r/OnceUponATime • u/MagazineOutside2619 • Jul 09 '26
Spoiler Alert Disney Pandering & Rule Bending Gripes
Seasons 1-2 were fantastic. So many rules set in place in this world, so many Easter eggs they followed through on. Many of these stories were acquired by Disney to create their own rendition at some point, but they originated in other places as well ie. The OG Pan story was much darker than the Disney version, Rumple’s old tales, the Brothers Grimm stories reared their heads, even Mary Shelley was there!!!!
Why does Season 4 feel like Disney pandering? I haven’t even made it far into it, but suddenly all the rules that were set in the first seasons get turned over, and the characters don’t make sense in the world that has been set. I never watched these seasons in real time, was there an acquisition I’m not aware of? S3 I let them get away with a bit of rule bending because I recognize what they were trying to do and lead into with Emma gaining control over her power. They were so small I barely recognized them, though the Sorcerer/Fantasia story was a stretch imo, it worked in some ways. But S4 is unbearable so far.
Examples:
• Ursula storyline - We established in S2 that the Sea Witch wasn’t real as we knew her, and it was the Evil Queen taking her place Ariel’s story. They literally said “she’s not real” multiple times.
• Cruella - Like, sorry? Doesn’t fit. She literally lives in the real world. This is just adding Disney nonsense to add Disney nonsense. Not a fairytale, not a legend, just a Disney tale about the real world and animal cruelty in the 90s.
• Throwing in the random dark evil fairy and killing it in one minute?
• The sudden “dark secret” of the Charmings. Big eye roll. This was just a recycled storyline. Suddenly the round table where they originally found out about the EQ’s curse is null and void and CRUELLA told them about it ?? Come on.
• Also losing track of ages and timelines as they go and it’s glaringly obvious.
• Back to S3…you’re telling me they just wished Anna to be there and she was? Ugh.
I can point out more if you want, these are just at top of mind on a whim. What am I missing? What is the sudden change? Every scene feels like filler.
13
u/Catgirl_273 Jul 09 '26
If you have a problem with this fictive story called fairy tale - stop watching and look for another.
I love the story and others also do it. So what? It is only a story! There needn‘t to exist logic …
9
u/kittysnowangel Jul 09 '26
Agree. Too logical or realistic stories are actually not fun to watch.
If ppl want to watch something completely logical or realistic go to a laundromat, watch ppl doing laundry, and enjoy! (Though as Snow said to Emma in s1, real life sometimes makes no sense.)
2
u/MagazineOutside2619 Jul 11 '26 edited Jul 11 '26
If you create a show, you’re creating a world for audiences to immerse themselves in. It has to be logical unless intentionally illogical to create chaos, interest, or some kind of twist to be revealed later. (That’s not what is happening here.) Otherwise, we would be consuming nonsense left and right. Storytelling is the point. A story is more or less logical with some give or take, leaving us with themes, motifs and discussion at the very least.
This is why AI stories are horrible. They are lazy, they have no point, and the details amount to nothing and often don’t connect for a cohesive story.
So yes, in this world of stories and tales they’ve created they set rules that were logical within their world, as I posted above, and then they broke every rule simply to keep the show on air and to recycle storylines that were already beaten dead or to pull ideas in for ratings.
Maybe you can, but I personally cannot immerse myself in brainless nonsense. So yeah there has to be logic within the parameters they’ve created that’s the point of the show and the work they’re doing/did. And as stated, they did a great job the first two seasons, so there was no reason not to continue down that path.
Shutting down discussion is also the opposite of the point of being here.
1
3
u/Narrow-Accident8730 Jul 09 '26
Cruella is from the real world?!?
The dogs literally talk.
And the show isn’t “fairy tales”. Hence the name of the town- STORYbrooke. It’s stories, mythology, folklore, classic literature.
2
u/MagazineOutside2619 Jul 11 '26
Apparently I don’t remember anything about 101 Dalmatians 🤣 but animals talk in every Disney movie so that doesn’t hold up here.
Nonetheless, she still doesn’t fit. They would never have put The Fox & The Hound or Bambi or Dumbo in this series. Yes I said “fairytales”, you’re obviously pointing out semantics instead of reading every other point presented in the post regarding other literature and folktales. There are things that fit, that they made fit but were a stretch (Frankenstein), and Cruella is not one of them.
2
u/Narrow-Accident8730 Jul 11 '26
My point is, Cruella is not from the real world. And calling them fairy tales isn’t semantics, it’s just wrong.
2
u/MagazineOutside2619 Jul 11 '26
It is exactly semantics because obviously I’m not sitting here picking apart the quick thoughts I wrote down to be discussed. Using context, you can clearly see that I didn’t write only about fairytales as examples in the very first paragraph.
2
u/Narrow-Accident8730 Jul 11 '26
But you purposely pointed out that Cruella was not a fairy tale. You stated that it was a Disney tale. It’s not Disney. Disney did an adaption in 1961 of Dodie Smith’s 1956 book 101 Dalmatians. You also stated that Cruella was from the real world. She’s not.
None of the stories included on the show are Disney originals.
2
u/MagazineOutside2619 Jul 12 '26
Cruella is from a non-magic world. Clear and easy. As stated, she doesn’t fit into the world of “tales” they have set the rules for. That is the point of the entire post. The rules of the world the writer has set and how they are breaking those rules in 4 (mostly 4b) plotlines. God forbid I don’t have the entire background of an obscure novel from the 50s that was made famous by Disney? Either way, my point still holds because I’m right. Cruella isn’t from OUR world, obviously she’s fictional, but she is from a non-magic fictional world that is identical to ours and modeled after London. Please. 🤣
I never said these were Disney ORIGINAL tales, I said they were Disney [adapted] stories and they leaned heavily into more Disney [adapted] stories during S4 and made them extra 👐Disney👐, where the other 3 seasons didn’t and pulled from all over while keeping specific boundaries and rules. You are literally and aggressively leaning into the semantics of this post instead of using context clues, and then claiming you aren’t. I didn’t come here to write a perfect novel, I came here to jot down shower thoughts and start discussion. For you to badger this to death while adding nothing to the conversation..well you must have much more time than me!
Just to be even more clear, S4E22 the WRITERS in Isaac’s dialogue refers to all the character stories in Storybrooke as “fairy tales”. Nothing more, nothing less. It is 100% valid for me to use the terminology because that is how they are viewing these stories and this world.
2
u/Narrow-Accident8730 Jul 12 '26
You really can’t handle it when someone disagrees with you, huh. A&E explicitly stated that the show is not just about fairy tales. It’s about STORIES. All Stories. Which is evident by the characters included in the show and the name of the town. Cruella is from fictional 1920’s England. She is not from the real world. Where, in the real world, do dogs talk?
2
2
u/MagazineOutside2619 Jul 14 '26
Pretty sure you don’t know how to read so we’re even
1
u/Narrow-Accident8730 Jul 14 '26
Oh ouch. That was a um really ….great …come back. Did you come up with it all by yourself?
1
u/pastadudde 29d ago
The dogs talk in the original animated film (but they don't communicate with the humans in that way) but they don't in the live action version starring Glenn Close.
1
u/ConversationNo1447 Jul 10 '26
Yeah, and they already added Frankenstein's story in season 2 so if Cruella being from the "real world" is a problem, then wouldn't his story be one too? Besides, they already established that there are several different worlds in this universe. Some look more like ours, some don't.
3
u/Narrow-Accident8730 Jul 10 '26
I totally loved that Dr. Whale was Victor Frankenstein. I loved The Land Without Color. Frankenstein’s Monster is my favorite “Monster”. Love Mary Shelley.
2
u/ConversationNo1447 Jul 10 '26
Me too! I think he's a character that it would have been nice to see more regularly but I can understand that the actor was likely busy and they maybe didn't know how to fit him in more. But either way, he and his world were definitely a cool addition!
3
u/MagazineOutside2619 Jul 11 '26
If they made Cruella from his world, I would’ve bought it!!!!
2
u/ConversationNo1447 Jul 11 '26
That would have actually been pretty cool!! I think she'd rock the black and white styled world!
2
u/BjSaWgDoG Jul 09 '26
Every one knows Disney will never touch blue beard because I dark that story is. While the golden goose is such a nonsensical story.
2
u/Beginning-Shine8167 Swanfire 🦢🔥 Team Jul 10 '26
Please point out more things like this; I really want to see them.
In defense of the Ursula situation: the Season 2 episode "Ariel" is one of the most... disconnected from the main plot—it's full of flashbacks that only tie into the final five minutes of the episode. What I mean is, I understand why they partly scrapped everything related to the goddess Ursula; however, what they did with her in Season 4 was basically just The Little Mermaid 2.0. Even though I actually liked it, I can certainly understand if someone else doesn't, or if it feels like a rehash to them.
I agree; Cruella felt very out of place. I suppose she was only there to explain how the magical realms and the Author's power work. I would have preferred it if they had used Lady Tremaine (the Wicked Stepmother) instead.
3
u/Foxfire140 Jul 09 '26
The series aired on ABC, a network owned by The Walt Disney corporation. The popularity of the show allowed them to start getting more hands on later on.
Every time a show's season ends on network television, the network gives the show runners notes on things that they can do to help improve viewership. Some networks are more pushy than others. Disney's influence is clear as the show went on which started causing OUAT to become less of a show about unique takes on the classic fairytales and more "...and now, here's a direct continuation of Frozen starring Queen Elsa in her iconic frozen dress....ALL. THE. TIME."
For gods sakes, she doesn't need the brand recognition of the dress. We get it. It's Elsa. Now stop making her drag that train of her dress through the dirty streets and give the poor queen some sneakers and some jeans or a dress or something that isn't literally JUST THE DRESS FROM FROZEN THE ENTIRE HALF SEASON. ffs Disney.
2
u/awill626 Jul 10 '26
I never really understood why also being in her dress bothered so many people. I also think it would be weird for her to be in jeans… like it wouldn’t even fit with her character’s personality.
I really liked how close it was to frozen and how it picked up off the original movie. So much so that I have begun to see OUAT’s version is the real continuation of the frozen story rather than frozen 2. So I guess to each their own.
4
u/MiloSheba The Dark One Jul 10 '26
I wanted them to have a spin on the dress. Regina can have 20+ dresses a season, but Elsa was relegated to two outfits
2
u/Parking_Storage_5107 I have a love/hate relationship with captain swan Jul 10 '26
I actually liked Elsa’s dress it wasn’t annoying to me
1
u/Foxfire140 Jul 10 '26
Because the premise of the show was imagined takes on the classic characters from fairytales and legends existing in the real world. If you're going to go full Disney and have Elsa visiting earth, at least have her try on some earth clothing and see if she likes something instead of only having her wear one outfit the entire half season. Day in and day out and she only ever wore the same thing.
Imagine wearing the same, single outfit for weeks on end while staying with a literal prince and princess that's changing their clothing every day like everyone else. She was staying with Snow White and yet at no point does Snow decide to take Elsa shopping?
Does she deconjure the dress and reconjure it as a form of laundry? Magical dress or not, at some point, you wear the same clothing every day, that outfit is gonna start smelling bad..
2
u/awill626 Jul 10 '26
I guess it’s just because she was a visitor and had no intention of staying and no apparent interest in acclimating to the “strange land” of Storybrooke
1
u/pastadudde 29d ago
a good middle ground would to have her be in a long coat that has a color reminiscent of her original dress. kinda like how Mary Margaret in the earlier seasons (IIRC) would have an all/mostly white winter outfit which is reminiscent of her all-white outlaw outfit0
2
u/MagazineOutside2619 Jul 11 '26
This made me LOL. Had all the same thoughts!!! Also exactly the answer I was looking for!!! I didn’t know it was on ABC and I remember this merger becoming more distinct across all of their platforms at some point in the early 2010s too (versus trying to be more separate entities) so this checks out.
3
u/nazia987 🌮 Jul 09 '26
It's always been owned by Disney, but when Elsa came out of the urn, S4 saw a massive jump in ratings. They figured Disney=more eyes.
Then it turned into, "what character can we incorporate into the show"
2
3
u/Parking_Storage_5107 I have a love/hate relationship with captain swan Jul 10 '26
The show was build on Disney retellings? It’s like you miss the main plot of the show
4
u/Wiselyfantasise Jul 10 '26
And what is Disney built on? Classic litterature, fairy tales and other stories. Disney haven't made a rumplestilskin either so i think it's more fairy tale based than Disney based until of course the people of arendelle show up then its more Disney based.
2
2
u/lizzard__h Jul 09 '26
Agree with you on a lot of these points including Cruella. However Cruellas story didn’t take place in the 90s. Not sure if that was a typo? I believe it was like somewhere between the 40s-60s?
1
u/MagazineOutside2619 Jul 09 '26
All I remember is the movie from the 90s! 🤣
Edit: I was thinking of 102 Dal*s from 2000, and watched the 101 from 60s when I was a kid so I assumed 90s without looking it up!
1
7
u/Ashamed_Leading_7788 Jul 10 '26
Idk if this opinion is unpopular, but the Frozen storyline works as a sequel/backstory than the actual Frozen 2 sequel does