Party of One: Unpopular TV Opinions

[EtheltoTillie]

I always get sucked in to some of it, no matter what.  This morning I was watching a 13 year old Japanese girl win at street skateboard!  Incredible.  The kind where they slide down a bannister. 

I also watched women's water polo for a while, which is a bit of an odd sport.  The hats are silly.  But their endurance is amazing.  The pool is deep enough so they can never touch bottom, so they have to keep swimming or treading water.  They have to wear special bathing suits so the other side doesn't try to drag them under.  I really could not follow the action too well, but it's interesting to see for a while.

[DoctorAtomic]

I forgot what year it was, but the Olympics were aired over broadcast and cable on like every NBC outlet, and you could watch *anything*. That's what I liked. The primetime NBC cast was pre selected. 

Just now, GussieK said:

I always get sucked in to some of it, no matter what.  This morning I was watching a 13 year old Japanese girl win at street skateboard!  Incredible.  The kind where they slide down a bannister. 

I also watched women's water polo for a while, which is a bit of an odd sport.  The hats are silly.  But their endurance is amazing.  The pool is deep enough so they can never touch bottom, so they have to keep swimming or treading water.  They have to wear special bathing suits so the other side doesn't try to drag them under.  I really could not follow the action too well, but it's interesting to see for a while.

Water polo is insane. 

[DrSpaceman73]

Studies have shown water polo to be the most physically demanding Olympic sport in terms of total energy expenditure. Both swimming and fighting in the water for an hour.  

[BlackberryJam]

I unabashedly love water polo during the Olympics, but during any other time, don't care at all. It is so physically demanding. I remember one year they had an underwater camera and you could see the fighting going on beneath the surface. I would certainly want my business to have more protection than a thin swimsuit. 

The caps take away the opportunity for hair pulling and I think they have a special insert to protect ears as well. 

This is the kind of stuff going down.

[Hiyo]

Anywhere else and that would be sexual assault...

[DoctorAtomic]

I don't how they do that and tread water. And not drown.

[DrSpaceman73]

2 hours ago, BlackberryJam said:

I unabashedly love water polo during the Olympics, but during any other time, don't care at all. It is so physically demanding. I remember one year they had an underwater camera and you could see the fighting going on beneath the surface. I would certainly want my business to have more protection than a thin swimsuit. 

The caps take away the opportunity for hair pulling and I think they have a special insert to protect ears as well. 

This is the kind of stuff going down.

Well......hmmm.....I mean.....

 

I guess we know now why there is no mixed doubles water polo. 

 

[Blergh]

20 hours ago, Hiyo said:

Anywhere else and that would be sexual assault...

If they regulate boxing to specify no hitting below the belt, why not put no hitting,pulling,etc. below the belt or above the knees in water polo?

[janie jones]

20 minutes ago, Blergh said:

If they regulate boxing to specify no hitting below the belt, why not put no hitting,pulling,etc. below the belt or above the knees in water polo?

Practicality, I'd assume. You'd either need people with snorkels under the water or some sort of reporting + instant replay system. With boxing, everyone can see people's hands at all times.

[DoctorAtomic]

I suppose you could install sensors in the pool, but there aren't really just water polo pools, and it probably costs a lot. 

They could make a rule where one hand has to be above the surface all the time.

[BlackberryJam]

There are rules. If they get caught, it’s a penalty. 

Quote

It is illegal in water polo to kick, strike, shove, or hold a player while they're not holding the ball. Penalties can range from a free throw to permanent exclusion with a delayed substitution. The severity of the punishment is reflective of the severity of the violation.

But it’s damn hard to see underwater. Even if they had cameras underwater and a referee monitoring those cameras, there are multiple bodies and limbs to observe through water churn and it happens so fast.

[annzeepark914]

On 7/25/2021 at 5:18 PM, icemiser69 said:

In any case, he was watching Olympic basketball, and my gosh those squeaky basketball shoes I couldn't take it.   I suffer from migraines and it doesn't take much to trigger them.  But damn, can't they make squeakless basketball shoes?   They need to oil them or do something, anything to stop the squeaking.

 

For me, it's the whistles that are now on a microphone...shrieking so damn loud.  It's like a razorblade slicing through my body (I've posted about this before). So, the squeaky sneakers are just slightly annoying to me but I have a good idea how they affect you. Why are sneakers so loudly squeaking today? Is this another amplified sound effect for TV viewers to feel like they're in the arena?

[Bastet]

31 minutes ago, annzeepark914 said:

Why are sneakers so loudly squeaking today? Is this another amplified sound effect for TV viewers to feel like they're in the arena?

There's also not the competing noise there normally is, since the stands are empty, so the squeaks would be more prominent even there in the venue.

[Blergh]

Is there no way for the sound engineers to  edit out the squeaks on the stands and on the playing courts instead of just broadcasting them ? It sounds like a mice colony! 

[proserpina65]

On 7/26/2021 at 12:09 PM, DrSpaceman73 said:

Studies have shown water polo to be the most physically demanding Olympic sport in terms of total energy expenditure. Both swimming and fighting in the water for an hour.  

You should check out the footage from the Hungary-Soviet Union match at the 1956 Melbourne Olympics.  There was literally blood in the water after a Soviet player punched a Hungarian one near the end of the match.  This was played only a couple of months after the brutal Soviet suppression of an uprising against the communist government in Budapest, and the match was so violent that the referee ended it early.  The Hungarians won 4-0.  Afterwards some of the players defected.

[DrSpaceman73]

I'm officially moving this to unpopular opinions after trying to binge watch sports night.  

First of all Sorkin cannot write comedy. That show is billed as a sitcom but is only mildly funny at best.  But that's not the unpopular opinion I don't think. Sorkin is more known for drama

I just had to stop though and couldn't watch more today.  It's PAINFUL to try and binge watch his shows. Because of the repetition he uses which he thinks conveys wit and insight.  Shakespeare said brevity is the sould of wit.  Sorkin would say repetition and speed is the sould of wit.  And he'd be wrong.  It's irritating.  He writes at times like a teenager who had a 500 word essay to do so he just repeats phrases as filler to meet the word requirement.  

And finally that show at times gets distinct after school special and 80s very special episode vibes with Sorkin going off on preaching about whatever lesson he wants to beat to death. Not at all subtle or nuanced.  

It's not to say there arent so w good episodes or moments or writing. There are.  But overall sportsnight is overrated. I heard to s kf good things about the show before trying it and halfway through season one had to turn it off, irritated by his dialogue. I'll still watch it and finish, I know it's only two seasons but I'm going have to take it in bits and pieces. 

 

[Bastet]

I still like Sports Night, but a strange thing happened the last time I re-watched it: I liked season one less than I used to, and liked season two more than I used to.

Until then, I was of the popular opinion that season one was better, given season two's inherent difficulty with Sorkin and Schlamme juggling The West Wing at the same time, the stupid Dana's Dating Plan storyline, and the presence of Paula Marshall (that last one's just a personal strike against the season - for some reason, she bugs me in everything I've seen her in).  But season one has a lot of Jeremy and Natalie, and while they both have great qualities and moments, they are also frequently annoying, and together they are nearly unbearable at times.

 

[ratgirlagogo]

On 7/26/2021 at 11:53 AM, DoctorAtomic said:

Water polo is insane

 

On 7/26/2021 at 12:09 PM, DrSpaceman73 said:

Studies have shown water polo to be the most physically demanding Olympic sport in terms of total energy expenditure. Both swimming and fighting in the water for an hour. 

 

On 7/26/2021 at 4:13 PM, DoctorAtomic said:

I don't how they do that and tread water. And not drown.

Surprisingly, I actually know the answer to this since I dated a water polo guy in high school.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eggbeater_kick

Like all the water polo guys (and unlike all the other team sports guys) he was a surfer/hippie type who was very smart, very cool and eventually became a National Park Ranger.  Sometimes I still regret (well, okay, not that much) that I chose to go full-bore on exploring my own open-ended insanity and didn't stick with him.  He was a genuinely good guy, probably still is.

[Anduin]

My unpopular opinion is the 100% judged events. Gymnastics, diving, skateboarding, whatever. I have little patience for any of them. I like sports where there is usually a clear winner. They ran faster, scored more goals, lifted more, whatever. Sure, sometimes the ref's call makes a difference. But on the whole, it's down to the athletes.

[Katy M]

1 hour ago, Anduin said:

My unpopular opinion is the 100% judged events. Gymnastics, diving, skateboarding, whatever. I have little patience for any of them. I like sports where there is usually a clear winner. They ran faster, scored more goals, lifted more, whatever. Sure, sometimes the ref's call makes a difference. But on the whole, it's down to the athletes.

I agree.  i do like watching figure skating (yes I know it's not the winter Olympics this year, jsut saying), but I do feel like even after the rules changes that there is a certain amount of personal taste that goes into the scoring.  If I were an athlete I would want to be in a sport where I know I won.  or more likely in my case, lost.

[DoctorAtomic]

The fundamental flaw is that you have to assume the judge is clear and unbiased. That's obviously not been the case historically to the point where anything could be questioned. 

I'm surprised there's not more strict parameters. You did a double axle - 2 points. Threw the lady up and she spun around 3 times - 4 points. Brian Boitano - all the points. 

 

[DoctorAtomic]

The fundamental flaw is that you have to assume the judge is clear and unbiased. That's obviously not been the case historically to the point where anything could be questioned. 

I'm surprised there's not more strict parameters. You did a double axle - 2 points. Threw the lady up and she spun around 3 times - 4 points. Brian Boitano - all the points. 

Different subject - 

"I didn't like the writing" is meaningless. What exactly is 'the writing'? It's become some catch all to say one didn't like something without having to actually give a reason. 

 

 

[DrSpaceman73]

48 minutes ago, DoctorAtomic said:

The fundamental flaw is that you have to assume the judge is clear and unbiased. That's obviously not been the case historically to the point where anything could be questioned. 

I'm surprised there's not more strict parameters. You did a double axle - 2 points. Threw the lady up and she spun around 3 times - 4 points. Brian Boitano - all the points. 

 

They do something like that in diving.  They give the dive a rating based on difficulty and then use that to determine the overall score with the judges rating. 

[DoctorAtomic]

Well then it seems like it should translate to the other sports readily then. 

[vibeology]

1 hour ago, DoctorAtomic said:

The fundamental flaw is that you have to assume the judge is clear and unbiased. That's obviously not been the case historically to the point where anything could be questioned. 

I'm surprised there's not more strict parameters. You did a double axle - 2 points. Threw the lady up and she spun around 3 times - 4 points. Brian Boitano - all the points. 

 

That's mostly what they do for the technical side of the scoring. Every element has a point value and then the judges give extra points or take points away depending on how well that element is executed. Where figure skating judging gets wonky is that there's still a program components parts that's more subjective because it includes things like interpretation of music and performance/execution. Things have gotten much better in the last ten years or so but those program components scores sometimes still baffle me. 

[Katy M]

1 hour ago, DoctorAtomic said:

Well then it seems like it should translate to the other sports readily then. 

Then you have to make the decision when you're making the rules--which gets more points, a clean double axle or an attempted quadruple axle where the skater falls on his/her butt, and all the things that can happen in between, i.e. a two footed landing, a bobbled landing, an incomplete rotation. 

[Kel Varnsen]

7 hours ago, Anduin said:

My unpopular opinion is the 100% judged events. Gymnastics, diving, skateboarding, whatever. I have little patience for any of them. I like sports where there is usually a clear winner. They ran faster, scored more goals, lifted more, whatever. Sure, sometimes the ref's call makes a difference. But on the whole, it's down to the athletes.

My unpopular opinion is the opposite, in that it doesn't really bother me that the Olympics has some judged events, since one way or another just about every event is judge (except maybe some track and field events where they have gotten to the point where everything can be determined automatically). Like a skater or a diver losing out on a medal isn't really that different than a basketball team losing a medal because the ref called too many fouls on one side. Sure there are degrees to how much influence there is but other than that it's not that different.

[proserpina65]

16 hours ago, DrSpaceman73 said:

I'm officially moving this to unpopular opinions after trying to binge watch sports night. 

I was extremely underwhelmed by Sports Night when it first aired, and stopped watching a few episodes in.

6 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

The fundamental flaw is that you have to assume the judge is clear and unbiased. That's obviously not been the case historically to the point where anything could be questioned. 

I'm surprised there's not more strict parameters. You did a double axle - 2 points. Threw the lady up and she spun around 3 times - 4 points. Brian Boitano - all the points. 

 

Actually figure skating's scoring system is a lot more like this than the old "perfect 6" system.

9 hours ago, Anduin said:

My unpopular opinion is the 100% judged events. Gymnastics, diving, skateboarding, whatever. I have little patience for any of them. I like sports where there is usually a clear winner. They ran faster, scored more goals, lifted more, whatever. Sure, sometimes the ref's call makes a difference. But on the whole, it's down to the athletes.

And that's why the Olympics has both kinds of events.  So that there's something for almost everyone.

[DoctorAtomic]

6 hours ago, Katy M said:

Then you have to make the decision when you're making the rules--which gets more points, a clean double axle or an attempted quadruple axle where the skater falls on his/her butt, and all the things that can happen in between, i.e. a two footed landing, a bobbled landing, an incomplete rotation. 

As long as the system is consistent, I don't see that as a problem. 

[Mr. Sparkle]

Hi folks:

Just a reminder that we have an separate Olympics thread here: 
Olympics Thread.

All Olympic talk should go there. 

Thank you! 

 

[janie jones]

On 7/29/2021 at 6:47 PM, DrSpaceman73 said:

I just had to stop though and couldn't watch more today.  It's PAINFUL to try and binge watch his shows. Because of the repetition he uses which he thinks conveys wit and insight.  Shakespeare said brevity is the sould of wit.  Sorkin would say repetition and speed is the sould of wit.  And he'd be wrong.  It's irritating.  He writes at times like a teenager who had a 500 word essay to do so he just repeats phrases as filler to meet the word requirement. 

I can't give this person credit because I don't remember who wrote it, but this is something I copied and saved (because it amused me) from a TWoP post in which someone was giving an example of how someone in a Sorkin show would compliment someone's cookies:

A: (enters room) Chocolate chip cookies.
B: What?
A: Chocolate chip cookies.
B: Chocolate chip cookies?
A: Chocolate chip cookies, my friend.
B: Cookies, we're talking about. With chocolate chips in them.
A: I always loved your mom's chocolate chip cookies.

Edited August 3, 2021 by janie jones

[Zella]

2 hours ago, janie jones said:

I can't give this person credit because I don't remember who wrote it, but this is something I copied and saved (because it amused me) from a TWoP post in which someone was giving an example of how someone in a Sorkin show would compliment someone's cookies:

A: (enters room) Chocolate chip cookies.
B: What?
A: Chocolate chip cookies.
B: Chocolate chip cookies?
A: Chocolate chip cookies, my friend.
B: Cookies, we're talking about. With chocolate chips in them.
A: I always loved your mom's chocolate chip cookies.

I can literally hear that in Josh Lyman and Sam Seaborn's voices. (Or Toby!) LOL 

Personally I really enjoyed the west wing through about the first three seasons or so on my first watch, but I tried to rewatch it a few years ago, and I could barely make it through a few episodes because I found most of the characters so insufferable. A friend also made me try to sit through an episode of Newsroom, and I was done after a few minutes. And I normally love Jeff Daniels!

It's made me reluctant to watch anything else by Sorkin.

Edited August 3, 2021 by Zella

[callie lee 29]

I love (still) the first for seasons of West Wing. Once Sam left I was done though. Rob Lowe and Sam brought such a sweet earnestness that was lacking afterwards. And I get why Lowe was pissed, it was sold to him a one thing and TPTB got sold into Bradley Whitfield/Josh (who I did like a lot) but forgot they needed to balance him out. 

[Zella]

6 minutes ago, callie lee 29 said:

I love (still) the first for seasons of West Wing. Once Sam left I was done though. Rob Lowe and Sam brought such a sweet earnestness that was lacking afterwards. And I get why Lowe was pissed, it was sold to him a one thing and TPTB got sold into Bradley Whitfield/Josh (who I did like a lot) but forgot they needed to balance him out. 

Though I had trouble rewatching, Sam leaving was when I noped out the first time. I didn't even particularly like Sam in the first episode or two, but I really did appreciate how much less of an asshole he was than Josh, and he snuck up on me as my favorite character.

I know this is probably considered heresy among WW fans, but I also thought President Bartlett was kind of an overrated asshole. (And I say that as someone who generally likes Martin Sheen.) I thought him disguising his diagnosis was incredibly unethical, and I never could get past it. One of my friends once told me I am a female Toby, and I guess he was right because I was totally Team Toby through that whole thing. 

Edited August 4, 2021 by Zella

[MargeGunderson]

I didn’t like Bartlett that much either. I rewatched the series last year and was surprised that I disliked so many characters, Josh most of all. He was such a cocky, condescending, misogynistic asshole. I do remain a loyal member of both Team Toby and Team CJ (but not Team Toby + CJ, because…just no). 

[Zella]

1 hour ago, MargeGunderson said:

He was such a cocky, condescending, misogynistic asshole.

Yeah Josh was really hard to take on my rewatch and was a big part of why I stopped watching. The way he treats people, even when he is "helping" them, is appalling.

I was gobsmacked when he steamrolled all over Charlie's wishes about what he wanted to do job-wise with his situation, and it was framed as a positive thing. I really liked Charlie as a character, and I can understand encouraging someone who is talented to think bigger, but he had really valid reasons for not wanting that job he didn't apply for (like he's in college and raising a younger sibling, which, you know, takes up a lot of one's time), and Josh shit all over him and pressured him into it anyway because it's always about what Josh wants, nobody else. What an asshole. 

And the way he treated Donna too. I just don't even have words. And I didn't even particularly like Donna, but she didn't deserve that! 

But Toby and CJ were pretty awesome. (And Sam!) 

[Bastet]

1 hour ago, Zella said:

I really liked Charlie as a character, and I can understand encouraging someone who is talented to think bigger, but he had really valid reasons for not wanting that job he didn't apply for (like he's in college and raising a younger sibling, which, you know, takes up a lot of one's time)

That always boggled my mind, too.  Whether Deena, being in high school, not a little kid, but still just five months out from losing her mom, could deal with the long hours home alone is irrelevant - what Charlie wanted was some income and regular hours (it's not as if they'd be relying on his salary, given the benefits they'd get upon their police officer mom's death) via the messenger job, to help take care of his sister.  Instead Josh just decreed he should instead take this other job, which doesn't pay much more yet 20-hour days are not uncommon and there's a lot of last-minute travel, not to mention the tremendous responsibility and stress, which this guy who's not much more than a kid already has an abundance of.

[Zella]

11 minutes ago, Bastet said:

That always boggled my mind, too.  Whether Deena, being in high school, not a little kid, but still just five months out from losing her mom, could deal with the long hours home alone is irrelevant - what Charlie wanted was some income and regular hours (it's not as if they'd be relying on his salary, given the benefits they'd get upon their police officer mom's death) via the messenger job, to help take care of his sister.  Instead Josh just decreed he should instead take this other job, which doesn't pay much more yet 20-hour days are not uncommon and there's a lot of last-minute travel, not to mention the tremendous responsibility and stress, which this guy who's not much more than a kid already has an abundance of.

Yeah I felt like a more caring approach that actually would have helped Charlie would have been hiring him for the job he applied for and then using that opportunity to mentor him, ensure he and his sister had access to the support that they needed, and encourage him to finish school. I think he'd dropped out, which I forgot about. And then encourage Charlie to do what Charlie wants to do with his life. Not what Josh the Asshole thinks Charlie should do. Maybe that would have been the job he was ultimately hired for. Maybe it would have been something else. 

Edited August 4, 2021 by Zella

[Bastet]

20 minutes ago, Zella said:

And then encourage Charlie to do what Charlie wants to do with his life. Not what Josh the Asshole thinks Charlie should do.

Yeah, I think the fact Charlie wound up benefiting so much from the personal aide job becomes a distraction, but Josh's actions back in that first meeting are disturbing - this privileged middle-aged white guy telling a young Black man who's navigating circumstances Josh has never known repeatedly talking over Charlie's requests and explanations is not a good look.  Sorkin's writing contains moments like that almost as often as it contains patronizing sexism - like the deplorable "look at what we can do" dreck from Dan to the unhoused guy in Sports Night.  The man has had to sneak into an office building in order to stay warm, and Dan's on about people with the resources to climb Mt. Everest as some relatable story of the triumph of determination.

[vibeology]

11 hours ago, MargeGunderson said:

I didn’t like Bartlett that much either. I rewatched the series last year and was surprised that I disliked so many characters, Josh most of all. He was such a cocky, condescending, misogynistic asshole. I do remain a loyal member of both Team Toby and Team CJ (but not Team Toby + CJ, because…just no). 

I am the Toby/CJ shipper. They flirt in a way that's delightful. They have a deep bond. The actors certainly played it like there was some sort of connection. I think about that moment where Toby tells everyone about the twins and CJ congratulates him but there's just this undertone of sadness. Or Toby's laugh when CJ tells him to avert his eyes because her wet clothes will be clingy. In the Sorkin years, they're a great example of two people who have a spark but know they can't connect because of circumstances. Post-Sorkin, Toby is the character who I feel suffered the most and stops being Toby on some level so it just isn't there the same way despite Richard Schiff trying. But in the first four season, I love them!

I love that so many of the characters were flawed, cocky, egotistical assholes. I don't think you can get to that level in politics without a massive ego. I don't think you can truly be humble and also think you are the only person up to the job of President. Jed first shows up quoting a line that puts him in the place of God. For all his Uncle Fluffy aw shucks shit, he's actually so self-centered. The show presents everyone as heroes but I don't think that means we're expected to not look at them critically and see their flaws. For me, the flaws are what make them interesting. 

Josh has probably aged the worst as a character because the misogyny is so glaring but I still love the show.

[Hiyo]

Quote

I found most of the characters so insufferable

That pretty much sums up Sorkin's TV shows for me...West Wing, Newsroom, Sportsnight...

[MaryMitch]

I didn't like Toby. There, I said it.

[MargeGunderson]

35 minutes ago, MaryMitch said:

I didn't like Toby. There, I said it.

I like him as a character, but would not like him as a person in real life, if that makes sense.

[Wiendish Fitch]

Just now, MargeGunderson said:

I like him as a character, but would not like him as a person in real life, if that makes sense.

Perfect sense. Sophia was always my favorite on The Golden Girls, but I would despise the hell out of her in real life.

[Zella]

Most of my favorite characters are people I'd actually despise in person. LOL 

[Annber03]

I'd probably genuinely like and get on well with most of my favorite characters, were I to know them in real life...but that doesn't mean I wouldn't have moments where I'd want to strangle them all the same :p. 

[Hiyo]

I think Ted Lasso is…ok. Nothing more. The acting is good, there are some chuckles here and there, but otherwise, it’s…ok. 

[peachmangosteen]

1 hour ago, Hiyo said:

I think Ted Lasso is…ok. Nothing more. The acting is good, there are some chuckles here and there, but otherwise, it’s…ok. 

Wow, this. So much this. I wanna love it but man it's just meh. Like, it's fine. But I also have an aversion to Jason Sudekis so.

[ifionlyknew]

21 hours ago, MaryMitch said:

I didn't like Toby. There, I said it.

I will say it with you. I didn't like Toby.  And if I'm being honest I wasn't a big CJ fan although I love Allison Janney.   I always liked Hoynes.  No matter how many times they tried to make him a bad guy I still liked him.  Might have something to do with me liking Tim Matheson.  

20 hours ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

Sophia was always my favorite on The Golden Girls, but I would despise the hell out of her in real life.

I wasn't crazy about Sophia. She got a lot of laughs but I found her grating.  Dorothy was my favorite.   Whenever I talk to friends about my life goal of living with other women in my golden years I always say I get to be the Dorothy.

Edited August 5, 2021 by ifionlyknew

[Zella]

I liked Hoynes too!