Party of One: Unpopular TV Opinions

[ByTor]

On 4/19/2017 at 3:46 PM, ribboninthesky1 said:

Ray Liotta does a good job, but I do not think he's the best actor evah.

He smells like apples (fans of MST3K will know what the hell I'm talking about)   :)

[MaryPatShelby]

21 hours ago, ByTor said:

The showrunners were going for scary & menacing, but I just found them and their silence annoying!

 

Plus they were stone-cold killers and not an integral part of all of BB. So I don't get why it would be so exciting to see them again.

[Mulva]

I thought Sister Ursula on Call The Midwife was absolutely correct when she told the nurses that they weren't social workers or babysitters, and that they should focus on their jobs, and that they shouldn't encourage the patients to be dependent on them.  I also agree with her about Sister Monica Joan.  The woman is senile and belongs in a care home before she wanders off again and dies of exposure or burns the building down because she decided to make tea at 3:00 a.m.

[Ohwell]

I'll go further on Sister Monica Joan and say she's my least favorite character on the show.  I get sick and tired of seeing her stuff her face with sweets.

[Mulva]

Thank you!  There's nothing funny or cute about Alzheimer's.

Another Call The Midwife UO:  Using all those resources and funds for a birthing clinic that only holds four patients at a time is ridiculous in a city the size of London.  The auditor was completely correct when he said that it could be absorbed into a hospital "in a blink".

[SmithW6079]

Mytharcs ruin shows for me, mostly because they're frequently not thought-out, and the writers get lazy. Grimm and X-Files were much better when they focused on their monsters of the week than when they had nonsensical and incoherent overarching story lines (except the mytharc on X-Files brought us Nicholas Lea/Alex Krycek, so that was OK).

I like musical episodes of shows that are not normally musicals. I think it's a nice change of pace and gives the actors a chance to stretch their acting/singing muscles. Sometimes, I'll watch a musical episode even if I don't normally watch the show in question.

I'm tired of flawed heroes with tragic backstories, the ones who became a cop/lawyer/doctor/FBI agent because their parent/sibling/spouse/child was the victim of a serial killer/miscarriage of justice/incurable disease/alien abduction and the burning desire to right the wrong is what drives the character.

[Katy M]

53 minutes ago, SmithW6079 said:

Mytharcs ruin shows for me, mostly because they're frequently not thought-out, and the writers get lazy.

Yes, yes, yes. Short arcs, that maybe run for 5 or 6 epis are fine, but season long ones often get bogged down by trying to stretch them out to last all season.

[Mulva]

Count me in on the "I hate mytharcs".  I'm tired of seeing the characters spend the entire season fighting one big bad only to have a worse one show up the next season.  After a while, it gets ridiculous.  I also hate it when they put in filler episodes during the mytharc.  Take Supernatural, or Buffy, the gang is in the middle of a fight to save all humanity, then they take a week or three to chase some random demon or vampire.  Uh guys, isn't stopping Lucifer, the First Evil, etc., a weensy bit more important than ganking a run of the mill monster?

Edited April 24, 2017 by Mulva

[ribboninthesky1]

There's a reason procedural shows tend to outlast genre shows.  If the writers themselves can't keep the arcs straight over time, the average viewer probably can't, either. Plus, people are busier than ever, with more distractions than ever, and commonly multi-task with the TV on.  Genre shows are popular online, but that doesn't always translate to ratings. One benefit of most procedurals - you can jump in at any point of the season, and not feel lost.  

[zxy556575]

5 hours ago, SmithW6079 said:

I'm tired of flawed heroes with tragic backstories, the ones who became a cop/lawyer/doctor/FBI agent because their parent/sibling/spouse/child was the victim of a serial killer/miscarriage of justice/incurable disease/alien abduction and the burning desire to right the wrong is what drives the character.

Plus 100!

I just commented in a show forum how tired I am of protagonists who are fixated on discovering past secrets or righting a wrong in their family. It makes their characters very one-note and boring, especially over multiple seasons.

[ganesh]

The reason why most of the long term plots get all over the place is because there's no show bibles and/or everything is needlessly complicated. 

[kiddo82]

2 hours ago, ribboninthesky1 said:

There's a reason procedural shows tend to outlast genre shows.  If the writers themselves can't keep the arcs straight over time, the average viewer probably can't, either. Plus, people are busier than ever, with more distractions than ever, and commonly multi-task with the TV on.  Genre shows are popular online, but that doesn't always translate to ratings. One benefit of most procedurals - you can jump in at any point of the season, and not feel lost.  

And I bet they do better in syndication as well for just that reason.

[bilgistic]

7 hours ago, SmithW6079 said:

Mytharcs ruin shows for me, mostly because they're frequently not thought-out, and the writers get lazy. Grimm and X-Files were much better when they focused on their monsters of the week than when they had nonsensical and incoherent overarching story lines (except the mytharc on X-Files brought us Nicholas Lea/Alex Krycek, so that was OK).

Yes! I felt this way about "The X-Files" waaay back when. The underlying story arc was so convoluted and I couldn't keep up with any of it. I loved the "Monster of the Week" episodes, and those remain some of the classic, best-loved episodes.

[paulvdb]

9 hours ago, ganesh said:

The reason why most of the long term plots get all over the place is because there's no show bibles and/or everything is needlessly complicated. 

That and the fact that American tv shows are intended to go on as long as people are watching which means that arcs get stretched out forever. Arcs work if they are planned well in advance and the show runs as long as the creator intended. Babylon 5 is a good example of an arc that works well. Although they did have to rush it a bit at the end of season 4 because they were not sure if they were getting a season 5. And when they did get a season 5 they had to stretch a half-season arc over the full season.

Planning an arc for a single season works better for American tv, but as mentioned earlier that creates the problem of creators wanting to introduce an even bigger bad in each subsequent season. And that gets ridiculous after a few seasons. So basically I think shows should end when the creators run out of good ideas even if the ratings are still good. But that doesn't happen most of the time on network tv.

Cable shows work better because the networks are more likely to end shows when the creators finish the story they wanted to tell, for example Bates Motel and The Americans both announced planned end dates for their shows.

[Archery]

My son is a little obsessed with Supernatural on Netflix.  He just finished S7.  I was floored to find out that show is still in production.

[Chaos Theory]

4 hours ago, Archery said:

My son is a little obsessed with Supernatural on Netflix.  He just finished S7.  I was floored to find out that show is still in production.

It's not strictly a bad show.  From what I have seen of it and for what it is it is actually fairly entertaining just a little too testosterone for me,

On 4/24/2017 at 7:07 PM, ribboninthesky1 said:

There's a reason procedural shows tend to outlast genre shows.  If the writers themselves can't keep the arcs straight over time, the average viewer probably can't, either. Plus, people are busier than ever, with more distractions than ever, and commonly multi-task with the TV on.  Genre shows are popular online, but that doesn't always translate to ratings. One benefit of most procedurals - you can jump in at any point of the season, and not feel lost.  

I get why people like procedurals.  I watch them too on occasion.  You can skip an entire season and then decide you are bored and watch an episode and it is like you never left.  You can watch the show out of order and it doesn't matter.  That is both a good thing and a bad thing.  I have seen people want it both ways.  A character makes a throw away comment in season 5 and then in season 9 directly contradicts it.  But by that point there has been two different show runners and twelve different writers.  You can't have a self contained show and demand long form storylines.

Edited April 25, 2017 by Chaos Theory

[meep.meep]

You can watch them at the gym!

[andromeda331]

5 minutes ago, Chaos Theory said:

It's not strictly a bad show.  From what I have seen of it and for what it is it is actually fairly entertaining just a little to testosterone for me,

I get why people like procedurals.  I watch them too on occasion.  You can skip an entire season and then decide you are board and watch an episode and it is like you never left.  You can watch the show out of order and it doesn't matter.  That is both a good thing and a bad thing.  I have seen people want it both ways.  A character makes a throw away comment in season 5 and then in season 9 directly contradicts it.  But by that point there has been two different show runners and twelve different writers.  You can have a self contained show and demand long form storylines.

That's why they should have a show bible and consult it. Its not the small contradictions that bug me too much but the big ones or when a show seems to contradict itself all the time (Once Upon a Time I'm looking at you). Like on Charmed when Paige asks how they vanquished the Source when she was there for all of the vanquishes of the Source. If it was part of a big arc or big story, yes they should remember it or have a show bible to consult.

[Chaos Theory]

3 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

That's why they should have a show bible and consult it. Its not the small contradictions that bug me too much but the big ones or when a show seems to contradict itself all the time (Once Upon a Time I'm looking at you). Like on Charmed when Paige asks how they vanquished the Source when she was there for all of the vanquishes of the Source. If it was part of a big arc or big story, yes they should remember it or have a show bible to consult.

OUAT is different it is a story not a procedural so I do for the most part think it should have at least "rules".   That being said OUAT has never followed the rules and has been more about how and event feels then the logic of it so I let it go.  Certain things need to happen logic be damned.   Yes I wish the writing was better but then I often feel that way.  

Edited April 25, 2017 by Chaos Theory

[andromeda331]

2 minutes ago, Chaos Theory said:

OUAT is different is a story not a procedural so I do for the most part think it should have at least "rules".   That being said OUAT has never followed the rules and has been more about how and even feels then the logic of it so I let it go.  Certain things need to happen logic be damned.   Yes I wish the writing was better but then I often feel that way.  

I think that's hardest part of watching some shows. Some really do have a lot of potential. They have a good concept and great cast but the writers never seem realize it and/or tap into that.

[Enigma X]

2 hours ago, Archery said:

My son is a little obsessed with Supernatural on Netflix.  He just finished S7.  I was floored to find out that show is still in production.

You and me both.

[bilgistic]

Ugh. I would watch Jensen Ackles read the phone book (ask your parents), but it's time to put Supernatural down already. It was supposed to end at season five...then seven... What used to be my favorite, can't-miss show is now piled, unwatched, three weeks deep on my TiVo.

[AimingforYoko]

As I said back when ER was renewed for its fifteenth season, "I've never wanted so badly a show I liked to be cancelled ."

[ratgirlagogo]

5 hours ago, Chaos Theory said:

OUAT is different it is a story not a procedural

It's not even a story, it's a soap opera so there is no attempt at consistency of character.  That plus the show's basic tropes that "family trumps every other concern, even if you just encountered this family member for the first time an hour ago"  and "no decision or event is ever final because magic and time travel" means storylines will be endless, incoherent and exhausting.  I gave up on OUAT early in season two.

Edited April 26, 2017 by ratgirlagogo

[Guest]

1 hour ago, bilgistic said:

Ugh. I would watch Jensen Ackles read the phone book (ask your parents), but it's time to put Supernatural down already. It was supposed to end at season five...then seven... What used to be my favorite, can't-miss show is now piled, unwatched, three weeks deep on my TiVo.

Supernatural is a case where they lost the writers who had a sense of humor (no more meta or pop culture or goofy episodes) and the actors are tired and want time off but not so much that they won't re sign for more seasons.

The one signal that should lead to an automatic final season decision is when the actors contractually require reduced filming days or hours as a condition of signing another contract to a degree that requires the show to be restructured by simplifying filming by reducing cast interaction or making a show that isn't an ensemble an ensemble.

Usually when this happens on long running shows its not about wanting to do other things.  Its about being tired.

[proserpina65]

17 hours ago, ratgirlagogo said:

It's not even a story, it's a soap opera so there is no attempt at consistency of character.  That plus the show's basic tropes that "family trumps every other concern, even if you just encountered this family member for the first time an hour ago"  and "no decision or event is ever final because magic and time travel" means storylines will be endless, incoherent and exhausting.  I gave up on OUAT early in season two.

I managed to drag myself to the end of season one.  To me, it would've been a mostly entertaining limited series had it ended then.

[Rosiejuliemom]

22 hours ago, AimingforYoko said:

As I said back when ER was renewed for its fifteenth season, "I've never wanted so badly a show I liked to be cancelled ."

I felt that way about ER's fourteenth season. I actually really liked season fifteen. Angela Bassett pulled me in and all the cameos and call-backs to earlier seasons kept me watching. It felt like a nice victory-lap for one of my all time favorite shows.

Edited April 26, 2017 by Rosiejuliemom

[memememe76]

Yes, and when ER was renewed that time, it was simultaneously announced that it would be its last season. I generally don't mind that. I can't remember a show where that final season is worse than the second last season. It may be bad, but not as bad as the prior season. As long as it known ahead of time that it's its last season. 

[Misslindsey]

19 hours ago, Rosiejuliemom said:

I felt that way about ER's fourteenth season. I actually really liked season fifteen. Angela Bassett pulled me in and all the cameos and call-backs to earlier seasons kept me watching. It felt like a nice victory-lap for one of my all time favorite shows.

I was one of the few that enjoyed the last few seasons of ER. I really enjoyed the last season as well. 

My UO is that I do not like Chip or Joanna Gaines. I will sit alone at my table with that opinion.

[proserpina65]

15 minutes ago, Misslindsey said:

My UO is that I do not like Chip or Joanna Gaines. I will sit alone at my table with that opinion.

You have company at that table.  I dislike them, and change the channel as soon as their mugging faces show up on my tv.  I feel that way about pretty much all of HGTV's design-type shows' hosts.

[Bastet]

30 minutes ago, Misslindsey said:

My UO is that I do not like Chip or Joanna Gaines. I will sit alone at my table with that opinion.

I've been at the head of that table for a while.  I can't point to anything specific, because I can't watch them for more than a few seconds at a time and have never read up to learn anything about them, but I find them incredibly off-putting.  Kind of creepy, really.  Like if I found out they're cultists or something, I wouldn't have a moment's surprise.  It's a visceral thing; they weird me out.

Edited April 27, 2017 by Bastet

[andromeda331]

36 minutes ago, proserpina65 said:

You have company at that table.  I dislike them, and change the channel as soon as their mugging faces show up on my tv.  I feel that way about pretty much all of HGTV's design-type shows' hosts.

I also don't like their designs. Their all pretty much the same design and that seems to be the case with most of the HGTV design shows.

[BabyVegas]

2 hours ago, Misslindsey said:

I was one of the few that enjoyed the last few seasons of ER. I really enjoyed the last season as well. 

My UO is that I do not like Chip or Joanna Gaines. I will sit alone at my table with that opinion.

You most certainly will not sit alone. I feel like so much of what bothers me about them is a sense of smug perfection that just probably isn't true.

1 hour ago, Bastet said:

I've been at the head of that table for a while.  I can't point to anything specific, because I can't watch them for more than a few seconds at a time and have never read up to learn anything about them, but I find them incredibly off-putting.  Kind of creepy, really.  Like if I found out they're cultists or something, I wouldn't have a moment's surprise.  It's a visceral thing; they weird me out.

I vaguely remember something about them being in some kind of super conservative church. No idea if it's actually true, but I wouldn't be shocked.

Edited April 27, 2017 by BabyVegas

[callie lee 29]

20 hours ago, memememe76 said:

Yes, and when ER was renewed that time, it was simultaneously announced that it would be its last season. I generally don't mind that. I can't remember a show where that final season is worse than the second last season. It may be bad, but not as bad as the prior season. As long as it known ahead of time that it's its last season. 

That 70's Show. I stop watching at the end of the second to last season.

[janie jones]

6 hours ago, BabyVegas said:

You most certainly will not sit alone. I feel like so much of what bothers me about them is a sense of smug perfection that just probably isn't true.

I vaguely remember something about them being in some kind of super conservative church. No idea if it's actually true, but I wouldn't be shocked.

I don't know about "super conservative," but they recently went public with their devotion to Christianity.

I hate Joanna less than Chip.  I also think their show shouldn't be called Fixer Upper, but instead Remodeling Perfectly Decent Houses.

[Dee]

5 hours ago, callie lee 29 said:

That 70's Show. I stop watching at the end of the second to last season.

I never got why That 70s Show ditched Hyde & Jackie (a much better option than Fez & Jackie) altogether in the final season.

[Chas411]

Yeah the ending of Jackie/Hyde ruined the show for me. I almost wish they'd do a reunion just to rectify that huge error.

[Dee]

I could understand the writers breaking H/J up temporarily, since that's what they'd been doing with H/J for the better part of two seasons by that point; but to break H/J up so completely to revisit the chemistry free Fez/Jackie ship, while pairing Hyde with a non-acting stripper (for a handful of episodes), was so bizarre.

[Chas411]

Yeah it was just insane. Hyde and Jackie were my favourite part of the show. I can't believe that they were dropped completely. It made no sense to me.

[truthaboutluv]

The Jackie/Hyde storyline at the end of the show was complete and utter bullshit and writers trying so hard to not do what they think everyone expects and instead what they do is just complete crap. I cannot think of anyone who was happy about that ending. Even people who weren't huge Jackie and Hyde fans thought that Jackie and Fez ending was complete and utter crap.

I think the worse part of the storyline and what truly felt like a slap to the Jackie and Hyde fans was the complete WTF of Hyde marrying some stripper while drunk and suddenly after she tracks him down, realizing that he really does love her or whatever and staying married. When the whole point of Jackie and Hyde's issues was his not wanting to get married or even commit to them possibly getting married down the road. But the series ends with Hyde of all people married. 

Edited April 28, 2017 by truthaboutluv

[Winter Rose]

I don't know if they thought they were being ironic but how they thought anyone would want to see Hyde and some random stripper, I'll never understand. And worse, the stripper turned out to already be married to some other guy so her "marriage" to Hyde, and breaking up Jackie/Hyde, was for nothing.

They didn't even try with Jackie/Fez either. She only "fell" for him because of some list she made, not even because of actual attraction. Even S1 Jackie followed her heart. And Fez was so perverted in the later years, it was a punishment that anyone should end up with him.

[vibeology]

On ‎4‎/‎26‎/‎2017 at 9:17 PM, memememe76 said:

Yes, and when ER was renewed that time, it was simultaneously announced that it would be its last season. I generally don't mind that. I can't remember a show where that final season is worse than the second last season. It may be bad, but not as bad as the prior season. As long as it known ahead of time that it's its last season. 

Buffy, though I know not everyone will agree with me. I can't remember the exact timeline but Joss knew early into season seven that it was definitely the last one. For me, season seven is the weakest of all of the seasons of Buffy. It's just painful.

14 hours ago, Dee said:

I never got why That 70s Show ditched Hyde & Jackie (a much better option than Fez & Jackie) altogether in the final season.

I can't even with how angry this makes me. Not only did it take a good and interesting couple and break them up, they both became these mean, miserable people that were unwatchable. Considering all the things they went through together, hearing Hyde and Jackie being genuinely cruel to each other was awful. The only good things about season 8 were Red and Kitty who were the show's best couple and a delight season after season.

[HoboClayton]

I guess my unpopular opinion would be that I didn't really keep up with That 70's Show, and I am sitting here wondering how in the fresh hell Fez and Jackie ended up together?

[Wiendish Fitch]

I don't think Laura Ingalls on Little House on the Prairie was a "goody-goody", and I'm so bored with the whole "Nellie Olson was way more fun" argument. First off, goody-goody? Laura Ingalls? Laura, energetic little scrapper who was always getting into trouble, fights, learning a valuable lesson from her numerous mistakes, and who wasn't above exacting revenge on those who deserved it? Being on the side of good does not make one a "goody-goody". Frankly, I think that label belongs to prim, prissy, boring (until she was blinded) Mary.

And you know what? I love Alison Arngrim (I highly recommend her memoir Confessions of a Prairie Bitch), but Nellie Olson was a loser! Seriously, how many times did she get her sorry ass handed to her by Laura? And anyone in the double digits who still plays Ring-Around-the-Rosey and has that hair is no one to be admired!

[Guest]

15 hours ago, janie jones said:

I hate Joanna less than Chip.  I also think their show shouldn't be called Fixer Upper, but instead Remodeling Perfectly Decent Houses.

I can usually watch a marathon of these remodeling shows, even the terrible ones; but Fixer Upper is too formulaic for me.  Now all of them are formulaic, in manufacturing fake challenges and family moments, but at least other remodeling shows can pull out a different look for the remodel from time to time.

I was watching a new one the other day with Nate Berkus and I laughed because he and his husband were talking about how important it was to learn what the home owner liked.  I thought of Joanna and that she only designs what she likes.  She doesn't even adapt as trends changes, which based on the magazines I get must have happened at least once while the show has been airing.  Thinking about it, she doesn't even really adapt her design to the style of home either.

4 hours ago, truthaboutluv said:

The Jackie/Hyde storyline at the end of the show was complete and utter bullshit and writers trying so hard to not do what they think everyone expects and instead what they do is just complete crap.

I believe they got new showrunners and writers at the end of season 8 who supposedly hated the idea of Jackie and Hyde and used the end of season 7 as an excuse to break them up permanently.  The last season of the show, in hindsight, feels like the writers saw part of season 1 and decided it would be cool if Fez got the girl in the end and never saw or never cared to find about anything that happened on the show between then and when they took over.

[festivus]

I'm sitting here liking everyone's post that hated that Jackie and Hyde  broke up and that she ended up with Fez and I didn't even watch the last season. I just hate the very idea of that and I refuse to believe it exists. That's probably not an UO though.

Edited April 28, 2017 by festivus

[Sweet Tee]

I guess my 70s Show UO is that I didn't care about Hyde/Jackie.  I didn't hate them together but they didn't do anything for me.  They just existed.  Them not ending up together didn't bother me.  But, I will agree that having Jackie end up with Fez was stupid and awful and I have no idea what they were thinking with that.

[janie jones]

4 hours ago, ParadoxLost said:

I was watching a new one the other day with Nate Berkus and I laughed because he and his husband were talking about how important it was to learn what the home owner liked.  I thought of Joanna and that she only designs what she likes.  She doesn't even adapt as trends changes, which based on the magazines I get must have happened at least once while the show has been airing.  Thinking about it, she doesn't even really adapt her design to the style of home either.

Rather than adapting to the homeowners, she invites them over to her house to show them what their house is going to look like when she's through with it.

[HunterHunted]

On 4/25/2017 at 7:32 PM, bilgistic said:

Ugh. I would watch Jensen Ackles read the phone book (ask your parents), but it's time to put Supernatural down already. It was supposed to end at season five...then seven... What used to be my favorite, can't-miss show is now piled, unwatched, three weeks deep on my TiVo.

I think 13 is a good number for a show about monsters, demons, ghosts, and what not. Now that the show has started to forget important details like Michael and Lucifer's birth order, it's clear that the show is crying out for someone to put it down.

[bilgistic]

I'm at four unwatched episodes now.