Party of One: Unpopular TV Opinions

[DoctorAtomic]

1 hour ago, ifionlyknew said:

Having watched Mr. Robot I can tell you it wasn't a USA type of show.  I think it would have been more suited for a premium cable channel.

It's a great show, and a poster here calling the ending with about 2 episodes to go. I have no idea how USA got it. Maybe they gave the showrunner the creative control he wanted. 

1 hour ago, ifionlyknew said:

I don't think they can.   They always look for the easiest way to program.  It's why you always see clones of successful shows. They think if Friends is a hit then lets put on more shows about groups of friends.  

Mostly yes; a little bit no. You can have 'Drama Thursdays' and have Royal Pains on Tuesday or something. Back in the day, you had these cable outlets just putting out content to beat the band. Lots were miniseries. I think they dropped the ball there where you let your broadcast networks put out the Friends, etc., and your HBO with the cash to do Sopranos.

Where does that leave me as a cable outfit? Well, we can have original programming year round and commission a bunch of miniseries and one off two hour movies. You can still get good talent that will draw viewers. Sopranos level? No. Respectable? Sure. 

SciFi, clearly, wanted to stick to scifi, but they had plenty of cool miniseries and did their primo shows on Fridays. 

TBS had stuff like Into the West. Another solid mini. 

I think the problem is, in fact, Sopranos, Breaking Bad, Mad Men. Those are really anomalies. Just focus on making good shows. Shows aren't allowed to be good anymore. 

[ifionlyknew]

12 minutes ago, DoctorAtomic said:

Shows aren't allowed to be good anymore. 

I think shows aren't expected to be good anymore.  There are too many choices and I think networks just hope to make some money back.  A truly exceptional show would probably go to premium cable or a streaming service that gives them a bigger budget.

[DoctorAtomic]

No, I meant the networks are all gunning to grab primo 1% material and aren't consciously looking for 'just good shows' to produce. I think you make more on a steady 'just good shows' and maybe you get a gem in there than gunning high and consistently missing. 

 

[Irlandesa]

2 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

I have no idea how USA got it. Maybe they gave the showrunner the creative control he wanted. 

They got it because they picked it up. I don't think there was a bidding war for a show run by a man that had basically two projects to his name--none of which are familiar to me. 

While it was a well received show (I kind of hated it so I can't really bring myself to praise it) it didn't get close to the ratings USA's other successful shows created under its previous brand got. 

And that's not me arguing against the show.  I'm not saying it shouldn't have existed; I'm saying the USA Network had a successful brand that they abandoned in order to chase dark and bleak.  They could have done both. 

And TNT is similar.  They had successful shows that were enjoyable to watch.  They might not have been the edgiest shows but they were well done.  And it was very open about canceling Major Crimes just because it didn't fit in with the vision of where they wanted the network to go.

Edited August 17, 2021 by Irlandesa

[DoctorAtomic]

1 hour ago, Irlandesa said:

And that's not me arguing against the show.  I'm not saying it shouldn't have existed; I'm saying the USA Network had a successful brand that they abandoned in order to chase dark and bleak.  They could have done both. 

And TNT is similar.  They had successful shows that were enjoyable to watch.  They might not have been the edgiest shows but they were well done.  And it was very open about canceling Major Crimes just because it didn't fit in with the vision of where they wanted the network to go.

That's basically what I'm talking about. Know thyself, cable network. 

 

[CoderLady]

2 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

No, I meant the networks are all gunning to grab primo 1% material and aren't consciously looking for 'just good shows' to produce. I think you make more on a steady 'just good shows' and maybe you get a gem in there than gunning high and consistently missing. 

 

Steady, good programming has been pretty much CBS's game plan for ages. Sure, people sneer at them for their "old people's shows" but these have great longevity and loyal audiences, which probably thrills their advertisers. CBS also benefits from having a streaming service for the good shows their broadcast network audience might be less interested in, so they get the best of both worlds.

[Mabinogia]

CBS is smart to go after less award baity shows that draw in big, loyal audiences. I think USA had that with their Characters Welcome concept but then wanted all the Emmy buzz that HBO and that tier were getting so they ditched the dependable shows for more edgy, award baity shows like Mr. Robot which, while I get that it's probably technically a great show, I found to be one of the most boring things I've ever tried to slog through. I made it to ep two, eventually, before giving up. Not my cuppa. 

Now, I can't completely blame USA as television tends to be cyclical. One show, like Game of Thrones, becomes a sensation, then all the networks try to make their own version of it. USA saw that the tide was turning toward "prestige dramas" and decided, rather than hybriding, and considering Mr. Robot just an edgy welcome character, they would go all in on the prestige and dump a concept that set them apart from all the other networks. 

Currently super heroes are shoving prestige dramas out the door, so all the networks are pushing comics based shows. That will eventually pass too and hopefully quirky dramadies will make a comeback. Life can be gloomy enough. I want escapist TV back!

[DoctorAtomic]

Mr. Robot was always going to be a limited show in terms of total hours of show anyway. 

Shows like Monk and Psych couldn't go on forever either, but you're getting 5, 6 years. 

[Irlandesa]

3 hours ago, Mabinogia said:

I think USA had that with their Characters Welcome concept but then wanted all the Emmy buzz that HBO and that tier were getting

The irony is that they had a buzzy Emmy show.  Monk won more Emmys than Mr. Robot. 

[Kel Varnsen]

16 hours ago, Dancingjaneway said:

Also since when is wrestling sci-fi OR fantasy?? Ugh. 

The Undertaker?

[Anduin]

Since wrestling has just come up, let me share my two related UO's. First, chairs are ridiculously overused as weapons. Sure, they're right by the ring. I understand why, I just don't like it.

Second, the psychology of the chairshot. Yeah, hit your opponent and get a two count. Why not hit him 17 times* and KO him for a full minute? Instead, one chairshot buys you time to set up some elaborate spot involving a pulling a table into the ring, setting up your opponent on the table, then climbing to the turnbuckle... It just looks silly and breaks immersion.

* Faked of course. I don't want any more head wounds in wrestling.

[ifionlyknew]

17 hours ago, Mabinogia said:

CBS is smart to go after less award baity shows that draw in big, loyal audiences.

It's that old choice of quality vs quantity.  Of course there are the rare exceptions that a hugely popular show with huge ratings also gets awards.  I can remember growing up and looking at the ratings in the TV Guide and I watched most if not all of the top 10.  Nowadays I'm lucky if I watch one show in the top 20.

[DrSpaceman73]

2 hours ago, ifionlyknew said:

It's that old choice of quality vs quantity.  Of course there are the rare exceptions that a hugely popular show with huge ratings also gets awards.  I can remember growing up and looking at the ratings in the TV Guide and I watched most if not all of the top 10.  Nowadays I'm lucky if I watch one show in the top 20.

Outside of sporting events like the Superbowl, NFL football, I couldn't tell you any top 20 tv shows right now.  I have no idea, haven't for years what is a top 20 show.  Big bang before it went off the air.   I assume some reality  show like horny teens dancing with milfs. And I used to look at those rankings weekly.  

[Bastet]

Y'all got me curious, so I checked the top-rated shows for the 2020-21 season, and football was the only thing in the top ten I watched.  In fact, other than more football, I only watched one other show - The Conners - in the top 50, and a mere two more - Rebel and Mom (both of which have been canceled) - in the top 100. 

[Mabinogia]

3 hours ago, ifionlyknew said:

I can remember growing up and looking at the ratings in the TV Guide and I watched most if not all of the top 10.  Nowadays I'm lucky if I watch one show in the top 20.

I used to pour over the TV Guide. When the fall edition came out I would plot out my entire week of prime time. I really miss proper seasons of television. The anticipation of all the new shows coming out at once, the TV Guide that gave little blurbs about each show, then showed the lineup so you could plot it all out. 

It was up there with the Sears Wish Book as my favorite bit of mail each year. The Wish Book was a months long project for me, picking what I wanted for Christmas. 

Yeah, I was a very analytical child. Still am...analytical, not a child, now I'm just childish. haha

[andromeda331]

24 minutes ago, Mabinogia said:

I used to pour over the TV Guide. When the fall edition came out I would plot out my entire week of prime time. I really miss proper seasons of television. The anticipation of all the new shows coming out at once, the TV Guide that gave little blurbs about each show, then showed the lineup so you could plot it all out. 

It was up there with the Sears Wish Book as my favorite bit of mail each year. The Wish Book was a months long project for me, picking what I wanted for Christmas. 

Yeah, I was a very analytical child. Still am...analytical, not a child, now I'm just childish. haha

I miss doing both of those.

[BlackberryJam]

1 hour ago, Mabinogia said:

I used to pour over the TV Guide. When the fall edition came out I would plot out my entire week of prime time. I really miss proper seasons of television. The anticipation of all the new shows coming out at once, the TV Guide that gave little blurbs about each show, then showed the lineup so you could plot it all out. 

It was up there with the Sears Wish Book as my favorite bit of mail each year. The Wish Book was a months long project for me, picking what I wanted for Christmas. 

Yeah, I was a very analytical child. Still am...analytical, not a child, now I'm just childish. haha

I remember ad campaigns for the new fall lineups. I fell for Matt Houston just from the teasers we got. I also loved the weekly TV lineup in the paper which listed all the movies that would be shown on the weekends and on PBS. And the Wide World of Sports.

 

[ABay]

I also used to go through TV Guide, and Entertainment Weekly, looking for new shows to try out and the premier dates of returning shows I liked. I put the dates in my desk calendar and set the DVR as soon as they showed up in the onscreen guide. I don't remember the last time I did that. Maybe checking the return date for Person of Interest. But it was clear before that that there was almost nothing on broadcast TV for me. Amazon Prime with Britbox, Acorn, and MhZ, and occasionally Netflix are all I watch now. And I'm thinking of ditching Netflix since it has maybe 2 series a year I want to watch.

[Mabinogia]

2 minutes ago, ABay said:

Britbox, Acorn

I am torn between which one of these to get. I don't know that I want to get both. 

IDK if this is an uo or not, but I kind of miss the pre-streaming days. When you didn't have to subscribe to half a dozen different streamers in order to watch the 8 shows you want to see. 

There are about 2 things on Hulu I want to see, 3 on HBO/Max, 5-6 on Disney+, I love British TV so then there's Acorn and Britbox. I currently have Netflix and Amazon Prime. All this stuff adds up and you end up paying as much as you would for cable so what is the benefit? Because rather than with cable just scrolling through one tv guide, I have to scroll through one, then if I find nothing, log on to another, nothing I want to see there, try the next one etc. I am just not into getting the free preview to watch a show or two and having to remember to cancel it. 

[ABay]

You could subscribe to Britbox for a month, unsub, and suscribe to Acorn for a month, unsub. Rinse, repeat. It's easy with Amazon and the interface is usually better than using the channel's app.

[DoctorAtomic]

I have a price point, and I'm there. I'm not getting another streaming service. I do have cable. There's actually a lot more I watch now because I'm more apt to look for something and discover a new program. 

I've made it a thing to watch a Saturday night movie, so I'll look for things to watch that I might not have considered. And I get ideas from here. 

I like the flexibility and portability because I can watch outside on the porch of when I want to watch things too. I mean, you missed Cheers on Thursday, that was it. 

Edited August 19, 2021 by DoctorAtomic

[Annber03]

57 minutes ago, Mabinogia said:

IDK if this is an uo or not, but I kind of miss the pre-streaming days. When you didn't have to subscribe to half a dozen different streamers in order to watch the 8 shows you want to see. 

There are about 2 things on Hulu I want to see, 3 on HBO/Max, 5-6 on Disney+, I love British TV so then there's Acorn and Britbox. I currently have Netflix and Amazon Prime. All this stuff adds up and you end up paying as much as you would for cable so what is the benefit? Because rather than with cable just scrolling through one tv guide, I have to scroll through one, then if I find nothing, log on to another, nothing I want to see there, try the next one etc. I am just not into getting the free preview to watch a show or two and having to remember to cancel it. 

If this is a UO, I'll join you at that little table, 'cause this pretty much sums up my feelings, too. I also like to rewatch shows I'm into, and streaming makes it a bit harder to do that if you're only able to do a free trial or subscribe to the service for a short time. 

[Anduin]

Babylon 5 and Star Trek: Deep Space 9 were both great and awfully similar shows. However, while I feel that B5 had the best high concept and general look of stuff like ships and aliens, DS9 was better actually executed. If there was some way to smush the best elements from both together, it would be awesome!

[Leeds]

On 8/16/2021 at 10:52 AM, Blergh said:

 

I have to agree with you  on that (and, even at her worst, she wound up being FAR more likable than either Rebecca or Carla  became). The big irony is that both Frazier and Lilith each started out as mere comic foils who were just supposed to be near one-shots that Diane and Sam were supposed to blow out of the water but first Frazier proved so popular that they made him a regular to the end then Lilith herself was too clever and had too much comic gold for them just to toss aside. Yes, I know that Lilith would be gone as a Cheers regular before the show was over but even after she was supposed to be out of Frazier's life (and he was restarting the dating scene), one couldn't overlook her influence.  I also think it was a bit intriguing that Carla wound up actually liking Lilith (a little) despite her having less outward 'bar scene' contributions than either Diane or Rebecca.  Yes, Frazier and Lilith wound up being FAR more intriguing, interesting and nuanced than  Sam, Diane or, especially, Rebecca would be.  In any case, both Mr. Grammer and Miss Neuwirth sure used their supposed one-shots to launch successful careers!  

Whoever named the character Lilith deserves an Emmy just for that.

And as far as unpopular opinions go, I don't find Cheers even remotely funny.

On 8/17/2021 at 1:16 PM, ifionlyknew said:

I think shows aren't expected to be good anymore.  There are too many choices and I think networks just hope to make some money back.  A truly exceptional show would probably go to premium cable or a streaming service that gives them a bigger budget.

And too much money I'm expected to pay out.  I'd be really interested if anyone has done research into how much % of their income people spend on cable TV, fancy phones, etc.  And how much debt they have. 

 

 

[BlackberryJam]

I don't care about Ted Lasso. I'm not interested in yet another story about a white dude. The 38 seconds of it I was forced to watch didn't interest me. 

[Shannon L.]

After looking at a few posts in various threads, I'm guessing that this is an UO:  For about a year now, my husband and I have been watching Criminal Minds. We still have a few episodes left in the final season, but I don't think the show is a mess and I've liked all of the characters (proven by the fact that I didn't miss any of the characters that left as badly as I thought I would). Some I've liked more than others, sometimes they annoyed me and sometimes there was a story or a story line that was frustrating, but overall, I've been impressed that stayed as strong as it did for 15 seasons.  Sure, it wasn't quite as strong in the final few seasons, but considering how many shows go to hell with only half the amount of seasons CM had, I think it did pretty well.  Of course, that could be because it was a straight forward procedural and not something that starts off with a huge, over arching story, but it still could have gotten so much worse, imo. 

[Annber03]

I'll gladly join you on that one, @Shannon L.. Especially the bit about liking all of the characters - I was the same way. I thought they were all interesting and each brought something special and unique to the team and the relationships within and whatnot. That definitely seems to be an unpopular opinion, because I've lost count of how many fandom places I've been on the internet where people are ranting about how they can't stand character x or how boring character y is or whatever.

And an even more unpopular opinion: I wasn't bothered by the Reid/JJ thing at all. A large part of that is because I happen to like that ship, so I'm admittedly bit biased in that regard, but yeah, I really didn't think it was as big an issue as some in the fandom felt it was. 

[Shannon L.]

@Annber03 the Reid/J.J. thing bothered me a little because it happened so late in the series and it came out of nowhere. But, it didn't bother me as much as it bothered other people. As much as I like Will and their marriage,  I kind of wish they had put her and Reid together from the beginning.  

If I have one complaint about the show is that they had the characters get over trauma or problems way too quickly.  On the flip side, though, I'm glad the show didn't turn into a soap opera, so even that wasn't a big deal for me.

[Annber03]

1 minute ago, Shannon L. said:

@Annber03 the Reid/J.J. thing bothered me a little because it happened so late in the series and it came out of nowhere. But, it didn't bother me as much as it bothered other people. As much as I like Will and their marriage,  I kind of wish they had put her and Reid together from the beginning.  

I can agree that the way the show introduced it was awkward, yeah. There could've been a smoother way to touch on it. And I also agree there were moments much earlier in the series where it would've made more sense for them to explore that idea as well. 

At the same time, I've also always felt that if the show were to ever seriously explore any hint of romance between any of the team members, whether it actually happened or not, it was probably going to be in the final season, when they wouldn't have to worry so much about trying to build up the romance and could, by and large, avoid any major ship wars and so on. So in that regard, I'm not too surprised that whole storyline happened when it did, eitehr.

Will mainly came about as a recurring love interest because AJ Cook got pregnant and since that was being written into the show, they, obviously ,needed a way to explain that :p. But it would've been interesting to see what the show could've done with Reid and JJ had they explored the possibility earlier, yes. 

Quote

If I have one complaint about the show is that they had the characters get over trauma or problems way too quickly.  On the flip side, though, I'm glad the show didn't turn into a soap opera, so even that wasn't a big deal for me.

Ha, that I'll definitely agree with. They build up all these big dramatic storylines and then the aftermath is often very anticlimactic and sporadic. Some of that is just the constraints of the procedural format in and of itself - it might be easier to expand on and delve further into those aspects were the show on a different network or something. 

But in that case, since the show is a procedural, then, yeah, they should've just stuck to their strengths in that regard with the storylines. They're chasing serial killers week in and week out. That's dramatic enough on its own :p!

[proserpina65]

On 8/27/2021 at 11:40 AM, BlackberryJam said:

I don't care about Ted Lasso. I'm not interested in yet another story about a white dude. The 38 seconds of it I was forced to watch didn't interest me. 

I'm a huge fan of the Premier League, so I would watch it if it were somewhere I already got.  But I'm not getting Apple TV for it.

On 8/22/2021 at 6:53 PM, Leeds said:

And as far as unpopular opinions go, I don't find Cheers even remotely funny.

Neither do I.

[paulvdb]

I find it easy to suspend disbelief on fantasy/scifi premises like the existence of vampires and werewolves or timetravel. But it is more difficult when the subject is closer to real life, especially if I am reasonably familiar with the subject. So when I read the premise of Ted Lasso (American football coach hired to manage a British soccer team—despite having no experience) I just couldn't suspend my disbelief enough to give it a chance.

[DearEvette]

45 minutes ago, paulvdb said:

So when I read the premise of Ted Lasso (American football coach hired to manage a British soccer team—despite having no experience) I just couldn't suspend my disbelief enough to give it a chance.

Not that you may not have other reasons for not wanting to watch the show, God knows I can’t with many popular shows. But as to the issue of Ted’s lack of experience — it a deliberate story choice. The show doesn’t want you to suspend your disbelief for that since a fair amount of plot conflict and tension actually hang on the very question of just why an inexperienced Yank was hired.

[SmithW6079]

For a year, I've been dreading the 20th anniversary of 9/11. Not so much for the emotional pain (which there is), but for the orgy of 20th-anniversary 9/11 grief porn we're being subjected to this week. Replay after replay of the planes hitting the Twin Towers; of people panicking; of the Towers' collapse; the "where are they now" interviews, all trying to find new ways to rip open the scab of healing. It's not so much that we shouldn't "never forget," but TV seems to want to ensure that we never heal. 

[Anduin]

Following the above, I recently realised that I'm sick of rip-off imagery. "Look at this building we whipped up in a bunch of computers! Look at all the animated people! Don't you care? It's just like this real-world horrific event!" It's hollow.

The point is that it was real buildings and real people! Movies want to steal its power for entertainment, which is gross and shamelessly exploitative.

[Shannon L.]

1 hour ago, SmithW6079 said:

For a year, I've been dreading the 20th anniversary of 9/11. Not so much for the emotional pain (which there is), but for the orgy of 20th-anniversary 9/11 grief porn we're being subjected to this week. Replay after replay of the planes hitting the Twin Towers; of people panicking; of the Towers' collapse; the "where are they now" interviews, all trying to find new ways to rip open the scab of healing. It's not so much that we shouldn't "never forget," but TV seems to want to ensure that we never heal. 

They've done that every year, so I expect it to be amplified starting tomorrow.  I'm not heartless--I remember every detail of that day and a few days following (including my mother crying not only because our country was attacked, but because no one was able to get in touch with her cousin who worked at the Pentagon. She was ok, thank, God, but friends of her's didn't survive it).  It hurts just to think about, I don't need to keep seeing it, especially that falling man picture.  Never being able to heal is a great way to put it. 

[Stats Queen]

50 minutes ago, Shannon L. said:

They've done that every year, so I expect it to be amplified starting tomorrow.  I'm not heartless--I remember every detail of that day and a few days following (including my mother crying not only because our country was attacked, but because no one was able to get in touch with her cousin who worked at the Pentagon. She was ok, thank, God, but friends of her's didn't survive it).  It hurts just to think about, I don't need to keep seeing it, especially that falling man picture.  Never being able to heal is a great way to put it. 

We need to be able to heal, but we also should never forget. How to do that in the media, I’m not sure how.

[Bastet]

There are a couple of 9/11 documentaries I watch every September (assuming National Geographic airs them as they generally do), and this year there was a new limited series on Nat Geo that was good, and there's one on Netflix that I'm a few episodes into and I'm impressed with it so far.  I'm so disgusted by the various atrocities the attacks were used as a justification for committing, and the ongoing repercussions of those, that I like to take some time each year to concentrate just on that day's events.

[Annber03]

16 minutes ago, Bastet said:

There are a couple of 9/11 documentaries I watch every September (assuming National Geographic airs them as they generally do), and this year there was a new limited series on Nat Geo that was good

I'm guessing you're referring to that "9/11: One Day in America" one? I saw that one last week and it was really well done. So many compelling, albeit obviously utterly gutwrenching, stories. Indeed, if I'm going to focus on some aspect of the tragedy around this time of year, I prefer to hear the stories from individual people, and their memories of those they lost, or, in some cases, the people they saved. 

[Bastet]

2 hours ago, Annber03 said:

I'm guessing you're referring to that "9/11: One Day in America" one? I saw that one last week and it was really well done. So many compelling, albeit obviously utterly gutwrenching, stories.

Yes, that's the one.  Almost all the stories were things I already knew, but it was nice to get updated information on some of them.  The one that most moved me was learning that when Josephine Harris - the civilian who was rescued, along with the firefighters who'd been helping her, from Stairway B after the  North Tower collapsed - died ten years later, those firefighters carried her coffin.

[Annber03]

Just now, Bastet said:

The one that most moved me was learning that when Josephine Harris - the civilian who was rescued, along with the firefighters who'd been helping her, from Stairway B after the  North Tower collapsed - died ten years later, those firefighters carried her coffin.

I was really touched by that story, too. The close bonds that were forged among some of those people that day were truly awe-inspiring. 

[Danny Franks]

If America was actually allowed to heal then more people would start questioning the forever war that the country has been engaged in since, which has made countless millions of dollars for the Military-industrial complex, and for the companies who hoover up contracts to go in and rebuild after the destruction is complete.

What would poor Raytheon and Lockheed Martin do to survive? Other than start selling even more arms to various dictators and military juntas around the world?

[Lugal]

A lot of the 9/11 memorial stuff strikes me as a certain amount of waving the bloody shirt.  Especially when we consider what was visited on people outside of America's borders ever since.

[andromeda331]

I always watch the 9/11 The Filmmakers one I bought years ago. French filmmaker and brothers Jules and Gedeon Naudet who had been filming a rookie firefighter in NYC and ended up filming 9/11. One brother caught one of the only images of the first plane hitting the tower. He had followed firefighters out to check a gas leak when they heard the plane over head. He goes with them to the World Trade Centers and captures what was going on inside. His brother got the ones from the firehouse and on the street. It was really well done. There's about 20 minutes of what they filmed before that day. Mostly cooking, because most of the few fires they were called out on weren't anything big. That part can be hard to watch knowing what was coming. They don't often show it on TV which is why I bought a copy. 

[Hiyo]

Quote

more people would start questioning the forever war that the country has been engaged in since, which has made countless millions of dollars for the Military-industrial complex

Which was happening long before Sept 11...

[magicdog]

On 8/21/2021 at 9:17 PM, Anduin said:

Babylon 5 and Star Trek: Deep Space 9 were both great and awfully similar shows. However, while I feel that B5 had the best high concept and general look of stuff like ships and aliens, DS9 was better actually executed. If there was some way to smush the best elements from both together, it would be awesome!

It's definitely not a coincidence.  It was alleged that Paramount ripped off the show that became B5. The idea was pitched to them, and they wanted a show to parallel ST:TNG.  There were too many similarities to ignore.

[Anduin]

4 hours ago, magicdog said:

It's definitely not a coincidence.  It was alleged that Paramount ripped off the show that became B5. The idea was pitched to them, and they wanted a show to parallel ST:TNG.  There were too many similarities to ignore.

Yes, I know.

[Spartan Girl]

I know a lot of people on this forum share this opinion, but since the loudest group is usually considered the popular one these days, I'll put it here:

I don't want Benson and Stabler to hook up.

I NEVER saw them as a potential couple on SVU, and after nearly a decade of Stabler being gone, the writers should have let things be instead of fridging poor Kathy Stabler just to make room for that. Also, it must be said, Olivia is a fucking TRAINWRECK when it comes to relationships. Not to mention she has become the worst since SVU has gone on without Stabler.

And the fact that the shippers are coming for Carson Daly on Twitter just because he dared to state his opinion that he doesn't want it to happen either is just infuriating. These people need to grow the hell up. Not everyone is going to ship the same characters you do, that's no reason to gun for their job. I mean, JFC...

[MargeGunderson]

If those two ever got together I would expect them to spontaneously combust from the combination of too much self-righteousness. 

[Zella]

I've always thought Unstabler is a lunatic and Benson is an asshole,  and they were my least favorite part of the show when I watched. I guess in a sense they deserve each other, but I also don't want them to be together. The way the writers killed his wife to make room for Benson is really gross. 

[Bastet]

I watched SVU for a while way back when, and that was because of their partnership; the actors' close friendship made for a great chemistry between the characters, and Olivia and Elliot were each the only one who'd occasionally call the other on their shit.  But Stabler was a jackass - and a terrible cop, so I'm disgusted they brought him back and gave him his own show - and Olivia seemed better off without a romantic relationship, so unless things have changed drastically in the many years since I quit watching (possible, I'll grant, given the length of time, but my sense is it's unlikely), I don't see how a romantic relationship would work for them.

Beyond that, it's just tiresome to keep saying that heterosexual men and women will inevitably fall for each other if they work together long enough.