Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
So is this supposed to be another realm they are in? I think the press release mentioned that they get taken to a twisted realm. So were they just using Vancouver for this realm? Maybe it’s not actually for NY.
I think Hook and co are in the twisted realm in those pics but they use Vancity for everything, including NYC (except for 201)
[adrotate group="5"]"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"The final adjusted ratings are in for ‘Last Rites’. We adjusted down. So the ratings are: Demo: 1.1 Eyeballs: 3.75 Million. I expect that we’ll go back up to a 1.2 for the finale this coming Sunday though.
Agreed
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"Screwball Ninja came up with an interesting interpretation. Basically “OUAT is pushing redemption over justice. The villains take precedence over the victims, for better or worse.”
That’s it. That’s it right there.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"“Will we ever see Robin Hood’s (Sean Maguire) backstory and the dark side that we’ve heard so much about? KITSIS: Second half of the season, absolutely.” I wish they would just own up and be real with people when they change their minds like this. The writers of the show all about “hope” continually give us false hope.
Yeah this makes them look….not good. It also makes them look like they have no plan for an entire season and just come up with all the details of the arcs a month or two before. Sean said he heard he was being let go in January, which would have been at least 2 if not more episodes into filming 5B
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"So no Guinevere. That’s just great, now she can stay on rape-drug mode forever. Who cares about the emotional state of a person after they were abused.
Well, there is hope that maybe Lancelot will give her the old True love smoocherroo and break her curse. Now, I don’t recall what happened to Lancelot. I know he isn’t dead, but is he in SB? Or…? But yeah, that’s always something that can happen. Probably wont happen.
He is not in SB. He was sent to his mother when the gang was still in Camelot.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"Could the original Azrael’s name have been Jean Paul St. Valley?
*nods*
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"There’s a lot of chatter that this is the golden age of the anti-hero on TV. A lot of TV shows are picking grey, morally complex, not necessarily good guys as their leading men/women. You’ve got your Tony Sorpanos, your Don Drapers, you Walter Whites, your Reginas, your Rumples. Even cosmic hero types like The Doctor get heavily shaded, questioning their own goodness (AKA: s8 of DW) and even to a much lesser extent Emma Swan’s own brief internal struggle in this arc. You’ve also got characters who are usually absolutely villains in “regualr” narrative being given a good side–like Lucifer on Fox’s new crime show (which is delightfully charming and you all should watch).
Contrast this to–say–the age of the superhero when superheroes were GOOD. Capital G, full stop. Superman in his red and blue emphasizing American superiority and strength. There were moral complexities in his stories, but you’d never call him “gray” necessarily or question his own hero-hood.
I’ve mused on this before…but I think it’s largely because our world is becoming increasingly grey and complex. I don’t know who the villains/bad guys are anymore, and if you’re living in America then take a look at our current election and the insane gulf that separates the two candidates and the overwhelming responses their supporters and naysayers give out. I think TV is trying very hard to capture this moment in time in which nothing is clear and there are no real heroes. Even those traditional heroes–cops, for one–are being shaded in different lights becuse of racial and class and gender issues.
If our society is telling us that there are no heroes and that anyone can be a villain depending on who’s telling the story, then TV is naturally going to reflect that. And that’s okay because TV is a mirror to society and it should be. But the problem is that OUAT doesn’t know to work through those issues. It just makes the heroes into villains at the drop of a hat (like stealing a baby and infecting it with darkness) and turns villains into sympathetic figures without really sitting with what that actually means.
There’s a great piece by I think the Hulk Critic once who was musing on why movie goers like Loki more than Thor and it came down to that: people respond to antiheroes more because cut and dry heroes don’t exist in our world. So they always fall flat because you can’t flesh out something that isn’t real outside of media.
This is my way of actually rationalizing some of OUAT treatment of their heroes and villains and why they can’t seem to make their non-villains complex or interesting and why the writers quickly bore of them and then in several cases chop them out entirely.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"I find it hard to imagine that showrunners would want their show cancelled. And even today on Twitter Adam responded to someone who claimed that the only people who were happy were CSers; Adam responded with “I’ve seen plenty of angry CSers today too.”
But, as usual, I think Adam’s missing the point. If everyone is angry (and there’s a pretty good argument to be made that most everyone is–even the CSers who are sick of being blamed for everything bad that happens, and for having every other subset of fandom angry at them and their character) then you really are doing something wrong and “artistic licence” only goes so far.
Should writers be allowed to tell their story the way they want? Yes, sure. But I’m allowed to say that their story isn’t very good. And right now it’s not, and it hasn’t been for awhile. This season, for me and probably me alone, has been better than anything that came after Neverland but only because of some stellar acting from a charismatic villain and some at least moderately thought provoking musing on topics outside of just plot.
There are a lot of big problems but one of the biggest is that I don’t think the writers even know what their show is. They offer up platitudes about hope, love, family, and happy endings but everything they show is in direct contrast to that. How is Robin (and Neal) dying and leaving behind children about hope, love, family, and happy endings? How is Regina never getting to be reunited with her soul mate about hope? How is rewarding a murderer many times over with a second life for doing an over emphasized good work a message about redemption? The writers don’t actually sit with their broad themes and muse on them. They just put them out there as things that you’re supposed to be getting from their show but never pausing to actually consider if their narrative is an accurate reflection of that. It’s like…as long A and E keep giving their song and dance routine about hope, they believe you won’t notice the rooms on fire and there’s no water in sight.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"The only way I can see this “twist” paying off now for Regina is if SwanQueen happens or if she decides she’s better off without romance. However…I’m not sure what her “endgame” is now. Do Zelena and Regina become spinster sisters who own lots of cats?
Yeah, if they wanted SQ to happen, they would have left Hook dead in the Underworld. I still doubt SQ will ever become canon, regardless.
Yup. The show “got” their LGBT ‘ship. The writers can check mark that off and move on.
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"Sean keeps insisting in every interview that the actors have absolutely no say in the writing of the show or the way characters behave. It makes me wonder if the actors HAVE tried to suggest something, or complained, and were shot down.
I don’t think this is entirely true. Didn’t Lana say back in S2 that she fought with the writers about Regina and Henry’s relationship? I got the impression that her efforts succeeded and got them to portray it differently.
Actually, yes. Now that you mention it, she did. So….maybe there was slightly more contribution or at least actor-insight and now there’s not? It’s just a strange thing for Sean to keep emphasizing in his interviews (unless it’s just him who didn’t get to speak up and discuss his character)
"He was a lot of things to me" "The only conclusion was love"
