiling it down from the point of a person being not much of a shipper of any popular pairing (aside from whishing for more diversity, and shipping general the idea of at least one queer couple on the show, but not SQ, most of you I think know my position on that): Hook is such a controverse, divisive character because of shipping wars. Disliking him is common ground where different factions of the fandom can come together, the culprit some can agree on, even if otherwise they have still a lot of different, and maybe sometimes opposing views on other things. The common foe.
I think there a some different views on why viewer numbers decreased in season 2. Overall quality of the writing, the loss of the new sensation factor, the curse been broken so early, and while some blame Hook, other people blame the mess they made of Regina with Cora in second half, other see the whole Tamara – Greg story has big mess up, or the show getting probably more and more confusing for casual viewers. Not one of the many views as profound research, numbers, analysis to prove their point. It’s a matter of what one wants to belief in and thus find more plausible.
Concering these screentime charts. They might show tendency, maybe, but they hardly can be judged as objective or accurate. I can only guess with screentime is meant every moment shown on screen (though for perception of importance as much talking about even if not on screen can be a factor as well). I am sure those who took these screentime are trying to be accurate, but one person alone hardly will be able to be accurate with such a task. To do it accurate you would have to focus on one character each, and I would suggest watch each episode at least twice if not better thrice to get every minute of screen appearance, front, center, supporting, silent background. If taken more seriously probably should keep record of how much time this was in interaction, speaking, maybe solo, or much only as bystander. It’s not as easy as we think to measure exact time for activity, even if it’s recorded, so one can rewatch it multiple times, clocking. I’ve done some study on time use and time perception studies and their methodes, so have a bit of an idea about it. .
If you have to trust just your memory – forget it. We are rather bad most of the times to tell length of an activity, some factors influence our perception, and then even more, our memory. When we think, a character is important but neclegted, we will likely remember seeing that character less than character we think have taken undeservedly space and time in the narrative, regardless what actual measurement might tell.
Personal bias is something that is quite an issue in research in social science, it is unavoidable, so one has to be very clear in their analysis, where they are coming from, which position you had before starting to dig into things, note anything that might influence your view and handle of research while researching, even seemingly unimportant things (seriously, something as a rainy day could make a difference in how people answer questions you ask them, or how you perceive their anwers).
And as noted by others: amount of screentime says not everything about importance in the story line or on the show, not even at a given moment.
But to amuse us more, nevertheless the tip, that there are more charts on that Tumblr, about season 1 and 2 as well, as there is another overview of season1 and 2 on a another Tumblr
The question in and of itself is also divisive because people on #TeamHook (can I call them that…I hate the idea of “stans” mostly because I have no idea where it came from. What is a Stan? Why Stan? Why not Martha? Or Jim….where was I…)
Stan: an overly (dangerously) obsessed fan of a celebrity, be it musician, athlete, actor. Is described as a blend (portmanteau) of stalker and fan. First used for fans of musicians but is spreading to all kind of celebrities, and eventually as well might spread in use to label the most obsessive fans of a character. Said to be based on the song “Stan” by Eminem (recorded 1999, originally with Dido. Song tells the story of a fictional person named Stanley “Stan” Mitchell, who claima to be the biggest fan of Eminem, doing some really crazy stuff)
(I put the explanation in the glossary as well)
¯\_(?????? ?)_/¯
Works like a charm for me, gets now the same IP. Tested with manual http://www.oncepodcast.com/forum, normal pc browser /wlan and mobile provider, outside US, just in case, all good.
¯\_(?????? ?)_/¯
uggghh:
Henry – that kid should get some friends his age and have some teenage fun. He’s getting into Wesley Crusher territory for me, is even pretty close to beat him in being most obnoxious teenager character very soon.
Operation Mongoose – makes no sense to me. So far the book only recorded events that happened in the past, before the first Dark Curse. Especially Henry should know that. So what is that nonsense about writing a happy ending for Regina? Never cared that much, who wrote the book anyway. And they want to drag out this story for the whole season? Whatever.
so-so:
The whole hand thing. So contrived. Romantic cheese factor turning a character into Mr. Superdumb, though Hook should have enough brain to know, that he never should trust Rumple. Love makes blind or so. On the other hand I like, that Hook gets something else to do than being just eye candy and material for for drooling and some smooching phantasies. As it is nice to see well earned and lasting animosity between two characters for a change, those two have at least both reasons (not saying good ones, but reasons) to hate each other, and even better, they’re allowed to show it. It gives Robert Carlyle and Collin O’Donoghe material to show their acting skills. Still, the hand thing makes no sense. And neither does the video tape (how many people have video surveillance installed at their homes and have it on while their at home?)
Anna’s fairyback story. Didn’t make that much sense either. But was fun to watch Anna meeting Rumple. Rumple made even my head spin a bit with twists, but good that Anna beat him – at least for that moment.
yeah:
Emma getting family moments, before and after the date. Yes, she is an adult woman, but a lot of parents can’t help it when you’re living under one roof with them, no matter what age. Not to mention, it’s amazing how many people often feel like they have a right to butt into one’s love life (a mix of care and voyeurism). I loved the moments.
extra mentions:
Kristoff and Sven – can I borrow them for a while? They are a lot more loveable in this live action form. Ovations to the team making Sven Sven, be it Jack the reindeer, trainers, camera team, sound – just great work.
Applause for the stunt mouse (or mice). Good touchdown, nice bite.
The mechanic wizard has become the Apprentice – nice to see Timothy Webber (another one from Arctic Air cast, played there the mechanic, but also known from North of 60).
extra notice:
80s brick cordless phone Belle used (looked like some AT&T cordless model)
Car parked before the apprentice’s house, a 1955 or so Ford Victoria, I think .
The curses created records of all inhabitants of Storybrooke? Neat.
Damon Lindelof on the radio.¯\_(?????? ?)_/¯
First saw Nicole Munoz five years ago in an episode of Sanctuary, did a good job there. She plays a current character on Defiance (more Scifi), a very interesting character. Can see her quite well as ” “charming, take-no-prisoners punk exterior and the heart of a secretive, insecure opportunist.”
Interesting. I thought the runaway orphan would be the snow queen but that girl is not blond or even look like Elizabeth Mitchell.
Would make only sense anyway, if the Snow Queen would disguise herself as runaway orphan, she was already a grown up woman some years before Emma was born.
¯\_(?????? ?)_/¯
I think you’re misunderstanding what I was getting at originally so here: Rumple and Milah are poor. They could pack up and leave town and try to set up a new shop in a little village but all of that is extraordinarily expensive and they will be in direct competition with whatever spinner is already set up in whatever tiny village they come to. And when push comes to shove, humans are more likely to go to the shop they’ve been going to and have a relationship with. I said it’s probable that Rumple is the only spinner in the village given it’s size, and Adam and Eddy needing to get across that THIS village is a really poor tiny one that the audience understands. I am not saying that Rumple and Milah cannot move simply because he is the only spinner int he village and the village needs their spinner.
You have a very romantic, fictionalized picture of spinning. Spinning was daily housework or work of servants, and yarn is just a step in the production of cloth. For a weaver to produce something for sale, something going beyond his and his family own needs, it took more than one spinner to produce enough yarn. Even in fairy tales spinning is usually women’s work, housework, work of servants, and unless Rumple was able to spin gold already before becoming the Dark One or over night a barn full of yarn, he would have not been able to make a living for himself and his family with that even in a fairy tale world, regardless if staying in his village or leaving it. Maybe the whole village was poor even, but that never mattered to the story, not even how small or big it was.
You make it sound like Rumple had not much of a choice, but I disagree in that. I said with medieval history in mind, it would have been tough to leave, not because people were poor that much though but because of political settings and societal structure, even a rather well doing dependent farmer would have been not able to move somewhere else legally without agreement of his landlord. On the show that is more or less reduced to economical reason then, as you read it. That is not the way I read it, they don’t bother to offer much of circumstantial reasons at all IMO, because that is not what matters much to their story.
Rumple was content as things were, he was alive, with his son and wife, had a place to live, food, no riches but a decent life – but that was not enough for Milah. Why ever she had married him, the life they were then living didn’t make her happy, she was clearly depressed at home. Was that okay, was she demanding too much? Depends on point of view, but whatever view, Milah was not happy. Was Rumple the same man Milah fell in love with when he returned home, after he had maimed himself to avoid battlefield, heard what allegedly was his fate? No, he wasn’t, he had changed. Milah even asked Rumple not to go into war, was worried, didn’t like that he was so eager to serve in the army, and she gets back a man running from fate who at the same time was believing in fate, and became driven by his abandoning issues.
I didn’t see on screen the story of a man who had no choice but to stay in his old village because of economy, if they really wanted it to be the crucial reason, they could have made Rumple say so instead of this cryptic “we talked about it”. I saw the story of a man who made choices. As David was a poor shepherd and made choices, like the choice to stand up against war lord Bo Peep.
Yes, Milah definitely became a victim when Rumple killed her. That was a horrible thing to do, I’m not denying it. But that doesn’t change the fact that before Rumple became the Dark One, he was a victim too.
The villians once were victims too trope. Besides the family relations one thing villains on Once have in common so far (well, for Snow Queen it’s more a guess at this point, we don’t know Maleficent’s life story, even Pan had a hint of victim as kid as back story). Making a villain a victim in the past is an easy way to make them sympathetic. They’re just leashing out now, are they, it’s all counterpunch, the world, or someone was evil to them. It starts to irk me. Maybe most villains had been victims before, but not many victims turn into a mass murdering, torturing, erratic tyrant, forcing their idea of happiness onto everyone, or a rather ruthless trickster murdering, ex partner and destroying worlds to counteract some huge guilty feelings. This trope is getting dangerously close to become offensive to victims, who struggle with what happened to them all their lives without turning to evil behavior. Since I can remember the question bothered me, how some people turn into “monsters”, do horrible, evil things. I grew up in a country, where in history evil became a system killing billions of people, where one could wonder, how much parents or grandparents knew about it or if they weren’t even in some degree involved. Trying to figure out, how people become “monsters” is for me not about guilty feelings, but to find ways to prevent it from happening. I am convinced evil isn’t born, nurture at least plays as much a role in it, but though having been a victim might explain how people get to some point in their lives eventually, it excuses nothing.
Right, Rumple was a victim in some way. So what?
¯\_(?????? ?)_/¯
But you and I agree on the most basic point: that it would be incredibly hard to pick up and move, but you’re going into more detail than what I think the writers are even interested in. If were you to ask A and E “why didn’t Rumple just move” they’d likely talk about Rumple’s psychology but also “they were poor. It would be hard.” But they aren’t going to give the questioneer a full length dissertation on the subject, specifically the feudal system. They have to reduce it down to something that translates well on TV in less than 60 mins since our show isn’t a time period piece for the most part. If ONCE was set in the past of the EF permanently then I would expect them to take greater care with their historical understandings. But boiled down: Rumple and Milah are very poor, can’t move cause poor.
Writing is more than putting words on a computer screen, it means a lot of research and thinking background through, otherwise you get stories full of plot holes, illogical development, flat character, distracting lack of coherence in the world you’re building. Being poor and can’t move because of that is a quite different explanation than being the sole spinner of the village and every village has only one spinner. Likely A&E haven’t give it more thought than being poor and in fairy tale fictional “medieval” society people just couldn’t move that easy, but the Once universe lacks plenty of solid world building, maybe because they might give things like that little thought and trust more on whatever the audience already imagine. (Aside that being poor was not the main point of mobility being a tough thing in Middle Ages in Europe, but societal structures and politics. Even a rather wealthy dependent farmer wouldn’t have had a chance to legally leave his landlord if the landlord didn’t agree.) But on the show they don’t bother to give much of any explanation, it’s just a “We’ve talked about it” – whatever it was, is left to the audience’s imagination, could have been economical reasons Rumple gave her, bonds to landlord, fate, whatever. But we know by now, Rumples biggest problem was, what his father did to him. Did he tell her that, was he honest in all accounts with Milah or holding back, ashamed? We don’t know that, a lot of the judgment of Milah is based on a few scenes seen from Rumple’s view and plenty of assumptions based on whatever imaginative ideas people have of society of the Enchanted Forest. It’s wide open for very different interpretations.
I don’t expect A&E to be able to write a full dissertation about the Middle Ages in Europe, but I expect them to give the worlds their story takes place in some thoughts. If people wonder, why a book like Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings has such an attraction over the years, then look at how much thought and love for detail he put into it – and he did that pretty much alone, not with a team of writers and assistance around. Now I don’t see a quality work like Lord Of the Rings in OUaT, it’s just some entertainment good for a few season of TV, but still if you want to make the psychology of characters work you should pay IMO a bit of attention, that the world you have around your character doesn’t work against the psychology you want to be driving your story.
I honestly have no clue, what the writers might have thought, Rumple’s reasoning, to not be able to leave and start somewhere new, could have been, aside his bad experience with such attempts. I don’t even care that much, because I don’t need to give Rumple any good reasoning, don’t bother if he was right or not, right or not to feel hurt, because he obviously felt hurt. To me that doesn’t at all change, that he committed a serious crime when he killed Milah years later, after having lived apart some time, after having become a different person as the Dark One.
¯\_(?????? ?)_/¯
