Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-25617908-20151229021726/@comment-26159109-20151229163231

CoolDudeAl wrote: Farerb wrote: CoolDudeAl wrote: Eskaver wrote: CoolDudeAl wrote: Eskaver wrote: CoolDudeAl wrote: Eskaver wrote: If the show says it, then it's true until it's retconned. Retcon isn't bad. You can't use in-show universe to not say that show-wise it isn't a retcon. If so, then you are saying is that they are all liars, even when it makes no sense to lie. If we can't trust the show, then technically we should put it in every article that there's uncertainty......Oh wait, that's not how it works because it's true until it's not. I'm just saying people take way too much at face value. Lumiere is a character whom what he said we should have not put much stock into. He was a prisioner of Zelena, and he was going to say whatever Zelena needed him to, in order for Neal to open the vault. So to then come and be like "Look a retcon, because Lumiere said..." is just silly. It makes sense that Lumiere was never telling the truth given the curcumstances of the episode. I get we can't assume everything everyone says is a lie, but at the same time, we should be more careful when something is only heresay, and not shown to us. It is sort of a retcon and as I said it's not a bad thing at all. If you want, you can call it a change in plans, or whatever else. From the outside view, it is a retcon. From an inside view, the character wasn't reliable. But that's my point. We don't know if what they had Lumiere say was a change of plans, or they always intended for it to not be the truth. Like when Cora said Lancelot was dead, they always intended for that to be a lie. In storytelling, the audience is sometimes mislead, so that a surprise twist can happen. That doesn't mean that when you encounter a surprise twist the writer has retconed something or had a change of plans. It is simply a part of the storytelling process. And retconning is part of the writing process. The Lancelot debacle was the only time your point counts. There is no reason to lie or to expect a lie unless one lives a paranoid life. So the Queen of Hearts being Cora wasn't planned? Bae being Henry's dad wasn't planned? Etc. And we should expect lies from characters when they have no reason to be telling the truth. Lumiere is a perfect example, he was manipulating Neal and Belle, why should we believe anything he said was true? Those are not example of retcons. And yes they were planned, the first stage of the series was planned, after that it just became a mess. So you know those were planned, but everything else is not? Unless you are one of the writers, you have no way of knowing what was planned and what was not planned, unless they specifically say "we didn't plan that". XD No. But I know enough about how a story should work when something is being build or when they just pulled something out of nowhere. You can see where they hinted about Cora being the Queen of Hearts from the first episode she appeared until the revelation, same with Bae being Henry's dad. They never told any piece of info that would contradict that. It was known that Regina and QoH have a history and don't get along - Something that can be said about Cora and Regina and so on..., Emma told Henry something about his father and it was revealed to be a lie in the same episode. Neal appeared in one scene in 2x01 without being relevant to the story before because he has an important role to play when the series progress, fan already speculated that he would be both Baelfire and Henry's dad cause both were plot threads that began in season 1 (remember that things weren't solved 2 episodes after they were first brought up?!?).