TV Tropes: Love 'em or Loathe 'em

[Kel Varnsen]

On 25/09/2018 at 4:43 PM, Brookside said:

Police procedurals when several cops go to grab the "perp" at a house and they all go in the front door, guns ablazing, and no-one covers the back door.  Through which the perp escapes.  Do they really want us to think that cops are this stupid?

Or when they find the perp in public and call out his/her name as they see them. Even if they are 50 feet away and it allows said perp to get a nice head start when they decide to run.

On 05/10/2018 at 4:30 PM, topanga said:

Serial killers are always evil geniuses. With deep-seated psychoses.  Rarely are they just evil jerks. 

That one is anoying. And they always set traps or display bodies in some crazy intricate displays to taunt the cops or target cops direct like the Riddler or something. They never just kill homeless people or prostitutes. Hell the Zodiac kiler was murdering people 50 years ago and he is still talked about for  simply sending coded letters. Because it was actually a big deal.

[AntiBeeSpray]

5 hours ago, topanga said:

I have to admit that I’m a sucker for will they/won’t they stories simply because I like watching actors work together who have great chemistry and banter. And I like a good romance—or the possibility of romance. But I agree with you that most of these stories are not written well. 

The first show I remember with a WTWT plot was Cheers. As a kid I really didn’t know whether Sam and Diane would get together. I had no idea that this was a common TV trope. So it was a fun mystery to me. 

Yea I like good ones. Like in Bones or even in Perry Mason. The latter was pretty fun to watch. To see Perry and Della end up together. Even though the actors played it 50/50, so neither the people who didn't want the romance and those who did would be upset. It was nice and even handed :).

[ganesh]

10 hours ago, kariyaki said:

This is why I think Fringe was ultimately a much better show. They weren't afraid to pull the trigger on romance between the main characters and they knew in advance what they wanted to do with the mytharc.

This is a salient point. If the XF had done this, it probably would have been the best show of all time. 

[andromeda331]

15 hours ago, Chaos Theory said:

Honestly I hate Will they/won’t they stories. Do or don’t.  I liked shows like Castle because it was pretty evident that they were heading for a “will they” so I was willing to wait for them to get there.   The X-Files liked to tease but never quite committed to Will they or won’t they.   If they had I would have been fine.  They liked to straddle both sides and that is what pissed me off in the end.

So do I. I used to like them but change my mind. I hate when they tease and don't deliver. But also they do the will they or won't they there's always a false boyfriend/girlfriend which ends up breaking up with. Then my least favorite they kiss or do something but then they come up with some excuse for why they can't be together. Friends was "We were on a Break", the Nanny had the Thing, even recently we had Sue and Sean who spent over an entire year missing each other, and after awhile I start wondering why neither one just says something. They usually drag it out for too long without ever really giving a reason why. With Castle and Gilmore Girls I liked the beginning part Beckett and Castle meet and spend the first season sniping back and forth, the second season seemed like Castle might realize his feelings or at least enough to see her with someone else and decided its time to move on, Kate finally realizes her feelings but its too late. This time it made sense as far as Castle knew she was going away with Deming so he ends up unexpectedly back with his ex-wife. Then through season three it seems like its Castle realizing he loves Kate and tells her, well after she got shot. But then it got weird with Kate pretending she didn't remember. It made no sense. Yeah, they finally date in season five, then they have that weird Castle disappearing on his wedding day. It just went weird. With Luke and Lorelai there were moments in season one back and forth Rachel leaving realizing Luke loves Lorelai, they had a really nice friendship but that all disappeared when they finally started dating (rumor is ASP didn't like having to put them together but the network forced her hand) we have Lorelai keeping stupid secrets from Luke like staying at Christopher's all night even though it was because Christopher's dad died and they spent all night talking well Christopher mostly talking. Then next season its Luke keeping a big secret after they make him look like a really big jackass by giving a speech about how about trust and then doesn't tell Lorelai about April for 2 months. Seriously, why did we even need a secret daughter? Oh, right a reason to split up Luke and Lorelai. But why? Why does it have to get weird? Why did we have to waste an entire season of Sue who always goes after everything won't just tell Sean she likes him. She had so many times. After the Chancellor's Ball, any time he showed up at her house. Christmas when they had that kiss. Nope, they wanted to put them off until the last episode but never came up with a reason why.

With other couples like Carrie and Big, Rachel and Ross, its not so much yea they finally came together after all this time its more of they deserve each other. After Carrie and Big's affair and how they both treated other people they dated, Rachel and Ross's horrible behavior any time the other dated someone else. 

[Irlandesa]

On 10/11/2018 at 8:26 AM, Chaos Theory said:

Honestly I hate Will they/won’t they stories. Do or don’t.  I liked shows like Castle because it was pretty evident that they were heading for a “will they” so I was willing to wait for them to get there.

99% of "Will they/won't they stories" are, much like Castle, obviously headed for "they will."  The only question is "when" and what obstacles will get in the way. 

I'm a sucker for a good will they/won't they.  My issue is with the obstacles. There are only so many that can be reasonably used before they stop being organic (based on characterization and circumstance) and more contrived.

[Anela]

On 10/11/2018 at 9:26 AM, Chaos Theory said:

Honestly I hate Will they/won’t they stories. Do or don’t.  I liked shows like Castle because it was pretty evident that they were heading for a “will they” so I was willing to wait for them to get there.   The X-Files liked to tease but never quite committed to Will they or won’t they.   If they had I would have been fine.  They liked to straddle both sides and that is what pissed me off in the end.

I don't like them much, either - especially if there is a love triangle involved. I haven't watched several of the shows mentioned, but it was weird when Niles and Daphne finally got together in Frasier (from what I remember). At least in Friends, Ross and Rachel were together for a while - they didn't drag it out for years, until it came to "will they get back together?" 

[andromeda331]

3 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

99% of "Will they/won't they stories" are, much like Castle, obviously headed for "they will."  The only question is "when" and what obstacles will get in the way. 

I'm a sucker for a good will they/won't they.  My issue is with the obstacles. There are only so many that can be reasonably used before they stop being organic (based on characterization and circumstance) and more contrived.

I agree there really are very few and after awhile it does get annoying. I really hate when one or both are dating someone else or married and then suddenly realize their in love with someone else. Like Daphne telling Niles she had feelings for him when he was MARRIED to someone else and she was engaged and his immediate reaction is to ask her for a date. Even though he just married someone else. Its not romantic or special and really cheapens what should be a really big moment. They finally declare their feelings for each other. That should be great. And it would have been awesome. If he hadn't just married someone else. I watch the episode when it first aired horrified that this was how they decided to put them together and felt horrible for Mel. It really doesn't make Niles or Daphne look good at all. They could have picked almost any other way to do it. It didn't have to include when one was married to someone else and the other was engaged. I find it annoying when one or both are engaged or in relationships when they suddenly decide to tell their feelings in the will they/won't they stories but marriage is so much worse. Or Carrie and Big having their affair behind his wife and her fiancé's back. Or Rachel and Ross not getting back together but every time one ended up dating someone else the other acted like a horrible jerk. But after that relationship ended they...didn't get back together. Or you know Rachel deciding to fly to England to ruin Emily's wedding. I get there needs to be obstacles but can there be ones that don't make them look horrible? 

[Anela]

4 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

I agree there really are very few and after awhile it does get annoying. I really hate when one or both are dating someone else or married and then suddenly realize their in love with someone else. Like Daphne telling Niles she had feelings for him when he was MARRIED to someone else and she was engaged and his immediate reaction is to ask her for a date. Even though he just married someone else. Its not romantic or special and really cheapens what should be a really big moment. They finally declare their feelings for each other. That should be great. And it would have been awesome. If he hadn't just married someone else. I watch the episode when it first aired horrified that this was how they decided to put them together and felt horrible for Mel. It really doesn't make Niles or Daphne look good at all. They could have picked almost any other way to do it. It didn't have to include when one was married to someone else and the other was engaged. I find it annoying when one or both are engaged or in relationships when they suddenly decide to tell their feelings in the will they/won't they stories but marriage is so much worse. Or Carrie and Big having their affair behind his wife and her fiancé's back. Or Rachel and Ross not getting back together but every time one ended up dating someone else the other acted like a horrible jerk. But after that relationship ended they...didn't get back together. Or you know Rachel deciding to fly to England to ruin Emily's wedding. I get there needs to be obstacles but can there be ones that don't make them look horrible? 

In Grey's Anatomy, they had that happen with April and Jackson - a couple I liked together, but didn't like the way they ran off from her *wedding* when Jackson said he was in love with her, in front of everyone. They eloped. Then they lost a baby, ended up divorced, she wanted to get back together, and ends up with the guy she dumped at the altar? I just can't with a lot of these shows now. It was supposed to be them having been through so much, but no... at that point, I wanted April and Jackson back together. 

Edited October 16, 2018 by Anela

[AntiBeeSpray]

18 hours ago, Anela said:

I don't like them much, either - especially if there is a love triangle involved. I haven't watched several of the shows mentioned, but it was weird when Niles and Daphne finally got together in Frasier (from what I remember). At least in Friends, Ross and Rachel were together for a while - they didn't drag it out for years, until it came to "will they get back together?" 

I remember that one. Hated when they did that in Frasier... and Mel got on my nerves. Hated her.

Another one... Diana Fowley on the X Files. Kind of a triangle/road block, all thanks to Chris Carter. I hated the bs that the show pulled just to make sure M and S wouldn't be together. 

[andromeda331]

20 hours ago, Anela said:

In Grey's Anatomy, they had that happen with April and Jackson - a couple I liked together, but didn't like the way they ran off from her *wedding* when Jackson said he was in love with her, in front of everyone. They eloped. Then they lost a baby, ended up divorced, she wanted to get back together, and ends up with the guy she dumped at the altar? I just can't with a lot of these shows now. It was supposed to be them having been through so much, but no... at that point, I wanted April and Jackson back together. 

That's horrible. That's why I end up hating the will they/won't they is more often then not they end up at that point for me. I stop rooting for couples some of the obstacles were horrible or became too much that you get to that point you don't want them together anymore. Nothing about Big and Carrie ending up together at the end of the series was happy or wonderful for me. At that point he cheated on his wife, she cheated on her fiancé, she stalked his ex-wife (it didn't really fact too much in the show but he cheated on her to so you really wonder his odds of not cheating a third time) and mother, and both ended up behaving horrible and treated each other like crap. Same with Ross and Rachel by the end of the series they had been together, broke up, had the never ending "We were on a break" crap, Ross treating who Rachel dated like crap, Rachel treating who Ross dated like crap, but when he broke up with the girlfriend deciding they can't be together, he got engaged to another woman, she decided to show up and crash the wedding, they got married, and divorced, they had a kid. It was too much and they both ended up really unlikeable when it came to each other. 

[WhitneyWhit]

I hate the "How am I going to pay for college" trope. In the TV world, there's only two ways to pay for college; your parents pay everything, or you receive some sort of full ride scholarship, financial aid, grants, loans, etc. do not exist.

[Jacqs]

US high schools on television are strictly for people in their early to mid 20s, with occasional students in their 30s (Hi, Ahhhndrea!). They are required to wear incredibly tight clothing, take part in incredibly cliched clique warfare, and no one is allowed to acknowledge that they are all 25.

[ChromaKelly]

10 hours ago, WhitneyWhit said:

I hate the "How am I going to pay for college" trope. In the TV world, there's only two ways to pay for college; your parents pay everything, or you receive some sort of full ride scholarship, financial aid, grants, loans, etc. do not exist.

And, you don't start worrying this until the last couple months of your senior year, which is also when you start looking and applying to colleges.

[Annber03]

2 hours ago, JacquelineAppleton said:

US high schools on television are strictly for people in their early to mid 20s, with occasional students in their 30s (Hi, Ahhhndrea!). They are required to wear incredibly tight clothing, take part in incredibly cliched clique warfare, and no one is allowed to acknowledge that they are all 25.

Seriously, I'm always amused when I see a show or a movie with high school students walking around in mini-skirts and tank tops and crop tops and midriff shirts and such. Their school dress codes are clearly a hell of a LOT more relaxed than the ones my high school had!

[Spartan Girl]

Bland/bitchy female characters that somehow all the male characters on the show fall hopelessly in love with.

[topanga]

1 hour ago, Spartan Girl said:

Bland/bitchy female characters that somehow all the male characters on the show fall hopelessly in love with.

And her main boyfriend is usually a nice guy, but he simply can’t break up with her because she apparently whipped up some kind of spell that keeps him bound to her. 

[proserpina65]

On ‎10‎/‎10‎/‎2018 at 9:56 AM, Chaos Theory said:

That’s been going on since Adam West was Batman and probably earlier. He would be dead if the bad guys didnt have deep seated psychoses.  Plus it’s just more fun to watch then your garden variety bad guy.

Not for me.  I'd much rather watch tv cops hunting for garden variety bad guys.  Which is why I don't watch Criminal Minds.

 

On ‎10‎/‎10‎/‎2018 at 12:57 PM, AntiBeeSpray said:

Thing is, at least for the most part, it made the show stronger for it. Heck even Frank knew that. I'm para-phrasing here, but he said this in 2016, that fans liked the show for the characters and not the scary stories (not all fans, just a general thing here). He had a better view of the show than CC ever did.

I felt it made the show weaker.  I hated Scully and Mulder together romantically, and it made me stop watching even now and then.

[Chaos Theory]

6 hours ago, JacquelineAppleton said:

US high schools on television are strictly for people in their early to mid 20s, with occasional students in their 30s (Hi, Ahhhndrea!). They are required to wear incredibly tight clothing, take part in incredibly cliched clique warfare, and no one is allowed to acknowledge that they are all 25.

But that does make a certain amount of sense especially if the show focuses on the high school students.  With Child Labor Laws as they are the budget for most WB and CW shows would triple.  Plus it would border on endangerment  every time the hot guy took off his shirt.   So they hire twenty somethings so they can work twenty hour days and go shirtless and give us those sex scene we all demand and not make us feel like sexual predators for enjoying them.   

Edited October 18, 2018 by Chaos Theory

[ratgirlagogo]

26 minutes ago, proserpina65 said:

On 10/10/2018 at 9:56 AM, Chaos Theory said:

That’s been going on since Adam West was Batman and probably earlier. He would be dead if the bad guys didnt have deep seated psychoses.  Plus it’s just more fun to watch then your garden variety bad guy.

Not for me.  I'd much rather watch tv cops hunting for garden variety bad guys.  Which is why I don't watch Criminal Minds.

It goes back to Professor Moriarty for sure.  At this point the TV Moriartys ARE the garden variety bad guys.  I'm SICK of them and even more sick of the stupid Criminal Minds style profiling that purports to be "scientific" as shit.  

[Domenicholas]

Speaking of high school, I hate when there’s the big dance coming up and one of the characters (usually female) makes up several excuses for why she’s not going (I have too much homework, I don’t have anything to wear, I’m not interested, etc...), only to go anyway. I would love for a character to decide not to go to the dance and actually not go.

 

On a different note, plans where one person has to seduce another are annoying because the seducer always always ALWAYS genuinely falls for the target. Just once, I would like the seducer to turn around and say I’m gay/married/just doing my job.

[Wiendish Fitch]

2 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

Bland/bitchy female characters that somehow all the male characters on the show fall hopelessly in love with.

*CoughJoeyPottercough*

[HunterHunted]

1 hour ago, Chaos Theory said:

But that does make a certain amount of sense especially if the show focuses on the high school students.  With Child Labor Laws as they are the budget for most WB and CW shows would triple.  Plus it would border on endangerment  every time the hot guy took off his shirt.   So they hire twenty somethings so they can work twenty hour days and go shirtless and give us those sex scene we all demand and not make us feel like sexual predators for enjoying them.   

Yeah, the only way around this is that you pull the Disney model. You pull the kid out of school, have an on set tutor, and you film 5 seasons of a show in 18 months. That's what they did for Lizzie McGuire. The show continued to air new episodes for 2 and a half years after they wrapped production.

[Silver Raven]

On 10/10/2018 at 6:07 AM, merylinkid said:

Oh yes.    As noted in another thread, they all have these elaborate staged scenes.   Because 1) you want to take all the time  you COULD be getting away to stage a scene with TONS of forensic evidence (this paint used to draw the ancient celtic symbol is only sold in 3 stores in the area)  and 2) nope, nothing to connect all those scenes when you are eventually caught.   Which is only when one of your victim's family members has a special talent that lets them join up with the task force formed to hunt you down despite absolutely no law enforcement experience.

No serial killer just slashes their victims throat and leaves them in the woods.   

The Top 100 Things I'd Do If I Ever Became An Evil Overlord

http://www.eviloverlord.com/lists/overlord.html

[Raja]

2 hours ago, Chaos Theory said:

  Plus it would border on endangerment  every time the hot guy took off his shirt.   So they hire twenty somethings so they can work twenty hour days and go shirtless and give us those sex scene we all demand and not make us feel like sexual predators for enjoying them.   

Now look here, Holly Robinson was playing an adult undercover in the high school ?

[Jacqs]

9 hours ago, Annber03 said:

Seriously, I'm always amused when I see a show or a movie with high school students walking around in mini-skirts and tank tops and crop tops and midriff shirts and such. Their school dress codes are clearly a hell of a LOT more relaxed than the ones my high school had!

Yeah. A lot of real life teenage girls try to get those codes changed by running to the media and screaming sexism, but there are reasons for the dress codes. Teenagers forget that every adult was a teen at some point. There was a newspaper article by a woman who mentioned that as a little kid she resented when the "don't let people touch you in certain places" video told little girls to not let adults touch them on their chest but didn't tell boys that. It was only when she older that she understood that even a little girl's flat chest is breasts to a pedo.

[AntiBeeSpray]

7 hours ago, proserpina65 said:

Not for me.  I'd much rather watch tv cops hunting for garden variety bad guys.  Which is why I don't watch Criminal Minds.

 

I felt it made the show weaker.  I hated Scully and Mulder together romantically, and it made me stop watching even now and then.

I'd say that was due to CC's writing getting weaker in parts. They didn't know what to do with their kid. Honestly hated them broken up. That didn't help things any. Made it unwatchable. I don't mind a good MOTW or mytharc, as long as it doesn't throw fans under the bus. That was very off putting in s10 and 11. CC wanted fans to like his scary stories over M and S. And that kind of thing (in my opinion) blinded him. I remember when he could write (at least half way decently), and I missed that. 

[paulvdb]

15 hours ago, topanga said:

And her main boyfriend is usually a nice guy, but he simply can’t break up with her because she apparently whipped up some kind of spell that keeps him bound to her. 

And there's also gender reversed situation of the nice girl with the asshole jock boyfriend.

[proserpina65]

On ‎10‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 9:05 PM, AntiBeeSpray said:

I'd say that was due to CC's writing getting weaker in parts. They didn't know what to do with their kid. Honestly hated them broken up. That didn't help things any. Made it unwatchable. I don't mind a good MOTW or mytharc, as long as it doesn't throw fans under the bus. That was very off putting in s10 and 11. CC wanted fans to like his scary stories over M and S. And that kind of thing (in my opinion) blinded him. I remember when he could write (at least half way decently), and I missed that. 

I hated it long before Scully had a kid.  I thought it worked with them as friends and partners; the move into romance killed it for me.  And I liked the scary stories.

Edited October 22, 2018 by proserpina65

[Mulva]

On 10/18/2018 at 1:47 PM, topanga said:

And her main boyfriend is usually a nice guy, but he simply can’t break up with her because she apparently whipped up some kind of spell that keeps him bound to her. 

You've watched the Gilmore Girls, I assume.

[topanga]

On 10/22/2018 at 11:12 AM, Mulva said:

You've watched the Gilmore Girls, I assume.

No, but I’ve heard so much about it, I feel like I have. 

I currently watch three TV shows that feature rude, angsty teenage girls (This Is Us, A Million Little Things, and Manifest). Plus, The Americans and Shades of Blue recently ended and also featured ansgty teenage girls. Oh, yeah--and Little Big Lies from last season. Writers and Directors, all adolescent girls are not that dramatic. Sure, there are hormonal surges and emotional sagas during the teenage years that affect both boys and girls. But girls are the ones we see yelling at their parents annoying everyone around them. The adolescent boys fare much better. I will say that This Is Us shows teenage Kevin being moody and rude at times, but it's nowhere nearly as bad as his twin sister Kate, who's always frowning and complaining about everything. 

[Jacqs]

 A person orders a turkey from a bloke in the pub for Christmas. Turkey arrives in a basket and is still alive. This leads to hilarious scenes whereby purchaser puzzles over the best way to dispatch it 

I think you should strangle it instantly, in case it starts to make friends with us.

[crowsworks]

On 7/22/2018 at 9:04 PM, Annber03 said:

It's usually because some fans ship the person who's in a relationship with one of their co-workers instead, so therefore the wife/girlfriend (or boyfriend/husband, sometimes) gets dumped on instead. Some "Criminal Minds" fans hate Will because they ship JJ with a teammate, some hated Haley (and later, Beth) because they think Hotch should be with someone on the team, etc. 

The part that really disturbs me is when I see some people ranting about the significant others and they're saying, "We want to make sure x character is with the RIGHT person!", as though the character were a real person and the fans were legitimately trying to match them up for real. I mean, I've got my favorite ships on my shows, sure, and if they became canon, hey, awesome :). And reading/writing fic about your favorite ships is cool, too.

But I'm also aware these are fictional characters, and I don't act like I have some kind of some weird ownership over their love lives. Nor would I harass the actors because their characters aren't together, or harass an actor whose character is "in the way" of a ship I like. That's just...creepy. 

Or they make co=workers gay - obviously -so no one can ship them. White collar  did this. Never explored just don't flirt with her, she's gay.

[crowsworks]

On 10/18/2018 at 12:20 PM, Spartan Girl said:

Bland/bitchy female characters that somehow all the male characters on the show fall hopelessly in love with.

Crabby...errrr Abby on ER. 

[Jacqs]

The "politics" episode of a sitcom.

British sitcoms used to have a political-candidate-in-local-election episode.

If one of the characters is standing in an election it's always as an Independent rather than for a named political party.

it has to be a comedy 'local issues' campaign.

[Dr.OO7]

"Uptight Loves Wild"

It's not that it's bad, per se, it's just that nearly every time it's featured, it's always "free-spirit gets stick-in-the-mud to loosen up and enjoy life".

I mentioned this in two other threads--I just watched the Hallmark Channel movie "Christmas In The Air", and for all of its typical cheesiness, I appreciated that for once, it's the uptight person to teach the wild person to get his act together--hell, he HIRES her because his life's a mess and he needs her to organize it.

[DrSpaceman73]

I can't say I "hate" this trope, but I noticed recently any scene on TV where a group of African American jazz musicians is shown playing in a bar is always followed by them then smoking pot out back, often secretly. 

[DearEvette]

I don't like the trope where you go through the trouble of giving your protagonist a powerful special ability but when it comes time for them to use it something renders it competently ineffective.  And I am not talking about the villain being aware of the power and taking counter measures against it.  I am talking about convenient plot elements to nullify the power.

For instance, your heroine is a psychic and while she can read everybody else's mind, for a reason never explained, she just can't read the bad guy's mind and he kidnaps her.  Or you give your hero the ability to teleport, but in a never before explained development when he is imprisoned he can't teleport out of his prison because it has iron walls or some such.

[Domenicholas]

I am really tired of slap-slap kiss relationships, where two people bicker before they figure out they like each other. There's nothing bad about those relationships, but media tends to make every relationship like that, regardless of whether or not it fits the personality of the characters. It makes romance boring when as soon as you see two arguing, you're like "they're going to be together." God forbid you have two characters get together by, gasp, being kind to each other and open about their affections. Monroe and Rosalee from Grimm, for example, had a compelling romance without it starting as slap-slap kiss.

[CoderLady]

Totally agree. What makes me saddest about this trope is that whenever a TV couple gets together because they actually like each other and have shared experiences that show that they're compatible, they're thought to be "boring" or "no/low chemistry." Shit. Chemistry isn't everything and if it's all they've got it's going to be a very short relationship.

[Annber03]

Exactly. Hell, I'd say that the fact they have stuff in common, and get on well with each other, and enjoy spending time together, is all part of what creates that chemistry in the first place. 

Besides that, while couples that fight passionately a lot may be interesting to some viewers, that constant drama can also get very exhausting very fast. 

[andromeda331]

23 hours ago, Annber03 said:

Exactly. Hell, I'd say that the fact they have stuff in common, and get on well with each other, and enjoy spending time together, is all part of what creates that chemistry in the first place. 

Besides that, while couples that fight passionately a lot may be interesting to some viewers, that constant drama can also get very exhausting very fast. 

It can be interesting and sometimes I have found it great depending on the couples. But it gets old fast when all they do is fight and also gets old when that type of couple is all you see. Its nice to see more variety. Couple that have a lot in common, get long well and happy, friends that turn into relationships. Also for all the opposites attract there still needs to be a reason why their together. For example in all the years I watch Big Bang Theory (I stopped a couple years back) I don't know why Penny and Leonard were together or meant to be. They had nothing in common, Penny disliked almost everything Leonard liked and loved, his love for her never seem beyond an attraction which yes it something but after that there was nothing else and as the years went by it didn't really work as a reason either especially since he was as dismissive about things she liked and her life as she was about his. Or Carrie and Big, why exactly were they so into each other? She stalked his ex-wife and mom, she flipped out all the time over everything, he's always coming and going, even if you take those away she had very few interests and not really interested in developing new interests there's nothing wrong with that but its hard to image what if anything the two talked about or that they both wouldn't bore of each other.

Edited January 5, 2019 by andromeda331

[Annber03]

49 minutes ago, andromeda331 said:

Also for all the opposites attract there still needs to be a reason why their together. 

Agreed. A couple can be different in any and all kinds of ways, but there needs to be that one big important thing (perhaps a couple things, who knows) that holds them together. Maybe they share the same beliefs and values about certain issues. Maybe they're on the same page about whether they want a family or not. Maybe it's as simple as the fact that they like the same books, or movies, or music. Whatever it is, there's got to be something they can connect and bond over. 

[aradia22]

Quote

I am really tired of slap-slap kiss relationships, where two people bicker before they figure out they like each other. There's nothing bad about those relationships, but media tends to make every relationship like that, regardless of whether or not it fits the personality of the characters. It makes romance boring when as soon as you see two arguing, you're like "they're going to be together." God forbid you have two characters get together by, gasp, being kind to each other and open about their affections. Monroe and Rosalee from Grimm, for example, had a compelling romance without it starting as slap-slap kiss.

I used to be really into this trope but then again I was younger and had a much shallower view of relationships. At this point, kind and respectful sound awesome to me. I think it can still work, especially when it's just at the start of the relationship. But like mostly poorly or lazily deployed tropes, it's ruined by the execution. Tropes are not inherently bad. Misused tropes are. 

When I think of times I liked this trope in the past I think of couples like Booth/Brennan on Bones, Cole/Phoebe on Charmed, Nicholas/Mia in The Princess Diaries 2, Sam/Diane on Cheers, Chuck/Blair on Gossip Girl, and Kyle/Max on Living Single. I don't think it's an accident that these are older examples. I think it's falling out of favor as a trope and also my tastes are changing so I'm moving away from shows that use this trope. Slap slap kiss can mean fun banter and crackling sexual tension. But while it might signal attraction in spite of seeming incompatibilities or protestations of dislike, it doesn't work longterm. It's too immature. How are the characters ever supposed to have meaningful adult conversations if they're always in this mode? I think that's why this doesn't work for sitcoms that don't really let the characters grow and change. I'd argue that this is what trips up the Big Bang Theory (I'm assuming, I don't watch it). 

[merylinkid]

On 1/1/2019 at 4:47 PM, DearEvette said:

I don't like the trope where you go through the trouble of giving your protagonist a powerful special ability but when it comes time for them to use it something renders it competently ineffective.  And I am not talking about the villain being aware of the power and taking counter measures against it.  I am talking about convenient plot elements to nullify the power.

Or they just plain forget about it.    EVERY single time I watch Rudolph's Shiny New Year (don't judge), I scream at the tv.   The Baby New Year gets blown away on the wind (just go with it here).   Rudolph WHO LED A SLEIGH OF  8 FREAKING REINDEER AROUND THE WORLD IN ONE NIGHT stands on the ground and says "Oh no, he's blown away.   What are we going to do?"    I scream "You are f*cking flying reindeer, go after him."   He never listens.

[Dr.OO7]

"Good Girls Avoid Abortion"

Yes, I said it.

I'm not asking for television to become an abortion free-for-all, nor to treat this as some casual, run-of-the-mill decision.

But with the number of unplanned/unwanted pregnancies--and within the context of an unhappy relationship or even a non-relationship that occur on television, it strikes me as ridiculous that I can count on one hand the number of times this issue is handled realistically.

Particularly on soaps. This is a medium that has redeemed rapists and turned them into popular and endearing characters, to the point of pairing them with their victims, yet the thought of depicting a woman asserting her right to choose is abhorrent to the writers.

* If writers are going to write in an actress' real life pregnancy, they need to do a better job of making her characters circumstances more plausible.

Edited January 5, 2019 by Camille

[ursula]

On 7/12/2018 at 4:51 PM, ganesh said:

On 7/12/2018 at 4:02 PM, ursula said:

Another trope - a side/supporting character is obviously not going to be given the same level of detail as the mains. So while the main character, say high school student Alice, has a house, parent(s), family etc and it's shown on screen, we're not going to expect the same extend of investment on the side character's. 

But there's nothing wrong with writing dialogue to imply this and planning a story that assumes this. So if for example, Alice wants her bff, Jane to go somewhere after curfew, Jane can mention that her dad would freak out, and she'd need to figure out how to sneak out. And there can be a Thanksgiving episode where dialogue implies that Jane's having Thanksgiving with them because her parents: a, are servicemen and are deployed, b, don't celebrate it for reasons between political and ridiculous, c, her mom's second cousin came with all the kids that Jane hates so she snuck out of the dinner to come here. Or heck, even the ridiculous - her parents are right there, just in the other room. 

 

It's ridiculous that it needs saying but you don't need to cast a whole football team of actors, or build expensive sets to imply that a character has a rich inner life. You can do the same by just writing good dialogue. And of course, the worst version of this trope is when the writers, because they've neglected to build this inner life - come to the worst conclusions for the character. Oh we've never seen Jane's parents and home because all this while, she's been an orphan living in a homeless shelter and hiding that from her friends. 

That's why they do it though, so later on down the road, they can shove something in like that to manufacture drama when they're out of ideas for the main characters. 

Apologies for digging this up but I just noticed this reply.

My grievance/grouse is that I don't believe that this is done deliberately. It's neglect/lack of interest in the showrunners's part. They simply don't think beyond these supporting characters, well, supporting the main character(s). That might work for a 2-hour movie where you meet characters during a condensed period of time(s), but it won't work for a hopefully long-running TV show that has to shift focus from the main characters occasionally just to reduce fatigue on the part of the actors and the audience. The fact that this is something that tends to happen a lot with characters of colour just makes it doubly annoying. 

[Jacqs]

29 minutes ago, Camille said:

"Good Girls Avoid Abortion"

Yes, I said it.

I'm not asking for television to become an abortion free-for-all, nor to treat this as some casual, run-of-the-mill decision.

But with the number of unplanned/unwanted pregnancies--and within the context of an unhappy relationship or even a non-relationship that occur on television, it strikes me as ridiculous that I can count on one hand the number of times this issue is handled realistically.

Particularly on soaps. This is a medium that has redeemed rapists and turned them into popular and endearing characters, to the point of pairing them with their victims, yet the thought of depicting a woman asserting her right to choose is abhorrent to the writers.

It's too politically polarizing and toxic. for advertisers Remember, progressive viewers are a minority. This is especially true when it comes to abortion - most people, including many women, have at least some reservations about it.

[aradia22]

Quote

"Good Girls Avoid Abortion"

Yes, I said it.

I'm not asking for television to become an abortion free-for-all, nor to treat this as some casual, run-of-the-mill decision.

But with the number of unplanned/unwanted pregnancies--and within the context of an unhappy relationship or even a non-relationship that occur on television, it strikes me as ridiculous that I can count on one hand the number of times this issue is handled realistically.

Particularly on soaps. This is a medium that has redeemed rapists and turned them into popular and endearing characters, to the point of pairing them with their victims, yet the thought of depicting a woman asserting her right to choose is abhorrent to the writers.

Agreed. I don't really watch soaps anymore. (I was really into All My Children for one summer. I remember Bianca though. That was a whole mess.) I sometimes watch stuff that feels like a primetime soap but they don't really call themselves that. Anyway, I feel like most shows handle unplanned pregnancies the way I've noticed that romance novels do. If they acknowledge abortion as an option it's not something they actually think about. There's no period of considering it. It's unquestioned that they will try to carry the pregnancy to term. I don't remember if it's come up on Degrassi aside from Liberty who kept the baby but that's the only guess I have for a show where a character had an abortion. Juliette had her baby on Nashville (though I don't remember the exact context of that). 

I don't know if it comes from a play to an imagined conservative audience or established rules as much as two things. If there are female characters with any prominence in the show, it's probably assumed to have a partial, if not majority, female audience and the assumption is that women don't want to see that (even though many women use contraception and have abortions). Secondly, I think there's an assumption that it would make the female character the worse thing she could be which is "unlikeable." I read the memoir of the creator of Sabrina recently and she mentioned how she had to fight to not have the mom be dead (because in the show Sabrina lives with her two aunts). The powers that be could not fathom having a female character be alive and not with her daughter so they had to write a convoluted reason for why they were apart. 

I think with the television landscape fracturing into specialized channels and streaming services this might change. Not that every show is even going to have an unplanned pregnancy but if it comes up I think it'll be less of an issue. Imagining more niche audiences, I think higher ups will be less frightened and more diverse writers rooms as well as writers who are trying to write challenging material (again, not that this is out of the ordinary at all) will probably make it happen. I actually think that when shows written for women are actually written BY women, you increase the chance of abortions, miscarriages, and pregnancies being handled with greater nuance instead of just as plot devices or excuses for moralizing. (Of course there are exceptions.)

[Jacqs]

Most women and most men are moderate-to-conservative. Overtly progressive People's Front of Judea groups get negligible support at elections. It just seems to be hard for some in this thread to understand that the writers (and tv shows) are reflecting the expectations of the women watching as well as the advertisers.

[ganesh]

47 minutes ago, Jacqs said:

It's too politically polarizing and toxic.

And showrunners lack guts.