TV Tropes: Love 'em or Loathe 'em

[Spartan Girl]

I love a good smartass character. However, there's a fine line between a genuinely funny smart ass character and a petulant loser that always has to make stupid jokes even at the most inappropriate moments to cover how needy and insecure they are -- hi, Xander Harris, what's good?!

Edited May 3, 2019 by Spartan Girl

[kiddo82]

1 hour ago, Spartan Girl said:

I love a good smartass character. However, there's a fine line between a genuinely funny smart as character and a petulant loser that always has to make stupid jokes even at the most inappropriate moments to cover how needy and insecure they are -- hi, Xander Harris, what's good?!

Before I got to the end of your post I thought, "I know one of those and his name is Xander Harris."

[Popples]

Overuse of any trope is annoying, but right now I'm watching a show that only wants to get its humor from Lampshade Hanging instead of being creative and writing jokes. When it's done sparingly and well, it can hilarious, but if they "nudge-nudge, wink-wink" any harder, I'll have bruised ribs.

[Joe Hellandback]

1. Anyone who served in the military was always at least an infantryman and normally a commando or special forces type. No one ever served in the artillery, crewed a tank, drove trucks, worked a radio or was a military policeman (as many civilian cops start off as). 

2. The hero's ex-wife will always hook up with some guy who is either a complete jerk or deathly boring. Whilst he will serve as a stepfather to the hero's kids he and the ex-wife will never have a baby of their own so there will always be some link between them. After committing some heroic act the hero's ex will normally return to them even though their underlying problems remained unchanged. 

3.  Guns can sometimes be heard miles away and sometimes not be heard outside the room. Bullets will never penetrate interior walls, car doors, tables or the human body. 

4. Hostage takers will always want to continue speaking to the first person to answer the phone rather than the negotiator. 

5. After shooting the bad guy the heroes will instinctively know they are dead and never secure their weapon, handcuff them or check their vital signs. They will not perform CPR on them despite it being a legal requirement. 

6.  CPR will only ever be performed on someone it will work on, if they're not going to make it no one bothers. 

7.  All serial killers will be incredibly intelligent, well funded and prepared and never socially inadequate working class stiffs.

8.  People who commit historical crimes will never move away from the place they committed them. 

9. Police officers will never search their prisoners. When searching a room for a suspect they will never look in the cupboards, under the bed etc but just give the place a quick look and shout 'Clear'.

10. All terrorists will construct their bombs using the same colour coded wire sequence. No one will ever defuse a bomb simply by removing the detonator. 

11. All rifles taken off the bad guys will be deadly accurate despite never having been zeroed for the good guys (having the sights adjusted to suit their eyes). 

12. Weapons will be stored will full magazines, grenades will always be fused despite the very idea giving any armourer a heart attack in real life. People will fire thousands of rounds through their machine guns and never change the barrel.    

[MargeGunderson]

On 4/23/2019 at 11:40 PM, janie jones said:

I was looking at greeting cards yesterday and there was one that was like, "Sometimes I watch you sleep and think about how sexy and wonderful you are and I love you so much."  At first I thought it was supposed to be funny, but I realized it wasn't.

That card is for people who use Every Breath You Take as their wedding song.

[DrSpaceman]

7 hours ago, Joe Hellandback said:

1. Anyone who served in the military was always at least an infantryman and normally a commando or special forces type. No one ever served in the artillery, crewed a tank, drove trucks, worked a radio or was a military policeman (as many civilian cops start off as). 

On Its Always Sunny, Ben the soldier did like computer work and never saw any combat action.  They try to trigger his "PTSD" one episode and he tells them this.  Said he loved being in the army, got to travel the world.  They had all just assumed he did some front line combat

[Melina22]

8 hours ago, Joe Hellandback said:

Guns can sometimes be heard miles away and sometimes not be heard outside the room. Bullets will never penetrate interior walls, car doors, tables or the human body. 

Yes! Want to dodge bullets being sprayed from a semi-automatic weapon? Duck behind a thin wall partition. Or a desk. Actually, if you're the hero, just run really fast out of the room. All the bullets will inexplicably miss you, so you can turn as you exit the room and get off one random shot that will kill your assailant instantly. 

Speaking of violence, people on TV and in movies are incredibly easy to knock out. Whack them on the head with something, or just punch them in the face, and they'll be instantly unconscious for as long as you need. But don't worry. They won't die or have lingering symptoms or brain damage. 

If the hero is knocked unconscious, they'll come to later, maybe on the ground, or maybe tied to a chair. (Seriously, what's with all the people on TV tied to chairs?) Maybe a mild headache, but otherwise good to go. 

My friend slipped on the ice last winter, fell and hit her head. A month later, she was still suffering with dizziness, fatigue and headache. Obviously, she'd make a terrible TV hero, what with all the pesky post-concussion side effects. 

[BigBingerBro]

On 4/1/2019 at 3:13 PM, Brookside said:

White guys who call black guys "my brother".  Does anyone actually do that in real life?  If so, they're assholes.

I hear it all the time on LivePD - it makes me cringe  It's either that or "Boss Man"

[ABay]

9 hours ago, Joe Hellandback said:

5. After shooting the bad guy the heroes will instinctively know they are dead and never secure their weapon, handcuff them or check their vital signs.

It used to drive me crazy on Lost that DOCTOR Jack Shepard never so much as checked a pulse. Hey, if the guy looks like he's dead, he must be dead.

[ganesh]

1 hour ago, Melina22 said:

Actually, if you're the hero, just run really fast out of the room.

I wrote a skit in HS where the "bad guys" were shooting a ton and missing, and the "good guys" fired once and the bad guys were dead. Hilarious. 

[Joe Hellandback]

13. If a female hero is captured she will always be threatened with rape. A male hero never will be.

14. If the heroes torture a prisoner it is purely for information. If the villains do it then they must always take some perverted pleasure in it. 

15. The male hero will sometimes have a younger brother or sister who go to them for advice and help but never an older sibling who does the same for them.  

[Anela]

People breaking and/or throwing things into the ocean, or the lakes (great lakes, Niagara Falls area, for example). Over a relationship? Toss that ring in the ocean. Need to get rid of a phone? Don't even think of taking it to a recycling centre. Just break it, and throw it off a boat, or a cliff. 

[andromeda331]

7 hours ago, Anela said:

People breaking and/or throwing things into the ocean, or the lakes (great lakes, Niagara Falls area, for example). Over a relationship? Toss that ring in the ocean. Need to get rid of a phone? Don't even think of taking it to a recycling centre. Just break it, and throw it off a boat, or a cliff. 

Too bad we never get to see the people who find stuff in the ocean or lakes. "I just found a diamond ring! Wahoo! Its mine now!" or excited and selling the expensive ring to buy a new car, trip, or pay off a bill. Or someone in desperately need of money finding it in the water.

The cellphone annoys me the most. You can donate your old cellphones to low income families, senior citizens and women's shelters. 

[Wiendish Fitch]

23 minutes ago, andromeda331 said:

Too bad we never get to see the people who find stuff in the ocean or lakes. "I just found a diamond ring! Wahoo! Its mine now!" or excited and selling the expensive ring to buy a new car, trip, or pay off a bill. Or someone in desperately need of money finding it in the water.

And that's why Old Rose from Titanic is a stupid cow.

[Popples]

 

 

1

8 hours ago, Anela said:

People breaking and/or throwing things into the ocean, or the lakes (great lakes, Niagara Falls area, for example). Over a relationship? Toss that ring in the ocean. Need to get rid of a phone? Don't even think of taking it to a recycling centre. Just break it, and throw it off a boat, or a cliff. 

Can't tell you how many times I've yelled, "Just take it to a pawn shop!" That way they'll be rid of the ring and have a few hundred in their pocket.

[andromeda331]

38 minutes ago, Popples said:

Can't tell you how many times I've yelled, "Just take it to a pawn shop!" That way they'll be rid of the ring and have a few hundred in their pocket.

You'd think they'd be happy to do that. Pissed at the boyfriend or fiancé for cheating on you? Or break up. Why wouldn't you take it to a pawn shop and pocked the few hundred? You got rid of the ring and got money for it. 

[andromeda331]

42 minutes ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

And that's why Old Rose from Titanic is a stupid cow.

Yes she is. I'll never let that one go. She could have sold it and kept the money for herself and been a rich woman. Or sold it and donated the money to no shortage to needy people at the time like victims of the Titanic or upcoming Depression. Stupid, stupid woman.

[kassygreene]

My roommate in grad school got a few people (including me) to go with her when she sold her rings from her marriage once the divorce was finalized.  We weren't there to support her with the jeweler, or even to help her negotiate the price.  In fact, we stayed in the car.  We were there to go with her to a celebration lunch afterwards.

It was a good party.

Edited May 12, 2019 by kassygreene
grammar

[Dr.OO7]

3 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

Yes she is. I'll never let that one go. She could have sold it and kept the money for herself and been a rich woman. Or sold it and donated the money to no shortage to needy people at the time like victims of the Titanic or upcoming Depression. Stupid, stupid woman.

Or given it to her granddaughter or the guy who was looking for it.

There's a terrific commercial that parodies this--after throwing it away, she jumps in after it and the next shot is of her leaving a pawn shop with a huge wad of money.

Edited May 12, 2019 by Camille

[Blergh]

It's been some time but one trope I used to hate seeing was watching folks have mortgage burning parties after making that last down payment for the house. And, no, there were times it was NOT a big piece of paper with the word 'MORTGAGE' written in huge letters but it seemed they were burning actual, irreplaceable documents. If a TV character MUST do that- at the very least put the disclaimer 'DON'T TRY THIS AT HOME- or you won't be able to prove you now own it instead of the finance company!'

[DearEvette]

On 5/7/2019 at 12:51 AM, Joe Hellandback said:

7.  All serial killers will be incredibly intelligent, well funded and prepared and never socially inadequate working class stiffs.

OMG.  I hate this.  The worst I ever saw of this trope was a book i read where the serial killer had bottomless resources  -- a seemingly endless supply of fake Ids and credit cards to go with those ids, lots of ready cash (his family was wealthy, natch), is an expert at computer hacking, surveillance, changing their appearance,  have a 160 IQ so they are so smart about everything.  Until they aren't,  Because of course they have to deviate from their regular serial killing M.O. to go after the female detective and die in a hail of bullets.

[selkie]

On 5/12/2019 at 7:50 AM, andromeda331 said:

Too bad we never get to see the people who find stuff in the ocean or lakes. "I just found a diamond ring! Wahoo! Its mine now!" or excited and selling the expensive ring to buy a new car, trip, or pay off a bill. Or someone in desperately need of money finding it in the water.

The cellphone annoys me the most. You can donate your old cellphones to low income families, senior citizens and women's shelters. 

There's the UK comedy series "The Detectorists" though they keep it real by having most of what the club finds be modern trash with no value; 

[tennisgurl]

Its not exactly a trope, so much as a writing choice, and its kind of hard to explain, but I've really grown to hate when shows write in out of nowhere twists, cruel endings, or pointless shock deaths because its so "unexpected" like that makes them such amazing writers or something, as if giving characters an arc that makes sense and writing stories based on logic and what has previously been established is just toooooo dull or something, it needs to be "OMG TWIST!" trending all over Twitter every single week, and I am just over. I love a good twist, and I dont mind a dark turn or death, can even enjoy one if done well, but only if it actually makes sense in the story and serves a freaking purpose beyond "hah, didnt see that coming did you?" I mean, I didnt see it coming that all the main characters turn into pillows shaped like strawberries in your cop show, but that does NOT make it good! It just makes it confusing and makes you feel like you wasted your time getting invested in a story expecting it to make sense. But we gotta get those "OMG" social media moments I guess!

Its the same energy that leads to show runners killing off characters in pointless and stupid ways, to be shocking or, possibly even more annoyingly, because its "realistic" that people die, and we have to listen to the writers babble on about how "revolutionary" they are for saying fuck you to character development or whatever. Well, yeah people do die, in all kinds of stupid random ways, and that can be great drama if done well (like Buffy's mom dying of natural causes in the middle of a whole supernatural mess) but its so often done poorly, in ways that dont seem tragic, just that the writers got bored of their own characters and want to get rid of them. And just because death is random, how does that mean it makes a good story? How does it gel with a characters arc that they just croak for no reason other than to be shocking or because "people die all the time"or whatever. Its so annoying, and both issues just make me less invested in shows, not more engaged, and makes it seem like I care way more than the writers. 

[Annber03]

1 hour ago, tennisgurl said:

Its not exactly a trope, so much as a writing choice, and its kind of hard to explain, but I've really grown to hate when shows write in out of nowhere twists, cruel endings, or pointless shock deaths because its so "unexpected" like that makes them such amazing writers or something, as if giving characters an arc that makes sense and writing stories based on logic and what has previously been established is just toooooo dull or something, it needs to be "OMG TWIST!" trending all over Twitter every single week, and I am just over. I love a good twist, and I dont mind a dark turn or death, can even enjoy one if done well, but only if it actually makes sense in the story and serves a freaking purpose beyond "hah, didnt see that coming did you?" I mean, I didnt see it coming that all the main characters turn into pillows shaped like strawberries in your cop show, but that does NOT make it good! It just makes it confusing and makes you feel like you wasted your time getting invested in a story expecting it to make sense. But we gotta get those "OMG" social media moments I guess!

You wouldn't happen to be referencing a certain show that's getting a lot of angry viewers right now with this, would you :p?

Seriously, though, I agree with this and your post in general. The worst part is when it becomes so obvious how badly those kinds of writers want to be seen as "edgy", to the point of desperation. They look at what made the shows that are critically acclaimed so popular and want that, but they completely miss the point of why those shows were so well-received and popular. They just want to be in the cool, hip crowd more than anything. 

[Yeah No]

On 4/1/2019 at 3:13 PM, Brookside said:

White guys who call black guys "my brother".  Does anyone actually do that in real life?  If so, they're assholes.

Guy Fieri from the Food Network does that all the time on his TV shows and I cringe every time.  And yeah, he is kind of an asshole.

[DrSpaceman]

You don't see this as much anymore in the era of cell phones and easy family access at all time, but back in the 80s and 90s on TV family sitcoms, any time a dad/mom went out on a date or went out somewhere to eat and left the kids home either alone or with a babysitter :

Mom can't stand to be away and has to keep checking on them, keeps calling, thinks something is wrong.  Dad will keep saying "They are fine, you worry too much....", but......

Inevitably something happens where they just HAVE to find the parents, wherever they are, with some hilarious consequences as a result.  Proving helicopter mom of course to think she is "correct" and "never should have left them alone like this".

Or the kids decide to have a party, and will be caught when the parents come back early. 

A few other variations as well.......common sitcom set up

[Bastet]

6 hours ago, DrSpaceman said:

Or the kids decide to have a party, and will be caught when the parents come back early. 

Also, no TV kid ever invited a few friends over for some simple "the 'rents are out of town!" fun and just had those friends show up -- it always turned into an "Oh no!  So-and-So blabbed and now the whole class/school is here!" mess.

This covered the cases where the parents didn't come home in time to catch them -- in the crowd, something always got broken or otherwise ruined, and the kids rushed around the next day trying to fix/hide it, pulling it off just in time for Mom & Dad's arrival.  But just when they thought they were home free with it, the damaged item fell out of its hiding place or the repair job gave way and the item fell apart as the parents walked by.

Edited May 14, 2019 by Bastet

[Silver Raven]

Shows set in military environments will inevitably get haircuts wrong, and nobody ever salutes properly.

[Kel Varnsen]

On 5/7/2019 at 12:51 AM, Joe Hellandback said:

1. Anyone who served in the military was always at least an infantryman and normally a commando or special forces type. No one ever served in the artillery, crewed a tank, drove trucks, worked a radio or was a military policeman (as many civilian cops start off as). 

I remember watching the Ken Burns WWII documantary ywars ago and it said that during the war, at least for the allies, only 1 in 5 military personnel actually saw combat. I can't imagine that number changing that much for modern combat. It takes a lot of support people to maintain a modern military.

[kiddo82]

19 hours ago, tennisgurl said:

Its not exactly a trope, so much as a writing choice, and its kind of hard to explain, but I've really grown to hate when shows write in out of nowhere twists, cruel endings, or pointless shock deaths because its so "unexpected" like that makes them such amazing writers or something, as if giving characters an arc that makes sense and writing stories based on logic and what has previously been established is just toooooo dull or something, it needs to be "OMG TWIST!" trending all over Twitter every single week, and I am just over. I love a good twist, and I dont mind a dark turn or death, can even enjoy one if done well, but only if it actually makes sense in the story and serves a freaking purpose beyond "hah, didnt see that coming did you?" I mean, I didnt see it coming that all the main characters turn into pillows shaped like strawberries in your cop show, but that does NOT make it good! It just makes it confusing and makes you feel like you wasted your time getting invested in a story expecting it to make sense. But we gotta get those "OMG" social media moments I guess!

24 got so full of itself with this.  The best--the BEST--ever death on that show (maybe even one of my favorite left turns ever) was Janet York's murder early on in season 1.  She was a rando, tertiary character but the twist leading up to it was set up so perfectly.  I remember it vividly and I haven't seen it since it originally aired.  Then the show just kept going to that well with less and less build up.  Then it became the show that "wasn't afraid to kill anybody off" (excpet Kiefer Sutherland).  Then it became kind of a joke that everyone was going to die at some point.  Cause the thing is, when everything is a shocking twist, nothing is.  And it's not cool to listen to show runners congratulate themselves for being so "brave" when they really have done anything to earn their shocking twists.

[Annber03]

5 minutes ago, kiddo82 said:

Then the show just kept going to that well with less and less build up.  Then it became the show that "wasn't afraid to kill anybody off" (excpet Kiefer Sutherland). 

This drives me nuts, too. First, because, as you note, the star will always be the exception to that statement. 

And second, it makes it harder for me to get invested in characters if you keep threatening to kill them off. Like noted above, there can be good ways to do death scenes and kill off characters, but you don't have to risk doing it with EVERY character. I'd like to be able to actually see some of these characters stick around for a while and get to know them.

That's one thing I've liked about "Criminal Minds" when it comes to the main team members themselves. Despite the dangerous nature of their work, they've only ever killed off two of them in the entire time the show's been on (three if you count Strauss-she wasn't a team member, but she did interact with them a lot). Otherwise, they've allowed the rest of the team members who've left the show to simply move on to other things instead. They've an issue with killing off side/minor characters connected to the team, which can be a whole other topic, but even then, they've been getting a little better in that regard in recent years, too. 

[kathyk2]

20 hours ago, tennisgurl said:

Its not exactly a trope, so much as a writing choice, and its kind of hard to explain, but I've really grown to hate when shows write in out of nowhere twists, cruel endings, or pointless shock deaths because its so "unexpected" like that makes them such amazing writers or something, as if giving characters an arc that makes sense and writing stories based on logic and what has previously been established is just toooooo dull or something, it needs to be "OMG TWIST!" trending all over Twitter every single week, and I am just over. I love a good twist, and I dont mind a dark turn or death, can even enjoy one if done well, but only if it actually makes sense in the story and serves a freaking purpose beyond "hah, didnt see that coming did you?" I mean, I didnt see it coming that all the main characters turn into pillows shaped like strawberries in your cop show, but that does NOT make it good! It just makes it confusing and makes you feel like you wasted your time getting invested in a story expecting it to make sense. But we gotta get those "OMG" social media moments I guess!

Its the same energy that leads to show runners killing off characters in pointless and stupid ways, to be shocking or, possibly even more annoyingly, because its "realistic" that people die, and we have to listen to the writers babble on about how "revolutionary" they are for saying fuck you to character development or whatever. Well, yeah people do die, in all kinds of stupid random ways, and that can be great drama if done well (like Buffy's mom dying of natural causes in the middle of a whole supernatural mess) but its so often done poorly, in ways that dont seem tragic, just that the writers got bored of their own characters and want to get rid of them. And just because death is random, how does that mean it makes a good story? How does it gel with a characters arc that they just croak for no reason other than to be shocking or because "people die all the time"or whatever. Its so annoying, and both issues just make me less invested in shows, not more engaged, and makes it seem like I care way more than the writers. 

I agree with you darkness inspired apathy is real. I loved the X-Files I wanted Mulder to find Samantha so badly. I watched Mulder and Scully go through hell in order to find her only to learn that she was dead all along. I was furious I felt like I wasted my time. I think writers need to understand that it's fine to give heroes a happy ending. I don't think it's a coincidence that Chris Carter hasn't had a hit show since then. 

[Joe Hellandback]

8 hours ago, kathyk2 said:

I agree with you darkness inspired apathy is real. I loved the X-Files I wanted Mulder to find Samantha so badly. I watched Mulder and Scully go through hell in order to find her only to learn that she was dead all along. I was furious I felt like I wasted my time. I think writers need to understand that it's fine to give heroes a happy ending. I don't think it's a coincidence that Chris Carter hasn't had a hit show since then. 

No point watching the X-files any more, that book the alien gave Reggie explained it all (they missed a trick, at the end of the ep the camera should have panned across Mulder's bookcase and the book should have been sitting right there). 

[Jacqs]

My stalker in high school loved the X-Files. It gave me a hatred for Mulder and Scully.

[Anduin]

Australia is ridiculously dangerous. You can die from a hundred different things at any moment. I used to find this amusing, but it has lost its charm over the years.

Yes, it can be dangerous. However, the first white settlers were unprepared and in some cases outright stupid. Those things will kill you wherever you are. My grandmother is 91 and going well for her age. The most common danger I face are the slippery stairs in my apartment.

Don't believe the hype. Just be sensible.

[ganesh]

I thought everyone drank Fosters and ate shrimp on the barbie. 

[DearEvette]

On 5/13/2019 at 11:03 PM, tennisgurl said:

Its not exactly a trope, so much as a writing choice, and its kind of hard to explain, but I've really grown to hate when shows write in out of nowhere twists, cruel endings, or pointless shock deaths because its so "unexpected" like that makes them such amazing writers or something, as if giving characters an arc that makes sense and writing stories based on logic and what has previously been established is just toooooo dull or something, it needs to be "OMG TWIST!" trending all over Twitter every single week,

Oh my stars, yes.  And when you mentioned it is ok for characters to die from natural causes if done right I immediately thought of Joyce Summers even before I read your next sentence!

The season one finale of New Amsterdam did this very thing.  They had a horrific accident in the final minute of the finale leading to a stupid cliffhanger.  It is a medical show, people!  You don't have to do and OMG! ending.  And now the showrunner is being interviewed talking about how a 'key' character died but you don't know who it is.  Just so pointless.

And then I saw on TVline they are giving reactions to the new pilots for the networks for the upcoming season and one of them is about a serial killer and his son.  And it is all dark and moody and Michael Sheen has crazy serial killer eyes and is totally trying to channel Hannibal Lecter.  And one of the writers on the site gushes about "prestige tv comes to network! ' and how the show is 'refreshingly dark.'

Um what?  'Refreshingly dark'?  GTFOH with that mess.

[Annber03]

6 hours ago, DearEvette said:

And now the showrunner is being interviewed talking about how a 'key' character died but you don't know who it is.  Just so pointless.

Yeah, I saw that article, and they're talking about how none of the cast knows who will be under that sheet and were laughing about how much of a "surprise" it will be for that actor when they get their first script for the next season. I get some shows like to keep their actors in the dark about what happens next, but when it comes to deciding whether or not they'll still have a job next season, I'm thinking that's not the best way to handle that issue. 

Quote

And one of the writers on the site gushes about "prestige tv comes to network! ' and how the show is 'refreshingly dark.'

Yes, because dark TV shows are in such short supply. 

[Anduin]

8 hours ago, ganesh said:

I thought everyone drank Fosters and ate shrimp on the barbie. 

Sometimes we fry prawns, yes. But Fosters really isn't a popular beer. I hear it's cheaper than many of the other brands, though.

Also, not many people sound like Steve Irwin or that one shotgun from Borderlands the Pre-Sequel. Chris Hemsworth and Margot Robbie have what I feel are 'normal' Aussie accents.

[ganesh]

51 minutes ago, Annber03 said:

Yes, because dark TV shows are in such short supply. 

But is it 'gritty' too? Because you really need that. 

[Mabinogia]

On 5/14/2019 at 6:43 PM, kiddo82 said:

Cause the thing is, when everything is a shocking twist, nothing is. 

That's the point they don't seem to get. When no character is safe there is no point investing in them. When anything can happen regardless of fitting the plot, there is no point following the plot. When there is a shocking twist every week it just gets boring. 

It reminds me of the movie Clue (best comedy ever! I will fight anyone who says otherwise! (just kidding, I'm a lover not a fighter) but it is my favorite comedy of all time), as the body count started rising the main characters would be searching the house all "yep, another dead body, let's check the dining room" shut the door on the corpse and move on. Too many twists/deaths/surprising desensitize the audience. 

I watched GoT religiously during it's entire run. I have not and will not watch anything beyond the second episode this season because I am just so over the bullshit. They are basically destroying all the character development they have built throughout the show either because they ran out of time to get to the books ending or they just think they're so clever for inverting tropes. 

That is a trope I hate. Inverting tropes for the sake of inverting a trope. It isn't any more clever than actually just using the trope. 

[Bastet]

3 minutes ago, Mabinogia said:

It reminds me of the movie Clue (best comedy ever! I will fight anyone who says otherwise! (just kidding, I'm a lover not a fighter) but it is my favorite comedy of all time), as the body count started rising the main characters would be searching the house all "yep, another dead body, let's check the dining room" shut the door on the corpse and move on. Too many twists/deaths/surprising desensitize the audience. 

Three murders.
Six, altogether.
This is getting serious.

[kiddo82]

50 minutes ago, Mabinogia said:

It reminds me of the movie Clue (best comedy ever! I will fight anyone who says otherwise! (just kidding, I'm a lover not a fighter) but it is my favorite comedy of all time), as the body count started rising the main characters would be searching the house all "yep, another dead body, let's check the dining room" shut the door on the corpse and move on. Too many twists/deaths/surprising desensitize the audience. 

Or the conspiracy episode of Community.

[tennisgurl]

3 hours ago, kiddo82 said:

Or the conspiracy episode of Community.

"If you conspiring with everyone, your not in a conspiracy! Your just doing random crap!"

Yeah this whole obsession with subverting tropes and killing off characters left and right because "no one is safe" and its "darker and edgier" is just so lame at this point. Just changing a trope isnt good writing, you have to actually do something interesting with it instead of just say "hahah, you didnt see this coming!" over and over. And sometimes tropes are done because they work! And your subversion just makes everything worse! And while I am not always against killing a character, in theory, if it happens too often, or it comes across as a cheap shock death, it just makes you less likely to invest in a show that can kill off your favorite for no reason, and it makes the deaths actually predictable and ridiculous. Like, how many people have died on Grey Anatomy now? More people have died in that random Seattle hospital in violent and strange ways than in active war zones!

6 hours ago, Annber03 said:

Yeah, I saw that article, and they're talking about how none of the cast knows who will be under that sheet and were laughing about how much of a "surprise" it will be for that actor when they get their first script for the next season.

Ugggg this is something else I have really grown to hate. I get that show runners are increasingly worried about spoilers getting out on the internet, but it just comes across as insensitive to their cast. And they always act like its so funny and cool, when really its just unprofessional and annoying. All of these show runners seem convinced that they are "so brave" and "breaking all the rules" when ALL of them are saying the exact same things!

Edited May 16, 2019 by tennisgurl

[kathyk2]

9 minutes ago, tennisgurl said:

"If you conspiring with everyone, your not in a conspiracy! Your just doing random crap!"

Yeah this whole obsession with subverting tropes and killing off characters left and right because "no one is safe" and its "darker and edgier" is just so lame at this point. Just changing a trope isnt good writing, you have to actually do something interesting with it instead of just say "hahah, you didnt see this coming!" over and over. And sometimes tropes are done because they work! And your subversion just makes everything worse! And while I am not always against killing a character, in theory, if it happens too often, or it comes across as a cheap shock death, it just makes you less likely to invest in a show that can kill off your favorite for no reason, and it makes the deaths actually predictable and ridiculous. Like, how many people have died on Grey Anatomy now? More people have died in that random Seattle hospital in violent and strange ways than in active war zones!

Ugggg this is something else I have really grown to hate. I get that show runners are increasingly worried about spoilers getting out on the internet, but it just comes across as insensitive to their cast, who I guess will have to spend all summer worrying about getting fired, and knowing of they should look for work or not. And they always act like its so funny and cool, when really its just unprofessional and annoying. All of these show runners seem convinced that they are "so brave" and "breaking all the rules" when ALL of them are saying the exact same things!

There is also gender discrimination involved in killing off characters as well. I've lost count of the female characters killed on NCIS. Wives are killed off more frequently as well there are more single dads on television than single moms.

[kiddo82]

I'd like to add characters "going gray."  It's not edgy or brave.  It's just done.  I'm not saying you can't have your characters go through some stuff but you eventually have to bring them back or you risk alienating your audience.  This is either accomplished too easily without the character really earning it or it drags on forever.  This is why I think show runners need to weigh the long term consequences of their decisions.  Yeah, you can trend for a night but it can lead to this tonal shift that might not be why audiences enjoyed the show on the first place.  I'm not saying it can't be done but it's much more delicate than hero doctor loses a patient and takes it personally then makes a bunch of morally ambiguous decisions then saves a little kid and all is right again and we love him.

Edited May 16, 2019 by kiddo82

[tennisgurl]

I think too many show runners are addicted to the big dramatic moments that get trending on twitter and inspire endless think pieces and the big social media explosion that follows, and they give tons of interviews about how bold and daring they are, without really thinking about what happens next. When twitter has moved onto the next big thing, they are still left with a show that has been fundamentally changed, and they have to make a story about it. Like, ok you had your hero kill someone in cold blood, now what? You killed off one of your lead characters, now what? Way too often, they dont have an answer once the show stops trending. Then they feel like they have to top themselves to get that trending OMG moment rush again, and the cycle continues. 

One of my (former I think) shows, The Magicians, just had a majorly shocking death in their season finale not too long ago, and oh my GOD you could just smell the smug satisfaction of the show runners, and how excited they were to give their show such a big "OMG SHOCKING" moment to get lots of buzz going, and how proud they were to be supposedly subverting tropes when they were actually acting upon many well worn and deeply harmful tropes, and now that they had their OMG trending moment, they are left with a super pissed off fan-base, a show that now has a massive hole in it and countless stories that have been torpedoed, and a cast that seems pretty annoyed with the turns the story took, and being manipulated and kept in the dark about the twist. Its a twist/death so awful and stupid, and so out of left field, that it basically killed the show, which has been so good about so many things up until now. And all so the show runners could pat themselves on the back and give themselves fake Woke points and get those sweet sweet tweets.

[ganesh]

I'll give GOT credit in for the most part, if you were stupid, naive, or arrogant, you got got. I can live with that because you were able to watch it unfold. 

Once they decided to end the show in two seasons it was clear no one wanted to be there anymore so it's a mess. 

[Bort]

1 hour ago, tennisgurl said:

I get that show runners are increasingly worried about spoilers getting out on the internet, but it just comes across as insensitive to their cast, who I guess will have to spend all summer worrying about getting fired, and knowing of they should look for work or not.

They can still look for work and shoot pilots. They just can’t accept a series pickup if it turns out they’re not out of work after all. Actors do this all the time.

[Irlandesa]

10 minutes ago, kariyaki said:

They can still look for work and shoot pilots. They just can’t accept a series pickup if it turns out they’re not out of work after all. Actors do this all the time.

Yep but since the finale was probably filmed after pilot season, the actors involved likely didn't know they would have to scramble for work the next season. 

But I agree with the "anyone could die" trope being something I tend not to like.  One well placed death for story purposes is ten times more effective than "anyone could die" and so we kill multiple people. 

Edited May 16, 2019 by Irlandesa