Party of One: Unpopular TV Opinions

[Columbo]

27 minutes ago, Llywela said:

Well, now you've said that, I can totally see it and I will never unsee it again!

It took me until watching Sherlock until I saw it (season 4 of that show was ridiculous).

[stewedsquash]

27 minutes ago, Columbo said:

scrubs is much more funnier than the office us

As a fan of both shows I view them as equals. I watched Scrubs as is aired and The Office in syndication. I thought both shows had actors, every one of them, that went all in on their characters so I only saw a slice of life when watching. I could believe that these people existed. I even gave the British comedian a second chance on The Office after not liking her at first sight and realized that she was perfect in her part. 

I also view HIMYM and Friends equal in that I think they are both terrible shows. Ha. I always saw actors playing a role and never got into the scenes. 

 

[Cloud9Shopper]

1 hour ago, Columbo said:

- there is too many streaming choices now, which is why I prefer physical media.

- I prefer genre television. Great for turning your brain off.

- soap acting is underrated considering all the episodes they film when they have to do so much stuff and they don't have time to prepare unlike movie actors.

- Moffat has basically reused the character of Lynda Day for nearly every woman character since Press Gang.

- scrubs is much more funnier than the office us. And a much better show. It should be rediscovered in streaming. Had such great inventive and imaginative humour. It also had heart. The Office mostly relied on cringe humour.

- apart from the ending, the worst part about himym was how mean the main characters were to each other. Really put me off rewatching it.

- I only watched friends last year, but Rachael and Ross had such great chemistry.

Ugh yes, too many streaming choices! I don’t have an endless budget for multiple streaming apps to watch one show apiece. I still stick to Netflix and Hulu. If I find a better paying job maybe I’ll get another app but I can’t subscribe to every single one. And IMO a lot of the streaming originals are just average to bad. 

I never cared for The Office. A few episodes were funny but I never got much further than two or three seasons into it. That said, I live in the Scranton area so there is still an obsession with it. The minor league baseball team still has an Office night. The hockey team was selling From Dwight shirts and plays the theme song sometimes during home games. And people still eat it up so I just ignore it and roll my eyes haha. 

I have to see Scrubs one of these days. No medical show has satisfied me since ER. New Amsterdam went off the rails. I tried Chicago Med but almost nobody was likable to me. I kind of like The Resident and have seen some first season episodes on Hulu (although I know what eventually happens for Conrad and Nic). So maybe I’ll try Scrubs.  

[Columbo]

5 minutes ago, Cloud9Shopper said:

Ugh yes, too many streaming choices! I don’t have an endless budget for multiple streaming apps to watch one show apiece. I still stick to Netflix and Hulu. If I find a better paying job maybe I’ll get another app but I can’t subscribe to every single one. And IMO a lot of the streaming originals are just average to bad. 

I never cared for The Office. A few episodes were funny but I never got much further than two or three seasons into it. That said, I live in the Scranton area so there is still an obsession with it. The minor league baseball team still has an Office night. The hockey team was selling From Dwight shirts and plays the theme song sometimes during home games. And people still eat it up so I just ignore it and roll my eyes haha. 

I have to see Scrubs one of these days. No medical show has satisfied me since ER. New Amsterdam went off the rails. I tried Chicago Med but almost nobody was likable to me. I kind of like The Resident and have seen some first season episodes on Hulu (although I know what eventually happens for Conrad and Nic). So maybe I’ll try Scrubs.  

Apparently scrubs was known as one of the more medically accurate TV shows.

[DoctorAtomic]

I have cable and two steaming platforms. 

That's my price point. If your show is that great, it will come around. 

[Avabelle]

I think Scrubs is my favourite medical show. The rest are so angsty and only seem to deal with stupidly OTT cases.

[Cloud9Shopper]

1 hour ago, DoctorAtomic said:

I have cable and two steaming platforms. 

That's my price point. If your show is that great, it will come around. 

Same here. :) I just wish cable weren’t so expensive where I am. 

[sistermagpie]

8 hours ago, Cloud9Shopper said:

I still don’t fully understand fandom culture or see the point in being overly into a piece of media or a ship/character. I’ve seen people on Tumblr around my age or somewhat older (30s/early 40s) still having rage fits that someone doesn’t like their favorite ship or character, saying stuff like “don’t tell me what to like” like they’re 15 (and no one did tell them what to like, but I guess now saying you don’t like characters A and B in a ship is a personal attack on fans), or talking about how hurt they feel when they see negative things about a character they like because they “identify with” that character. I’m on a subreddit for a show that has a character who’s always been very divisive with fans, and people have actually gotten so upset at seeing posts from those who don’t like her that they leave the sub over it. I don’t like the character and still get people saying shit to me like “Maybe we’ll convince you she’s not that bad!” and I’m just like uh she doesn’t exist; why are you so determined to convince me? 

I do post in fandom spaces and watch my favorite media multiple times and I even write fanfic! But I try to keep a healthy balance and remember that there is a real world out there, a world which is of more urgency or priority than staying online complaining that someone didn’t see fiction in the exact same way I did so now my life is over. And I try to check out newer shows too and not stay stuck on just watching the same thing over and over. Obsession just isn’t worth it to me at this point in my life. I’ll never become famous from my fanfics or my Tumblr insights on ship A and B, but some people really make it their identity and I still don’t understand it. 

I remember someone one explaining to me that I shouldn't interpret something in the negative way I was doing, because that was like saying that she was guilty of the negative stuff I was saying about the text. And I was like....so why doesn't that apply to you when you interpet something differently than I do? It's fiction! People are going to relate to it in different ways!

 

[Mabinogia]

39 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

People are going to relate to it in different ways!

And if one keeps an open mind (and remembers it's fiction and not real) one can learn a lot from hearing how someone else interpreted something. It is interesting for me to hear why someone loves a character I can't stand or hates a character I love. What I don't love is when they try to change my mind or prove they are right and I am wrong. 

An example is, I love Regina/Evil Queen from Once Upon a Time. You can point out all the people she's killed, all the horrible, horrible things she has done. It's not going to change my mind because I've seen the show. I have seen everything she has done. I don't love her in the sense that I want her to be a real human who does these things, I love her in the sense that watching Lana Parrilla having a blast wearing glorious clothing and chewing the scenery is fun for me. And you know what, that's okay. I'm not an evil person because I love evil characters. 

I think it is just fine to love evil characters and hate good characters.

[sistermagpie]

17 minutes ago, Mabinogia said:

And if one keeps an open mind (and remembers it's fiction and not real) one can learn a lot from hearing how someone else interpreted something. It is interesting for me to hear why someone loves a character I can't stand or hates a character I love. What I don't love is when they try to change my mind or prove they are right and I am wrong. 

 

Yes, the only time it bugs me is situations that a friend of mine described as when someone really should be writing fanfic, but they don't want to, so they try to write fanfic as meta. So you're pointing out what's actually onscreen/in the text and they act like all interpretations are equal and it's just an opinion.  Like, oh, the murderer is revealed to be X? Well, here's a complicated theory about how it's Y despite that being what's there. Just go write the fanfic where the story was the one you wanted it to be and I can read it or avoid it based on whether I would also enjoy that scenario!

Edited December 5, 2021 by sistermagpie

[Mabinogia]

30 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

Well, here's a complicated theory about how it's Y despite that being what's there. Just go write the fanfic where the story was the one you wanted it to be and I can read it or avoid it based on whether I would also enjoy that scenario!

That's what I do. If a show doesn't go in the direction I hoped it would, I take as many of the facts as I can (that will suit my reinvented version) and write myself a nice little fanfic (sometimes just in my head) as a great creative exercise, but I would never expect anyone to accept it. 

I will admit that in a fantasy world where I am super rich I would hire the actors etc to act out my version just because it would be fun to see it play out the way I want it to, but I am fortunate enough to have a vivid imagination so I play it out in my head. 

[Blergh]

No, I am NOT going to watch the Jimmy Kimmel special of them redoing Diff'rent Strokes/Facts of Life episodes with ONLY adult cast members! 

IMUO, having adults play children's or teens' roles not only loses the original appeal/authenticity of the roles but also makes it next to impossible to keep the episodes from devolving into complete farces! 

And BTW, Miss Aniston, I don't care how many elbow grease or joint juice ads they put you in, you are still 52-years-old and NOT able to pass for a teenaged Blair Warner! 

Yeah, boo me! 

[Mabinogia]

21 hours ago, Blergh said:

No, I am NOT going to watch the Jimmy Kimmel special of them redoing Diff'rent Strokes/Facts of Life episodes with ONLY adult cast members! 

Wait, so they are basically like Saturday Night Live skits? WTF? Why?

I loved both of those shows when I was younger, but this is a hard pass for me. 

[Katy M]

15 hours ago, Mabinogia said:

Wait, so they are basically like Saturday Night Live skits? WTF? Why?

I loved both of those shows when I was younger, but this is a hard pass for me. 

I wouldn't say they're like SNL skits because they're using the exact scripts. I think an SNL script would do something like have Willis call Mr Drummond a white savior. I don't know, add some updated contemporary thing to it. I think it sounds stupid, so not for me either.  To me this would make sense if school kids, of any age, were doing this as their school play.

[GHScorpiosRule]

18 minutes ago, Katy M said:

I wouldn't say they're like SNL skits because they're using the exact scripts. I think an SNL script would do something like have Willis call Mr Drummond a white savior. I don't know, add some updated contemporary thing to it. I think it sounds stupid, so not for me either.  To me this would make sense if school kids, of any age, were doing this as their school play.

They actually changed the script for the Facts of Life episode. In the original, Carl had severe acne, and was mocked for it. Why they changed it to him being made fun of because he had to wear head gear for his braces, I still don't understand. Like being mocked for the latter is worse than the former? If they were worried about offending or hurting those who still suffer from acne and the names called, then maybe do a different episode?

Ann Dowd was definitely the ROCK STAR, channeling the late and wonderful Charlotte Rae's Edna Garrett.

But 99% of the cast for Facts of Life was downright horrific. Especially the casting of Jennifer Aniston as Blair. She had neither the charm, nuance, or ability to be believable as Blair Warner. Then there's the fact her face was so botoxed, she couldn't make any facial expressions or manage to crinkle her nose like Blair did in the episode chosen.

 

[SusanM]

On 12/7/2021 at 8:54 PM, Blergh said:

And BTW, Miss Aniston, I don't care how many elbow grease or joint juice ads they put you in, you are still 52-years-old and NOT able to pass for a teenaged Blair Warner! 

I'm puzzled as to why so many people are singling out Jennifer Aniston here - AFAIK none of the roles were played by  actors who were actually kids/teenagers.

[Katy M]

14 minutes ago, SusannahM said:

I'm puzzled as to why so many people are singling out Jennifer Aniston here - AFAIK none of the roles were played by  actors who were actually kids/teenagers.

While having admitted I didn't see it, I don't think it was ever intended for people to think that actors in their 40s and 50s were teenagers.    I would say unless that was part of the joke because older (but not that old) people play teenagers on TV, but that wouldn't make sense for the FActs of Life, because with the exception of Nancy McKeon, all the actresses on that show were roughly the same age as their characters.

[GHScorpiosRule]

7 minutes ago, Katy M said:

While having admitted I didn't see it, I don't think it was ever intended for people to think that actors in their 40s and 50s were teenagers.    I would say unless that was part of the joke because older (but not that old) people play teenagers on TV, but that wouldn't make sense for the FActs of Life, because with the exception of Nancy McKeon, all the actresses on that show were roughly the same age as their characters.

Yes it was. The actors were intended to play teenagers, as the characters they were portraying were teenagers.

Otherwise, they would have hired teen or early 20s actors to portray them.

[Katy M]

3 minutes ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

Yes it was.

Yes it was intended for people to think they were actually teenagers, or yes it was part of the joke?

[GHScorpiosRule]

Just now, Katy M said:

Yes it was intended for people to think they were actually teenagers, or yes it was part of the joke?

Like I posted in the special's thread, this wasn't a parody or a satirical joke. It's a continuation of paying homage to shows that Normal Lear had a hand in creating or developing.

So yeah, it was intended for viewers to think they were teenagers. 

There is no joke. These actors were playing teenage characters. And Aniston was just TERRIBLE. 

[Katy M]

1 minute ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

So yeah, it was intended for viewers to think they were teenagers. 

There is no joke. These actors were playing teenage characters. And Aniston was just TERRIBLE. 

Oh, I just assumed it would be seen as actors playing characters that were different ages than them, such as if you went to a high school play and the kids are playing adults, or at a senior center where the seniors are playing younger people.  I would have never dreamed that professionals would actually think that people could think that people of that age were actually teenagers instead of just acting as such.  Weird.

[DoctorAtomic]

This is the time of year that I say I do not care for the Nutcracker. I don't have anything against ballet. It's the story that I just don't get and seems ridiculous. 

I also do not care for GOB but that is year round. 

[proserpina65]

1 hour ago, DoctorAtomic said:

I also do not care for GOB but that is year round. 

GOB?

I loved the version of the Nutcracker I saw decades ago, with Mikhail Baryshnikov and Gelsey Kirkland.  I did not love the version I saw live where Clara and the Nutcracker Prince were danced by actual children.  The skill level was simply not there.

[Popples]

2 minutes ago, proserpina65 said:

GOB?

It's from Arrested Development.

[magicdog]

1 hour ago, proserpina65 said:

I did not love the version I saw live where Clara and the Nutcracker Prince were danced by actual children. 

I saw a performance that did something similar - except the director had TWO Claras!  One was "Child Clara" who was at the party and receives her nutcracker doll, while a "Teen Clara" did the dancing for the fantasy scenes.  Only time I had ever seen it done that way.

 

I never watched the Different Strokes/FOL redo, but if they were going to use adult actors, (this is more in line with FOL since almost all the original cast of DS are no more) they might as well have brought in the originals and had them do it, or at least film a coda to see where Blair, et al ended up and what they'd be doing now. 

[Blergh]

 

7 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

This is the time of year that I say I do not care for the Nutcracker. I don't have anything against ballet. It's the story that I just don't get and seems ridiculous. 

I also do not care for GOB but that is year round. 

I've always liked the songs and music but the story is so lame!

Spoiler

I mean, once the Nutcracker Prince defeats the Rat King, it's nothing but meeting and greeting the dream kingdom's inhabitants until it's time for Clara to wake up and it's all over. Ho hum!

 

[Mabinogia]

5 hours ago, magicdog said:

I never watched the Different Strokes/FOL redo, but if they were going to use adult actors, (this is more in line with FOL since almost all the original cast of DS are no more) they might as well have brought in the originals and had them do it, or at least film a coda to see where Blair, et al ended up and what they'd be doing now. 

This is what is perplexing me. Why use adults if 1) the characters are teens or 2) you can't get the original actors. 

It could have been fun seeing the original cast (for Fact, obviously not Strokes) playing their old role in an old ep. Or it could have been cool to see a "where are they now" of the characters. But why would you have adult actors like Aniston playing teenage characters? Was it because it was too risky for teens because of Covid? Or was it an artistic choice? It's just...odd. 

[peachmangosteen]

I think they just wanted some big name actors to draw attention.

[GHScorpiosRule]

36 minutes ago, peachmangosteen said:

I think they just wanted some big name actors to draw attention.

Which makes no sense to me, since this wasn't the first shows bringing this back. Kimmel did it with "All in the Family", "The Jeffersons" and "Good Times". And if they want big name actors, at least get some who can actually do the job and make us believe they are the characters.

[proserpina65]

49 minutes ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

Which makes no sense to me, since this wasn't the first shows bringing this back. Kimmel did it with "All in the Family", "The Jeffersons" and "Good Times". And if they want big name actors, at least get some who can actually do the job and make us believe they are the characters.

I don't get the point of doing it at all.  I didn't when it was the three shows you mentioned, and I really didn't with Diff'rent Strokes and Facts of Life.

[GHScorpiosRule]

3 hours ago, proserpina65 said:

I don't get the point of doing it at all.  I didn't when it was the three shows you mentioned, and I really didn't with Diff'rent Strokes and Facts of Life.

Neither do I. I'm not in the group who was/is soooo excited Jimmy Kimmel is doing this. I watched because I had nothing else to do. A few actors did a good job portraying the original characters (Marisa Tomei, Ann Dowd), so points for that. But if Kimmel or whoever is doing this, wants to keep doing this, well then get actors who can actually act and do it justice, and not actors whose faces are so botoxed they can't emote, or fall flat in rehearsals.

And if they're going to do shows whose stars/cast were kids/teenagers, then damn well hire teen or kid actors to play them; not middle aged adults.

And just commenting in here to clarify that this is not ABC's version of SNL skits, a parody, or satire.

[Bastet]

3 hours ago, proserpina65 said:

I don't get the point of doing it at all.  I didn't when it was the three shows you mentioned, and I really didn't with Diff'rent Strokes and Facts of Life.

I enjoy it well enough (the whole live stage performance of an episode of classic television thing), but I found these last two shows an odd choice, given how many shows Lear was more involved with - and were better shows - they could pick from.  For the next two, I'd love to see them do an episode of Maude and one of One Day at a Time.

[Blergh]

3 hours ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

Neither do I. I'm not in the group who was/is soooo excited Jimmy Kimmel is doing this. I watched because I had nothing else to do. A few actors did a good job portraying the original characters (Marisa Tomei, Ann Dowd), so points for that. But if Kimmel or whoever is doing this, wants to keep doing this, well then get actors who can actually act and do it justice, and not actors whose faces are so botoxed they can't emote, or fall flat in rehearsals.

And if they're going to do shows whose stars/cast were kids/teenagers, then damn well hire teen or kid actors to play them; not middle aged adults.

And just commenting in here to clarify that this is not ABC's version of SNL skits, a parody, or satire.

TOTALLY agree with you here!

 

If Mr. Kimmel's intention was to celebrate Mr. Lear's legacy by recreating the classic shows that the latter had created in his heyday, this latest effort re having it done via performers WAY past their teens  and, especially, seeming to care more about getting big names (e.g. Miss Aniston, Mr. Hart ) instead of   ensuring the performers actually cared about revitalizing iconic characters (Miss Tomei and Miss Dowd) just wound up falling flat. 

Using middle-aged performers playing teens and preteens might have worked had there been some kind of 'play within a play' devise (e.g. a group of performers came across Diff'rent Strokes and Facts of Life scripts and decided to imagine what it may have been like to have been on the shows them voila) but the format of pretending these performers ARE teens and preteens just didn't work! 

Oh, and the constant genuflection Mr. Kimmel does to Mr. Lear when presenting these recreations has lost its appeal and become downright tiresome (and Mr. Kimmel needs to acknowledge that  even during his prime, Mr. Lear DID have some duds- anyone else recall Carter Country?)

Edited December 10, 2021 by Blergh

[proserpina65]

1 hour ago, Blergh said:

anyone else recall Carter Country?

I loved Carter Country!

I still remember the disagreement between Victor French's character and Kene Holliday's character about the right time to take a shower (morning or bedtime), and the Mayor's "Handle it, handle it".

Edited December 10, 2021 by proserpina65

[Blergh]

2 hours ago, proserpina65 said:

I loved Carter Country!

I still remember the disagreement between Victor French's character and Kene Holliday's character about the right time to take a shower (morning or bedtime), and the Mayor's "Handle it, handle it".

Well, it sure seems apt to bring it up in the Unpopular TV Opinions Subforum! 

I wonder if the late Victor French would have been happy that there's at least one person who has fondly remembered it or would he have preferred it to have stayed forgotten? He seemed to kick himself  many times for having left Little House on the Prairie to 'star' in this! 

[Browncoat]

3 hours ago, proserpina65 said:

and the Mayor's "Handle it, handle it".

I remember that!  I wouldn't have been able to tell you what it was from, but we used to quote that all the time.

[GreekGeek]

18 hours ago, proserpina65 said:

I loved Carter Country!

I still remember the disagreement between Victor French's character and Kene Holliday's character about the right time to take a shower (morning or bedtime), and the Mayor's "Handle it, handle it".

I enjoyed it too! That "when to shower" debate was right up there with Archie vs. Mike on the proper order to put on shoes and socks: sock, sock, shoe, shoe or sock, shoe, sock, shoe?

[Leeds]

On 12/9/2021 at 8:31 AM, DoctorAtomic said:

This is the time of year that I say I do not care for the Nutcracker. I don't have anything against ballet. It's the story that I just don't get and seems ridiculous. 

I also do not care for GOB but that is year round. 

I don't mind The Nutcracker per se, what I do mind is the fact that for most Americans it's the only ballet in existence.  Why can't people be exposed to a couple more? Since they aren't, I guess this is an unpopular opinion.

[Enigma X]

While Succession is a good show, I find it to be overly repetitive to the point of exhaustion.

[SusanM]

On 12/11/2021 at 11:35 PM, Leeds said:

I don't mind The Nutcracker per se, what I do mind is the fact that for most Americans it's the only ballet in existence.  Why can't people be exposed to a couple more? Since they aren't, I guess this is an unpopular opinion.

Anyone who has PBS could watch other ballets if they chose to.  I guess most people don't choose to though. 

I'm fortunate that I live in a city big enough to have major ballet companies come through at times other than Christmas but unless you've got a kid in ballet most people would have to really go out of their way to see any ballet performed.

[Zella]

American here. Ballet isn't really available where I live as something you can attend, but I do enjoy watching it from the comfort of my home. My possibly unpopular opinion is that, though I respect the artform, I am only particularly interested in watching the Russians (and Ukrainians) dance. I feel like they have a magnetic dynamism and charisma to their performances that I just personally have not experienced when watching ballet dancers from other countries, even if they're obviously very talented. The first time I watched Baryshnikov was like a religious experience, which is not a reaction I have to a lot of things period. 

[Constant Viewer]

11 hours ago, SusannahM said:

Anyone who has PBS could watch other ballets if they chose to.  I guess most people don't choose to though.

I don't know, the PBS station my grandmother has often has different programming than the one where I live.

[proserpina65]

On 12/10/2021 at 6:24 PM, Blergh said:

Well, it sure seems apt to bring it up in the Unpopular TV Opinions Subforum! 

I wonder if the late Victor French would have been happy that there's at least one person who has fondly remembered it or would he have preferred it to have stayed forgotten? He seemed to kick himself  many times for having left Little House on the Prairie to 'star' in this! 

Two.  My best friend loved it too.  Something we discovered years later since we didn't even know each other when it was on tv.

On 12/13/2021 at 11:23 AM, Zella said:

The first time I watched Baryshnikov was like a religious experience, which is not a reaction I have to a lot of things period. 

I wholeheartedly endorse this.  Watching him dance was like a view into the heavens.

[DoctorAtomic]

I haven't seen ballet advertised on my PBS channel either. 

[Blergh]

36 minutes ago, DoctorAtomic said:

I haven't seen ballet advertised on my PBS channel either. 

I have . This happens  usually during Pledge Weeks when the viewers are expected to tune in and dose off- but perk up just enough during the guilt pitches   to pledge X$ to keep the stations going! 

[DoctorAtomic]

They show the local outdoors show during the pledge week here. Which, I actually like the show anyway. 

[Bort]

There is zero ballet on my PBS. Not everybody’s PBS is the same.

[Leeds]

3 hours ago, kariyaki said:

There is zero ballet on my PBS. Not everybody’s PBS is the same.

And even if everyone had the same access on PBS, there's a huge difference between live ballet and televised, which is why I wish people had more live options.

[Blergh]

By any chance is Just Like That using the Sex in the City theme for its own?

IMUO, that theme was the ONLY  likable part of the former show so if the newer show is not going to use it, then I'll have no reason to even momentarily tune into said newer show! To each one's own! 

[SmithW6079]

On 12/9/2021 at 11:26 AM, GHScorpiosRule said:

Aniston was just TERRIBLE. 

To be fair, she's a terrible-to-mediocre sitcom actress who got lucky.