Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
TheBee – you’re wrong with your guess, I am no writer.
But it is interesting what image you have of writers, charming.
Nearly as charming as your image of men, of what makes a real man.What you wrote was offensive, not personally against me, neither am writer nor a man, but in general.
Sad, that others even agree with it.
To everybody here:
To set this straight: I find Hook as a character interesting, I did NOT suggest to kill him right away. All I am saying is, IF the writers can’t come up with good stories for him anymore, THEN I prefer them to give him an exit with a big bang, and not drag it. And IF the writers’ plans for Hook already includes a great showdown ending in Hook’s death, then so be it, as long as it is good writing, but I don’t know, what their plans are. I didn’t start to watch OUaT for Hook, I don’t watch it for Hook – that is all I am saying.What annoys me by now is, that some Hookers behave as if Hook is the only character really counting on the show and disrespect, that this is not how everybody sees it. I don’t judge people, viewers or whoever here, like or dislike anyone, I judge behavior.
BTW, Oncewatcher, I too pay attention to social media, surprise. I do notice, that Hook is a popular character. I do notice, that people like him or find him interesting out of different reasons, but there are a number of people, who seem to talk about little else than that Hook (and Colin O’Donoghue portraing him) is hot. I’m not saying, that is all, what they’re interested in, but if there is more, it is not as visible. What I am saying is, that the character deserves more than being primeraly some love interest for whoever on the show (and Colin O’Donoghue deserves more to show his good acting) . Oh, and I did mention, that good writing gets us invested emotionally in the characters, I am very aware that people feel with characters.
I’m giving my opinions here. Not sure what makes any of you think that these opinions and views might be any near to what the creators and the writers of the show think and will do. I find this ongoing writer bashing embarrasing and ridiculous.
@Phee wrote:
@Oncewatcher wrote:
Why don’t writers get attached to tv characters, namely the ones they write about?
You don’t think writers get attached to their characters? Characters they imagined, they deisgned, they created, they breathed life into, they make up the stories for. I’m not a writer, but I would imagine that it’d be impossible for a writer to not become attached to their characters. That doesn’t mean they won’t put said characters through hell, it doesn’t mean they won’t kill them if necessary, but even if they feel the need to do that, that doesn’t meant they don’t still love and feel attached to the character. K&H still talk about how they love Graham, but he was always designed to serve his purpose in the story, and then die.
Well said.
[adrotate group="5"]¯\_(?????? ?)_/¯
To rub salts into the wounds: I want good story telling, that is what really keeps me watching a show, not liking particular characters. So, if they can’t come up with a good story for a character or not with a good way to integrate a character into the story lines they’re telling, I want them to let that character go, no matter how much I like the character. And I want them to do it, even if it means losing a number of fans or people, new ones will join, if you still are telling good stories. Or maybe not, but that is a risk you have with any TV show with whatever you.
And if the writers have a good story line which means killing a character I like – well, tough, but go ahead, kill the character.
And let’s stop talking just about Hook. He is not the only character on the show, and the unsubstantiated panic that is spreading, is becoming annoying. Starting to make me wish, that we should get done with it, kill him, just to move on. From my observation doubt people want to live with Hooking being only in every third episode, and then even just for a minute or so, that doesn’t leave many options besides killing him once the revenge story line is done. Saying that, because there are characters like Archie (although some are complaing about him being seen so seldom this season so far) or Belle, who very well work without being around much in every episode since they first came onto the show. Be honest and ask yourself if Hook could work that way. Alright, some are sure wishing for more Belle, but I’m not talking about what people are wishing for, I’m asking, what is working while keeping the stories good. OOokay, now quite sure provoked more talk about Hook, oh well, so be it.
Remember Graham wasn’t all loved at the beginning, whatever. Think killing him was brilliant and pretty much the right time to do it.
IMO no character, no matter if main cast, regular, or not, no matter if having many fans or not should be safe. Not from the point of view of story telling. The only thing I would feel sorry about is, that it means taking a job from good actors / actresses, but that is business.
¯\_(?????? ?)_/¯
@Marilou wrote:
myril thank you, you took my poor knowledge of the english language and translated it into exactly what I meant. 😀
Poor knowledge of English, you? No! I merely enjoyed to take you on a tour into my mind to express in many words what could have been said in one short sentence: I mostly agree with you.
Oncewatcher: Live long and prosper!
And I see your point,I’m not sure yet about what they’re going to do with Hook. We’re not even sure that there will be a next season, are we (seeing the ratings it would be stupid if not, but still)? Wouldn’t say they’ve barely done anything with him yet, but I agree, there is more to the character, and we will see more of him. After all, he just got only one step closer to his big goal. Can even imagine storylines going beyond this, but not sure if they are any good. Think the producers and writers are aware of the reception, and I trust them as much, that it won’t be any easy thing for them to kill him, if they will do it. But I see it from a different point of view: If Hook in some way gets what he is seeking, it will take a very good reason and good story to keep him around – and sorry to all Captain Sawn fans, a love story with Emma is not a good enough reason to keep him in the show IMO, he is no lapdog. If they can think of a good story, he will stay, but otherwise, Hook is a character who certainly deserves a big exit, death or disappearance, whatever. Same goes for Cora. Both are not Redshirts, but they aren’t central main characters either.
For a show like OUaT to work you need always good adversaries. As I said, they want us to get invested emotionally with the characters, and with the bad guys you have the problem, that you have to keep them being good at being bad. But if a character is around longer you have to deepen their character, to stay interesting, and hen pay the price, that they will become more sympathetic and thus eventually less evil. So shows running longer come up with new villains once in a while. Look at Star Trek’s long history and the change of villains there. They had to come up with new ones not just because of different generations of Starfleet officers and exploring more of the universe – it was necessary because the bad guys became more and more sympathetic the longer they were around (and Klingons even made it on the bridge!). If that happens, you have to find good stories for them to stay – or you have to kill them (it’s the best option, proper end of their story line, no confusion), while building up a new villain. Remember the awful development of the Borg on Star Trek Next Generation, best example for how not to do it (although later in the movie and then Voyager they managed to make the Borg well working bad guys again).
Before anyone worries, nope, I’m not pleading for killing the Evil Queen or Rumple, they’re far too rich characters to be done with them any time soon. Besides, they are main cast, central to the overall storyline of the show.
You have to come up with good stories for the good guys too, don’t get me wrong here – but often most of the main cast are good guys, so they’re more likely last on the death list of writers. Just being succesfull fighting the bad guys is not enough for a long running show though either. It’s all about character development, findind interesting stories.
¯\_(?????? ?)_/¯
Interesting, I found that speech believable because seemingly it was making so little sense (to me it made a lot of sense). Regina is emotionally so confused. It’s a love-hate relationship she has with her mother. Regina knew, that her mother still could make her do things, no matter how much she at the same time might hate her. Love is weakness in this case not because Regina cares in any positive, healthy sense about her mother, but Regina never stopped craving for her approval, her affection, that is the grip on her heart, Cora had, and Cora still has. Getting approval of your parents, as daughter especially of a mother is a strong motivator to do a lot of things you otherwise would even despise doing. Regina had her plans with the Dark Curse and she certainly didn’t want to be distracted by being tempted to please her mom in any way. Regina knew, she wasn’t free of that wish to please her as long as Cora was alive.
Very sure Regina believed Cora was dead, that was the moment she and Rumple were talking about in the episode before at the dinner, that she saw Cora’s dead body.
¯\_(?????? ?)_/¯
The moment it looked like Hook was about to kill Belle I found actually a bit out of character. But sometimes Hook seems to do things just because he can, not only because they serve him. He is a gambler, the bad guy having even something like fun behaving bad, unlike any other of our villains, and despite that he has a code of honour. But as well he does good things, and not just when it serves him right now, but might come in handy later – or just because he can do it. If he is just a little bit like Jack Sparrow, his code is, well, adaptable,only when he gives his word, it counts. It makes him refreshingly unpredictable.
But I can way more picture him charming the bean from the giant, or winning it in some game he might have talked him into to kill time, than Hook killing the giant. He could have simply stolen it from him. Or he even found some mutual interest with the giant.
¯\_(?????? ?)_/¯
Has anyone here heard the term “Redshirt”? Well, hello fellow treckies – and fans of Lost should know about it too. Nope, has nothing to do with our she-wolf Red here. A Redshirt is a minor character, who dies most of the times shortly after being introduced. Not always nameless but their prime funtion in the story is to get killed, to show, that there is real danger and live at stake, that lives can be lost, that bad things happen and might happen again. Term is based on that in Star Trek at the beginning (the Originals) particular security personal had red shirts on, and they were the most likely poor guys to get killed when they beamed to some place. It’s a plot device. On OUaT Gus, Stealthy, and in a certain degree maybe Peter and Quinn and even Daniel, would qualify as Redshirts (hm, just noticing that it looks like Redshirts appear significantly often in Red’s story line)
A part of drama is pushing people to the bring of their abilities and their psych and beyond. Killing people they love, they are close to, are important to them, sure is a way to push people. Those killed often are just a plot device, even as guest stars, even if they might not qualify as typical Redshirt. For example Daniel, not much of a character on his own: his purpose was to give Regina a background story of love and lost. That was it. He served well again in another episode, to deepen the insight in Regina’s motivation and emotional state, and helped to get a glimpse of Dr. Whal’s background, but we’re very much done with him now. The situation is similiar with Henry se., Regina’s father, although we see him in more scenes and episodes, might even see him again, but basically his character is of not much interest for the audience on his own. He serves to tell Regina’s story (despite being Cora’s husband so far he had not much to do with her story). Alike Milah, in this case as plot device for Rumple’s and Hook’s background story, and Peter and Anita, used to push Red and tell her background.
Don’t always have to kill people to create drama, but death is ultimate lost, taking away hope. Considering that Kitsis&Horowitz said, that hope is an important motif in the show, it shouldn’t surprise, that death is an often used plot. But it’s not a sign of good or bad writing to often kill people, it depends on how they do it, and how it’s embedded in the story arc.
Up to this point you can say we lost if at all only one character, who worked on his own and had his own story and was not just a plot device: Sheriff Graham, the Huntsman. Although you can say, his main purpose was to bring some insight into Regina and into Emma, but to up the stakes somewhat, they gave him a bit of own story to tell, He was no major character either to be killed of, but his death certainly gave people the feeling, the writers might not be shy to kill (seemingly) important, even regular characters, characters who many in the audience liked. So now, in dangerous situations, we feel not so sure, that good always will win and that our loved characters will be safe from dying. Makes things more interesting.
Good writing makes us invest emotionally in fictional characters, we identify with them, like them, love them, drool over them (and/or the actor/actress). There is always a dilemma with the bad guys in a story, if you want to keep them around longer, you either have to make people really hate them, but that seldom works so good in the long run, or like them, but that makes them less bad. And of course we don’t want to lose the characters we like, for many they are the main reason to keep watching a show. So often only minor characters, recurring at best, sometimes guest stars, often not, get killed on shows – after all they want to keep us watching. Main characters are mostly killed only out of necessity – because the actor/actress leaves the show, having another job, or out whatever reason. You’re not going to find many main characters being killed on any TV show (think Grey’s Anatomy is one of the shows with the most main characters killed). Although sometimes from a dramatic point of view it would be good for the story telling to even kill a main character. Doubt they will dare that on OUaT without necessity, but never know. At least they shouldn’t be shy to kill recurring characters, guest stars, as long as it serving the story well and not just a way to get rid of character.
What I worry about is ressurrecting people without good plot. Remember Ensign Kim in Star Trek Voyager becoming annoying because it seemed like they had a hard time to come up with any really good story for him besides killing him, or nearly killing him – he was like the regular Redshirt replacement, to compensate for the low number of possible crew members. Thankfully so far they don’t go there on OUaT. The only case of ressurrection was Daniel, and that served the plot and character development well. But think all this talk about getting back Graham is something that people should reconsider. In flashback, okay, but not for SB in present time – that would be bad writing. Dead is dead. And no, not counting Phillip as dead.
Is there too much death on OUaT? No, I think not, but that is a matter of point of view. So far the deaths added something to the over all plot and the development of a character, so it made sense. And they didn’t kill Aurora or Mulan (despite wishful thinking of some), did they, but I guess they will be out of the picture at least for a while now (their quest would be worth a story on its own, but there is always fanfiction to turn to).
@Elle wrote:
Not to sound cold, but look at the amount of characters on this show for starters. There is just so much, a good portion of them have not done much. Plus, this show is supposed to be dark. People get hurt. Locked up. Killed. It is going to happen. There are battles being fought, people fighting one another, people going on quests for revenge. It is going to happen.
I agree with you, that it is going to happen, that there are battles fought. I don’t agree on OUaT being supposed to be dark. Think quite the opposite. Probably why some people seem to feel umcomfortable with seemingly a number of characters getting killed. This is not a show about how desperate people can become, but a show about how they find hope even in dark moments – evil never will win. It’s about hope and love, not about darkness, desperation and destruction.
¯\_(?????? ?)_/¯
I would find it lame, if it had much to do with Lake Nostos, as plausible as it sounds. I prefer to think, that there is still something special in the love between Snow and Charming, explained by their personalities, their development over time and what they’ve been through (I’m despite all an idealist). Their love goes beyond most romances, beyond love on first sight, happy Valentines Day and media induced pictures of true love. Or in other words: other FTL couples might have found true love as well, but the true love between Snow and Charming is a special one, stronger than any. And as well, as Marilou said, you might not need true love, love can be enough, to have a happy life and family.
But furthermore, possible Emma shows that kind of power, and so strong, because of her own story as well. She was looking for her parents all of her life, wondering, questioning, craving, that makes her different from other kids of true love.
Does it make her a kind of good wizard? Nope, or hopefully not. Think any attempt to fully control that power or magic will end badly. Not magic per se is a problem, but wanting full control over it, using it as a power for whatever purpose, no matter what good intention. Look at Rumple, Regina, Cora, they are all corrupted because of wanting to control magic, of seeing it as power to use merely for their own purposes. It might have been more in their personalities to end up being so corrupted by it than maybe other people would be, but trying to control magic is always a dangerous path. And yes, I think the fairies shouldn’t be seen as simple all good beings either, but they are maybe more aware of the dilemma.
So far Emma’s power is more of a passive kind, it’s a power happening when need be. The moment she tries to control it, it will be corrupted, and it will eventually corrupt her. Simple: love and the power / magic coming from it is something you can’t control, and you shouldn’t try to.
Is it stronger than the Dark One’s magic? Yes, it is.
Might Emma be able to break the barrier between Storybrook and the outside world? Maybe, but what good would be in this? Think the people in Storybrook are better equipped to deal with the kind of Cora and Rumple, their magic, than our world would be. We can’t handle them, they can. It’s not just a barrier preventing people from leaving SB without giving up their FTL identity, so keeping them from exploring our world and making friends here, or Rumple from finding his son, it’s as well a barrier to protect our world – that’s how I see it. And because of what I said before, of making willfully use of the power and that that might corrupt the power as well as Emma, I sure don’t want Emma to even try to break the barrier. If it happens accidentally, so to speak, that would be something different of course.
¯\_(?????? ?)_/¯
Thanks for the link, obisgirl. Might be useful for winter time now as well 😉
And to celebrate!
On December, 20th 1812, 200 years ago, the first edition of the first book of “Children’s and Household Tales” by the Brothers Grimm was published.
Because of that and because of the 150th anniversary of the death of Jacob Grimm in September 2013 (and another brother of the Grimm family, an illustrator) the state of Hessen, Germany is celebrating in 2013 a Grimm year. In connection to this anniversary the Goethe Institute did some stuff, of course, here a collection of their links . Among other things they did a video contest, which resulted in some nice short videos. The website they’re on is interesting too, but only available in German or Italian, but the videos are enjoyable no matter what language you understand.
Dream’s Shadow
Rothäppchen (red bit)There are some more videos, but liked these two most.
¯\_(?????? ?)_/¯
@obisgirl wrote:
I will admit this now: I watched Hercules and Xena. Buffy too. When I was in high school, she was in high school struggling all the way through it.
I think the cheese factor of these shows aren’t coming back. TV is reinvented a lot. It could come back (later decades from now or something).
Not sure if the “cheese factor” is all gone. Look at a show like Lost Girl (Showcase/Syfy) – not first run syndication, but a show with some cheese factor, reminding of Xena and Buffy.
¯\_(?????? ?)_/¯
