This site will work and look better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.

Whedonesque - a community weblog about Joss Whedon
"My entire existence was constructed by a sociopath in a sweater-vest. What do you suggest I do?"
11944 members | you are not logged in | 17 September 2014




Tweet







November 04 2011

'Once Upon a Time' gets a full season order. Jane Espenson and Andrew Chambliss are staffers on the show.

I'm glad to see this. I watched the pilot and was drawn right in. Looking forward to seeing the story play out.
I really like this show but ugh I am having problems with it's presentation of adopted moms. I know, it's a fairy tale based show, so why did I expect anything beyond a negative depiction of the adopted mother. I simply didn't see it coming on my Sunday night viewing. That was pretty silly of me, especially because I am an adopted mom.

I am going to continue to watch because I adore the writers and producers and I like the actors, esp. SU's Robert Carlyle. The two world concept is also quite cool.

I just keep telling myself that the show is in Whedonverse and Lost hands. Eventually, this initial presentation of adoption has gotta morph into something that's more complex.

Right?
I saw this news yesterday, but Espenson and Chambliss slipped my mind.

I can't help but wonder about what influence "Fables" had on it, and the Showrunners' snarky boasting about how they're ripping "Fables" off really doesn't help. I'm hopeful that they will have sense enough to learn some humility and be thankful that they have a hit show that, if it can keep it up, will run for at least several more years.
I don't think it is trying to present adopted moms badly, just that one in particular. The main character seemed pretty surprised to find the adoptive mom was so lacking in what makes adoptive parents into the REAL parents.

I love the show and can't wait to see where it goes!
Risch22 the show isn't in the least bit like Fables though. Do you have a link to where the showrunners talked about that? Are you sure they weren't being facetious?
I'd seen some mentions, but they were complimentary to Fables - here and here.
Well, second mom's never fare very well in fairy tales; there's that whole 'wicked step-mother' thing. And there isn't much adoption in stories in general. When there is, some couple generally raises the child as place holders so that they can eventually be reunited with their 'proper parent(s)' or they adopt a child of supernatural origins who then goes on to save everyone.

Oh, and add me in as one who is really enjoying the show - especially due to the 'hope' vibe. Sometimes I just want to scream (metaphorically), "I get it! I get it! Life is hard. Dark stuff happens. But come on! After a point (which I personally reached a couple of years ago) there is nothing new in gritty and grim and graphic. It's all become the same. There's nothing edgy about it anymore; it's the norm." /personal rant
I'm loving this show so far! Looking forward to the rest of the season.

I also don't think that the Regina character is meant to be a portrayal of adoptive Moms, she's an evil step-mother character in the fairy tale world, and that is coming through in the 'real' world. I can't imagine anyone is watching the show and thinking that adoptive moms are evil and cold hearted.
IrrationaliTV said, "Risch22 the show isn't in the least bit like Fables though."

You mean that it doesn't follow a group of primarily European fairy tale characters, including Snow White & Prince Charming, living in the North Eastern U.S. who are there not of their choice due to the machinations of a major adversary?

I certainly wouldn't argue that the executions of each idea are terrifically similar, but I think that there is some "bit" where a comparison can be made.

"Do you have a link to where the showrunners talked about that?"

No, I do not. Neither of the articles that zeitgeist links to were the one that I am referencing though.

"Are you sure they weren't being facetious?"

It did not seem like it. Though I was surprised that they highlighted an example of where their show and Fables do the same thing, such as depicting a pregnant Snow White wielding a sword, as proof of their original thinking.
I love FABLES. It is awesome!! If the show is half as good, I'll watch it. Saw Grimm. What a disappointment. Hopefully, OUAT won't be so formulaic and predictable.
Funny, I've read Fables and I've seen the first couple eps of OUaT. Other than sharing the same copyright free fairy tale characters in a modern setting, they really aren't anything alike.

Yes, several corporations realized that these characters are totally free around the same time and decided to take advantage of that but otherwise, these different properties are as similar as Angel, True Blood, The Vampire Diaries, that mormon crap that shall not be named, and Bram Stokers Dracula.

Disparaging it because it takes advantage of the same FREE IP doesn't seem fair. It's not the best show on the planet but it isn't ripping anything off that Fables isn't ripping off.
"Funny, I've read Fables and I've seen the first couple eps of OUaT. Other than sharing the same copyright free fairy tale characters in a modern setting, they really aren't anything alike."

We all have opinions and you are certainly entitled to yours.

"Yes, several corporations realized that these characters are totally free around the same time and decided to take advantage of that but otherwise, these different properties are as similar as Angel, True Blood, The Vampire Diaries, that mormon crap that shall not be named, and Bram Stokers Dracula. "

Fables was not created by a corporation, so I'm not sure how that applies? Also, you say "several", what other examples were you thinking of?

Disparaging it because it takes advantage of the same FREE IP doesn't seem fair. It's not the best show on the planet but it isn't ripping anything off that Fables isn't ripping off."

Each property interprets the IP in it's way, some observers will see no similarities, some will see a few, and some many. Again, that is an example of different people holding different opinions.
Yep. Definitely different. LOL!
FWIW, via Wikipedia:
There has been no news since [2008] concerning a series based directly on Willingham's series. Instead, ABC has announced a new series called Once Upon a Time, which features fairy tale characters such as Snow White and Prince Charming exiled in the "real world". The show's creators, Edward Kitsis and Adam Horowitz, stated that they "read a couple issues" of Fables but believe that while the two concepts are "in the same playground," they are "telling a different story."

I wasn't aware that stating such an obvious truth was LOL worthy, but it has been said that one learns something new every day.
Once Upon also has the Disney stuff to play around with.
First, I've really enjoyed the first two episodes and am definitely looking forward to what happens next. And it is helping me to get the nasty taste out of my mouth I got from watching Jennifer Morrison on HIMYM last season. She was just dreadful on that, but I like her on this.

I don't think there is any doubt whatsoever that the idea for the show was suggested by FABLES. It is a tad different, but the fact that ABC had been considering adapting it for TV and then came up with ONCE UPON A TIME indicates that they loved the general idea but wanted their own twist. Frankly, based on just two episodes, this show isn't even remotely of the same quality as FABLES. Willingham's comic is the one that each Wednesday when I pick up my comics I read first. He is just so damned good, with an almost endless string of great ideas. And I loved his stint on ANGEL. I wish he would do a guest appearance writing BUFFY.

I've wondered if they came up with the idea of ONCE UPON A TIME as a way of circumventing paying Willingham royalties. As it is, with ABC being owned by Disney, they can claim that the show is based on Disney characters, despite the whole concept resembling FABLES.
The Wikipedia entry The One True b!X quoted before is pretty helpful on the production history. ABC already has the rights to make a tv adaptation of Fables. I've read most of Fables, and I don't think this show is ripping off the comic. Although I do suspect the town sheriff is the wolf, haha. But the characterization's been pretty different so far, other than some broad similarities. I don't particularly like Fables but it is a more compelling story than the tv episodes so far.
Well, lots of us are watching or thinking about this show.

I do understand that the Evil Queen is one character, it's just so typical of "second" (thx for the word @Breathesstory) parents to get a bad wrap in media. It's frustrating to see stereotypes like this in a show. But that said, my hope is that the stereotype is just an initial presentation.

As for Fables, should I read or are "second" moms evil there too? I love comics and would like to try them. Plus, Bonnie, the Star Wars crafty gal, recommended them on twitter.
You should definitely try out Fables hann23. It's an excellent comic and I don't think there are any evil mothers in it, "second" or otherwise.

ETA: Haven't had the time to try out Once Upon a Time yet, but I'm looking forward to it. Anything Jane does is worth at least a try in my book.

[ edited by the Groosalugg on 2011-11-05 21:23 ]
I don't recall any evil "second" moms either, though I've read it monthly since Issue #1 with no re-reads, so it's possible that something could be slipping my mind. But imho it's definitely worth sampling. I have heard that some fans find the initial volume, "Fables TPB Vol. 1: Legends in Exile", to not be up to the quality of later books. It's not true of everyone, but just in case, it might be a good idea to try the first two Trades, just to be sure to get an accurate impression of the series.
I've really enjoyed both episodes that I've watched so far, but I really wish they would scrap the Evil Queen character. She's a completely one-note villain and the actress is so bland and lacks the charisma needed to make the character even remotely interesting...

P.S. I actually hated Fables (I know - burning my nerd card as I write this) with a passion, so I'm relieved that "Once Upon a Time" is only similar to it in concept but quite different in execution.
I was indifferent to Fables, and I'm kind of indifferent to this show. I like the performances of the main female leads (Snow White, Emma, Mayor/Evil Queen), but the writing is meh and the men on the show are dull. I realize only three episodes have aired, but there isn't even a zing to the writing that would keep me interested as they try and understand/flesh out the characters and the stories.

You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.



joss speaks back home back home back home back home back home