Bitterswete
-
Posts
184 -
Joined
Content Type
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Discussion
Posts posted by Bitterswete
-
-
Boy, I guess I'm in the minority. I planned on coming on here and seeing how many people hated Eric being completely over the top. And it appears that nearly everybody thoroughly enjoyed his appearance and performance.
I'm in the "thoroughly enjoyed it" category. Which actually surprised me because I was one of those who didn't like what happened with Eric in later seasons of BMW. But it just worked for me here. Maybe because, on BMW, it really did look like he'd totally lost it and would need 24 hour supervision to survive from day to day. But here, I really did get the feeling a lot of his behavior is an act. And I guess I'm more okay with him choosing to be that way.
And Eric not getting Maya's name right? Either stupidity or a total lack of respect. He could (occasionally) remember Topanga's name; Maya's not THAT odd by comparison.When Eric reappears, I really hope he keeps getting Maya's name wrong, because that was one of my favorite parts of the episode. Now, if it looked like it was totally wrecking Maya's self-esteem or something, maybe I'd get up in arms about it. But she barely seemed even mildly bothered by it. (And her reactions were funny too.) And since I watch a comedy to see things that amuse me, and don't take things that happen on comedies all that seriously (unless the writers are treating something like a "serious issue"), I really hope that carries over.
-
3
-
-
I don't think they are surprised at all. This is aimed towards viewers of BMW who are primarily adults.
A lot of tweens and teens have picked up BMW thanks to reruns. So a lot of the kids watching GMW are familiar with BMW, and do know and care about those characters.
And as hard as it might be for some BMW fans to believe, there are tweens watching this show because they like Riley, Maya, Farkle, etc. The fact that they might never have seen BMW makes no difference to them liking the show. But that doesn't mean they can't like the adult characters too, just as tweens like the adult characters on some of the other DC shows.
No normal tween is going to care about any of these characters or what happened to them after all this time.Tweens don't have to know anything about BMW to like the adult characters on GMW. There have been adult characters on other DC shows who have become very popular. Amy Duncan, the mom from Good Luck Charlie comes to mind. A lot of young viewers just loved Amy. So much that when the actress was in other DC things, that was usually promoted heavily.
If the writers can make the adults appealing to the tweens, the tweens not knowing them from BMW doesn't matter.
For example, I know of some young viewers who had no idea who Eric was, but thought he was just too funny. (And thought the way he was dressed at first was hilarious, even though they knew nothing about the bit on BMW where he was dressed the same way.)
I just don't find it hard to believe there are tween viewers who just like GMW, and the returning BMW characters, whether they've ever seen BMW or not. And I definitely don't think GMW was made only for the BMW fans. If that were the case, the young characters would get no attention at all.
-
3
-
-
I think considering their normal demographic, they were looking at it as a show where parents would remember watching BMW, and now introduce their kids to GMW, but not necessarily watch it themselves, because they have their own adult-oriented shows they're watching.
I think Disney Channel very much wants adults to watch their shows. That's why the adult roles on some DC shows are bigger now than they were back in the day. Many DC shows will throw in bits of subtle, suggestive humor that a tween viewer might not get, but any adults watching will. And some shows will reference things no one under 20 or 30 would be likely to know about.
I think one of the main reasons GMW exists is DC wants adult BMW fans watching. And that means making the show appealing to those fans. However, they do also want the show to appeal to their tween audience. And I think that was part of their problem early on. Because a show trying to appeal to just one audience can have trouble finding its legs early on, and GMW started out trying to appeal to two audiences. But the writers seem to be finding their way.
-
3
-
-
Have we (collectively on the boards) figured out what the target demo is for GMW? Do we know what the target demo was for BMW? With all of the discussion about Auggie and how he seems to collectively be disliked among board members, but that younger audiences would love him, does that mean all of the writing is supposed to be somebody of a younger audience?
I don't dislike Auggie. I dislike the Auggie/Ava stuff. And, every once in a while, Auggie does something that makes me cringe. But, in general, I like Auggie just fine. And have been mostly amused by him in these first episode of season 2. For example, the whole "Let him be right, Mom," thing with Doy tickled me.
If so, there won't be any subtlety - meaning Shawn and Katy are endgame no matter what.Actually, that's not necessarily the case. Shake It Up did this storyline where CeCe's mom was getting married. And the really built up to it. She met the guy, they started dating, she met his mother, they got engaged, there were wedding preparations. They actually got all the way to the wedding, and the couple standing at the alter, only for the mom to call it off. Why? Because her ex-husband had shown up a little earlier, and they ended up kissing (which one of the kids saw, and his reaction was hilarious). And it wasn't that she wanted to get back with the ex, but she realized that, if she was making out with Guy A right before her wedding, she probably wasn't ready to marry Guy B.
And I was somewhat surprised that they didn't do the "fairytale ending," but chose the whole, "I'm actually not ready for this," thing instead, especially after the build up. Never mind the whole, "Kissing the ex right before the wedding," thing.
Which is all my way of saying that I don't assume things will play out a certain way on a show just because it's on Disney Channel and has a younger target audience. The shows often end up surprising me with some "mature" thing I might not have expected going by older DC shows.
-
2
-
-
Maya was not mad at Lucas for calling her "short stack of pancakes". She was mad at Riley for not defending her even if the statement was true. It seemed to Maya like Riley was taking Lucas's side. Whenever Maya calls Lucas a nickname, Riley goes "MAYA." So, Riley this time probably kept quiet or laughed which Maya didn't like.
I actually don't think it was about Riley taking Lucas's side or anything. But Maya believes you stick up for your friends, no matter what. That means you don't stand by and let other people say stuff that could hurt them. Whether what's being said is true or not doesn't matter. For example, she thinks Riley is clumsy. And Maya can joke about that because they're friends, and Riley doesn't take it seriously coming from her. But she wouldn't stand by and let anyone else call Riley clumsy because she knows Riley would probably be hurt by that. (As she was.)
So, to Maya, what Riley was saying was, "If what someone else says has a grain of truth to it, I'll totally stand by and let them make fun of you." And that's what she was upset about.
-
2
-
-
I actually wanted more of sensible, responsible Eric than the Plays With Squirrels aspect we got.
By the end of the ep, I actually felt like Eric has it more together than he lets on. And he could probably act a bit more normal and mature if he wanted to, but I think he has way too much fun being the way he is.
I enjoyed this episode so much. A lot of the characters had good moments, but Eric, and just about everything that came out of his mouth, was gold.
-
6
-
-
Hated the Topanga subplot. It was obvious the kid had a speech impediment. He's going to grow out of it.
I didn't think for a minute the kid had a speech impediment. In fact, it didn't occur to me until I read this right here, and I still don't think that's what was going on.
It was simply the kid did not like his name.
Yeah, this. For whatever reason, the kid doesn't like his actual name and decided to call himself something else. Since I've actually seen this happen more than a few times in real (and pretty recently, too) that's all I thought the storyline was about.
As for whether or not Topanga should've let it go, this is a comedy, and I thought the storyline was amusing. And, by the end of the ep, it was pretty clear the kid wasn't traumatized or anything by what was going on, so I didn't have a problem with it.
-
3
-
-
I was really disappointed we didn't get to see much of the old set at all, the could've just done part of the kitchen and had the mom or dad pop out for a minute..were we really to think they didn't stop and see the Matthews?
I can easily believe a visit took place offscreen.
I don't like Shawn and Katy/Maya's mom and they have just about zero chemistryFor me, it isn't so much about them not having chemistry. I've seen pairings that I didn't think had much chemistry to start develop into couples I thought had loads of chemistry. And I think Shawn and Katy play off each other well enough. I don't feel repelled seeing them together or anything, and have even enjoyed some of their moments.
The problem is the way they set it up. First, we get hints that Shawn longs for a family. He's also longing for a relationship (whether he says he's given up on that or not). So here's this girl he wants to be a father figure to. And her mom, who's single, isn't exactly hard on the eyes either. It's almost like they're this ready-made family, and everyone seems to think they could be his family if he'd just give having a relationship with Katy a shot.
Basically, they've set it up to feel like it's more about Shawn wanting a family (and wanting to be there for Maya) than him actually being into Katy.
Maybe that's not what they're going for, but that's sure how it feels.
-
5
-
-
Damon has lived as a vampire for nearly two Centuries, and navigated and survived the supernatural world and many attempts on his life. The fact that Stefan thinks that he wouldn't be able to come up with a plan that would enable him and Elena to live comfortably, and make new friends is laughable. Stefan never fails to underestimate his brother, and point out his failings.
No, Stefan's just showing good old common sense. It's just rational to think that Damon would have some problems making the drastic transition from vampire who can do whatever whenever, to human having to live by all kinds of rules, not to mention the many other complications. I myself have had doubts about things people I knew were about to do that were far less drastic.
And I think Damon (who has harped on Stefan's "shortcomings" plenty of times) would be saying similar things if the shoe was on the other foot.
The thing that none of them seem to get about Damon, is that ANY life with Elena, human or vampire is what will make him happy. That is what he wants, that is the ONLY thing he wants.You know, if that's the case, if all Damon really needs to be happy is to "be with the girl," I'd see that as a lack of character growth. Because that's pretty much what he was all about when the show started, and what he's been all about through the show's run, to varying degrees. And, with a character like that, I'd think part of their growth would be learning that, as great as being with the person you love is, there's more than that to having a happy, full life.
Then again, with this show, who knows.
-
3
-
-
Haha haha that's fantastic! TV is really letting us down these days.
I've gotten into some relatively older fandoms (usually through reading crossover fic), and have sometimes been able to find stuff from back when those shows were on the air. And it's amazing how similar complaints about those shows were to complaints about current shows. For example, the Forever Knight fandom (a show from the 90s) was way before my time. But the hatred some fans had for the last season (not to mention the series finale), and how many wished it had been cancelled sooner, is almost legendary. Even now, I see fans who watched the show back in the day ranting about that last season.
And the last two seasons of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, there were plenty of fans who kept watching out of a sense of loyalty, but couldn't wait for it to be over so the pain would end.
So fans being disappointed enough in a show to want it to end, or wishing a show had ended sooner, isn't a new thing really.
-
I didn't like or dislike early Lana, I felt sorry that the fandom hated her more than anything.
I didn't hate Lana. I didn't love her either, but it's not like I thought she was a terrible person or anything. Mostly, she was just boring to me. I wasn't interested in her, her relationships, or her storylines, and so much screen time being devoted to so much stuff I wasn't interested in (instead of stuff I was interested in) was annoying.
Lana and Kristen became infinitely better whenever she shared scenes with Lex/MR.I agree that Lana was often at her best in storylines with Lex. But Lex wasn't at his best in storylines with Lana. So it was like a trade off. Lana was more tolerable (even slightly more interesting) but Lex was less awesome. And I didn't care enough about Lana to be okay with that trade off. Especially given how much I think the Lex/Lana stuff ended up hurting Lex's character.
They had a lot of chemistry. Much more than she had with anyone elseLex/Lana is actually the example I pull out of a pairing that I thought had chemistry but didn't want to see together. Because I don't automatically think characters having chemistry means they should hook up, or that putting them together would make for a good storyline that I would actually enjoy. And I think I was right in the case of Lex/Lana.
Also, what I said above applies here. Lana had more chemistry with Lex than just about anybody else. But Lex had more chemistry with lots of other characters besides Lana. So while being with Lex brought Lana's character up, I felt that being with Lana brought Lex's character down.
-
3
-
-
I agree that human Elena had moments of proactiveness, but for the most part she was a passive sitting duck, waiting to accept her fate. That was whole frustrating part about the S2 sacrifice thing, she just wanted to let it happen, and let some 500 year old magical elixer determine her fate,
Being proactive is about taking action and making decisions. It's not necessarily about taking the right action or making good decisions. In season two, I didn't see Elena sitting around letting everyone else make decisions for her. She was making decisions and choices based on what she thought was best. Of course, not everyone agreed with her decisions (Damon forced his blood on her exactly for that reason), and some of her choices seemed dumb partly because the writing was kind of dumb. Still, I saw her as being proactive more often than not.
Also, being proactive isn't about how much people-saving a character does. Clark Kent, on Smallville, saved people all the time (being a young Superman and all, he certainly had the powers), yet still came across as one of the least proactive lead characters I can think of.
without worrying about the werewolf or vamp that would be sacrificed along with her with zero get out clause.I don't hold that against Elena in particular because the writers didn't seem to want anyone, including the viewers, to think about that part of things all that much.
-
1
-
-
Say what you will about Vamp Elena, but at least one has to admit she could actually hold her own against the threats much more often,I said much more often. Elena was still used as a damsel in distress by the writers, just a lot less often than they did when she was human.
Oh, I thought human Elena was extremely proactive. That's part of what I really liked about her.
Being proactive isn't about whether a character has the power to handle situations without help, or whether they sometimes need saving. It's about whether they are the type to sit around waiting for things to work themselves out, or they actively try to do whatever they can about what's going on.
Now, if they are mostly powerless humans dealing with uber powerful characters, they will often (and realistically) find themselves in situations where they do need help. But that doesn't make a character less proactive. In fact, a character with no powers at all can be a hundred times more proactive than a character who has powers coming out of their ears, and can handle most things on their own. (Chloe and Clark from Smallville are perfect examples of this.)
That's how I saw early Elena. She might not have had any powers, and sometimes ended up in situations no normal human could deal with without some kind of help, but she still came across as very proactive.
-
3
-
-
Ratings bump?
I expect that while the GMW episodes on other days might get superior ratings to the other stuff that might have otherwise been in those spots, they will probably at the same time get WORSE ratings than if each of them had eventually shown in the normal Friday timeslot.
If I'm right I suppose it will all boil down to if they want to boost ratings for the channel for the week or maintain ratings for the show. Because one of the two of those will be sacrificed.
The thing to keep in mind is that DC doesn't work like other channels, so probably don't look at ratings the same way. With most networks, ratings for first run episodes count big time because that determines how much they can charge advertisers who want to run commercials on the network. But, with Disney Channel, their biggest advertiser is Disney, because most of the commercials on Disney are all about promoting Disney stuff. (Movies, DVDs, CDs, the amusement parks, games, etc.)
So how many people watch the first airing of an episode doesn't matter as much to DC as it would another network where ratings help them set ad prices. They're more concerned with getting more people to watch the network overall, whenever that is (which is why they re-air episodes at all hours), because it means they can promote their stuff to more people. And I think they do "special events" like this one hoping to get more people to check out their shows and the channel and, hopefully, become somewhat regular DC viewers.
In fact, I think one of the reasons GMW exists is that DC is hoping to attract new viewers, especially BMW fans, to the network.
-
2
-
-
That's fine, I don't think their actions made them the worst people in the world, or even the worst friends. But there's no getting away from the fact that they acted like dickheads to her. Excusable because they're technically children?
No, because they are human beings with emotions who had gone through things they hadn't properly dealt with. Although being so young, and not having a lot of life experience dealing with a situation like that, probably contributed. But even people who are more mature can react in similar ways when emotions are running high.
But I always tend to come down more on Buffy's side the same way I always did Harry in the Harry Potter books - simply because their traumas are far more hard-hitting and difficult to deal with. I don't think Willow being conked on the head and spending a few days in the hospital is half as bad as, say, being tortured recently after the woman you love was murdered, or having to kill what you consider the love of your life.And that's not how human beings work. I know people who've gone through things that might be considered minor compared to things someone else has gone through. But try telling them that, because other people have had it so much worse, they somehow don't have the right to be messed up and should just suck it up and get over it. It just doesn't work that way.
Just because the others didn't go through things that were as bad as what Buffy went through doesn't mean what they went through wasn't bad and didn't effect them.
I actually felt bad for Buffy during the confrontation scene in "Dead Man's Party." But I could also see where the others were coming from and why they were reacting the way they were. Because as bad as what Buffy went through was, the others had gone through some pretty bad stuff too.
As goes Buffy getting the scythe by herself, I'm not sure how to argue against "this happened because Buffy was wrong, but that happened because the writing was dumb". Either it's all there as canon or it's not, but it can't be both at once.Sure it can. Just because canon says something is true doesn't mean the story logic behind it doesn't suck.
To me, Buffy turned out to be right the same way a broken clock is right twice a day. And even if Buffy did turn out to be "right" in this case, I think the others still had every right not to want to just do what she said, which pretty much amounted to them doing the exact same thing that ended up with so many of them dead or maimed. And, as someone else pointed out, even if the others had gone along with her, and she turned out to be "right," there's a good chance a lot more of them would've ended up being killed or maimed in the process. Because Buffy's "let's do that again!" strategy was terrible.
if Buffy decided she didn't want to sit in a room with a bunch of people who'd just essentially told her off like she was a naughty child and unfairly wrested control from her - something she was born to have - I can't say I blame her.Sure, Buffy had every right not to want to be involved if she wasn't running the show. But after everything that happened, and how irrational (almost hysterical) she was coming across with the whole "let's go back to the place where we were slaughtered right now, just because" thing, the others had every right not to want her to be in charge.
I just don't hold to the idea that Buffy should be in charge because she's Buffy, and everyone else should just shut up and do what she says...because she's Buffy. Because, in a lot of ways, that feels a lot like, "The Slayer should do what the Watchers tell her to do, because they're the Watchers and, obviously, know better than her, so she should just shut up and do what she's told."
-
3
-
-
With the end of S2/beginning of S3, I've never been able to justify their awful treatment of Buffy. Truly, I understand that it was unfair to leave them without letting them know she was okay. The worry she put them all through was awful and I would have had zero problem with them having a less than happy reunion with her, letting her know just how worried they were all summer. What I did not get at all was the passive-aggressive bullshit followed by the ganging up on her.
I totally disagree. I have no problem with the way the gang acted because they were kids. They had all of these feelings stored up about Buffy leaving (not because she left them with her responsibility but because she left them with no idea where she was, how she was, etc.), and they were trying to push those feelings down and act like everything was fine. (And not doing it very well, but I don't blame them at all for that.) Then when Buffy decided they weren't reacting to her return to her satisfaction and was about to take off again, they blew.
Really, unless some kind of counselor sat those kids down over the summer and helped them deal with their issues (not just Buffy taking off, but the various traumas they'd all gone through before she headed for the hills), I don't think it's surprising, or even out of line, that they reacted the way they did to the situation. Their reaction wasn't the best in the world, but it was understandable and human under the circumstances.
And as for going right back - she was right!Nah, that was just terrible writing. She was right because the writers decided she was going to be right, not because she actually was right.
What happened right after they unfairly booted her out of her own house?And not to start a debate, but Buffy wasn't kicked out of the house. Buffy left because the others didn't want to play things her way. She was like the kid who takes her ball and goes home because the other kids don't want to play by her rules.
-
1
-
-
But Buffy never held back with Angel she was always telling him things like her worries and fears.
With Angel, I do agree that she was open with him in a way she never was again in her later relationships - Riley in particular suffered from that. I think it's because Angel and Buffy were each other's first loves - and that person always has that special place that no-one else can really touch.
Actually, I never saw Buffy spilling to Angel as an indication of her level of feeling for him compared to anybody else. I think you can feel as strongly about one person as another but have two totally different relationships with each one. (One maybe being more open, for example.)
I kind of saw Angel as Buffy's diary, as weird as that might sound. Whenever Buffy wanted to unload about whatever was going on in her life, he was there to listen (because he really didn't have anything else going on). He could really focus on whatever she was telling him because, again, it wasn't like he had a bunch of issues in his own life to think about. He didn't judge her, and she didn't feel like she had to protect him from anything (the way she sometimes seemed to with her friends). And while he might offer some advice, it was really more about Buffy just wanting to get stuff off her chest than her wanting someone to tell her how to handle a situation (which is all you want sometimes).
Also, their relationship started at an age when Buffy was much more open, which had a lot to do with it.
-
3
-
-
6) I think Spike's origin as William the Bloody Awful Poet was lame as shit lol. It was deeply disappointing that when we finally got a backstory for what had once been the coolest character on the show, with the most acerbic wit, he turned out to be a wet mummy's boy. What were they thinking?
I actually really liked that. A lot of vampires seem to take being turned as their chance to be someone they were afraid to be (or didn't think they had the power to by) before. Angel, Darla and Doppelgangland!Willow all changed their images when they were turned. Even Harmony tried to do it. She just sucked at it.
In Spike's case, he wanted to get as far away from the guy who was picked on and put down by everybody as he could get. And, over time, that persona he adopted became more and more real. (Which is a thing that can actually happen according to the experts on this stuff.)
I've actually read some things about what people thought Human!Spike was going to be like (a lower-class street punk seemed to be the popular theory). And I don't think that would've been nearly as interesting.
-
3
-
-
I feel like it is not only the Delena fans that are unhappy with Nina leaving. I have been on twitter and most of the fandom are losing their shit over it!
I've learned not to judge what most of any fandom thinks based on what's happening at Twitter, or a forum, or anything like that. The people who are actually upset about something are usually the ones venting about it, while those who aren't upset have no reason to vent and are mostly silent. Unfortunately, the silent crowd ends up being kind of invisible because they aren't kicking up a fuss. So, as a result, it looks like "most of the fandom" is spitting mad about whatever's going on when, in reality, most of the fandom probably isn't.
-
3
-
-
I think the other problem is that the PSA vibe they want to replicate from certain episodes of Boy Meets World is really hard to do in 2010's Disney, which is just so sanitized and the like. Going by how they did the bullying episode, in which the grand total of bullying is Farkle being called "nothing",And, now that I've said that, one of these shows is going to pull a "very special episode" on me. I know GMW came close in the bullying episode, when they moved from the bullying to the kids trying to "save" the bully. But, I don't want to see a full on one. Just...no.
You know, I was going to say that you probably wouldn't see a DC show do a serious bullying episode. Then I remembered one that did. This probably slipped my mind because it was on a DC show I'm not really big on.
Anyway, on Austen & Aly, Trish got the part of Sleeping Beauty in the school play. And some of her classmates decided that not only was she not pretty enough for the part, but they should tell her so by doing things like putting stuff on her locker, saying nasty things about her online, and making comments as she walked down the hall. And it wasn't just one meanie, or one group of meanies, doing this. Once it started, a lot of kids seemed to decide making fun of Trish would be fun, so she was getting it from several sides.
With Farkle, I almost had to talk myself into believing that being called "nothing" a few times by one jerk would be enough to have such a huge affect on him. With Trish, I could totally understand why she would rather stop going to school than spend several hours a day being made fun of because of the way she looked.
And, the thing was, even though the episode was pretty serious for A&A, it still didn't feel as heavy-handed or "very special episodish" as the GMW episode was. I think it was because the only thing the A&A ep was trying to do was show how painful being made fun of can be. The GMW episode was trying to do some deep, over-the-top, philosophical thing that just didn't work.
Seriously, I always find myself cringing when I sense a "deep, philosophical moment" coming on in a GMW episode. Even though some of them haven't been too bad, I've still started to dread them.
-
I'm just shocked they actually allowed Riley and Lucas to peck on the lips. We went 5 seasons on Good Luck Charlie without ever seeing that. Which was just weird as hell.
I actually started to enjoy the way the writers started poking fun at that, and really drawing attention to it. Either they'd come up with some elaborate way to interrupt the kissage, or they'd come up with some really obvious, "everybody knows what's going on" way to block it. Like, just before the couples lips touch, someone holding a bunch of balloons just happens to walk in front of them.
Actually, I can't remember if that happened on GLC because I've seen a lot of DC shows poking fun at that. Because while Disney Channel puts a limit on how much kissing can go on in their shows, they don't seem to mind the writers blatantly making fun of the limit. So I think even they get that it's a little silly, but they're sticking to it.
I actually wonder who at DC decides when it's okay to show kissing, like in this episode.
-
Early Seasons Lex doesn't get quite enough credit for just how great a character he is, IMO. He's not just awesome by Smallville standards, but awesome in general!
I think their portrayal of Lex, especially in the early seasons, is the best thing the show did. They eventually tried to mess it up, of course. But I think MR leaving when he did kept them from being able to do too much damage. And my brain just ignores anything Fake!Lex did after that.
MR's Lex is my standard now. Everyone else seems silly and cartoonish.
Yeah, MR set the bar for me as far as Lex Luthor is concerned. Before I started watching SV, I was perfectly happy with Lex Luthor as the ultimate Big Bad. What made him interesting was knowing how dangerous he was, how much damage he could cause, and how much trouble everyone was in when he showed up.
But thanks to MR (and, yes, the SV writers from back in the day), I need the Lex character to have layers, and motivations, and actual reasons (however messed up) for the things he does. Just watching him be the ultimate Big Bad isn't enough anymore. And most versions of Lex that I've seen since SV just fall flat.
-
5
-
-
I just have to say that Allison & Erica are both such wonderful people and I do think if you met Erica you would like her too. Maybe even rewatch with a gentler approach.
I have no problem separating the character from the actress and while I have no desire to watch her work, I don't have personal feelings toward a stranger. Same thing applies to Kristen Kruek. I don't enjoy her acting but from all reports she's an extremely kind and lovely person.
What BkWurm1 said. I can think an actor is the nicest, kindest, most awesome person ever, but that doesn't mean I'll think their characters or storylines are well-written. If I really like an actor, I might feel bad if I think they are being given bad material. But me liking them doesn't make the material less bad.
I actually don't have a huge problem with ED's acting. She's not the best actress ever, but I've liked characters played by actors who weren't particularly great either. But something about their roles was so well done or interesting that I could look past the occasional, shaky acting.
SV's Lois Lane just did not work for me. There was just so much wrong with how the character (and her relationship with Clark) was done that I couldn't invest in the character, or buy how her storylines played out. (Like how she was suddenly such an awesome reporter.)
That being said, I remember finding ED's Lois very likable on occasion, so I think I could've like the character if she'd been handled differently. But SV just dropped the ball with her in too many ways.
-
2
-
-
Hmm. Nah. I never presumed Disney was forcing the show to "message". The opposite in fact. It's the direct legacy of Boy Meets World and I'd think anyone who watched BMW would realize that.
I agree. But I've seen so many comments various places that criticized the heavy handedness, then added, "Must be because it's on Disney Channel," or even, "Disney must be making them do that."
I think the comments might be because, while BMW was big on delivering messages, they just did it better, so it didn't really stand out the way it can on GMW.
GMW kind of feels like every episode is a very special episode.
That's the perfect way to put it.
Personally I think the heavy handiness is coming from the writers who are trying so very hard to make this BMW 2.0. Instead of letting the messages happen naturally, the writers tend to think they need to hit the audience over the head with it.It seems like they're trying to use these "deep messages" to make the show more mature somehow. And I'm hoping they realize that didn't really work in season one, and they back off of the heavy-handedness in season two.
Unpopular Opinions
in Smallville [V]
It's the opposite for me. When I try to re-watch the show, all I can think of is how great it seemed like something was going to be. Only now I know that it didn't turn out to be all that great. At least on first viewing, I had that anticipation that a great set-up was going to lead to a great pay-off, so I was all excited for it. Now, I mostly find myself thinking, "Oh, remember how excited you were after this episode because it looked like it was going to lead to a really great storyline? Well, we know how that turned out, don't we." It makes it hard to enjoy the setup on re-watch, even if it's pretty good, because I know it's not going to really lead to anything.
I think the difference is that Lionel was a sociopath and Lex wasn't. They were both capable of doing bad things. But whereas Lionel could do something truly horrendous and just not feel all that bad about it (unless it caused problems for him or something), every bad thing Lex did just made him hate himself more, and convinced him he didn't deserve anything (happiness, love, friendship, etc.) But, at the same time, he would convince himself that the bad things he was doing were "right" or "necessary" for whatever reason. And since he was already such a lost cause, he might as well do the bad thing. Which only made him feel even worse about himself, and pushed him more towards the edge. It was like a vicious cycle.
Lionel, on the other hand, couldn't really "get" that what he was doing was bad, let alone hate himself for it. And even when he did something because it was "right," there was still this vibe that there was something in it for him somehow. While Lex would often do the right thing because he truly believed it was the right thing and, as often as not, there really wasn't anything in it for him.