TV Tropes: Love 'em or Loathe 'em

[magicdog]

There's a good article out there about how some guys think they deserve to "get" the "hot chick" because they went to college, have a good job, work hard; basically good members of society. So that makes them entitled to "pursue" her.

 

I read that article and the writer was soaking in serious bitters!  I don't know why people act as if this is new - stories of heroes getting the girl have been told in fables and tales for centuries.  Today's definition of hero changed a bit for some.  To be honest, I prefer a guy who at least meets those standards (educated, working, making decent money, and is a good person) because they're increasingly hard to find!

 

 

 

That's the other TV trope -  that you have to have a HUGE, elaborate, expensive wedding.

 

 

I don't blame TV so much as bridal magazines;   it's a racket like none other! 

[Wax Lion]

That's the other TV trope -  that you have to have a HUGE, elaborate, expensive wedding.   How many times do we see people competing on game shows, cooking shows, for money for a wedding?  TV shows have taught us that we can't get married unless we can afford elegant flowers, gourmet food, designer wedding dress, luxury honeymoon, etc.  What happened to having the wedding you can afford, and then saving for a house?

 

I liked how Coronation Street played with this recently. Two women in the neighborhood are planning their wedding and they get competitive about how extravagant their weddings can be. One of them owns a struggling shop, the other works in a clothing factory. When the factory worker stops to look at all the costs and think about how many hours of overtime she and her fiance would have to work (and how much time they'd spend apart), she decides she'd be better off having a small wedding where everyone dresses as 80s pop stars.

 

And this being a soap opera, the amoral shop owner who goes forward with her plans ends up having her wedding disrupted when her fiance is arrested for murder.

 

The thing I liked about Ugly Betty -- in theory at first and eventually with the finale, was that it subverted the trope and this time the premise was that the guy shold learn to look past looks and appreciate a woman for her personality. (Of course, America Ferrera is as ugly as Patrick Dempsey was in Can't Buy Me Love.) The stars kinda derailed that by trying to shut down the idea of Betty and Daniel getting together but the series ended saying they should end up together (even if they don't).

[proserpina65]

And of course, on tv, you will put your name down for the super exclusive, years long waiting list special place to get married despite not even dating anyone.   Then you will get a phone call saying that there was a cancellation for that very weekend and somehow you made it to the top of the years long list for the venue.   Wacky hijinks ensue.

And then you give your wedding to your dying friend.  Never mind having to file for a marriage certificate for the people who end up having the wedding.

[Chaos Theory]

Once again I hate you TV for making me use the word "trope" but I hate love triangles. That counts as a...Ick,,trope right?

[Gudzilla]

Once again I hate you TV for making me use the word "trope" but I hate love triangles. That counts as a...Ick,,trope right?

Pretty much any love geometric shape annoys me.

[Spartan Girl]

One trope I really hate is when a girl gets involved with a guy for the sole intent of "fixing him". As if all women view men as some kind of project to take on...

Take Sheldon and Amy on Big Bang Theory. For all his many many faults, Sheldon made it clear to Amy from Day One that he had capital I issues with intimacy and he was who he was, and she kept trying to mold him into her idea of a romantic boyfriend anyway. And yet a lot of fans faulted him for not wanting to be be intimate with her after five years of dating. Yes, Sheldon could be an asshole, but he never pretended to be anything he wasn't.

[Shannon L.]

 

Sheldon made it clear to Amy from Day One that he had capital I issues with intimacy and he was who he was, and she kept trying to mold him into her idea of a romantic boyfriend anyway. And yet a lot of fans faulted him for not wanting to be be intimate....

While I thought 5 years was a bit much (but accepted that any intimacy would take a very long time), it was worth it for that first kiss on the train. 

[Chaos Theory]

One trope I really hate is when a girl gets involved with a guy for the sole intent of "fixing him". As if all women view men as some kind of project to take on...

Take Sheldon and Amy on Big Bang Theory. For all his many many faults, Sheldon made it clear to Amy from Day One that he had capital I issues with intimacy and he was who he was, and she kept trying to mold him into her idea of a romantic boyfriend anyway. And yet a lot of fans faulted him for not wanting to be be intimate with her after five years of dating. Yes, Sheldon could be an asshole, but he never pretended to be anything he wasn't.

Honestly I fault them both for this. By then again it is because I like the pairing. Asking for something from your partner isn't a crime; even on television. If your partner is willing to give it or try to give it then good....if not then Amy was right to finally draw a line in the sand.

[ToxicUnicorn]

 I thought Amy got involved with Sheldon because she wanted to know what having a boyfriend was like, not for Sheldon himself.  Am I wrong about that?  However it started, I remember thinking Amy didn't have a very good reason at the beginning to have any expectations (especially for Sheldon to be physically affectionate), and I thought her persistent desire to have Sheldon behave the way she wanted was pretty obnoxious, coercive, in fact.  The only saving grace to me then is that Sheldon never buckled (while I was still watching).  Maybe the dynamic changed after I stopped.

[Bastet]

I know almost nothing about the show, because the episode I watched on a plane was terrible (and me liking anything from misogynist Chuck Lorre is a rarity, so I was never inclined to seek out more), but I thought I'd read on TWoP that Sheldon was asexual.  Is that true?  (And, if so, did they write some horrid scenario in which he was asexual until "the love of the right person brought him around"?)

Edited July 16, 2015 by Bastet

[Wax Lion]

I don't think they've identified him as asexual but Sheldon has been written as being uninterested in a romance. As I recall, he and Amy both ended up on their first date to shut up their friends and they initially kept seeing each other for a totally unromantic reason (I can't recall the specifics). However, I think they softened Amy and she became less antisocial (I think it was from having female friends?) and started wanting a more traditional relationship out of Sheldon.

 

I watch BBT very infrequently, so someone could probably fill in better. Amy was a great character when she first showed up, she was just as abrasive as Sheldon. I don't know when it changed but it was sad when it didn't last.

[MaryMitch]

They met via an online dating service. Raj and Howard signed Sheldon up for it, and were amazed when they found a match. They blackmailed him on going on the date - Raj hid a dirty sock somewhere in the apartment and he wouldn't tell Sheldon where it was until after the date. Amy was on the dating site because she had promised her mother to date at least once a year.

 

At first Amy was almost a female Sheldon - "I share your aversion to soiled hosiery."  But the Amy character has changed to be someone who is more aggressively trying to fit into society, where Sheldon doesn't really care about that.

 

Nonetheless, I love the Amy/Sheldon relationship; it's one of the most interesting ones on TV.

[ganesh]

I don't like the trope that online dating is still kind of a stigma. I know tons of people who do it. Me included. 

[Wax Lion]

Thanks for the recap MaryMitch! I agree they're an interesting couple, I do miss when Amy was more of a female Sheldon that was a fun combination.

[andromeda331]

But the Amy character has changed to be someone who is more aggressively trying to fit into society, where Sheldon doesn't really care about that.

 

And this is why they should have broke up awhile go. They were great when they both wanted

the same things. But Amy changed and ever since then she's been wanting Sheldon to change

to and constantly disappointed. I had hoped she would have broken up with him sooner. Yes, it

sucked that she really liked or even loved Sheldon and he didn't want to change. But he didn't

want to, and she should have realized they wanted different things and ended the

relationship.

 

But on the flipside I don't like in the dating couples when a couple is dating and the

girlfriend is constantly complaining about wanting to go out to dinner or on a date. 

While constant nagging is annoying but wanting to go out to dinner or out on a date

with your boyfriend really shouldn't be that big of a deal or too much to ask or even

a surprise. Its annoying when the guy rolls his eyes and act like its a big deal or even

a huge chore to do  something with their girlfriend.  Like on Burn Notice when a job

would come up and  Fiona would say they'd have to cancel their dinner plans only to

find out Michael never made them and be disappointed. While they shouldn't try to

change their boyfriends, they should be allowed to have some expectations. If not

then what is the point of the couple even being together? Its not always guys.

Sometimes the girl in the couple does it too.

[ganesh]

The main driver for relationships on tv though is the lack of communication. It's a lazy writing cheat because it gives you manufactured (read: fake) drama. 

 

I can only speak for my married friends, but on FB, they're posting about 'date nights;' stuff to do just for them (no kids) that they planned out. 

 

You just don't see well functioning couples on tv because either writers don't have them or they just don't have the skills enough to pull off a compelling happy couple. 

 

You can want to go on a date all you want, but how about asking, 'what's your schedule? I want to go out with you, so let's find some free time in the next couple of weeks and we'll just have our night."

 

I don't see tv couples that actually like being around one another for that matter. My married friends are always having a good time. 

[andromeda331]

I don't see tv couples that actually like being around one another for that matter.

 

If I could like this a million times I would. Most really don't act like they like being around each other.

 

You just don't see well functioning couples on tv because either writers don't have them or they just don't have the skills enough to pull off a compelling happy couple.

 

 

You really don't I do wonder which is it the writers have never been in a happy functioning relationships so

they have no idea how that works, or the skills to pull it off, lazy or think the audience loves all the drama,

brewing, miscommunication and etc. Or all of the above or some of the above. It really shouldn't be that hard.

 

You can want to go on a date all you want, but how about asking, 'what's your schedule? I want to go out with you, so let's find some free time in the next couple of weeks and we'll just have our night."

 

That would make too much sense. If they did that then what next open communication? Actually speaking to

each other, clearing up any misunderstanding or fess up any secrets they might have had and acting like

a normal real couple. Its too bad it would be nice to see.

[FormerMod-a1]

Yes, Dear actually had 2 married couples where the both couples liked each other.  (Yes, I watched it).

 

So did Family Ties and Growing Pains...

 

 

uuhh...  trying to think of something more recent...

 

... thought of one - Burn Notice!  Michael and Fi.  Once Upon a Time has some, too (Snow & Charming, Emma & Hook...)

 

The fact that I'm having trouble thinking of them though, speaks to this stupid trope.

[QueerGirrl]

Leslie and Ben on Parks and Rec

The Taylors on Friday Night Lights

 

That's all I got so far.

[Wiendish Fitch]

Overton and Synclaire on Living Single are good examples. I'd also include Howard and Bernadette from The Big Bang Theory.

[Sweet Tee]

Gomez and Morticia.

 

And my personal favorite, Hal and Lois from Malcolm in the Middle.

[Shannon L.]

The couple on Mad About You (the Buchmans?), iirc, was pretty drama free.  They had one serious issue, but it was resolved quickly. 

[ganesh]

Given the tens of examples out of 100,000 family sitcoms, I'd say there still needs to be a lot of work.

 

The married couple on Firefly was a good relationship too.

 

That would make too much sense. If they did that then what next open communication? Actually speaking to
each other, clearing up any misunderstanding or fess up any secrets they might have had and acting like
a normal real couple. Its too bad it would be nice to see.

 

You could still have the couple plan a "date night" and have wacky hijinks. Stuck at the office, etc. So it could be done in a funny way. 

[Spartan Girl]

One trope I absolutely hate more than anything is when a female character dumps her boyfriend only to later act mortally offended when he starts dating another woman.

Take Boy Meets World, when Topanga irrationally broke her engagement to Cory because of her parents divorcing. After several episodes of her basically treating Cory like dirt, Cory finally (for the moment) gave up and accepted a date with another girl. But when Topanga saw them together, she suddenly got all snotty, saying "If he wants her, he can have her." That really pissed me off. It's one thing to get jealous, but she lost the right to be upset when she dumped him.

It's like the writers of these scenarios believe that all women want their exes to pine forever for them, even if they don't want them. It's maddening.

Edited July 18, 2015 by Spartan Girl

[Rick Kitchen]

"But we were on a break!"

[Danny Franks]

One trope I absolutely hate more than anything is when a female character dumps her boyfriend only to later act mortally offended when he starts dating another woman.

Take Boy Meets World, when Topanga irrationally broke her engagement to Cory because of her parents divorcing. After several episodes of her basically treating Cory like dirt, Cory finally (for the moment) gave up and accepted a date with another girl. But when Topanga saw them together, she suddenly got all snotty, saying "If he wants her, he can have her." That really pissed me off. It's one thing to get jealous, but she lost the right to be upset when she dumped him.

It's like the writers of these scenarios believe that all women want their exes to pine forever for them, even if they don't want them. It's maddening.

 

And also the trope of one half of a 'will they, won't they couple' not being interested in the other... until they start dating someone else. Then it's suddenly jealousy and bitterness and pining glances. Usually followed by a pattern of dating/revenge-dating for years.

 

In fact, most romantic tropes on television are absolutely terrible. Because television writers are petrified of writing a proper romance, due to the fact a TV show thirty years ago fell apart for many reasons, including the writing of the relationship between the two leads.

[MaryPatShelby]

Yes, Dear actually had 2 married couples where the both couples liked each other.  (Yes, I watched it).

 

I watched it too.  Many, many times.  Thanks Nick at Nite!!

 

Never understood why I liked it, because the whole show is tropy as hell, but I think you hit it - the couples not only loved each other, but liked each other and showed it every day.

[Danny Franks]

Regarding couples who liked being with each other, I'd nominate Chuck and Sarah, in Chuck. Sure, it took them a while, and there was more than the requisite angst along the way, but once they got together, they were happy and clearly adored one another. They had a healthy sex life, enjoyed one another's company, laughed at one another's lame jokes, and when they had a fight, they made up afterwards. Almost like real people. Once they were together, they never broke up or cheated or anything that might create Drama. Their relationship just progressed from dating to living together to getting engaged to getting married*.

 

*Not counting the amnesia storyline.

[ABay]

*That ending almost made me hate the whole show retroactively.

Edited July 19, 2015 by ABay

[Danny Franks]

*That ending almost made me hate the whole show retroactively.

 

I know lots of people felt that way, but I was absolutely fine with it. To me, there were more than enough signs to confirm that she would eventually be back to normal.

[Wax Lion]

You just don't see well functioning couples on tv because either writers don't have them or they just don't have the skills enough to pull off a compelling happy couple.

    

You really don't I do wonder which is it the writers have never been in a happy functioning relationships so

they have no idea how that works, or the skills to pull it off, lazy or think the audience loves all the drama,

brewing, miscommunication and etc. Or all of the above or some of the above. It really shouldn't be that hard.

 

American soaps used to be good about this. They'd have couples that have been together forever. They usually dealt with their children's lives (as functional family sitcom parents do) or their jobs (they'd often have key roles in their small town), in the end they'd be there for each other. Nowadays they're constantly being thrown against each other, often get put in opposing jobs (General Hospital loves putting cops and mobsters together). But soaps don't do their infamous coffee scenes (where two friends discuss their lives over coffee, admittedly the talk was "I'm so worried about Dan now that he's with Jenny's evil twin, what is he thinking?") anymore, too.

 

I only see that in the international soaps. I've only been watching Coronation Street since it showed up on Hulu but it has plenty of couples who feel like they've been there forever and people look to them as an idea of the stability that's possible. (Corrie also has characters that just seem to be around to chat with the characters who have storylines.) Neighbours has a ridiculously small cast but it has room for two stable couples, when they're not being supportive of the other residents, they've often got comedic stories like when a guy gets his online shopping mixed up and switches his anniversary and his mother's birthday present.

[Rick Kitchen]

The only married couple still together on Days of Our Lives is the gay couple, Will and Sonny, and Will cheated on Sonny with Sonny's ex boyfriend, and they are in the process of breaking up.  Justin and Adrienne were just recently divorced after both of them had affairs, although they have had their on again and off again for years.

 

Oops, I forgot that Maggie and Victor are married, and the recurring characters Julie and Doug, whom we hardly ever see any more.

 

There is a couple coming back to the show who are married, but they've been off the show for years - Shawn and Belle.

[ToxicUnicorn]

Neighbours has a ridiculously small cast but it has room for two stable couples, when they're not being supportive of the other residents, they've often got comedic stories like when a guy gets his online shopping mixed up and switches his anniversary and his mother's birthday present.

 

Do you mean Good Neighbors, the British comedy?  (Spelled with or without the "u")  I enjoyed that show.  Very silly, light-hearted, completely clean humor, yet so much fun because the actors' chemistry and delivery was so good.  I would gladly watch Penelope Keith in anything she does, and that show is the exception that proves that stable couples can be fun.

[andromeda331]

But soaps don't do their infamous coffee scenes (where two friends discuss their lives over coffee, admittedly the talk was "I'm so worried about Dan now that he's with Jenny's evil twin, what is he thinking?") anymore, too.

 

I miss those scenes or an old one like Katherine on General Hospital commenting on how

horrible the last Nurse's Ball was which was funny because Katherine was dead last year.

I've always wanted more of the first date questions whether it was on soaps or other shows.

What's your family like? Well, my mom's been married nine times or my dad died twice but

he's now alive again. Fox on the X-Files my sister was kidnapped I think its by aliens.

[Wax Lion]

 

Do you mean Good Neighbors, the British comedy?

 

Actually, I meant the Australian soap Neighbours, which is running on Hulu. The Australian soaps tend to be surprisingly clean cut (considering that in the 70s they were known for being really racy).

[Proclone]

I agree. I know opposites attract and their tv couples but what do they talk about? Penny

doesn't like anything Leonard does she's constantly commenting on the shows he likes and

everything else. But every once in awhile she admits she has no idea what he's talking

about. So why are they together? Does she really want to spend the rest of her life

having no idea what he's talking about or asking him to explain? I know Ross and Rachel

ended up together but its hard to believe they'd stay together, they have nothing in common.

Luke and Lorelai is another couple, Luke is a hermit and there's nothing wrong with that but

Lorelai isn't. When they start dating someone else and many times I end up think their a

better fit then the one set in stone. Like with Beckett, I thought Deming was a better fit for

her. I could easily see her marrying him or another cop.  

 

Not that I particularly want to defend Castle because I don't watch it anymore, but I did think the show did a pretty good job of showing that Castle and Beckett had a fair amount in common outside of solving crimes.  They were both into comic books and scifi and heck, Castle was even one of Kate's favorite authors prior to meeting him.  I think there were a handful of other things they winded up having in common that I just don't remember off hand.  I think there was a reason that Kate was not given a working class background of a typical cop, and part of that was to make her more compatible with Castle.

 

I do agree that couples should seem like they like each other.  I don't mind playful teasing between couples.  I do with my friends and loved ones in real life, but when the jabs slip into just plain meanness then I usually have a hard time investing in the couple.  I can continue to use Castle as an example, I thought that at least by the end of the first season, Beckett at least liked Castle even if she wasn't sold on the idea of a relationship with him and their banter was just friendly teasing.  On the other hand a couple like Logan and Veronica from Veronica Mars I have a hard time getting behind because he was just so vile to her prior to them getting together, but I guess he was funny so that means it's alright in TV land.

 

Regarding couples who liked being with each other, I'd nominate Chuck and Sarah, in Chuck. Sure, it took them a while, and there was more than the requisite angst along the way, but once they got together, they were happy and clearly adored one another. They had a healthy sex life, enjoyed one another's company, laughed at one another's lame jokes, and when they had a fight, they made up afterwards. Almost like real people. Once they were together, they never broke up or cheated or anything that might create Drama. Their relationship just progressed from dating to living together to getting engaged to getting married*.

 

*Not counting the amnesia storyline.

 

I really liked Chuck and Sarah.  I thought they were genuinely sweet together and I liked that they weren't the "slap, slap, kiss," kind of couple.  While I don't hate that trope (some of my favorite couples in fiction fall into that trope), I don't think every couple need to throw witty barbs back and forth at each other all the time.

 

But Chuck does bring me to the trope I do absolutely hate-Resets! Writers, just say no to amnesia plots, time travel (especially if it wasn't part of the story to begin with) and "it was all just a dream" episodes.  Dear writers do not get me invested in the relationship upgrade, or the significant character being killed etc, and then pull the rug out from under everyone and say "whoops, never happened."  If I sat through watching that story it better have an impact on the overall story arc of the piece of fiction.  And no I don't care if one (or even a couple) of characters still know the truth of what happened, it's still a cop out.  It's bad writing in my book. Events in stories should have impact, on the characters and the audience when you reset you take away the impact and leave me wondering why I bothered to watch in the first place.  For example with Chuck, what was really the point of watching Chuck and Sarah's relationship grow and develop if they were just going to have to start over from scratch?  Why did I bother watching Sarah's character grow and change, if she was going to reset to who she was before the first episode?

 

It makes me feel like I wasted my time getting invested in the characters and the plot. When it's done in one episode, then I'm pissed.  When it's done with whole seasons or story arc then I'm usually out.

 

A slightly related trope I dislike (but not to the level of the reset) is the "Groundhog's Day Episode."  In my book they are rarely done well, I and I get tired of seeing the same events over and over even if they are slightly changed.  I usually find them really boring.

Edited July 20, 2015 by Proclone

[ZuluQueenOfDwarves]

Scrubs is the only show I've ever seen that does alternate reality/all just a dream episodes well. There was a first season ep where JD (the main character) went through a whole arc to prove a patient he liked didn't have a grave diagnosis only to realize the whole episode took place as a daydream. There was another that drew from the Sixth Sense in the third season where a recurring character turned out to be dead all along, and a fourth or fifth season ep called "My Life in Four Cameras" where the events set up in the beginning were resolved in a typical sitcom fashion, only for the real resolutions to be shown in the last 5 minutes. All of them were well-written, beautifully acted, and gut-wrenching when I first saw them. Even many years later they're still affecting. That's what a show should aspire to, and if you can't do an episode like that, don't do an alt-reality episode.

[Andyourlittledog2]

A slightly related trope I dislike (but not to the level of the reset) is the "Groundhog's Day Episode."  In my book they are rarely done well, I and I get tired of seeing the same events over and over even if they are slightly changed.  I usually find them really boring.

 

I agree with this except for Stargate SG-1's 'Window of Opportunity' episode which was one of my top five favorites in the entire series.  

 

As far as TV couples go, the miscommunication trope is so worn out that I can barely tolerate it any longer.  Couples on TV also break up over minor things for no real reason that is ever shown to the viewer.  It seems to just happen so that the writers can feed more plotlines or characters into the series, it's never truly organic to the couple itself. And the 'I broke up with him but must control his dating choices/life forever anyway' trope is beyond irritating.  But really, all of this is just inorganic plotlines.  The writers want things to happen, so they do. It doesn't matter if it makes sense for the characters or within the storyline.  It's just lazy writing. Which I think we see more of lately than ever. I sometimes think the writers have some algorithm they use to create story ideas and just plug in the character names and run with whatever pops up next. Makes as much sense as anything else. 

[AntiBeeSpray]

^ Word! I HATE this trope with FIRE! It just screams cheap.

[ganesh]

I agree with this except for Stargate SG-1's 'Window of Opportunity' episode which was one of my top five favorites in the entire series.

 

Scifi likes the 'groundhog day' and the 'body switching' episodes. A show can only do them once, so if they screw it up, they look tacky. But if they pull it off, it's brilliant.

 

WOO is great. I defy anyone to show me a body switching episode better than Farscape though. 

[selkie]

WOO is great. I defy anyone to show me a body switching episode better than Farscape though. 

 

Farscape often did a really good job of putting their own spin on what should be a tired trope like the body switching episode and 'Different Destinations' which has to be one of the more gut-wrenching time travel episodes I've seen. But even they couldn't pull off a tolerable version of Groundhog Day's even more tiresome cousin the Rashomon episode.

Edited July 21, 2015 by selkie

[ganesh]

The body switching made up for it. "why are you wearing a picture of Rygel on your shirt?"

[Linderhill]

One trope I am heartily tired of is the season ending cliff hanger.  Its one of the reasons I loved Leverage so much, the showrunners thought that it was lazy writing and I totally agree.  It get's very tiresome. 

[ganesh]

Not to crow about Farscape too much, but they did 4,3,2 as a cliffhanger three parter, and the finale was the wrap up/denouement. 

[Demented Daisy]

WOO is great. I defy anyone to show me a body switching episode better than Farscape though. 

 

While I haven't seen Farscape, Haven's The Old Switcheroo (Parts 1 and 2) were great fun!

 

I also liked Haven's Groundhog Day episode Audrey Parker's Day Off -- though it was much more dramatic than the film it was patterned after.

[HalcyonDays]

If you are a woman who lives in the city, has a career of her own, eats sensibly, works out, dresses well, is clean, not an outdoorsy type, and a brunette to boot? Yeah, you will never, ever be written to be rooted for by the audience. You will either be the other woman or the out and out villainess, but never the heroine (or, at the very least, someone we care about).

 

Don't forget the second part of that trope. The this City Woman only really wants to marry the perfect man, have tons of babies and move to surburbia to be a hausfrau. That her career isn't rewarding enough, having lots of friends isn't enough and being financially stable isn't enough. Even though she dates lots of men, it's only because she's looking for the perfect man. In her heart, she really wants to give it all up to be with her "perfect" husband and babies in the life she "really wanted."

 

Not saying some people don't want this, but when was the last time you saw a man give up his big-city career to marry a woman in the city, and he gets to be the stay-at-home dad doting on the kiddies, whereas high-powered wife does her thing. I think I've seen it maybe once on TV (and I forget the show).

 

You can only be happy living in a small town with small town folks. Cities are for soulless workaholics.

 

Cities aren't souless? The one I live it feels like it *grin*

[ganesh]

X-Files did a good ground hog day too.

[DittyDotDot]

Farscape many times tackled so many genre tropes and came out ahead, mostly due to them not taking themselves too seriously and embraced that it was a trope. I think that's the key myself.

[Proclone]

Farscape often did a really good job of putting their own spin on what should be a tired trope like the body switching episode and 'Different Destinations' which has to be one of the more gut-wrenching time travel episodes I've seen. But even they couldn't pull off a tolerable version of Groundhog Day's even more tiresome cousin the Rashomon episode.

 

I should probably clarify, time travel in and of itself doesn't bother me.  I'm currently catching up on 12 Monkeys and quite enjoying it and time travel is inherit to that plot.  What I don't like is when it's used as an easy reset button when either the writers have written themselves into a corner or just want to throw the fans a bone without actually having to make permanent plot advancements.

 

The first time I remember seeing the season long reset and being really annoyed was in Witchblade (which I'm pretty sure I'm one of five people who watched that series).  At the end of the first season the timeline is reset back to the beginning of the series.  I remember wondering why I bothered to get invested in the plot and the characters, (and even being upset when some of them died) if nothing really "counted."  

 

I also should point out I don't really mind seeing alternate timelines or alternate realities as long as it is clear from the beginning that this is an alternate timeline, and then that it does have some impact on the overall plot or at least the characters.  I think why some of these tropes worked on Farscape is that everything that happened in those alternate or unrealized realized (the term the used in the show) or even the episodes where all the events were hallucinations had a profound effect on John and therefore effected the plot moving forward.  I never felt like I was wasting my time watching those episodes.

 

While I haven't seen Farscape, Haven's The Old Switcheroo (Parts 1 and 2) were great fun!

 

I also liked Haven's Groundhog Day episode Audrey Parker's Day Off -- though it was much more dramatic than the film it was patterned after.

 

I remember thinking Haven's Groundhog Day episode was okay.  It was certainly one of the better ones but even then I was starting to get bored watching the same events happen repeatedly.  I also think the problem with those episodes is the viewer tends to get a head of the characters and figures out what needs to be "fixed" before the characters do (or at least I feel I like tend to).  I feel like if events are pretty different between days, I don't mind it as much. If there almost the same with only minor changes I get really bored.

 

I'n neutral on body switching episodes.  They can be really fun (both Farscape and Haven's were) or they can be really bad and hammy.  It really falls completely on whether the actors can pull it off.

Edited July 22, 2015 by Proclone

[Wax Lion]

 

The first time I remember seeing the season long reset and being really annoyed was in Witchblade (which I'm pretty sure I'm one of five people who watched that series).

 

I've long wanted to watch Witchblade. I avoided it because of the comic being such a joke but then a friend told me the first season was full of radical feminist concepts turned into scifi. Unfortunately it seems to be hard to find since it didn't end in a satisfying way.