Party of One: Unpopular TV Opinions

[Katy M]

15 minutes ago, proserpina65 said:

I didn't see her turn as coming from out of nowhere, but I do think it could've used a little more development.  I liked the character, but also had no problem with how her story ended.  I think people who got more involved in the character reacted more strongly to the storyline.

At least in the books, I always found Dany to be very impetuous and a little reckless.  So, a violent ending does not seem out of character to me.

[JTMacc99]

On 5/26/2019 at 8:18 PM, Enigma X said:

No joke, but I found both Thors sexy. Different strokes and all...

Endgame Thor was vulnerable, hurt, but also kind and heroic. And under what we saw on the outside, he was still the god of thunder.

There's a lot to be said about all of those things and whether or not that can equal sexy. 

[BuyMoreAndSave]

I think the only thing keeping broadcast TV and especially daytime broadcast TV afloat at this point is businesses like doctor's offices, laundromats, restaurants, etc. that just leave the TV on all day.

I also think this is the only reason why The Simpsons is still on the air.

[Neurochick]

On 5/25/2019 at 9:24 PM, kiddo82 said:

An oldie but a goodie:  Darker in tone doesn't necessarily equate to better in quality.

True.  The problem is shows that are light in tone don't win awards.  I think about USA, that had a good thing going (IMO) with the fun, light shows they used to have.  Then one day USA probably went, "we want to win Emmys and shows like "Fairly Legal" ain't cutting it."  So they went from "characters welcome" to "we the bold."  For the most part, I haven't watched USA since.

However, USA did get an Emmy for "Mr. Robot."

Edited June 2, 2019 by Neurochick

[Misslindsey]

3 hours ago, Neurochick said:

True.  The problem is shows that are light in tone don't win awards.  I think about USA, that had a good thing going (IMO) with the fun, light shows they used to have.  Then one day USA probably went, "we want to win Emmys and shows like "Fairly Legal" ain't cutting it."  So they went from "characters welcome" to "we the bold."  For the mosts part, I haven't watched USA since.

I loved the "characters welcome" USA Network. It was fun, light fluff. I love me some good fluff television. I have not watched much on the USA Network since.

[Jaded]

3 hours ago, Neurochick said:

True.  The problem is shows that are light in tone don't win awards.  I think about USA, that had a good thing going (IMO) with the fun, light shows they used to have.  Then one day USA probably went, "we want to win Emmys and shows like "Fairly Legal" ain't cutting it."  So they went from "characters welcome" to "we the bold."  I haven't watched USA since.

I quit watching USA after they changed directions dropping all of their lighter shows too. I still need to watch the TV movie for Psych. I forced myself to watch the entire last season of Royal Pains even the cringeworthy musical episode. That was a show I was always kinda off and on with though. One USA show I really liked that didn't last long was The Huntress. Somewhere into the almost 30 episode run they tried retooling it a bit and it wasn't as fun. I was still sad when it got cancelled though.

[andromeda331]

25 minutes ago, Misslindsey said:

I loved the "characters welcome" USA Network. It was fun, light fluff. I love me some good fluff television. I have not watched much on the USA Network since.

Me too. I loved the shows they used to have on when it was light and fun. Burn Notice, Psych, Covet Affairs (at least the first two seasons), Monk, In Plain Sight, and Royal Pains. Same with TNT they used to have really good stuff Leverage, the Closer, Rizzoli and Isles, Last Ship (the first couple seasons), the Librarians, and Perception. 

[Danny Franks]

8 hours ago, Neurochick said:

True.  The problem is shows that are light in tone don't win awards.  I think about USA, that had a good thing going (IMO) with the fun, light shows they used to have.  Then one day USA probably went, "we want to win Emmys and shows like "Fairly Legal" ain't cutting it."  So they went from "characters welcome" to "we the bold."  For the mosts part, I haven't watched USA since.

However, USA did get an Emmy for "Mr. Robot."

I've watched three USA shows - Covert Affairs, White Collar and Suits -  and with every one of them, the writers seemed to get delusions of grandeur around season 3, and seem to think their light, frothy, summer show should be a serious drama.

It didn't do them any good at all, because the writers weren't good enough to pull the transition off, and often the actors weren't either. I ended up quitting all those shows not long after.

As for their new shows, I managed four episodes of Mr. Robot before I realised I just couldn't be bothered keeping up with it, and maybe five episodes of Shooter (which was honestly just rubbish).

[kiddo82]

7 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

Me too. I loved the shows they used to have on when it was light and fun. Burn Notice, Psych, Covet Affairs (at least the first two seasons), Monk, In Plain Sight, and Royal Pains. Same with TNT they used to have really good stuff Leverage, the Closer, Rizzoli and Isles, Last Ship (the first couple seasons), the Librarians, and Perception. 

I always liked that Major Crimes/The Closer would jump back and forth from light to heavy to light.  I thought they handled those transitions very well. 

[festivus]

7 hours ago, andromeda331 said:

I loved the shows they used to have on when it was light and fun. Burn Notice, Psych, Covet Affairs (at least the first two seasons), Monk, In Plain Sight, and Royal Pains.

I watched every one of those shows. I agree with the opinion on quitting USA when they quit doing "characters welcome". I don't have any idea what they're up to now, nor do I care. I do watch and enjoy dark shows but USA was my respite for that when I just wanted to watch something enjoyable and not too heavy. I don't really watch any main network shows (except comedies) because most of them lean too much on the procedural side for me. Any quirky ones I watched would get cancelled quick!

[Mabinogia]

2 hours ago, kiddo82 said:

I always liked that Major Crimes/The Closer would jump back and forth from light to heavy to light.  I thought they handled those transitions very well. 

Those were two very well written shows with amazing casts. And you are right, they handled dark and light equally well. I prefer when my dramas have some humor to them, like all the shows you fine folks have been listing from the Golden Era of USA Network. 

I tried Mr Robot but it was so pretentiously bleak I couldn't stand it. Sadly TV has taken the turn towards "prestige" shows and everyone wants to write the next big thing. They are all hungry for awards. I have pretty much given up tele for the time being. I used to watch it all the time and now I more often than not skim through, see that there is nothing worth wasting my time watching and turn it off. I do watch reruns of early Monk and Psych. Black and Tan was on the other day and though I've seen it about a dozen times now, it still put a smile on my face when I saw it was on. 

Soon this trend of "prestige" will blow over, hopefully the epic fail of the Game of Thrones series finale will put at least one more nail in the coffin, and maybe the next trend will be back towards more light-hearted fantasy stuff. I don't mean fantasy as in dragons and princesses, but something like Leverage, which wasn't remotely realistic but was fun fantasy fulfillment. 

[GHScorpiosRule]

11 hours ago, Misslindsey said:

I loved the "characters welcome" USA Network. It was fun, light fluff. I love me some good fluff television. I have not watched much on the USA Network since.

I dropped USA after my beloved Psych ended.

Edited June 2, 2019 by GHScorpiosRule

[ganesh]

I watched those shows too, but I do like Mr. Robot. I don't see why the network can't have a mix. 

[Bort]

1 minute ago, ganesh said:

I watched those shows too, but I do like Mr. Robot. I don't see why the network can't have a mix. 

Because USA wanted to win awards. And unless they have a critical darling like Tony Shalhoub as a headliner, those fluff-pieces aren't getting anything and they don't want to waste their money/time on it.

[Bastet]

6 hours ago, kiddo82 said:

I always liked that Major Crimes/The Closer would jump back and forth from light to heavy to light.  I thought they handled those transitions very well. 

Both shows were so fantastic at weaving the heavy and light together (you know, like life), other writers should study and take notes.  And it was wonderful seeing a group of realistically flawed yet fundamentally good people working together to do a job well.  Not superheroes, not anti-heroes, just everyday people trying to do right.  And not a group of people good at their jobs but utterly dysfunctional in their personal lives, just people with the typical array of existing and former relationships.  It was truly comforting.  (And, with Major Crimes, seeing a police squad led by someone who demands that law and policy be followed, that the ends never justify the means so there will be no going rogue because "but, he's a really bad bad guy who'll walk if we don't," was specifically important.)

Of course, even though Major Crimes was TNT's number one show, and the second-highest-rated drama on cable altogether, when the new guy came in to head up the network, he hated the show because it wasn't the edgy, gritty fare he wanted to become known for.  So he effectively stopped promoting it (no appearances at the upfronts, no Emmy submissions, a paltry number of ads on his own network), moved it around several times, and eventually demanded format changes.  When the audience numbers stayed high through all that, he finally just canceled it because he was so focused on his "dark" type of entertainment.

[Katy M]

12 minutes ago, Bastet said:

And not a group of people good at their jobs but utterly dysfunctional in their personal lives

I might disagree on that where Brenda is concerned. She doesn't see to have a very good work/personal life balance.

[Bastet]

Just now, Katy M said:

I might disagree on that where Brenda is concerned. She doesn't see to have a very good work/personal life balance.

Heh; I was thinking more of Major Crimes (which is my hand-down favorite of the two shows), but it works even with The Closer looking at the ensemble. 

And, even with Brenda specifically, I wouldn't classify her as dysfunctional.  It's certainly not a label that would be placed upon a male character with the same set of characteristics (in fact, it's a dynamic we've seen time and again with male characters dedicated to their jobs whose wives/girlfriends adapt to that focus), and, regardless of the double standard, she's functional in her personal life.  Not ideal, certainly, but functional.  She was happy with who she was, had healthy (flawed, definitely, but loving and overall functional) relationships with her parents and husband despite her myopic tendencies, and - perhaps most importantly to the issue at hand - made some changes when it became clear they were necessary.

[kiddo82]

17 minutes ago, Bastet said:

Heh; I was thinking more of Major Crimes (which is my hand-down favorite of the two shows), but it works even with The Closer looking at the ensemble. 

And, even with Brenda specifically, I wouldn't classify her as dysfunctional.  It's certainly not a label that would be placed upon a male character with the same set of characteristics (in fact, it's a dynamic we've seen time and again with male characters dedicated to their jobs whose wives/girlfriends adapt to that focus), and, regardless of the double standard, she's functional in her personal life.  Not ideal, certainly, but functional.  She was happy with who she was, had healthy (flawed, definitely, but loving and overall functional) relationships with her parents and husband despite her myopic tendencies, and - perhaps most importantly to the issue at hand - made some changes when it became clear they were necessary.

I agree wholeheartedly re Brenda.  It definitely worked for her and her outside work relationships were at least healthy if flawed.   

[Neurochick]

3 hours ago, Bastet said:

Of course, even though Major Crimes was TNT's number one show, and the second-highest-rated drama on cable altogether, when the new guy came in to head up the network, he hated the show because it wasn't the edgy, gritty fare he wanted to become known for.  So he effectively stopped promoting it (no appearances at the upfronts, no Emmy submissions, a paltry number of ads on his own network), moved it around several times, and eventually demanded format changes.  When the audience numbers stayed high through all that, he finally just canceled it because he was so focused on his "dark" type of entertainment.

This is my issue with the definition of "edgy."  To me, Major Crimes was edgy.  A good portion of the cast was over the age of 45, there were various ethnicities in the cast, there was a gay storyline, and the boss was a woman.   So to take that show off and put on an "edgy" show where everybody is white, doesn't cut it.

The racial tone deafness of people who consider themselves "edgy" is often mind boggling.  A UO that I have is that USA's "The Purge" was one of the worst things I've ever seen on TV.  I'm glad I only watched a few episodes of that garbage, but from what I heard, it descended into a racially questionable mess.  Very "edgy" to make the big villain a white/male/middle aged/blue collar guy.  Whoever greenlit that show needs to go back to kindergarten and start again.

[Bastet]

10 minutes ago, Neurochick said:

To me, Major Crimes was edgy.  A good portion of the cast was over the age of 45,

Well over 45.  I hope this isn't unpopular, but you remind me how much I appreciated that about the casting -- I'm so tired of shows about characters who are the best of the best in their profession being populated by people in their late 20s.  With Major Crimes, the squad was actually comprised of people who'd accumulated the experience and honed the skills necessary to be selected for the elite squad, and that was especially true of the leadership roles.

When the show began, Mary McDonnell (who played the captain) was 60 years old.  The second-in-command was played by G.W. Bailey at 68.  The other lieutenants were played by actors in their early 60s (Tony Denison and Michael Paul Chan).  Raymond Cruz, playing the detective who'd been with the squad since its inception, was about 50, and only the newcomer detective was played by a youngish actor, Kearran Giovanni, and I think she was early 30s. 

The Assistant Chief of Police was played by 58-year-old Robert Gossett.  The DDA who prosecuted most of the major cases was played by Kathe Mazur, 51, and the Medical Examiner was played by Jonathan Del Arco, who was 46.

Most of these characters had originated on The Closer, so subtract seven years for how old they were when first selected for the newly-formed priority homicide squad (or, in Sharon's case, heading up the Force Investigation Division), and they were still old enough to have made their mark -- it was believable off the bat that all these characters had reached the level of professional success they had. 

And you're right about the diversity in terms of race/ethnicity and sexual orientation, too.  It was a great show all around, one of the few crime dramas I have ever liked, never mind loved. 

[Neurochick]

9 minutes ago, Bastet said:

Well over 45.  I hope this isn't unpopular, but you remind me how much I appreciated that about the casting -- I'm so tired of shows about characters who are the best of the best in their profession being populated by people in their late 20s.  With Major Crimes, the squad was actually comprised of people who'd accumulated the experience and honed the skills necessary to be selected for the elite squad, and that was especially true of the leadership roles.

Correct, they were well over 45.  But today edgy is nothing more than a lot of nudity, violence and saying the word "fuck."

UO:  Why are the people naked on "Naked and Afraid" if their "naughty bits" are blurred out?

Another UO about Naked and Afraid:  I think they should show some of the episodes to undergraduate or graduate psychology classes.  I find the relationships/group dynamics in this show interesting.

[andromeda331]

28 minutes ago, Bastet said:

Well over 45.  I hope this isn't unpopular, but you remind me how much I appreciated that about the casting -- I'm so tired of shows about characters who are the best of the best in their profession being populated by people in their late 20s.  With Major Crimes, the squad was actually comprised of people who'd accumulated the experience and honed the skills necessary to be selected for the elite squad, and that was especially true of the leadership roles.

When the show began, Mary McDonnell (who played the captain) was 60 years old.  The second-in-command was played by G.W. Bailey at 68.  The other lieutenants were played by actors in their early 60s (Tony Denison and Michael Paul Chan).  Raymond Cruz, playing the detective who'd been with the squad since its inception, was about 50, and only the newcomer detective was played by a youngish actor, Kearran Giovanni, and I think she was early 30s. 

The Assistant Chief of Police was played by 58-year-old Robert Gossett.  The DDA who prosecuted most of the major cases was played by Kathe Mazur, 51, and the Medical Examiner was played by Jonathan Del Arco, who was 46.

Most of these characters had originated on The Closer, so subtract seven years for how old they were when first selected for the newly-formed priority homicide squad (or, in Sharon's case, heading up the Force Investigation Division), and they were still old enough to have made their mark -- it was believable off the bat that all these characters had reached the level of professional success they had. 

And you're right about the diversity in terms of race/ethnicity and sexual orientation, too.  It was a great show all around, one of the few crime dramas I have ever liked, never mind loved. 

That was what was so nice about the Closer/Major Crimes each member of the squad was old enough to be there and still had long years with the LAPD. In the Closer the only "younger" person was really Gabriel. But he was still old enough to have gone to college and spend a few years in the LAPD before being moved to the newly formed squad. Taylor names in the pilot or second episode where each person came from and over the series they follow up on that.  There were no late 20 who somehow managed to get all the experience of an experience cop and detective to rise up so fast or 20 year old geniuses. 

[Raja]

13 minutes ago, andromeda331 said:

That was what was so nice about the Closer/Major Crimes each member of the squad was old enough to be there and still had long years with the LAPD. In the Closer the only "younger" person was really Gabriel. But he was still old enough to have gone to college and spend a few years in the LAPD before being moved to the newly formed squad. Taylor names in the pilot or second episode where each person came from and over the series they follow up on that.  There were no late 20 who somehow managed to get all the experience of an experience cop and detective to rise up so fast or 20 year old geniuses. 

Along with Gina Rivera's  Detective  Danials their forensic accountant before the bad break up and budget cut in the cast/unit. Part of me wonders if it was real life budget issues to add Anthony Denison to full time after his first appearances

Quote

[BuyMoreAndSave]

10 hours ago, Mabinogia said:

I tried Mr Robot but it was so pretentiously bleak I couldn't stand it. Sadly TV has taken the turn towards "prestige" shows and everyone wants to write the next big thing. They are all hungry for awards. I have pretty much given up tele for the time being. I used to watch it all the time and now I more often than not skim through, see that there is nothing worth wasting my time watching and turn it off. I do watch reruns of early Monk and Psych. Black and Tan was on the other day and though I've seen it about a dozen times now, it still put a smile on my face when I saw it was on. 

Soon this trend of "prestige" will blow over, hopefully the epic fail of the Game of Thrones series finale will put at least one more nail in the coffin, and maybe the next trend will be back towards more light-hearted fantasy stuff. I don't mean fantasy as in dragons and princesses, but something like Leverage, which wasn't remotely realistic but was fun fantasy fulfillment. 

That's why I liked Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt...a surrealist show that didn't take itself seriously and where the "comedy" didn't come from "everyone is a depressed alcoholic with a personality disorder."

I think coziness is largely absent from the modern TV landscape, and everything now is very cynical.

Edited June 3, 2019 by BuyMoreAndSave

[Annber03]

14 minutes ago, BuyMoreAndSave said:

I think coziness is largely absent from the modern TV landscape, and everything now is very cynical.

I've been thinking the same thing lately, especially when I'm watcthing old sitcoms on channels like MeTV or Antenna TV or the like. They weren't afraid to have some genuinely touching, sentimental, thoughtful moments, and allow the characters to actually like and get along with each other. Not to say they never had their moments of fights and other craziness and whatnot, of course, they absolutely did. But at the end of the day there was still that close bond. I do agree that t feels like some of that has been lost in some shows in recent years. 

[BuyMoreAndSave]

1 hour ago, Annber03 said:

I've been thinking the same thing lately, especially when I'm watcthing old sitcoms on channels like MeTV or Antenna TV or the like. They weren't afraid to have some genuinely touching, sentimental, thoughtful moments, and allow the characters to actually like and get along with each other. Not to say they never had their moments of fights and other craziness and whatnot, of course, they absolutely did. But at the end of the day there was still that close bond. I do agree that t feels like some of that has been lost in some shows in recent years. 

A show like Golden Girls would never be successful today...even though a lot of people, even younger people, still watch it! Now it would be considered to be unrealistically cheesy, even though that was part of its charm. Another thing I've noticed is that shows of the past were a lot more about friends or families, whereas now they're a lot more about workplaces or careers, and people who don't have a lot of close confidants. I think that reflects changes in our society.

Also, I like The Sopranos, but not only did it start the tiring prestige TV trend (and got pretty tiring itself a few seasons in), but as an Italian-American resident of New Jersey, it does kind of disappoint me that most peoples' conception of NJ and Italian-Americans comes entirely from The Sopranos and Jersey Shore.

[ganesh]

3 hours ago, Neurochick said:

But today edgy is nothing more than a lot of nudity, violence and saying the word "fuck."

If that's the definition, then my office is the edgiest fucking place on the planet because you won't get 7 seconds without 'fuck' blasting out. 

[GaT]

16 hours ago, kiddo82 said:

I always liked that Major Crimes/The Closer would jump back and forth from light to heavy to light.  I thought they handled those transitions very well. 

I used to look forward to the Provenza/Flynn "funny" episode that they did every season.

[PepSinger]

20 minutes ago, GaT said:

I used to look forward to the Provenza/Flynn "funny" episode that they did every season.

“WHERE ARE PROVENZA AND FLYNN?!”

[Irlandesa]

On 6/1/2019 at 7:49 PM, Neurochick said:

However, USA did get an Emmy for "Mr. Robot."

And Monk earned them 8 Emmys.  Tony Shaloub was nominated every season and won three times. Guest actors and music won the other five.

Burn Notice got a few nominations. 

12 hours ago, ganesh said:

I watched those shows too, but I do like Mr. Robot. I don't see why the network can't have a mix. 

Because they'd rather chase elusive Emmys (that they were already winning) than have hit shows.

That's why I don't get TNT.  They cancelled Major Crimes to chase after an "edgy" audience.  They had one or two hits and a lot of cancellations. 

Right now, the only place purely dedicated to "cozy" is Hallmark but their brand of cozy is afraid of being too edgy to the point that I feel like they're scared to write anything truly funny.

[andromeda331]

1 hour ago, Irlandesa said:

And Monk earned them 8 Emmys.  Tony Shaloub was nominated every season and won three times. Guest actors and music won the other five.

Burn Notice got a few nominations. 

Because they'd rather chase elusive Emmys (that they were already winning) than have hit shows.

That's why I don't get TNT.  They cancelled Major Crimes to chase after an "edgy" audience.  They had one or two hits and a lot of cancellations. 

Right now, the only place purely dedicated to "cozy" is Hallmark but their brand of cozy is afraid of being too edgy to the point that I feel like they're scared to write anything truly funny.

That's what's weird. TNT switched to "edgy" shows but every few last that long. Most ended up being canceled after a season or two. But their still chasing it. Its not working but they still won't quit.

[andromeda331]

9 hours ago, PepSinger said:

“WHERE ARE PROVENZA AND FLYNN?!”

That episode was so hilarious. Starting with them at the garage as the door goes up. They see the body. The garage door goes down and they go off to the game. The team sabotaging robbery homicide team to keep the suspect from revealing he left the body at what's now Provenza's house. Brenda telling Provenza to go home and him asking Is that how they say your fired in the South? The rest of the squad listening and their reactions to "Sky Box tickets."

[Raja]

10 hours ago, PepSinger said:

“WHERE ARE PROVENZA AND FLYNN?!”

With the description for the visually impaired of Chief Johnson banging her desk with a stapler,. on the beat.

[Bastet]

19 hours ago, Neurochick said:

But today edgy is nothing more than a lot of nudity, violence and saying the word "fuck."

And often for no purpose other than because they can. 

When show runners' concept of their show is "awful people doing messed-up things with lots of blood, tits, and f-bombs" and they loosely concoct some plots around that raison d'être, it shows.  It's different than creating a show that happens to contain some of those things.

And none of it should be the only kinds of dramas being made and promoted anymore, since the ratings proved audiences also enjoyed having lighter, character-driven shows in their lives.  But USA and TNT both ran screaming from what they were doing best to try to fully immerse in the "dark, edgy" pool.  Which means neither network has drawn my interest since, but if there was a balance to their programming, I might have become interested in something new while watching one of my regular programs.

[Katy M]

1 hour ago, Bastet said:

I might have become interested in something new while watching one of my regular programs.

And that's a very good point. Years ago I would start watching a show because it would be advertised while I was watching something else.  Now, that I'm watching very little new TV, I'm not seeing the ads, so I end up watching less and less. Not that that's a bad thing for me. But, it is for the networks.  Well, maybe not just me specifically, but assuming the trend extends beyond me.

[Mabinogia]

17 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

That's why I don't get TNT.  They cancelled Major Crimes to chase after an "edgy" audience.  They had one or two hits and a lot of cancellations. 

I think TNT cancelled Major Crimes because they wanted a "young" audience, they just used edgy as code for "we want the prime demographic and Major Crimes is too mature to attract 22 year old males. 

Major Crimes was an excellent, well written, well acted, ensemble. Unfortunately none of it's stars dated royalty or had drunken escapades that made them buzz worthy, or are considered "hot" buy the gullible youths who will buy whatever is being hocked by their favorite celebs. 

If you look at television these days, despite all the "prestige" shows popping up, very few are well crafted. They are flashy, dark, filled with pretty people doing nasty things, but if you really look at them, very few of them are all that well written. They are disposable. Once the "shock" value is done, once you've seen the "twist" they aren't all that rewatchable. But that's where society is at these days at least the media consuming part of society. They want something they can tweet about. They want to watch people might retweet something they said so they can think of themselves as "famous".

I seriously spend about 80% of my TV time watching reruns, most of them of shows/eps I've seen more than once. I still watch Golden Girls, Mash, The Middle, though I can practically rattle off all the dialog along with the actors. 

[Ceindreadh]

1 hour ago, Katy M said:

And that's a very good point. Years ago I would start watching a show because it would be advertised while I was watching something else.  Now, that I'm watching very little new TV, I'm not seeing the ads, so I end up watching less and less. Not that that's a bad thing for me. But, it is for the networks.  Well, maybe not just me specifically, but assuming the trend extends beyond me.

I mostly watch from my DVR rather than live, but I’ve started making a point of watching (or at least fast forwarding) through the closing credits just in case there’s a promo for another show at the end of it. I’ve picked up a few suggestions for new shows to try or reminders that older shows are returning. 

(And then of course I add them to a spreadsheet so I won’t forget to set them to record...if only I could be as organized in other aspects of my life!)

[Irlandesa]

32 minutes ago, Mabinogia said:

I think TNT cancelled Major Crimes because they wanted a "young" audience, they just used edgy as code for "we want the prime demographic and Major Crimes is too mature to attract 22 year old males. 

Sure but even then, they didn't really succeed. 

[Mabinogia]

7 minutes ago, Irlandesa said:

Sure but even then, they didn't really succeed. 

Well, it wasn't a GOOD idea. lol 

Major Crimes might not have been a splashy watercooler buzz worthy show, but it was stable, had pretty strong numbers, it got critical acclaim, it was kind of the work horse, strong and stable, you could count on it. Keep that show running while you slowly add something "edgier" and "cooler". It just seems like cable networks seem to think all their shows have to be the same, and right now that same is bleak, dark, and twisty. There is room for other things. I miss light hearted hour long shows. Not sitcoms, not bleak dramas, but fun shows like Psych, White Collar, Leverage, Major Crimes. I miss character driven shows. All the shows out right now seem to be plot driven, which is also fine, but not when that's all you get. 

[Stats Queen]

Man, I really miss the USA characters welcome TV shows. I have no idea what’s on their channel now.

There used to be a lot of shows that were well written and acted (comedy, drama, dramedy, you name it). Now I am lucky if I can find a new one to watch. 

All those channels.......

[Mabinogia]

3 minutes ago, Stats Queen said:

All those channels.......

ironically, the more channels we get the less options we seem to have. Mainly because, once something becomes successful all the other networks make the same show with just enough differences to not get sued for plagiarism. 

New/current shows I watch: 

1. The Good Place (which best be returning soon!)
2. Good Omens (my new favorite obsession)
3. Sabrina the Teenage Witch
4. Stranger Things
5. The Bachelor/ette (100% because of the snark on the forums here)

Only two of those are on actual TV.

When I was a kid/teen/early 20s I would get the TV Guide Fall Preview and map out what I was going to be watching (I'm old. We had not just a paper TV Guide, but a Fall Season!) I would stress out over which show I was going to watch when there were more than one I wanted to see at the same time. Now I wear out my finger flipping channels desperate to find something to watch. I usually end up with reruns. 

[Stats Queen]

1 minute ago, Mabinogia said:

New/current shows I watch: 

1. The Good Place (which best be returning soon!)
2. Good Omens (my new favorite obsession)
3. Sabrina the Teenage Witch
4. Stranger Things
5. The Bachelor/ette (100% because of the snark on the forums here)

Thank you, thank you so much. I am a huge Terry Prachtett fan and loved the book Good Omens. So excited to watch it.

I really like the other shows also.

Just like you, I watch the Bachelor/ette for the huge snark on the forums also - 

😻

[Mabinogia]

6 minutes ago, Stats Queen said:

Thank you, thank you so much. I am a huge Terry Prachtett fan and loved the book Good Omens. So excited to watch it.

I've only just gotten into Terry Pratchett and haven't read Good Omens yet. I want to finish watching the series before I start reading it. I'm only two eps in (my ear clogged up and I want to be able to hear the dialog so I had to stop) but I am in LOVE with it. I also am torn between wanting to just mainline it like heroine, and savour it like a fine wine.

I do love Pratchett's quirky humor and the show is really unlike anything else out there, which makes me so happy. 

[Guest]

21 minutes ago, Stats Queen said:

Man, I really miss the USA characters welcome TV shows. I have no idea what’s on their channel now.

There used to be a lot of shows that were well written and acted (comedy, drama, dramedy, you name it). Now I am lucky if I can find a new one to watch. 

Mostly reality and wrestling and syndication.

I don't think the desire to have a prestige show is about Emmys.

I think its a cost model. USA took their place in the top tier of basic cable by having a solid block of original programming.  They use to have a lot more scripted original content compared to the rest of basic cable.    I think they looked at AMC and decided if they could get one or two shows that were buzz worthy, then they could maintain their position without as much cost.  It just didn't work that great because they didn't find a GoT, Breaking Bad, Mad Men, or Walking Dead.  They got Mr Robot but I don't think that was ever as buzzworthy as they would have liked.

And look at AMC now.  Mad Men is gone and Walking Dead is falling apart and they are throwing everything they can at the schedule to find something to stick.

Although with USA (and SyFy) I also always think it might just be that every new NBC Universal/Comcast exec has to come in with a new vision and new programming because they use the cable networks as a corporate stepping stone.

[ganesh]

4 hours ago, Katy M said:

Now, that I'm watching very little new TV, I'm not seeing the ads, so I end up watching less and less.

That's really the only reason I have EW magazine. They cover new shows and have a weekly schedule. 

1 hour ago, ParadoxLost said:

Although with USA (and SyFy) I also always think it might just be that every new NBC Universal/Comcast exec has to come in with a new vision and new programming because they use the cable networks as a corporate stepping stone.

SciFi at least has been doing that for 20 years. 

I don't think shows overall are worse, but it's harder to find shows you like because there's so much content now. 

I think the problem is, yes, they all want the next Mad Men or GOT, but statistically, that's going to be a low low hit rate. However, you can make just good shows. 

Everyone is talking about USA because they had a bunch of just good shows, and there was nothing wrong with that. 

You can still have your flagship show and a bunch of other stuff that people like too. 

[kathyk2]

On ‎6‎/‎2‎/‎2019 at 10:45 AM, Mabinogia said:

Those were two very well written shows with amazing casts. And you are right, they handled dark and light equally well. I prefer when my dramas have some humor to them, like all the shows you fine folks have been listing from the Golden Era of USA Network. 

I tried Mr Robot but it was so pretentiously bleak I couldn't stand it. Sadly TV has taken the turn towards "prestige" shows and everyone wants to write the next big thing. They are all hungry for awards. I have pretty much given up tele for the time being. I used to watch it all the time and now I more often than not skim through, see that there is nothing worth wasting my time watching and turn it off. I do watch reruns of early Monk and Psych. Black and Tan was on the other day and though I've seen it about a dozen times now, it still put a smile on my face when I saw it was on. 

Soon this trend of "prestige" will blow over, hopefully the epic fail of the Game of Thrones series finale will put at least one more nail in the coffin, and maybe the next trend will be back towards more light-hearted fantasy stuff. I don't mean fantasy as in dragons and princesses, but something like Leverage, which wasn't remotely realistic but was fun fantasy fulfillment. 

I miss the lighter shows on the Syfy network like Warehouse 13 and Sanctuary too. They were fun to watch and when they did have a serious episode it really stood out.

[ganesh]

Add Eureka to that. 

One of the few (if the only) shows to do time travel and not reset at the end. 

[PepSinger]

5 hours ago, Mabinogia said:

I seriously spend about 80% of my TV time watching reruns, most of them of shows/eps I've seen more than once. I still watch Golden Girls, Mash, The Middle, though I can practically rattle off all the dialog along with the actors. 

First, I want to thank everyone here for naming something I picked up on subconsciously. I didn’t watch a lot original programming on USA. I mainly watched SVU reruns. However, even I could tell something’s been different for the past three years, and it’s totally the “characters welcome” disappearing, which is unfortunate.

Second, I don’t watch a lot of new TV, either. If we are talking about recent series, the last new show that I still watch is This Is Us. (I still watch Grey’s Anatomy). I’m starting to get into New Amsterdam. Other than that, most new shows I watch are actually limited series (Big Little Lies, The Red Line, True Detective, etc...). I’d be perfectly happy watching BV 90210, Felicity, Charmed, ER, Dawson’s Creek, and maybe some other shows I’m forgetting for the rest of my life.

Edited June 4, 2019 by PepSinger

[merylinkid]

I don't think Shallow is all that great of a song.   Not the melody, not the vocals and definitely not the lyrics.    It's about how they are in too deep but they song is called Shallow and they repeat that word over and over.    Except they aren't in the shallow end anymore.   Just ugh.   

[Minneapple]

1 hour ago, merylinkid said:

I don't think Shallow is all that great of a song.   Not the melody, not the vocals and definitely not the lyrics.    It's about how they are in too deep but they song is called Shallow and they repeat that word over and over.    Except they aren't in the shallow end anymore.   Just ugh.   

Plus...I was so fucking sick of it by the end of awards season. Enough.