TV Tropes: Love 'em or Loathe 'em

[HalcyonDays]

One trope I have always been weary of was the "a great opportunity comes up and the character chooses to abandon it for no discernible reason".  This is a cousin to the "bettering yourself equates to snobbery" trope.  A person inherits/wins millions of dollars, a grand palace, offered a scholarship to an exclusive school/college, or a dream job.  They often end up abandoning all that because it would take them away from their friends .

 

Dang it!  Take it!  I would have!

 

I completely agree! Opportunities like this come once in a life time and only some humans are that lucky. Instead, you get characters that sacrifice so much and get so little in return. I guess that is supposed to make them honourable, strong people. On top of that, those great opportunities always seem to pop up time and time again for those TV characters.

 

The reverse is that no matter what certain characters do, they never get a lucky break, which is just as bad. It seems to be all or nothing.

[magicdog]

Opportunities like this come once in a life time and only some humans are that lucky.

 

 

I blame it on lazy writing.  When you write a character into a situation that is so life changing, you should stick with it.  It's too easy to just have a character win the lottery only to lose the ticket somehow.  That's why I was impressed with that storyline in "Roseanne".  Sure they ended up making it a dream, but at the time, I was impressed that the storyline continued and they stayed rich until Roseanne Barr decided to give the proverbial finger in the final episode.

[GreekGeek]

One trope I have always been weary of was the "a great opportunity comes up and the character chooses to abandon it for no discernible reason".  This is a cousin to the "bettering yourself equates to snobbery" trope.  A person inherits/wins millions of dollars, a grand palace, offered a scholarship to an exclusive school/college, or a dream job.  They often end up abandoning all that because it would take them away from their friends .

 

Dang it!  Take it!  I would have!

There's some rationale for it on TV if it's important that the core cast stay together. I did wish that Rachel had jetted off to Paris in the series finale of Friends, though.

 

This isn't TV, but I was so happy Billy Elliott took advantage of the opportunities to study ballet instead of becoming a coal miner like the other men in his family. And I was irked that the dad in Meet Me In St. Louis was made out to be an ole meanie by wanting to move the family to New York; and that he caved to family pressure and opted to stay put.

[ABay]

The equivalent for supernatural-type shows would be the supernormal person who just wants to be rid of their super-power. At least, if they're *good.* Only bad super-powered types actually enjoy immortality, having exceptional physical strength or speed or whatever. Because being normal is just so fucking miraculous, you know.

[ganesh]

That's what was so great about Methos in the Highlander tv show. He didn't want to fight people. He didn't want to get rich. He enjoyed life and drank beer. Possibly invented it. 

[Wiendish Fitch]

One trope I have always been weary of was the "a great opportunity comes up and the character chooses to abandon it for no discernible reason".  This is a cousin to the "bettering yourself equates to snobbery" trope.  A person inherits/wins millions of dollars, a grand palace, offered a scholarship to an exclusive school/college, or a dream job.  They often end up abandoning all that because it would take them away from their friends .

Dang it!  Take it!  I would have!

 

 

If they insist on utilizing this trope, then I demand the characters regret it later, because anyone stupid enough to throw away opportunities deserves nothing less!

 

The equivalent for supernatural-type shows would be the supernormal person who just wants to be rid of their super-power. At least, if they're *good.* Only bad super-powered types actually enjoy immortality, having exceptional physical strength or speed or whatever. Because being normal is just so fucking miraculous, you know.

 

 

I'm so bored with this trope I could scream.

Edited November 10, 2014 by Wiendish Fitch

[ganesh]

If anyone reads a book on tv it's always A Meaningful Title tied into The Theme.

[Milburn Stone]

I completely agree! Opportunities like this come once in a life time and only some humans are that lucky. Instead, you get characters that sacrifice so much and get so little in return. I guess that is supposed to make them honourable, strong people. 

 

Don't you get it? :) TV writers are lucky folks who got offered amazing opportunities and jumped on them. But if they had too much competition they'd be out of business. So they tell the rest of us to let opportunity pass us by. Guaranteed job security, suckas!

[Joe]

If anyone reads a book on tv it's always A Meaningful Title tied into The Theme.

And they never seem to have any guilty pleasures.

[scarynikki12]

I could live with a character not taking advantage of an amazing opportunity if what they have at present is enough and said opportunity is just a bonus.  Look at Friday Night Lights.  Coach Taylor was offered the position of head coach of the Dillon superteam in the final episodes of the show.  It would have been amazing money and the chance to cement his status as a coaching legend.  Yet, he turned it down.  A part of the reason was that his wife, Tami, was also offered an amazing opportunity out of state but the key to Coach Taylor is that he gets his coaching satisfaction from being the King Maker, not the Emperor.  The final scene of the series has him as the new head coach of a struggling team near Tami's new job and he's ready and eager to turn these players into kings the way he did with his Panthers and Lions back in Dillon. 

 

I think the problem with this trope is that the character in question so often is shown to hate their existing circumstances when the offer comes along so they look unbelievably stupid for not taking them.  For a character like Coach Taylor, we saw how much happier he was making kings than being one himself, so him turning down the amazing coaching offer in Dillon makes sense for his character.  This trope would cease to be an issue if shows would just lay the groundwork better.

[ganesh]

At the end of the day, he's still coaching and is very good at it. I'd say he's a good spouse too because maybe his wife would only get that opportunity, while he can always get a coaching job anywhere. That doesn't also preclude him turning the new team into giants and moving on to the better position down the road either. 

 

I think the intent of the original posting was the characters will turn down like a full scholarship to Berkeley or Harvard to go to local State U because Friendship Is Magic. Not to be a dick, but a diploma with those names on them has cache. 

[tribeca]

The TV tope I hate is when the geeky girl takes off her glasses she is gorgeous.  Tried this in real life & it just doesn't happen : (

[Moose135]

The TV tope I hate is when the geeky girl takes off her glasses she is gorgeous.  Tried this in real life & it just doesn't happen : (

 

I'm sure you are gorgeous, tribeca, you probably just forgot to shake out your hair in slow motion.

[ganesh]

It had to be the shaking of the hair. Tina did on Bob's Burgers with her glasses still on and she won over all the zombies. 

[giovannif7]

OK, this is an industry-wide trope that's becoming pervasive, and it needs to be nipped in the bud fast. TNT just cancelled Franklin & Bash after 4 seasons, citing their push to show more "darker, edgier" programming. And this morning's LA Times had an article in the Business section titled "USA Network To Embrace Darkness," indicating that they also feel that dumping all of their lighter-toned "blue skies" programming will help them remain relevant.

 

I do get it - every middling cable network wants to put on the next Breaking Bad, Mad Men, Walking Dead, etc. These shows create buzz, and people do take notice. The problem is, for every "edgy" show that is good and deserves a following, there are five (and from the sound of things, we're heading toward ten or twenty) of them that vary from run-of-the-mill to inconsistent to unwatchable. Throwing all your eggs into the "We're your home for darker, edgier serialized dramas" basket will backfire - there's just too much of it to choose from.

 

I'm not sure why lighter, more humorous dramas have become so hated by the industry. While they may not have become ratings bonanzas, shows like Psych, Eureka, Monk, Warehouse 13, White Collar, Royal Pains, Leverage and the like do bring in very loyal fanbases who appreciate a bit of light-hearted programming with enjoyable, familiar characters when they've had a rough day, or just need a pick-me-up. Replacing them all with forgettable and depressing fare like Rush, Dominion, Satisfaction, Legends, Graceland, etc - and the over-darkening of established shows like Burn Notice, Covert Affairs and Suits - may bring you an influx of curious viewers. However, they will vanish like your hits of yesteryear as soon as someone else puts on "The Next Big Thing" that gets the watercooler buzz.

 

In short (yeah, too late, I know), don't throw away all the goodwill you've built up with your long-time viewers. Go ahead with the best of the darker fare you're preparing, but save some room on your schedule for shows that Eureka/Psych/Leverage fans can support as well. You won't regret it.

[ABay]

Well said!

[kiddo82]

I'm not sure why lighter, more humorous dramas have become so hated by the industry. While they may not have become ratings bonanzas, shows like Psych, Eureka, Monk, Warehouse 13, White Collar, Royal Pains, Leverage and the like do bring in very loyal fanbases who appreciate a bit of light-hearted programming with enjoyable, familiar characters when they've had a rough day, or just need a pick-me-up. Replacing them all with forgettable and depressing fare like Rush, Dominion, Satisfaction, Legends, Graceland, etc - and the over-darkening of established shows like Burn Notice, Covert Affairs and Suits - may bring you an influx of curious viewers. However, they will vanish like your hits of yesteryear as soon as someone else puts on "The Next Big Thing" that gets the watercooler buzz.

 

In short (yeah, too late, I know), don't throw away all the goodwill you've built up with your long-time viewers. Go ahead with the best of the darker fare you're preparing, but save some room on your schedule for shows that Eureka/Psych/Leverage fans can support as well. You won't regret it.

Well said. And might I add, the darkness and the light need each other to coexist. Without one extreme, you truly cannot experience the highs or lows of the other. If everything is dark and edgy, then nothing is.

[merylinkid]

Sometimes people need just some light fun entertainment.   If everything is "dark and edgy" they just won't watch tv.   Hello Netflix and Hulu.   That doesn't help the networks either.   

 

Multiple channels is about choices.   If everything is the same, what's the choice?

[ganesh]

We've been in this dark and edgy paradigm for a while, it's the same thing in movies. 

 

Not for anything there's no law that says drama = dark and edgy either. 

 

Monk and W13 had their fair share. Even Leverage did. 

 

The more I think about it, the more "dark and edgy" is really a cover up for lazy writing. Characters get to be more one-note and they don't have to focus on building relationships as much. 

Edited November 12, 2014 by ganesh

[Featherhat]

 

the problem is, for every "edgy" show that is good and deserves a following, there are five (and from the sound of things, we're heading toward ten or twenty) of them that vary from run-of-the-mill to inconsistent to unwatchable. "We're your home for darker, edgier serialized dramas" basket will backfire - there's just too much of it to choose from.

 

That's kind of what happened with Stargate. The producers had created 2 long running (10 year and 5 year) fairly lighthearted sci fi shows that were never as celebrated as something like BSG or Babylon 5 but had a loyal fanbase. 

 

The decided to dump that formula to create SGU and cash in on the BSG "dark and edgy" (and mega critically adored), the only problem was that they couldn't really do it and it came across (IMHO) as a desperate copycat, the stories were trite and often *less* interesting and potentially complex than the "bumblegum" previous shows. 

 

"Gritty, dark, edgy" doesn't automatically = either interesting or well written. 

[Kel Varnsen]

I'm not sure why lighter, more humorous dramas have become so hated by the industry. While they may not have become ratings bonanzas, shows like Psych, Eureka, Monk, Warehouse 13, White Collar, Royal Pains, Leverage and the like do bring in very loyal fanbases who appreciate a bit of light-hearted programming with enjoyable, familiar characters when they've had a rough day, or just need a pick-me-up. Replacing them all with forgettable and depressing fare like Rush, Dominion, Satisfaction, Legends, Graceland, etc - and the over-darkening of established shows like Burn Notice, Covert Affairs and Suits - may bring you an influx of curious viewers. However, they will vanish like your hits of yesteryear as soon as someone else puts on "The Next Big Thing" that gets the watercooler buzz.

I think the problem is that networks think that it is the concepts that make the hits not the writing. So they see "dark and edgy" shows like breaking bad being hits, and instead of realizing that it was the amazing writing by Vince Gilligan and his team that made the show a hit, it was the darkness. So they copy that. Same thing happened when Lost came out, and every other network was trying to do weird supernatural/mysterious serial dramas. When CSI hit, everyone copied with a million different similar. procedurals. And in the 90's when Seinfeld hit everyone copied with a ton of different sitcoms about annoying, selfish single people living in New York. I remember reading an article years ago about this kind of thing and there was a quote that still stands out in my mind. The author said that networks shouldn't be trying to find the next "Seinfeld" (as in the show) they should be looking for the next Larry David. 

[DittyDotDot]

I just don't understand why it needs to be all or nothing. I like to have a variety in my viewing. I watch some dark and edgy stuff, but also love a good laugh and cheese is also very delightful, especially when wedged between some salty crackers. ;)

[ganesh]

That's kind of what happened with Stargate. The producers had created 2 long running (10 year and 5 year) fairly lighthearted sci fi shows that were never as celebrated as something like BSG or Babylon 5 but had a loyal fanbase.

 

The SGs were good shows. Which is another problem. Shows can't be good. I'd even both shows had dark moments. But the premise was good: traveling the galaxy, exploring, helping people where they could. There's nothing wrong with that. SGU could have been good, but TPTBs failed to realize there was a lot of fatigue after BSG. 

 

I just don't understand why it needs to be all or nothing.

 

People running tv don't know much about tv or how people watch tv. 

[kassygreene]

The trope I hate is existing shows, or spin-offs of good shows, being re-imagined to the style of some other wildly popular series that everyone suddenly wants to have created.  For your consideration: Stargate Universe.

 

Stargate Universe was created and screwed up by people who wanted to be the people who created BSG.  Which, ok, it's good to have a career goal, but the outright contempt expressed to the old fans has pretty much never been forgiven, and ain't gonna be forgotten.  SG Atlantis could and should have had a sixth season, but the SGU boys preferred the commitment to two seasons of SGU... hell, fans know this story, I'm not repeating it.

 

While the more recent "light" shows are ones I didn't watch (Franklin and Bash remind me of too many former co-workers, and I wanted to love Psych for Dule Hill, but the lead character just annoys the hell out of me), knowing that there will probably be no new shows for me to watch on basic cable for at least a year gives me that much more time to catch up on other programs.  Thankfully Major Crimes appears to span the light/dark divide well enough to remain tamper-free and is already renewed for a fourth season.

[BoogieBurns]

I do not watch dark and edgy shows. The edgiest show I watched was 30 Rock. It's so dumb to eliminate huge groups of viewers (like people who watch TV with their kids) just so you can find the next Breaking Bad. The only shows I've seen on USA in the last 5-8 years were Cougar Town and Playing House. I will give almost any light and funny show a chance on any channel. But so few channels are giving me that these days.

 

Even Food Network has gone from being easy breezy to trying to have some edge. It used to be 30 minute cooking shows or mini-documentaries about candy canes. Now it's all 1 hour competitions or that horrible human named Guy. All edge! All the time! Backward sunglasses! 

[Cobalt Stargazer]

I just don't understand why it needs to be all or nothing. I like to have a variety in my viewing. I watch some dark and edgy stuff, but also love a good laugh and cheese is also very delightful, especially when wedged between some salty crackers. ;)

 

This is me, right here. Zombies? Love 'em. Shows full of terrible people? Bring it on. Angsty drama? Yes, please.

 

But with that said, I think balance is possible and even desirable. It is possible to like both Pete Campbell and Phil Dunphy. Not everyone does, obviously, and I think there's a bit of a dismissive tone in the extreme end of each camp. No, life is not always a giant ball of heartache and misery a la the sixth season of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, but neither is it wacky workplace hijinks like Ally McBeal.

[Wax Lion]

To some degree I think the move towards "darker" dramas are a misreading. TV is trending more towards bingewatching shows online and a lot of the biggest bingewatch shows were dark dramas with plenty of OMG moments. After all, one of the biggest new shows is "How to Get Away with Murder" (That said, the second TV network to offer an online streaming subscription, CBS, has the least bingewatchable shows so who knows.)

 

However, you know what's the other big new fall drama? "The Flash" which is fun, brightly-colors and breezy... and will also make great bingewatching once it has enough episodes.

 

Even Food Network has gone from being easy breezy to trying to have some edge. It used to be 30 minute cooking shows or mini-documentaries about candy canes.

 

 

I'll admit, the old Food Network kinda mystified me, even if I loved it. I mean, you could watch a show about how to make your own vinaigrette with ads for Wish Bone. I had to think the advertisers for all those processed foods weren't happy to be advertising in between segments about how to avoid those processed foods. Now, its much more likely a Food Network viewer will see an ad for frozen lasagna and, instead of deciding to make lasagna from scratch, will go and buy frozen lasagna.

Edited November 14, 2014 by Wax Lion

[Mulva]

One trope I have always been weary of was the "a great opportunity comes up and the character chooses to abandon it for no discernible reason".  This is a cousin to the "bettering yourself equates to snobbery" trope.  A person inherits/wins millions of dollars, a grand palace, offered a scholarship to an exclusive school/college, or a dream job.  They often end up abandoning all that because it would take them away from their friends .

 

Dang it!  Take it!  I would have!

Thank you!

 

I've always hated both of those tropes and I don't understand why TV writers, who presumably are erudite people with college degrees, constantly tell us that being erudite and going to college is snobbish! 

 

It's always bothered me on Supernatural that Sam is considered to be disloyal to his family because he accepted a scholarship to Stanford.  Going to school is not abandoning your family, especially when said family live out of their car and can visit you at any time they want.

 

I think the prevalence of 'dark and gritty' explains the longevity of House Hunters.  It's about the only show on that doesn't feature nonstop gloom and despair.

Edited November 15, 2014 by Mulva

[supposebly]

Thank you!

 

I've always hated both of those tropes and I don't understand why TV writers, who presumably are erudite people with college degrees, constantly tell us that being erudite and going to college is snobbish! 

 

It's always bothered me on Supernatural that Sam is considered to be disloyal to his family because he accepted a scholarship to Stanford.  Going to school is not abandoning your family, especially when said family live out of their car and can visit you at any time they want.

.....

 

Agreed. I would have and did leave. What a stupid conceit. It creates interesting conflicts on Supernatural and there were other reasons why his father wanted him close and why Dean was so hung-up on that but yes, overall, if you get that scholarship at a good school or an offer for your dream job, you go.

Edited November 15, 2014 by supposebly

[Mulva]

Exactly.  Sure it created interesting conflicts, but the show and much of the fandom have always taken the position that 18 year old Sam was wrong to 'abandon' his 23 year old, car owning brother. 

 

Anyhoodle, another TV trope I hate is The Designated Hero and The Designated Villain.  If you want me to believe that X is a good/bad guy, you have to show me, not tell me, show me, that X is better/worse than X's antagonist. 

[Milburn Stone]

I've always hated both of those tropes and I don't understand why TV writers, who presumably are erudite people with college degrees, constantly tell us that being erudite and going to college is snobbish! 

 

I explained it in my post:

 

Don't you get it? :) TV writers are lucky folks who got offered amazing opportunities and jumped on them. But if they had too much competition they'd be out of business. So they tell the rest of us to let opportunity pass us by. Guaranteed job security, suckas!

 

Perhaps it seemed I was being facetious. I wasn't.

Edited November 15, 2014 by Milburn Stone

[Bastet]

I think the prevalence of 'dark and gritty' explains the longevity of House Hunters.  It's about the only show on that doesn't feature nonstop gloom and despair.

 

Except when the buyers walk into a kitchen and discover the appliances aren't stainless steel and/or the countertops aren't granite.

[selkie]

I think the prevalence of 'dark and gritty' explains the longevity of House Hunters.  It's about the only show on that doesn't feature nonstop gloom and despair.

 

House Hunters has also long been one of the most diverse shows on television. Gay couples, straight couples, interracial couples, singles, old people,  young people, physically disabled people, people who doesn't seem to be quite there mentally (see Mickey Mouse law school lady)  and pretty much every ethnicity you can think of has whined their way through their choice of three different properties. And yet they never feel the need to have a Very Special Episode for a Very Special Homebuyer when they're showing something that would be in VSE in a scripted drama or sitcom.

[JTMacc99]

I hate it when a generally competent character in a sitcom gets himself or herself caught in an ever deepening web of lies.  I think I'm okay with the web of lies story, but for whatever reason, it bothers the crap out of me when applied to the character who should be above it. 

[Qoass]

With the holidays coming, may I please request that television writers squash their desires to do an episode based on A Christmas Carol?  It's been done.  And done.  And done.  And done and done and done and done and done and done and done and done...

[ganesh]

Christmas episodes begin and end with My So Called Life for me. 

[Bastet]

With the holidays coming, may I please request that television writers squash their desires to do an episode based on A Christmas Carol?

 

I love that Roseanne went with the ghosts of Halloweens past, present and future instead.

 

What I would also like to see vanquished from the television landscape is a Christmas episode in which some guy dressed up as Santa is implied at the end to really be Santa.  Unless it’s a show for kids, knock that shit off.

 

Christmas episodes begin and end with My So Called Life for me.

 

I love Rickie’s storyline in that one, but find the actual Christmas part with Juliana Hatfield pretty much unbearable.

Edited November 17, 2014 by Bastet

[BatmanBeatles]

 

With the holidays coming, may I please request that television writers squash their desires to do an episode based on A Christmas Carol?  It's been done.  And done.  And done.  And done and done and done and done and done and done and done and done...

The same goes with It's A Wonderful Life.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

The same goes with It's A Wonderful Life.

 

Married...With Children actually did their own version of It's A Wonderful Life that I thought worked. Al, having failed in buying Peg and the kids their gifts, electrocuted himself on the faulty Christmas lights on the house and dropped to the ground. A guardian angel played by Sam Kinison (don't ask), appeared to him and said it was his duty to make sure that Al decided to live, so he showed him what would have become of his family without him. Peg was married to a successful doctor or something, and Bud and Kelly were smart and well-adjusted. The angel apologizes to Al at the end and tells him that it looks like his family would have actually been much better off without him, and that he'd failed in his mission and thus wouldn't get his wings. Al, livid at how well they did without him around, decided to live after all, because they'd made his life such hell pre-electrocution. A happy ending, MWC style.

Edited November 17, 2014 by Cobalt Stargazer

[ganesh]

That was more of a showcase episode for Kinison than a typical xmas episode though.

[Bastet]

I think the only Christmas episodes I've enjoyed in the last 20 years have been atypical - and cynical - takes, even parodies of what we usually see.  I like sweet and light as much as I like darkly humorous when talking about entertainment in general, but when it comes to Christmas on TV, I've long since stopped being able to abide the sweet.

[merylinkid]

Give me the sickly sweet beauty of the magic of Christmas every time.    Only time of the year I get excessively sappy.

 

But the Christmas Carol thing has been done to death.   You can show the "true meaning" of Christmas without 3 ghosts thank you very much.

[magicdog]

Another trope I'm tired of:

 

The TV movie (or series) in which an adult child (usually the daughter) and parent(s) are estranged due to the choice of the adult child's spouse (usually a husband the family didn't approve of).    I'm especially tired of the variant in which the parent(s) howl that their child could have had their pick of better spouses and a better lives while adult child insists they loved the person they married and didn't regret it.  Of course, by the end, the spouse comes though and the parent (s) have to admit they were wrong about him/her.

 

For once I want to hear:

 

"I'm sorry Mom & Dad.  You were right about [John] .  The more you warned me against seeing him, the more I wanted to rebel and stay with him.   I thought he was a romantic bad boy and that we were soul mates.  After we got married I thought he'd settle down.  In the end he cheated on me, gambled our money away and was just a jerk.  I apologize for being such a self centered brat.  My life could have been much better and had a lot less heartache.  Please take me and the grandchildren back home with you."

[jhlipton]

I do think Farscape did a great job with their "switch" body episode. They went into things I always wondered about like the other person having to go to the bathroom lol.

 

Haven did this pretty well with 3 body-swaps in the same 2 hour episode.  The best was  burly, manly Dwight switched with elderly, fussy Gloria.

 

And of course that scarf was made from rare silk and only sold at a boutique in the Hamptons, I'm on it. (Visit to boutique, where owner of course remembers the purchaser, who is not the victim, but the suspect.) No one wears a scarf from Old Navy that 100,000 other people own.

 

Almost all detective shows use this a lot.  The gun, explosive, cigarette, whatever that's only sold by three stores, all conveniently local. 

 

Moonlighting, for whatever reason, did an episode that was the Taming of the Shrew. I have no idea why they did, but it was actually very good an extremely funny. 

 

"WRONG PLAY!!!"  That was a great episode.

 

Here it is: Atomic Shakespeare

Edited November 18, 2014 by jhlipton

[Wax Lion]

With the holidays coming, may I please request that television writers squash their desires to do an episode based on A Christmas Carol?  It's been done.  And done.  And done.  And done and done and done and done and done and done and done and done...

 

There's no point now that someone has made a movie called "It's Christmas, Carol!" (with Carrie Fisher!) there's no point, even if you're going to subvert it, like Black Adder did brilliantly.

 

If you're going to do something heartfelt, you need to find something other than a well-worn trope, at that point the cliche undoes any attempt at making the movie seem sincere.

[Bruinsfan]

For once I want to hear:

 

"I'm sorry Mom & Dad.  You were right about [John] .  The more you warned me against seeing him, the more I wanted to rebel and stay with him.   I thought he was a romantic bad boy and that we were soul mates.  After we got married I thought he'd settle down.  In the end he cheated on me, gambled our money away and was just a jerk.  I apologize for being such a self centered brat.  My life could have been much better and had a lot less heartache.  Please take me and the grandchildren back home with you."

Isn't this basically the setup of Flowers in the Attic?

[magicdog]

Isn't this basically the setup of Flowers in the Attic?

 

 

Based on what Ive read here, hell no!  I've never seen either the films nor the series so I cannot confirm. 

[Aquarius]

Isn't this basically the setup of Flowers in the Attic?

 

Um, no, not unless John is her brother.

[lucindabelle]

Actually not unless John were her half uncle,

[Aquarius]

. . . it comes out later in the series how convoluted the relationship is . . .