Once Upon a Time: The Cricket Game Review

I always know when people lie...
but the writers forgot so this might get messy...

I've been enjoying Once Upon a Time since I discovered a reference to it via my interest in Fables.

Initially I was wroth..

."Who are these people what dare to make a TV series about Fairytale Characters in the Real World and not adapt Fables to the screen?  Grr...I suspect dishonorable motives!"

Which might still be true on the part of the executives, but I've been won over by the producers and writers who swear up and down they knew nothing of Willingham's work.  I could believe this--I've written things for years cloistered from the fan community.  However I reserve judgement about the executives who I have a hard time believing would take a chance on a fantasy property without knowing there is a fanbase for this theme AND knowing who built it.  So thank you Willingham for making Once Upon A Time possible as a TV series.

SPOILERS.

The series centers on character from well known fairytales: Snow White, The Evil Queen(Regina), Red Ridding Hood, Rumpelstiltskin, Beauty(Belle), Prince Charming and others.  Because Regina has never gotten over Snow White beating her out  in the Fairytale Fairest of Them All Competition--plus Snow accidentally getting Regina's BF killed when she was a kid, oops--Regina finally has her revenge by destroying the Homelands(Willingham's phraseology) and sending everyone to A World Without Magic aka a World with No Happy Endings, aka a picturesque  fictitious town on the east coast called  Storybrook.  It's not too miserable(Regina has to live there), except no one knows who they are with the exception of Regina, and we later find Rumpelstiltskin(Mr. Gold). Everyone happily lives as muggles, except Henry, Regina's adopted son who knows the Truth and sets out to find his real mum, Emma Swan,  a bailbond/bounty hunter who has the ability to know when someone is lying.  Henry is also convinced she is the Hero who will save the town.  This forms the story arc of the first series which is well done.  I eagerly looked forward to the second Season.

The second season started out solid, picking up after everyone remembers who they are.  Karma's a bitch, chickens come home to roost, and new developments arise.  Then the series takes a risk with Regina pulling an Angel , seeking redemption.  This can be tedious in the hands of the best writers.  Unwatchable in the hands of incompetent or naive writers.  Even Joss Whedon and Co, writing Angel and Buffy in my opinion averaged okay with the redemption themes.   And Regina doesn't have Angel's excuse of actually being a different person(Angelus) from the one who did all those horrid things.

There is a way to deal with this, properly deal with it: Regina can say she wants to be Good, but she has to allow people will suspect her motives.  Furthermore, she must allow some people will take years before they believe it, and, even if it's true, some people will NEVER forgive her.  And she has to have the sober humility to accept that they have a right to do that and she will have to live with it for the rest of her life.

This is how it is is reality, but is almost never done in TV.   Writers, producers or someone in the process is uncomfortable with Good characters failing to forgive all but the worst monsters. Hollywood culture has some very wooly thinking going on.  Or perhaps they're uncomfortable with hard truths in a contemporary setting.  I saw this in Buffy the year(Fifth Season) they pulled out of their asses that 'the Slayer never kills humans'.

Bollox.  (Warning fan mini rant ahead)

Patrice, the assassin from the Order of Taraka was killed in the fracas with Kendra the Slayer.

Buffy kicked numerous Knights of Byzantium of the top of the caravan, and they were nominally good guys!  What do you think is going to happen to someone falling off the top of a moving caravan, weighed down with armor, with no helmet?  The Slayer never kills humans except accidentally?  Didn't they give Faith a ton of grief about that?   And it's completely contradicted by the story of Sonnenblume, the slayer who operated during Nazi Germany.  The Slayer only kills humans if they're Nazis?

The probable real reason 'the Slayer never kills humans' bollox was invented is the culture was uncomfortable writing stories where a  contemporary young woman could use lethal force on humans and not be accountable by the legal system.  This wouldn't have been a problem in a historical setting.  It also wouldn't have been a problem if the hero was a young man.   Human's were turned into mincemeat all the time in Highlander..in the modern world.   It was like some executive was trying to reframe our experience of Buffy, make the powerful young woman culturally "safer".

These are the same people(in the industry generally, not the Buffy producers) who I'm now to trust with an emotionally believable redemption of the Evil Queen, when so far all they've given us is, "I want to be good to impress Henry."  Excuse me while I reserve judgment.

Back to this Once Upon a Time episode...I don't suspect cowardly executive meddling so much as sloppy writing.  Everything was going okay...the redemption theme was handled unevenly(close ups of hurt Regina...please.  She was the EVIL Queen.  Grin and bear it or leave gracefully, woman)..and now someone has handed the writers the idiot ball...

MORE SPOILERS

I'll try to be brief.  There was a murder.  The viewer knows it's Cora, Regina's Mommy Dearest, shaping up to be this season's Big Bad.  Because Cora is a twisted bitch, she kills disguised as Regina hoping to frame her and drive her back into mummy's arms.   So far , fine.  When Regina is questioned by the sheriff, Emma, who has the ability to know when someone is lying.  But Emma doesn't use this talent, instead relying on Regina's reactions, which are spot on for an innocent person.

But that's not the point.  Regina is on social "probation"; considering her past, it is unreasonable to rely on her reactions which could be faked.   So just using Emma's lie detector superpower, we can KNOW Regina is innocent and everything else is a frame.   But the writers forgot EMMA KNOWS WHEN PEOPLE ARE LYING.  It's on her abc page people:

http://beta.abc.go.com/shows/once-upon-a-time/bios/emma-swan

Emma Swan

Played by Jennifer Morrison

Emma 101
- Daughter of Snow White and Prince Charming

- Biological mother of Henry

- Broke The Dark Curse

- Skeptical; knows when people lie

This was  a plot point early in season two between Emma and Hook.  Even AV Club..whose views I don't always agree with, but are generally astute observers... let this slide in their review:

Ruby tells Emma about the day before and Regina is brought into custody, but while Snow and Charming are certain of Regina’s guilt, Emma believes her when she says she’s innocent. Surely there’s some kind of truth spell they could use on Regina to find out if she’s lying, but magic is only used when it’s convenient on this show.

Italics mine.  They don't need a truth spell.  They have Emma, who's inherent power is knowing if someone's lying.  The writers or production crew got inexcusably sloppy.  And I will not spin some fanwank benefit of the doubt rubbish to help them save face.

I was holding out to the end of the EP, hoping for a twist, but only more idiot balls:  Regina reactively defends herself against a binding spell, and that's PROOF she's not serious about quitting magic.  Uh huh.  And I suppose picking up a bottle in a bar brawl is PROOF you've been drinking.  Okay, not the best metaphor(a person quitting drinking is unlikely to be in a bar)... but what was she supposed to do?  She can't turn off two decades of magical combat training overnight.

Sloppy writing can be the sign of impending doom.  If someone isn't watching continuity, someone isn't giving the show the resources it needs to succeed.  I will still watch it and hope for the best, but do so with my expectations lowered.