Once Upon a Time (ABC TV Series)

[tsom]

1. Emma and Henry are no one in the fairy tale world. They are regular people.

2. Graham is most defintely the Huntsman from the Snow White story.

3. I was waiting for the queen to eat the heart like in the orginal story! Haha.

4. Yeah, I know it had to do with a secret that Snow White revealed, but is it THAT bad that the queen has to get revenge by killing her husband, her father, and trying to kill her stepdaughter?

5. There's a theory going around that the Evil Queen is the miller's daughter from the Rumple story. If the theory is true, then here's what I think:

Of course we all know the Rumple story, so what if the secret had something to do with the baby that Rumple said he would take from the queen if she didn't guess his name? Well, what if the queen from that story is the Evil Queen and when she couldn't figure out his name, she got scared that she might lose the only person she ever loved, her son, and confided in Snow White, in which she had to reveal that she never really spun thread into gold. Then, Snow told her father and maybe somehow the baby was taken away. This would explain why Regina wanted Henry. Also, it will explain why Regina's last name is Mills. In the Rumple story, the maiden turned queen is a miller's daughter. Also, we can infer that the evil queen did not come from royalty seeing that her father served her when he should have been ruling some other kingdom if he were a king. So, it only means that the evil queen came from either a noble family or a common family, not a royal one. Also, the miller's daughter was pretty much sold into matrimony and forced into royalty, which would explain why the evil queen could have easily killed her husband/Snow's father given that she never really loved him.

Again, this is just my theory IF the Rumple theory is true.

[slave2moonlight]

Yeah, I know he's the huntsman. Honestly, that's what I assumed since the first episode. However, there is always the chance he is more than just the huntsman. He still could also be the wolf from Red Riding Hood too. He did become the Queen's "pet" in the past... Maybe the wolf with the red eye is a part of himself...

I know Emma and Henry are not from the fairy tale world, I just always thought her last name of Swann must be significant. As descendants of fairy tale characters, they are still tied to the fairytale world, obviously. I mean, Emma was even born there, so she is someone in the fairytale word in a sense, if only a baby.

Since they are always dropping Disney links (and this isn't meant to piss anyone off, *ahem*), I do wish they'd made it the "heart of a pig" rather than a stag. However, I guess there was a running stag theme in this one.

Anyway, I hope that wasn't the last we see of the Sheriff. He was just getting interesting. I mean, what's up with the whole raised by wolves thing. They've got to have more for him to do. Though, I saw this online, so I didn't see next week's preview.

Yeah, I got the idea of the miller's daughter too. I think you have a good theory on what the secret is there. As for the miller's daughter/Evil Queen, two fairytale characters in one thing, this is what I mean about the Huntsman. I feel like he is more than just the Huntsman because of his wolf connection.

[AliceinWonderland]

Emma is from the fairytale world. She was born there, right? transported to the "real world" first.

oh.. the moglie comment.. it was just a joke

[slave2moonlight]

I know, ha, but I'm a big Jungle Book fan, so I'd be up for it, ha.

[UmbrellaFish]

Of course we all know the Rumple story, so what if the secret had something to do with the baby that Rumple said he would take from the queen if she didn't guess his name? Well, what if the queen from that story is the Evil Queen and when she couldn't figure out his name, she got scared that she might lose the only person she ever loved, her son, and confided in Snow White, in which she had to reveal that she never really spun thread into gold. Then, Snow told her father and maybe somehow the baby was taken away. This would explain why Regina wanted Henry. Also, it will explain why Regina's last name is Mills. In the Rumple story, the maiden turned queen is a miller's daughter. Also, we can infer that the evil queen did not come from royalty seeing that her father served her when he should have been ruling some other kingdom if he were a king. So, it only means that the evil queen came from either a noble family or a common family, not a royal one. Also, the miller's daughter was pretty much sold into matrimony and forced into royalty, which would explain why the evil queen could have easily killed her husband/Snow's father given that she never really loved him.

I like that theory. Makes a lot of sense. Hmm...

Since they are always dropping Disney links (and this isn't meant to piss anyone off, *ahem*), I do wish they'd made it the "heart of a pig" rather than a stag. However, I guess there was a running stag theme in this one.

I know. I was a little disappointed when the Evil Queen didn't say, "The heart of a piiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiig!?!?"

[Disney's Divinity]

@tsom: And, I may be wrong, but didn’t the girl in the Rumpilstiltskin tale have a really close relationship with her father, too? I believe she got into the whole gold-spinning fix to try and help him, didn’t she?

About Henry, some people on another forum were speculating that maybe he was Peter Pan.

I'm not really sad about the Huntsman dying. He was bland. Anyway, I am looking forward to the Hansel/Gretel episode.

[tsom]

@DD: I think it depends on the version you read, but as I understand it, he was the one who practically used his daughter to gain wealth.

The Annotated Rumpelstiltskin:

http://www.surlalunefairytales.com/rump ... index.html

[Linden]

Btw, was there any doubt that Graham was the Huntsman?!?! Wasn't it obvious from the very beginning?

He still had a lot of wolf qualities that might of made him the Wolf from Little Red Riding Hood. The way the Ruby always looked at him... Emma wearing red.

I agree there were other possibilities for Graham in the beginning. He could've been the wolf (although not necessarily the Wolf from Red Riding Hood). Right after Emma sees the wolf and crashes in the pilot, Graham shows up. I thought it could've been possible in the beginning that he was a werewolf.

[Disney Duster]

I really liked the Jiminy Cricket origin Episode, the fairy tale part of the "Peasant Charming" episode (I swear their real world dialogue was just constant repeating of "the man who married her isn't who I am" or "he needs to figure himself out alone!"), and the most recent, thrilling episode! Loved the Disney film heartbox reference and the Queen's new outfit and the "black was for mourning but now it suits me" explanation for her evil-looking clothes and the opening mourning scene and the last gripping scenes and the whole caboodle!

In the Jiminy Cricket episode, the Blue Fairy looked different from how she did before. Her hair was very different, as was her necklace, and her fairy dust effects were not as good as the first ones, they were barely there. I love her design (even though it looks too different from Disney's and doesn't make sense to me considering she looks Cinderella-fashion-ish, and roses come from the ground and she's from the sky), but on the whole the first version of it looked better. Here's a comparison:

Tell me I've imagined this but did Rumple just did what I saw him do??? murdered Cinderella's GodMother?? broke my heart, just threw me way off I was like "what the-?!"

You missed where I said the same thing. I agree, it was awful and broke my heart. It was unecessary and he could have done away with her godmother perhaps without killing her, after she got Cinderella to the ball, and he made the deal with Cinderella to help the Prince find her with the slipper.

Face-wise, I don't think she looks anything like Belle, but I still think she's a good choice for the role, for this show at least.

Um...this show is not going for characters looking very much like the Disney versions beyond the slightist bit of recognition, such as the colors and styles of their hair and clothes and that's almost it.

If they kept things a little more consistent, I could view this as the fairy tale characters and Disney characters being one in the same, just shown in a revisionist light with "things about them you didn't see/know". But the way they've done things...I am done with such sense-making and am just along for the ride with enjoyable Disney references.

I don't think the Queen is the Miller's daughter just because I think it's weird to make different fairy tale characters be other fairy tale characters. The huntsman being the same one that freed Red Riding Hood seems like a fit that doesn't go too far because I'd say both huntsmans were pretty nondescript. But maybe I'm be wrong.

I do feel I have a pretty good theory on the Queen's story and desire for revenge, though. First off, haven't any of you been paying enough attention to know Snow White got the Queen's lover killed?! Her talk with Maleficent in the second episode said enough. My theory is she had a lover, but she married the king for power, wealth, safety, or something of the sort. She told Snow White either about her secret lover or some secret related to him, and Snow White, in sharing this secret, somehow allowed the King to find out about her lover, and the King had him killed. This would give the Queen reason to kill the King, who she didn't love in the first place. Then she just needed to kill Snow White for causing the whole thing.

And isn't Henry totally the Queen's father? Who's name is...Henry. I also have a theory that the Beast is Dr. Whale.

[slave2moonlight]

Face-wise, I don't think she looks anything like Belle, but I still think she's a good choice for the role, for this show at least.

Um...this show is not going for characters looking very much like the Disney versions beyond the slightist bit of recognition, such as the colors and styles of their hair and clothes and that's almost it.

If they kept things a little more consistent, I could view this as the fairy tale characters and Disney characters being one in the same, just shown in a revisionist light with "things about them you didn't see/know". But the way they've done things...I am done with such sense-making and am just along for the ride with enjoyable Disney references.
.

Ugh, people are still coming down on me for this? I never have said they are trying to make these characters exactly like the animated ones. Even you just commented that the Blue Fairy didn't look enough like the Disney one though. It's naturally on our minds, and it is because they are putting TONS of references in. But, I only said Belle didn't look enough like the animated Belle to me because someone here (I forget whom) said she looked just like her. Note that I did say she was fine for this program.

HOWEVER, having said that, it's been said here that Gaston will be in the Belle episode. Frankly, once you bring Gaston in, that's pretty much it. You're doing an adaptation of the Disney fairytales for sure, because he was never in the original story. He is purely a Disney character. So, if they DO bring in Gaston, that pretty much ends that debate if there is one. Now, I'm NOT saying that means they are trying to tell the stories the same and make everything exactly the same, but they definitely are not just honoring the Disney versions at that point, they are full on incorporating Disney-only characters. It's arguable that they have already done that with some of the very specific name choices, but a character who is ONLY from the Disney version? C'mon.

[Disney Duster]

Sorry I didn't mean it that way, I actually agree with you on a lot.

But them bringing Gaston in can only be taken as a big mess-up or it doesn't change anything. It's still inconsistent. Maleficent never used a sleeping curse, she tried to kill Aurora from the get-go. Cinderella's fairy godmother was never killed so Rumplestiltskin could send her to the ball. Jiminy Cricket didn't know Gepetto before he met Pinocchio. The show still can't really be viewed as seeing the Disney characters a little "differently" with parts of their story we didn't know.

I'm pretty sure they are just throwing in the references because people know the Disney movies best (Beauty and the Beast is especially well known) and most don't know crap about how the real fairy tales went anyway, and it's fun to have Disney references.

Gaston is only like a GIGANTIC Disney reference. That's the only way the show can possibly make any...sense!

[slave2moonlight]

But them bringing Gaston in can only be taken as a big mess-up or it doesn't change anything. It's still inconsistent. Maleficent never used a sleeping curse, she tried to kill Aurora from the get-go. Cinderella's fairy godmother was never killed so Rumplestiltskin could send her to the ball. Jiminy Cricket didn't know Gepetto before he met Pinocchio. The show still can't really be viewed as seeing the Disney characters a little "differently" with parts of their story we didn't know.

Gaston is only like a GIGANTIC Disney reference. That's the only way the show can possibly make any...sense!

Why can't they be viewed as seeing the Disney characters "differently"? That's exactly what they're doing. This who show is really just a "what if", as in, "What if the Disney fairytale characters were put together in a night-time soap." Sure, there are differences that are inconsistent with the Disney films, but that doesn't matter. This is like a reboot. It's like watching 60's Batman, then the Burton one, then the animated shows, and then watching The Dark Knight. They're all different, they have inconsistencies with the comic book, but they're all based on the comic book characters.

I was totally agreeing with the "these are just Disney references for fun" thing too, even though for some reason I got attacked here for saying this was supposed to be a show about the Disney characters. However, now that they are bringing in Gaston, I have to admit, that changes things. It's not just a Disney reference, it's a Disney character. That's what Gaston IS.

That does not mean I expect everything to be consistent with the Disney version, it just means that if they do bring on a Gaston similar to the one we know at all, then they are basically doing the Disney characters here. It's a different version of them, just like 90's Dark Shadows is a different version of Dark Shadows than the original. It's like when you see the animated Teen Wolf. Teen Wolf has a little sister and lives in a different town, etc... It is STILL based on the original Teen Wolf movie, ya know?

So, yeah, if they bring on Gaston, I gotta change my opinion on this. If they do, then they ARE doing the Disney characters. But, this is all just a question of semantics, really. What does it mean for these to be the "Disney characters", what does it mean to be "Disney" characters, just how much similarity does it take for them to be that? What's the line of just being a nod and being an out and out reinterpretation? In a sense, if a character is Snow White, then it is the same character, whether the Disney Snow White or some other version. How much inspiration from a particular source is required to feel it is a reinterpretation of that particular version?

Maybe we could put it this way... If Disney didn't own "Once Upon a Time" (which, I believe, it does, therefore making these Disney characters... but that's beside the point), could you imagine them being able to sue over the similarities used in this show? I think the use of names like Maleficent (specifically for the Sleeping Beauty villain) and Jiminy Cricket (for Pinocchio's Cricket), and completely Disney characters like Gaston make it something they could definitely at least attempt to sue over. So, honestly, I think I'm going to have to take the position now that these are the Disney characters, just done differently. A reimagining. A new take on them, but mostly the Disney characters whenever possible. Disney (as best I can remember) has never had a Rumpelstiltskin, so there's one that obviously isn't from a Disney film, but they have thrown in similarities at almost every opportunity.

Of course, I am just defending a position here. Truth is, I don't care and it doesn't affect my enjoyment of the show. I like the Disney aspect, but I would like it even without that. I am only discussing this because others keep discussing it, so I hope I won't get more attacks like the original one I got here about being childish for over-analyzing a show (which doesn't even make sense, as that is a more involved way to view something).

[Disney Duster]

Well slave2moonlight, you are perfectly entitled to that view. I just want you to be able to see and understand how my view could still be right and that Gaston could be just a very huge Disney reference. Yes, a whole character as a mere reference. You see, the general audience doesn't know that there wasn't a Gaston in the original story, they think it was probably part of the original fairy tale. In a way, he actually is. You see, in the orignal story Belle had beautiful sisters that married men with qualities the Beast didn't have, men who were very handsome or witty. Gaston isn't witty but in a way he is the handsome man and the three triplet beautiful girls are like Belle's sisters, as they desire him while Belle does not, also just like the original story.

Let's see how can I explain it...if Maleficent had a pet raven that was named Diablo, even though that, too, would count as a whole, entire Disney character, that could also just be seen as a Disney reference. Or if Cinderella had a Grand Duke with a monacle.

I understand that the show in a way wants to say "the Disney characters and the original fairy tale characters are one in the same, and they all lived in the same time period in kingdoms next to each other!", but that's not a reinterpretation of Disney characters, it's just trying to sell a whole new idea that everything we knew, the original stories and the Disney versions, didn't really happen the way we think. They have created their own mythology.

And the only thing that Disney could sue the show for would be the names. Because the designs are not that close to Disney's originals, are they? They only suggest or reference them, and even Disney characters are in a way the same fairy tale characters, as you said.

One thing we can agree on is if these are supposed to be the Disney characters they aren't doing a very good job.

[dvdjunkie]

Do Not take this as a negative..........But has anyone just watched this show for the pure enjoyment of having a great family show on in Primetime that isn't filled with foul language or innuendos??? I understand that this show is based on fairy tales, and it is supposed to have us do some comparisons once in a while.

My question is why does everyone have to take this so seriously that they can't sit back and just watch the show instead of worrying about whether this character is doing what or what character is from what fairy tale? I really think that obsession with this sort of thing is not healthy, and we should all back off a little bit, and just sit back and enjoy what is going on. We know that it is going to be on for a full 22-episode season and has already been renewed for the next season, so they have done their part getting us hooked into the show.

I just think we need to sit back and watch and enjoy and talk about what just happened, but not cruise the internet to find out what is going to happen next or to whom or when. We should just take each episode as it comes and enjoy it for what it is.

I originally didn't like this show because of the acting, but have grown to understand what they are doing. Now I feel that this is one of the best, if not THE BEST television series on the networks at this time. I smile each time a new character is unveiled, but I don't want to know about next week, I don't watch the trailer or preview of next week's show. I want to be knocked out each week, and so far that has worked. But I am not obsessed with comparing character or people to characters in Disney films. Just because ABC is owned by the Disney company, that doesn't make it a full-fledged Disney show and it seems like everyone doesn't want to believe that.

How does one enjoy a show that they go looking for spoilers all over the internet before an episode is aired just to find out if they can be first to post something about it. I think it's great that we have something to compare this show to and that the characters have a portion of or the full Disney character name, but I don't get so carried away that I have to know everything about them. I can wait for the show to reveal what is going to happen with each episode as it is aired.

[Disney Duster]

Dvdjunkie, I think I understand that you want us to stop doing something that could take away from our (and also your?) enjoyment of the show.

I personally do not go looking for lots of previews, clips, or other information that will have spoilers of what will come next, but one thing I cannot help is this:

The show bothers me a little with what it's doing. At first, I thought the show was making it's own unique versions of the fairy tale characters. Aside from some slightly bad-looking parts of costumes or sets, I was very excited. But then they had Grumpy, and Maleficent, and I was confused, all of a sudden they were supposed to be the Disney characters? My Disney-loving mind couldn't ignore that. Then, they killed Cinderella's fairy godmother and she got sent to the ball by Rumplestiltskin. This bothered me immensely, not just on a sentimental/emotional level but a logical one. How on Earth was I supposed to believe this was really Cinderella now?

Look, when they use fairy tale characters with stories I know well, or Disney characters with lives I know well, they are purposely trying to have us recall those characters and stories, and how they went. So it really makes little sense to suddenly tell me that's not how they went at all! It throws me off, confuses me, and bothers me. It's just not very sensical writing. It would be sensical if they showed us scenes that "we missed" and "could have" happened, like Rumplestiltskin taking the wand after Cinderella already goes to the ball, or making a deal with her right before she loses her slipper, but they didn't do that, they changed how the stories went.

So I would really like to believe that these are all new characters in an all new story in an all new show, but when they make so many references to the way we knew these characters and stories so well before, it's really hard to buy into that sometimes.

[Sotiris]

For anyone interested, Disney is releasing a fairytale storybook tie-in with the series:

http://www.hypable.com/books/2011/12/22 ... -foreword/

[Disney Duster]

I'd like to buy that fairy tale book if it's in stores...but if it's Disney's tales, what is a story titled Rapunzel doing in there? What happened to the fairy tale Tangled? I wonder if we'll see Rapunzel in this and if she'll be heavily based on the Disney version.

Anyway, I'm surprised no one's been talking about the last two episodes, epecially the killer last episode! That has to be the best one they've had so far! I certainly think so! What a wicked roller coaster of good drama!

I didn't care much for the Hansel and Gretal tale, either in real life or in the fairy tale. I suppose it's pretty hard for child actors not to be dissapointing or annoying...but even the part in the witch's house...but I loved what the queen did right after that (while also being horrified), and I really liked the end where she talked to the kids and then she asked their father why they really preferred holding onto the hope of their father not abandoning him and having no home to her offer. Though I'm sure in real life children would accept her offer just out of fear and having no one to take care of them. Or maybe children back them would know how to take care of themselves in the woods. The bit about Emma and her parents and Henry's father was also really something to me, but I worried about the ethics of her having the father see his kids, even though they didn't know it was him and I'd have probably done that too with what she had experienced and knew.

But the last episode, whoo man!!!! They're relationship finally took a step forward, after all that back and forth "I love you...but I don't. Well, no, it's just that I can't..." bull! I must also say that what Mary Margaret did was exactly what I have done with my current crush. I found out what times he goes to work and tried to see him when he would go places, like church, and I even was thinking of going to the place he gets coffee every morning on his way to work, just like her! Another weird coincidence is I one climbed over a fence to, well, just see him do his laundry without him seeing me, and I felt like when Snow White's prince climbed over the wall to see his beloved, and everyone calls him a stalker, but in the show, Snow White's stalking him! Well I suppose he is too, mutually. Also, I found myself realizing (or was it just stirred back up?) my feelings of love for him won't go away unless I have Rumplestiltskin's potion, or a broken heart. I tried to not see or think about the guy I like because he doesn't return my same feelings, but I couldn't get him "out of my head". So I don't know to say "Thanks a lot" in seriousness or sarcasm to this show! But it was a great episode. Though I don't see why, no matter how evil she is, Regina would try to break up Mary Margaret and David, just because his old wife became her friend. I suppose because she doesn't have many friends...?

Can't wait for the next epiosde!!!!!

[toonaspie]

The studio that produces this show is called ABC Studios so it's safe to say that Disney is giving their film references to the writers on a silver platter without giving a shit in hopes of extra shameless marketing of Disney fairy tales, even if it doesn't make any sense.

[slave2moonlight]

I was about 3 episodes behind today, and I'm catching up right now. Just saw the one all about Rumpelstiltskin! So good! And, it was hilarious seeing that Mickey phone and that Minnie bank (or whatever it was) in his shop, ha. The Mickey phone was featured quite a bit, ha.

[Hogi Bear]

Just went onto TVNZ's website yesterday to see if they had added it yet and it is now a Coming Soon series, along with other ABC series:

http://tvnz.co.nz/once-upon-a-time/
http://tvnz.co.nz/revenge/

This is for anyone living in New Zealand.