Party of One: Unpopular TV Opinions

[Princess Sparkle]

With this Dancing with the Stars finale, I have to get a long-standing UO off my chest: I have never liked the Drew Lachey "Save a Horse" freestyle, and I have no idea how it was voted favorite of all-time a few years ago. There are clear mistakes in it, it's not danced all that cleanly, and Cheryl basically dances around Drew while he does push-ups.

[UYI]

Two Drew Carey Show UOs:

 

I loved when they used The Vogues' "Five O'Clock World" as their theme song and wish they had used it longer.

 

Even more UO?

 

I love "Cleveland Rocks." *runs away*

[Brandi Maxxxx]

I didn't know those were UOs. I didn't even know there were any popular opinions about The Drew Carey Show except about the later seasons sucking.

 

Modern Family UO: Lily has been the best character on the show since around season 4.

[Shannon L.]

 

Modern Family UO: Lily has been the best character on the show since around season 4.

Thank you! I, personally, won't go as far as saying the "best" character, but I think she's great and am always stunned when people say she's awful. Like every character/actor, she has her great moments and her "meh" moments.  I guess my UO is that I'm still really enjoying the show, although I'll admit that it's not as good as it was in the first couple of seasons.

[UYI]

I didn't know those were UOs. I didn't even know there were any popular opinions about The Drew Carey Show except about the later seasons sucking.

 

 

 

Back in the day of the older JumptheShark.com (Oh how I miss it so!), the big reason it was seen as jumping the shark was when they added the Cleveland Rocks theme. Maybe it was just a UO there, I don't know.

 

Continuing with another UO:

 

Coach had one of the greatest theme songs of all time. I post it here because I think its' theme song is hardly ever referred to as one of the greats. 

 

Edited November 29, 2014 by UYI

[applecrisp]

My UO is like some others have stated  for Sleepy Hollow all of the negativity on the forum.  For me, it is the show The Middle.

 

It is such an underrated show, which I think is done well and remains funny.  The people here in the forums complain so much about Frankie being a bad mother or any inconsistencies.  Just drags me down to read the comments.  Even the the A.V. Club people just enjoy the show.   It is a sitcom, not everything makes sense enjoy this fine little show.

 

If a show bugs you that much DON'T WATCH.

[Sweet Tee]

 

Modern Family UO: Lily has been the best character on the show since around season 4.

Agreed.  That kid cracks me up.  I'm always surprised at how many people hate her and complain about how mean she is.  In real life, would I allow my child to talk like that?  Of course not.  But, it's a sitcom.  It's supposed to make me laugh.  And these days, she's the one getting the most laughs out of me.  Never change, you sarcastic princess.  Never change.

[UYI]

Here are some Facts of Life UOs:

 

I actually love the last few seasons almost as much as I love the earlier seasons (and in another UO, I actually don't even mind Season 1!), and I LOVE the final, 80's rock version of the theme song that was used in the final four seasons of the show, especially the instrumental version used during the closing credits.

 

And I will always love Blair more than Jo. Always. 

[LilWharveyGal]

My UO is like some others have stated  for Sleepy Hollow all of the negativity on the forum.  

 

Oh thank goodness I'm not alone!  I haven't been able to deal with that forum for weeks.  Life's too short.

[Wiendish Fitch]

And I will always love Blair more than Jo. Always.

 

 

I liked Jo until she became too special: all the guys wanted her, and she was always the most sensible, the most level-headed, most talented (she could cook, dance, play piano, sing, fix cars and bikes, teach) member of the group. She went from being a brash, flawed, likable kid to this insufferable beacon of perfection. Blech. What does it say about me that I thought Blair's character development felt the most natural? 

Edited November 29, 2014 by Wiendish Fitch

[Shannon L.]

 

My UO is like some others have stated  for Sleepy Hollow all of the negativity on the forum. 

 

Oh thank goodness I'm not alone!  I haven't been able to deal with that forum for weeks.  Life's too short.

I don't post there, I just read it from time to time, but it got to the point where I was feeling guilty for still loving the show.  Yes, there are aspects of it that I don't care for, but I think it's fun.  Also, I don't take my tv shows too seriously, so some of the nit picky stuff gets on my nerves.  This is also true for Scorpion.  Which, in my opinion, is, at least for now, a great show to watch with the family.  So far, the violence has been kept to a minimum, there has been nothing overly sexual and it's refreshing that the main character, who has a crush on one of the women, is actually helping her ex with problems he's having with their son instead of getting all jealous and manipulative. 

[ganesh]

I'm still behind on Sleepy Hollow, so I only peeked into the forum. I think the show is fine, so I don't quite get the negativity either. This is part of my theory that a show has to be the best show ever or it completely sucks. Sleepy Hollow was pretty batshit from the get-go. A show like that isn't going to be a character study by a long shot. As long as everyone isn't suddenly acting OOC and the leads have good chemistry then I'm fine. 

 

Although I don't mind a lot of bitching about a show if it's legit stuff, like people arguing against the leads getting together, or if there's a obvious drop in quality. I actually can deal with that better because if people are all praising the show up and down, there's not much of a conversation. The Leftovers was a pile of pretentious garbage to anyone who has watched tv for more than 3 months. I was getting a little sick and tired of how many "nuanced and subtle great show" comments were flooding the board. I thought I was missing something until I got a "the character motivations aren't important to the story" comment and I realized discussion was pointless. 

 

I suppose there's a line for every show. People complain about TWD but I think it's legit because they made some strange storytelling decisions, but the actors really all bring it every episode. On the other hand, sitcoms are largely static shows, so I don't see what one could complain about. 

 

In this era of tv though, I think having a show bible and continuity editor are essential to every show. 

[ribboninthesky1]

Sleepy Hollow was over-hyped to begin with, and I suspect the weak plotting, which was present from the beginning, is just easier to perceive in its 2nd season.  I can understand the "hey, it's TV, and I'll just go with it" perspective, but I don't understand why something like weak writing, which was always there, is suddenly the big elephant in the room that media and sundry are highlighting.   

 

I've heard about marginalization of some (most?) of the black characters, and that seems to be a valid concern.  But then I have the HUGE UPO in always disliking Ichabod Crane and his dynamic with Abbie Mills.  It's why I've never really tuned into the second season.  I watched the "Mama" episode, since that focused primarily on Abbie and Jenny, the two characters and relationship I cared most about.  To date, no reason to watch the other episodes since the show's focus, from season one, episode one, was Ichabod Crane's personal drama, and probably always will be.  Maybe I'm just crazy, but after binge-watching most of the first season, the Apocalypse stuff seemed like a red herring to me.        

Edited November 29, 2014 by ribboninthesky1

[kiddo82]

From the Once Great Shows Thread...

Ugh.  That's what's happened to American Idol and the chef shows.  And especially Next Food Network Star.  I don't want to hear about how your third cousin's appendectomy showed you to be a better person, just perform/cook, dammit.

On the flip side, Bethany Hamilton (a surfer who lost an arm to a shark attack) and her husband Adam are killing it on the Amazing Race this season. They are smart racers in exceptional shape who make sound decisions and don't fight. They accept that they have a potentially unusual circumstance with some of the challenges, do their best, and move along. Should they win, the aforementioned reasons are why it would be a deserved win, at least in my opinion. Good racers are good racers are good racers. Another strong team this season is the dentists. Now, I am definitely rooting for the surfers because they seem like nicer people than the dentists but, and here's my UO, the surfers don't "deserve" to win because they have had to overcome more. They only deserve it if they are the best team out there. We get this in reality TV a lot but no one "deserves" anything merely by showing up. I believe it needs to be earned, no matter what potential barriers may have to be addressed. If I have an impairment, or even if I don't, that is not my competitor's worry and he or she should not have to apologize for potentially being better than I am. That's life. I root for whomever I want but I typically find that the most satisfying endings happen when the best team/person wins, not necessarily the one with the best story.

[ChromaKelly]

My UO is like some others have stated  for Sleepy Hollow all of the negativity on the forum.  For me, it is the show The Middle.

 

It is such an underrated show, which I think is done well and remains funny.  The people here in the forums complain so much about Frankie being a bad mother or any inconsistencies.  Just drags me down to read the comments.  Even the the A.V. Club people just enjoy the show.   It is a sitcom, not everything makes sense enjoy this fine little show.

 

If a show bugs you that much DON'T WATCH.

Yes! On a sitcom, I don't care if a kid has been a junior for three years or whether a table would really collapse if this happened. Stop nitpicking sitcoms for realism.

[ganesh]

I have no idea if SH was over hyped. I just don't pay attention to that anymore and I stay as unspoiled as possible. It completely changes the pov of a show. 

[ribboninthesky1]

So then, how do you know whether the negativity towards the show is valid or not?

[ganesh]

Stuff like this is interesting to me because I do like talking about shows. It can enhance the viewing experience. I try to use my own judgement as someone who has watched tv a lot. People tend to see things in general, that just aren't there. By and large most negativity isn't earned. I've gotten caught up in it, but then I'm like wtf am I doing? That doesn't mean one can't watch a show with a critical eye, however. But there's usually just bitching for the sake of bitching and it's not that relevant to the show. I'll concede that some of my Leftovers griping was tending toward the bitching side, but I've yet to see much of my criticisms as unfounded. 

 

Generally, making characters suddenly stupid to move the plot along is a legit gripe. One can also tell when a show is running out of ideas. That's frustrating if a show used to be pretty good. Or the "hole in the writing" trope, where there's a gap in the plot and TPTBs leave it to the viewers to handwave what happened. I don't think anyone likes to be spoon fed any show, but there's a difference between viewers inferring what happens on the screen versus expecting them to make up their own connections to hold the plot up. 

 

A show like H50 is patently ridiculous, so complaining much about it seems silly to me. It's not like it wasn't anything ever than testosterone fueled. The female characters are pretty awful. It's basically an 80s action movie every week, without any commie bad guys.

 

Similarly with SH. I'm not seeing much of the criticisms of SH that people seem to be complaining about. Although I'm behind so I don't follow the discussions in real time. I mean, I watched an episode that had Evil Pied Piper. This isn't going to be much of a character study. The lead is fairly one-dimensional, though can be fun to watch, so wanting him to act different is fine, but it's not that kind of show. It's way more plot driven than anything.

 

I think part of it is that we're in a cynical paradigm so people tend to be more petty on a show. There's also an all or nothing attitude that if a show isn't the best thing ever then it totally sucks. Good shows aren't allowed to be good shows. Shows that really aren't that good aren't suddenly going to be good. The Mentalist is terrible, and has been trading on the strength of the leads and the large shipper base for years. There's a side character I like, and once and a while the case of the week is clever, but it's never going to be anything more than that. I have tons of complaints about it, but it's not worth my time. I can't spend more than 15 seconds on the board because of the ridiculous use of "Jisbon" either. 

 

A lot of the gripes at TWD are legit to me. There have been pacing problems. TPTBs have made questionable creative choices. It is actually a good show. I don't think it's going to be any more than that. I think there's plenty of storytelling left in the show, but they need to put together a full season.

[ribboninthesky1]

But I'm asking, regarding Sleepy Hollow in particular, if you don't pay attention to the hype (I assume media), and you are unspoilered, AND you're behind on the show...then how can you assess if criticism of the show is legit or not?  Are you just assuming that because most negativity isn't earned, then that automatically applies to Sleepy Hollow?  I think praise is as unearned as negativity at times, especially for shows barely out of their first season. 

 

In any case, in general, I like what I like.  If my perception of the show doesn't line up with the majority of those discussing said show, I'll just avoid the forum.  I agree that people can watch the same episode or show and see things that aren't there.  On the other hand, I disagree that fans keep a show from being good, which seems to be the implication of "good shows aren't allowed to be good." 

 

I've read the argument that fans can give good feedback, which is true, but fandom is a verbal minority.  I feel like most people watching a show will watch what is provided by the show, and go on.  If the showrunners can't bother to get with the evolving times and realize that the Internet means that the shit they got away with 15, 20, 30 plus years ago in terms of continuity and general storytelling doesn't fly now, that's on THEM, not fans.  And if showrunners take the advice of a verbal minority, again, that's on THEM, because they have creative control of the show.  I have my issues with some fans, but unless fans have the ability to halt production of a show, force themselves into the writers' room, then I still hold the creative fate of the show in the showrunner and/or network's hands.      

[ganesh]

I was just going by what people said in this particular thread about the SH board. 

[Neurochick]

My UO is that I don't hate Dawson on Chicago Fire and I really don't get the hate for her.

[topanga]

 

In any case, in general, I like what I like.  If my perception of the show doesn't line up with the majority of those discussing said show, I'll just avoid the forum.  I agree that people can watch the same episode or show and see things that aren't there.  On the other hand, I disagree that fans keep a show from being good, which seems to be the implication of "good shows aren't allowed to be good."

I avoid forums until I've watched show and have developed own opinions about an episode. Otherwise, forums can take away some of my enjoyment of an episode since many of the comments are critical. Yes, the comments are often nit-picky, but for us old-heads, the words "Television Without Pity" (a now-defunct website) remain true. Even if you like show, these forums are the place to post comments, nit-picky or otherwise. It doesn't always mean we don't like the show.

 

In the case of Sleepy Hollow, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But even the writers have stated that the focus of season 2 will be more on Ichabod and Katrina's marriage, and Katrina will have a larger role than she did in the first season. And there is a new character, Hawley, who has appeared in almost every episode this season. And by consequence, Jenny and Irving have less screen time. I'm not giving an opinion on it. But those are the facts.

[amensisterfriend]

Some random ones: 

 

It actually saddens me to admit this, but Buffy the Vampire Slayer hasn't aged well for me at all. And I'm including even the show's supposedly best seasons here. 

 

I think Ron Howard's narration, generally praised as a terrific part of the show, was the very worst aspect of Arrested Development. 

 

The fiery hatred for Gilmore Girls' Christopher has always been way over the top for me----as is the blind love for the (IMUO) extraordinarily overrated character of Luke. 

 

I could never get into either Breaking Bad or Walking Dead at all.  

[truthaboutluv]

It actually saddens me to admit this, but Buffy the Vampire Slayer hasn't aged well for me at all. And I'm including even the show's supposedly best seasons here.

 

 

I sadly have to agree with you. I loved the show when I was younger, albeit I was in my early teens so maybe I just wasn't as wise but I tried watching it on Netflix and I found myself very bored. I also feel the same about Friends. I rarely stop and watch Friends when I see an episode on in any of the syndicated channels.

[ganesh]

I avoid forums until I've watched show and have developed own opinions about an episode.

 

I usually watch shows that don't have a lot of viewers so the discussion isn't that bad. But the "popular" shows I don't even bother with much. The summer shows are actually the best in terms of supplementary discussion. I think Halt and Catch Fire actually benefited from online discussion. 

 

TWOP wasn't really though. Because if you complained about the "wrong" things you got penalized. Here you can say whatever you want about the show. Which is my original point that a lot of the bitching about shows is largely unfounded. 

[topanga]

 

I usually watch shows that don't have a lot of viewers so the discussion isn't that bad. But the "popular" shows I don't even bother with much. The summer shows are actually the best in terms of supplementary discussion. I think Halt and Catch Fire actually benefited from online discussion.

 

I agree. Here's one thing I miss about the 80s and 90s: because there weren't as many shows on TV, it was fairly easy to find people in your real life to have discussions with about a show. So you could go to school or work and discuss what happened the night before on Dallas or The Thorn Birds or The Cosby Show (too soon?).

 

 

I could never get into either Breaking Bad or Walking Dead at all.

Yeah, me too.

[ganesh]

I like being able to interact with people online about tv because irl I don't have many friends and they don't watch the same shows. I also wouldn't have found out about a lot of good shows like on BBC or smaller networks without online. 

 

I actually think miniseries should be brought back. The use of social media could really turn it into a event tv. 

[Cobalt Stargazer]

TWOP wasn't really though. Because if you complained about the "wrong" things you got penalized. Here you can say whatever you want about the show. Which is my original point that a lot of the bitching about shows is largely unfounded. 

 

I'm late to this discussion, but I don't think all "bitching" is unfounded at all. Why should it not be just as valid to talk about what's wrong with a show as what's right about it? While I'm kind of glad they don''t have the rules about boards on boards here, I generally try to stick to talking about the show unless its a really egregious case of fandom craziness. I feel like if I'm saying something that's both reasonably intelligent and pertinent to the subject at hand, that's not "bitching", that's saying "I think X Thing could have been done a lot better." or "Whatever Show used to be so much better." Just because I add a healthy dose of snark to the mix, that doesn't mean whatever I'm saying isn't valid.

[ShadowHunter]

I do not care that Beth died on TWD. I understand it sucks when your favorite character dies on a show it has happened to me but this is getting crazy. A petition s going around to bring her back on the show. I guess some of her fans do not realize this is not the type of a horror show where you can be brought back to life.

[Miss Dee]

I agree criticizing a show and insisting that it reach higher standards is not the same as bitching about it or hating on it.

That said, I do think constant negativity in a forum ends up feeding off itself and convincing a lot of fans to feel more negative than they would on their own. I also think it leads to a lot of unnecessary "line-in-the-sand" declarations, where people demand the writers write the story to exactly the specifications they have in their heads, or they're out. And I think that's a really limited kind of thinking. Once it gets to that point - where a fan is only going to accept one outcome for a plot point or even a whole series of them - then I think at thatvpoint it's just better to get out. If you don't trust the writers to tell the story, if you're convinced they're going to fuck it up just like they have with every other story because they're no good talented hacks who should DIAF, and you're starting to have revenge fantasies about them getting properly punished for ruining your show - dude, there's a LOT of TV out there; find something more to your taste. Life is short, man.

[ganesh]

That's basically what I'm getting at. It seems there's more that than legit criticisms about writing, pacing, etc.

I think it's becoming farcical with all the deaths on GOT, but bitching about it is kind of short sighted on my part because that's been the show m/o from E1.

People can say whatever they want but I tend to think a large part of it is what they think the show is and what it actually is.

As part of that, "well this show had officially jumped the shark" needs to be retired immediately.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

That said, I do think constant negativity in a forum ends up feeding off itself and convincing a lot of fans to feel more negative than they would on their own.

 

As a Buffyverse refugee, I feel qualified to speak to this point.

 

I don't believe that anyone can change someone's mind about whether or not something is good, or if they "should" like it. Over a decade later, I still see people who think that Chosen was the best series finale in the history of series finales, and even though I wonder if I was watching the same episode, and have offered perfectly well-reasoned arguments for why I found it to be a nonsensical, insulting mess from top to bottom, I'm pretty sure I've never convinced someone of my position if they felt the opposite. For more current shows, there's Supernatural, which I had to back away from. When Dean said the equivalent of, "Sure, go ahead and possess my brother without either his knowledge or permission," I knew it was time for me to go. Too many bad memories of Angel mind-wiping his son because he was unwilling to actually do the work that would help Connor. Of course, the die-hard fans talk about how it was in character for Dean to do whatever he could to keep Sam alive, which....fine, but that kind of personal violation didn't sit well with me. I don't know if that's unpopular or not that that was my breaking point, but there you go.

[DittyDotDot]

I actually think miniseries should be brought back. The use of social media could really turn it into a event tv. 

 

I've been saying this for a while now. There are so many great ideas out there, but they would be better served as short one-off stories rather than drug out for years and years, IMO. I miss the miniseries of my youth. I have a general curmudgeon view of social media, but this could be an actual great use of it!

 

 

That's basically what I'm getting at. It seems there's more that than legit criticisms about writing, pacing, etc.

 

I think it's becoming farcical with all the deaths on GOT, but bitching about it is kind of short sighted on my part because that's been the show m/o from E1.

People can say whatever they want but I tend to think a large part of it is what they think the show is and what it actually is.

 

It's like getting into a relationship thinking you're gonna change someone or "fix" them. It generally just ends in bitter heartbreak.

[Enigma X]

My UO on show bitching (which may truly be a UO on forums like these) is that it is ok to hold your own opinion and snark, but some people just take it to a fanatical level that sucks even the joy of snarking out of a show. I have stopped visiting so many forums (even ones where I hold the same negative opinions as the other posters) because it becomes clear that some viewers get a high off of criticizing the show, the actor, the writing, etc...no matter what is produced each week. They also start to form this "my way or the highway" attitude (but never take that highway). This whole attitude straddles the line of being confrontational because they start to judge other posters on their opinions.

 

Since I believe that I don't own people, and we all have a right to our opinions, I remove myself from those forums.

[Princess Sparkle]

 

It actually saddens me to admit this, but Buffy the Vampire Slayer hasn't aged well for me at all. And I'm including even the show's supposedly best seasons here. 

 

 

I have to agree with you, and I'll go one step further: My UO is that Angel was the much better show, and has held up much better on rewatch.

[ganesh]

There's tons of fun to have online snarking on a show. I mean, DaVinci's Demons is batshit; it's got its moments, but, I mean, blind Dracula on fire getting thrown out of a window. Not to mention the massive hoyay. The forum is a romp, but no one would really argue that it's not a silly show. He invented the parachute and jumped off a mountain ffs. 

 

My UO on show bitching (which may truly be a UO on forums like these) is that it is ok to hold your own opinion and snark, but some people just take it to a fanatical level that sucks even the joy of snarking out of a show.

 

What I'm saying is because we're in a such a cynical veiwing paradigm that crossing that line is more and more frequent. I question whether people are really watching the show that's being aired. 

Edited December 2, 2014 by ganesh

[Sweet Tee]

 

I do not care that Beth died on TWD.

 

Agreed,  The petition thing is weird to me, too.  Like you said, this isn't that kind of horror show.  

 

 

My UO is that Angel was the much better show, and has held up much better on rewatch.

Yes.  I've always liked Angel better as a series and rewatches only confirms that.  I can still enjoy an episode of Angel.  I loved Buffy back in the day, but I'm just not invested in it anymore, not even on a nostalgic level.  I'd much rather revisit team Angel.

[Kel Varnsen]

It actually saddens me to admit this, but Buffy the Vampire Slayer hasn't aged well for me at all. And I'm including even the show's supposedly best seasons here.   

I think part of the problem is that it is a very dated show. Like if you were in the future and wanted to show someone pop culture in the late 90's/early 2000s. So watching it now it is like watching Leave it to Beaver or Welcome Back Kotter. Plus a lot of the things that were revolutionary or even just different on this show (all the little Whedon quirks) everyone does now (tough female main character, musical episode, quick dialog). 

 

Plus every time I watch it I can't help but notice that 1) the stunt doubles are really obvious and 2) Sarah Michelle Gellar looks like her entire arm is going to shatter every time she throws a punch.

Edited December 2, 2014 by Kel Varnsen

[ganesh]

I don't think too many people were upset that Beth died. The whole back half of the season was plotted out rather poorly.

 

There's a line you have to toe where you have a show universe where death is common, but you can overdo it and it loses its punch. I tend to think character deaths are being overdone because TPTBs don't really know what to do with a particular character. Killing someone off is as much lazy writing as anything. 

[joelene]

I thought True Detective was awful. Made it three episodes then I gave up.

Edited December 2, 2014 by joelene

[Mulva]

When Dean said the equivalent of, "Sure, go ahead and possess my brother without either his knowledge or permission," I knew it was time for me to go. Too many bad memories of Angel mind-wiping his son because he was unwilling to actually do the work that would help Connor. Of course, the die-hard fans talk about how it was in character for Dean to do whatever he could to keep Sam alive, which....fine, but that kind of personal violation didn't sit well with me. I don't know if that's unpopular or not that that was my breaking point, but there you go.

My UO is that Sam was not an ungrateful bastard for being angry that Dean stuck an angel in him, especially after his prior experiences with possession, and that his speech to Dean in The Purge if anything, was mild. Of course it had a negative impact on their relationship.

[ganesh]

Who decides how two characters' names are smooshed together? Why was this a thing in the first place?

[ganesh]

First of all, if you're an adult and do this, you should ask someone to backhand you.

 

But I mean, who decides if it's Spuffy? Why not Bike? Is there some naming authority like with the comets and the planets, and moons?

 

I rarely ship anyone, and I rarely think when couples are canonically shipped that it's "natural". Unless it was planned from the get go, it's usually a hack. People can like what they like about a show, but using these smooshed names like Spuffy goes to Vegas, makes them come off like vapid teens. 

Edited December 3, 2014 by ganesh

[Cobalt Stargazer]

First of all, if you're an adult and do this, you should ask someone to backhand you.

 

But I mean, who decides if it's Spuffy? Why not Bike? Is there some naming authority like with the comets and the planets, and moons?

 

I think it depends on whether or not you like the pairing. At one point on General Hospital, a couple of the characters were dancing around each other as if they were going to be together. The couple was never actually official, but people who liked them together called them Liaison, for Liz and Jason. People who did not like the pairing called them Jiz.

[ganesh]

That's an obvious one though. Others aren't. All sound stupid.

[Minneapple]

On Sleepy Hollow, Ichabbie just sounds stupid and awkward to me. But then, I have a hard time getting behind a pairing that's all "ADULTERY OR KATRINA'S DEAD LET'S BOINK YAY." So maybe that's why it annoys me.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

That's (Liaison/Jiz) an obvious one though. Others aren't. All sound stupid.

 

Oh, well, sure. I didn't say it wasn't stupid, that's just the most obvious example I could think of that wasn't Buffy-related.

 

That will never not be funny,  

 

It is pretty much hilarious forever, isn't it. I'm sitting here snickering just re-reading it. Because I am twelve.

[Neurochick]

I completely agree with you.  I do miss Jenny and Irving, but I have this theory that they're working on building characters to help Ichabod and Abbie at the end game and that's going to mean showing certain characters more often than others just to establish who everyone is.  Now, if by the middle of next season, we're still missing a lot of Jenny and Irving, I might start grumbling, but for now, I'm still ok with the show.  Also, while Katrina isn't my favorite character, I don't dislike her as much as many fans seem to.  I think I'll avoid discussion groups, too.

 

 

This didn't happen.

 

The issue with this show is that there is a history of white producers and directors having diverse casts in the first season, but then the show becomes all about the white people and the POC, especially black people become marginalized and side-kicked.  Kind of how they killed off the black woman in Person of Interest and made it The Shaw Show.

[Miss Dee]

While I don't disagree with your general premise, Neurochick, I think POI might not be the best example of it. Aside from the narrative structure supporting the death of that character as a proper plot point (and I say that as someone who loved Carter), there is also the fact that it's an ensemble show and Shaw does not get the bulk of the storyline or timeslot; moreover, the actress is half Iranian and her character's name is Sameen, so she's a WOC too.

[galax-arena]

The couple was never actually official, but people who liked them together called them Liaison, for Liz and Jason. People who did not like the pairing called them Jiz.

Sam and Kurt on Glee = Kum

Kirk and Spock on Star Trek = Kock

 

I use portmanteaus because they’re convenient in fandom discussions. Yes, they sound silly a lot of the time, but I’m lazy, and the latter wins out. It’s not really a big deal. A lot of the fighting over ship names within fandom is dumb - it shouldn’t be such srs bsns - but the use of the ship names themselves? Meh. Don’t care.

Edited December 3, 2014 by galax-arena