Party of One: Unpopular TV Opinions

[Cloud9Shopper]

56 minutes ago, Annber03 said:

Ha, yeah, I do love to rewatch my favorite shows, but I still manage to find other things to watch as well, both old and new. Watching one thing over and over and over again would just get a little old after a while, you need some variety. 

Agreed on the reboot thing, too. I've always felt that reboots/revivals made the most sense for shows that have been off the air for at least ten years or more, 'cause you've had enough time to properly miss the show/characters/cast and whatnot, so it'd be like revisiting an old friend. It seems pointless to reboot things that ended just a few short years ago. 

Even then, though, still, I agree, it is okay for some things to just, y'know, end. No story can possibly last forever, there needs to be a natural stopping point eventually. It's to the point where it makes series finales seem less significant, because chances are good we'll probably see these characters again in a few years anyway. I kind of miss the days when a series finale and a goodbye actually felt meaningful, like it really was the end of something special.  

Yeah. I admit I do rewatch movies but that’s because a movie takes 2-3 hours at most to watch, and not weeks or months of binging, or it’s a tradition to me. (Like watching The Sound of Music on ABC the week before Christmas…it was my grandmother’s favorite movie, so my mom and I watch it every year.) I don’t watch a movie, though, if it’s on cable two weeks in a row. Once is enough. 

Fuller House was one remake/reboot that did work for me because yeah they kind of redid the same plot point of the original, but the cast also worked well together as (now) adults and they threw in a lot of meta that made it clear they were making fun of themselves. And the kids they casted were memorable. 

Sometimes I want shows to stay in the past because by the time they ended, they were shadows of what made them so great in the first place. I don’t want them rebooted because I know their original glory would never be recaptured, the cast members we all loved are probably too wrapped up in other projects now (or some may have even stepped away from acting), and I don’t want to see the same show with a totally different cast. (Or in the case of Glee, three members of the cast are dead now and there’s been too much controversy around some of the other cast.) I agree with you, having the nostalgia element and the end of a story is OK, too. Besides, fanfic exists if you want to keep things going… ;)  

I wanted to like the original Law and Order reboot this year, but it paled in comparison to when my mom loved to watch Jerry Orbach, Sam Waterston, and S. Epatha Merkerson. I could not get into it at all, but it got renewed, so I guess I’m the minority opinion LOL. I’m also not a fan of L&O: Organized Crime. 

Edited September 11, 2022 by Cloud9Shopper

[Cinnabon]

On 9/10/2022 at 10:04 AM, DrSpaceman73 said:

Hank was like that too.  At the beginning I thought he was the clichéd middle aged white guy douche cop, macho and self righteous. 

By the end......that guy was awesome! Right up until the end of ozymandias, as he died telling Walt how he always has to be the smartest guy in the room but also is incredibly naive. 

I felt exactly the same about Hank. He may be my favorite character of all time. Although I appreciate the character of Mike in many ways, there is still no comparison between someone who chose to kill for a drug kingpin for a living and a hero who committed his life to saving lives ruined by drugs like meth.

On 9/3/2022 at 9:11 PM, kiddo82 said:

I cannot stress this enough.  No matter how "misunderstood" or "funny" he may be (that second one is certainly in the eye of the beholder), Loki attempted to commit mass genocide, people!

Same thing happened on the first season of American Horror Story (Murder House). Tate was a great character, but people were literally swooning over a school shooter. A school shooter!

On 9/10/2022 at 11:13 AM, Zella said:

Hank's journey was one of my favorite parts of Breaking Bad. His final scene has always given me chills.

That was amazing. 

[Cinnabon]

16 hours ago, Cloud9Shopper said:

Not every show needs to be rebooted, or should be. Even if it was popular in its era. Sometimes it’s best to just enjoy shows for what they were and rewatch it, or move on to one of the other endless options on streaming. Just like not every show needs to go on forever and ever. I like SVU but it really hasn’t been worthwhile to watch since S17 or so. (IMO, of course.)

At the same time, while I do rewatch things. I don’t get people who seem fixated on only one show. “I’m on my 4400th rewatch; I just keep starting over when I finish!” Please go outside. Read a book. Find something new to watch. I really don‘t need a play by play of an episode you’re watching for the tenth time in as many months. 

Yes! I feel the same when a show ends and some people post “what will I do now with my Wednesday nights?” Um, read a book, listen to music, talk to your friends and family, go outside? 

[DrSpaceman73]

Yeah there is enough stuff on tv that I dont need reboots. They usually disappoint. I'm sick of them. 

And almost all the reboots had good runs and dont need more. They ran their course. 

If you want to reboot something try ones that were cancelled too soon. 

[Mabinogia]

14 minutes ago, Cinnabon said:

Yes! I feel the same when a show ends and some people post “what will I do now with my Wednesday nights?” Um, read a book, listen to music, talk to your friends and family, go outside? 

I read books, listen to music, talk to friends and family and, well, I don't tend to go outside at night but I do go out during the day and all kinds of things but still feel a kind of loss when my favorite show ends because watching a show fulfills a different need than reading, music, friends, outdoors. There's time enough for all those things. 

[Hiyo]

Quote

If you want to reboot something try ones that were cancelled too soon. 

Speaking of, if your show lasted 3 or 4 seasons and was cancelled? It wasn't too soon. It had a chance.

[Mabinogia]

Just now, Hiyo said:

Speaking of, if your show lasted 3 or 4 seasons and was cancelled? It wasn't too soon. It had a chance.

I think between 3-5 seasons is the sweet spot personally. It is enough time to tell a story but not too long that you run out of story and start either getting totally ridiculous or retell the same story over and over and over. 

[Cinnabon]

6 minutes ago, Mabinogia said:

I read books, listen to music, talk to friends and family and, well, I don't tend to go outside at night but I do go out during the day and all kinds of things but still feel a kind of loss when my favorite show ends because watching a show fulfills a different need than reading, music, friends, outdoors. There's time enough for all those things. 

You do, but I have my doubts about too many others. It’s quite sad, imo.

[Mabinogia]

24 minutes ago, Cinnabon said:

You do, but I have my doubts about too many others. It’s quite sad, imo.

Fair point. It also explains a lot about the state of television that people will basically watch whatever is put in front of them.

I think of myself as an active TV watcher. Whatever I watch, the story continues in my mind long after. I know that people who prefer books often reason that with books you make up the worlds in your head. I'm that way with television. My favorite characters live on in my head. I see television as just a visual book and since I'm more of a visual person, it is easier for me to tell stories with TV characters than with book characters. I do love reading, but I struggle to retain what I read. Made school a nightmare.

So yeah, I am probably not a typical tv watcher.

The reasons I rewatch rather than check out a new show are part comfort (having something familiar in the background while I do other things) part research (getting more detail for my mind stories) and part laziness (when I'm done working I want to unwind with something I don't have to put too much effort into).

Another part of it has to do with what is trending. I'm not a fan of the type of shows that are popular right now. Reality was interesting in the beginning but now it's just a bunch of influencers looking for more followers and almost more scripted than scripted shows. While I love some superhero stuff I am not into all of it, so that eliminates half of what is on tv right now. And I have grown to hate "prestige" style shows the older I get. Life is depressing enough without watching shows about gangs or drug dealers or constant death and dystopias. My new show options are very limited. 

I have been discovering old shows I never really knew about or exploring very old shows from my childhood that I've nearly forgotten about. 

[sistermagpie]

54 minutes ago, Hiyo said:

Speaking of, if your show lasted 3 or 4 seasons and was cancelled? It wasn't too soon. It had a chance.

And also, one of the good things about shows now is they can end where the story ends instead of pushing on for as long as possible. Most peoples' ideas for how the show could go on or have a spin off about whatever character are actually bad.

[Cinnabon]

20 minutes ago, Mabinogia said:

Fair point. It also explains a lot about the state of television that people will basically watch whatever is put in front of them.

I think of myself as an active TV watcher. Whatever I watch, the story continues in my mind long after. I know that people who prefer books often reason that with books you make up the worlds in your head. I'm that way with television. My favorite characters live on in my head. I see television as just a visual book and since I'm more of a visual person, it is easier for me to tell stories with TV characters than with book characters. I do love reading, but I struggle to retain what I read. Made school a nightmare.

So yeah, I am probably not a typical tv watcher.

The reasons I rewatch rather than check out a new show are part comfort (having something familiar in the background while I do other things) part research (getting more detail for my mind stories) and part laziness (when I'm done working I want to unwind with something I don't have to put too much effort into).

Another part of it has to do with what is trending. I'm not a fan of the type of shows that are popular right now. Reality was interesting in the beginning but now it's just a bunch of influencers looking for more followers and almost more scripted than scripted shows. While I love some superhero stuff I am not into all of it, so that eliminates half of what is on tv right now. And I have grown to hate "prestige" style shows the older I get. Life is depressing enough without watching shows about gangs or drug dealers or constant death and dystopias. My new show options are very limited. 

I have been discovering old shows I never really knew about or exploring very old shows from my childhood that I've nearly forgotten about. 

I am similar. I have less than zero interest in “reality” shows (but I enjoy documentaries), teens/20-/somethings’ nonsense dramas, science fiction/fantasy, or generally anything involving vampires, zombies or similar, lol.  I really need to go back to reading more books. 🙂

[ABay]

I find it difficult to feel outrage over people swooning over Loki or other physically attractive (or even unattractive), intellectually nimble, verbally acute bad guys because they are fictional characters perpetrating fictional evil deeds against other fictional characters.

[Cinnabon]

2 minutes ago, ABay said:

I find it difficult to feel outrage over people swooning over Loki or other physically attractive (or even unattractive), intellectually nimble, verbally acute bad guys because they are fictional characters perpetrating fictional evil deeds against other fictional characters.

I get your point, but people swooning over a school shooter, even a fictional one, disturbs me. 

[Mabinogia]

39 minutes ago, Cinnabon said:

I get your point, but people swooning over a school shooter, even a fictional one, disturbs me. 

That one is a lot tougher to accept for me as well. Only because school shootings are far more prevalent in my country than genocidal space gods. I can understand "oh, the actor is so cute so I like watching the character", because I do that. I've liked characters who would make horrible real people because the actor was sexy. But I wouldn't swoon over the character per say, in that very teenage girl way of "he's just misunderstood and I can fix him" way that is the basis of making YA vampire lit so huge. 

I don't lust after a villainous character so much as lust after the actor and find the character they are playing fascinating in a car crash shouldn't watch but can't look away kind of way. 

But the villains I prefer tend to be the kind I wouldn't run into in real life. I am never going to read about Loki coming down from space and wiping out the human population but I have read far too many articles about teenagers going into school and shooting and killing as many people as they can. I just can't romanticize that. 

[GHScorpiosRule]

21 hours ago, Cloud9Shopper said:

I wanted to like the original Law and Order reboot this year, but it paled in comparison to when my mom loved to watch Jerry Orbach, Sam Waterston, and S. Epatha Merkerson. I could not get into it at all, but it got renewed,

Not alone. I didn’t have high hopes when it was announced and I learned who would be the new show runner.  I gave it a chance. But not only were the production values cheap as FUCK, but one of the things that made it the ORIGINAL was the CHUNG-CHUNG! sound with the tags that showed the passage of time. The plots were weak and thin and the acting of the main cast sucked. So I dropped it after 3 episodes. For nuance and good stories that weren’t afraid to push the envelope and have good guys you can root for, I’ll watch the original, thankyouverymooooch.

[Cloud9Shopper]

1 hour ago, GHScorpiosRule said:

Not alone. I didn’t have high hopes when it was announced and I learned who would be the new show runner.  I gave it a chance. But not only were the production values cheap as FUCK, but one of the things that made it the ORIGINAL was the CHUNG-CHUNG! sound with the tags that showed the passage of time. The plots were weak and thin and the acting of the main cast sucked. So I dropped it after 3 episodes. For nuance and good stories that weren’t afraid to push the envelope and have good guys you can root for, I’ll watch the original, thankyouverymooooch.

I just cringed when I heard NBC was doing a crossover with all three L&Os to start the season. Just the kind of thing I don’t want to sit through for three hours. And I hate crossovers with Organized Crime because I really only care about SVU now, and even that’s getting stale with Rollins leaving soon and Olivia and Elliot making no progress in their relationship. 

9 hours ago, sistermagpie said:

And also, one of the good things about shows now is they can end where the story ends instead of pushing on for as long as possible. Most peoples' ideas for how the show could go on or have a spin off about whatever character are actually bad.

I feel like some people can’t distinguish between what would work in fanfic and on Tumblr versus what would be a good concept on TV. And I get it; we’re not industry professionals so fans can’t generally be expected to know what works or what attracts an audience. But when I see people say stuff like they wish Abby and Luka from ER could have a show today about their lives, I just think…that’s what fanfic exists for.* Besides, it makes it look like they’re totally ignorant to why ER succeeded to begin with, because it was an ensemble show in its early years with more realistic drama and a balance of fun. Abby had years of screen time and major stories anyway; it is long past time to move on and let someone else have the spotlight on the off chance the show is ever rebooted. (It won’t be as far as I understand.) 

If you are actually referring to TV execs @sistermagpie I stand corrected. Although I am glad the Bo/Cheyenne spin-off from Superstore was scrapped. They’re not strong enough characters to carry a show on their own. Dina and Glenn or Amy and Jonah would have made more sense. Bo just annoys too easily. 

*I write fanfic and read it, so this is not a diss. But one of my fic series is about a supporting character and while I wish she had had more of a story in canon, I realize why she didn’t. It’s like people signing petitions trying to get Kelli Giddish to stay on SVU. Unfair as her firing was, it’s unlikely to do anything. 

[sistermagpie]

3 minutes ago, Cloud9Shopper said:

If you are actually referring to TV execs @sistermagpie I stand corrected. Although I am glad the Bo/Cheyenne spin-off from Superstore was scrapped. They’re not strong enough characters to carry a show on their own. Dina and Glenn or Amy and Jonah would have made more sense. Bo just annoys too easily. 

Nope, that's exactly who I meant--the people watching. I even think that some of the people saying stuff like this haven't tried to write fanfic, because sometimes they seem to be suggesting things based on just the vague memory that a character was on the show or something. Good fanfic writers put in much more effort.

[Cloud9Shopper]

31 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

Nope, that's exactly who I meant--the people watching. I even think that some of the people saying stuff like this haven't tried to write fanfic, because sometimes they seem to be suggesting things based on just the vague memory that a character was on the show or something. Good fanfic writers put in much more effort.

I like to think so. ;) I don’t think every fic I write is gold or high quality or anything but I do try to look for compelling characters or stories that weren’t in canon and build them out more, flesh out their story, that type of thing. I’ll even write in original characters if I think it would help. Sometimes I like putting characters in situations they didn’t face on the show just to see how they’d do and how their relationships would change or be tested. 

That said, I’m also not so pretentious that I’m above the occasional fluff story of my ships flirting or having a brunch date or something like that. :) 

Edited September 12, 2022 by Cloud9Shopper

[Gharlane]

On 9/11/2022 at 11:34 PM, Cloud9Shopper said:

I write fanfic and read it, so this is not a diss. But one of my fic series is about a supporting character and while I wish she had had more of a story in canon, I realize why she didn’t. It’s like people signing petitions trying to get Kelli Giddish to stay on SVU. Unfair as her firing was, it’s unlikely to do anything. 

The only fanfic I have ever enjoyed was written by Tina Belcher. 😀

[Popples]

1 hour ago, Gharlane said:

The only fanfic I have ever enjoyed was written by Tina Belcher. 😀

Erotic friend-fiction. 😆

[Cloud9Shopper]

2 hours ago, Gharlane said:

The only fanfic I have ever enjoyed was written by Tina Belcher. 😀

Honestly a lot of it (including my own) is just average, yet so many fic writers think they’re better than published authors or that they’re writing quality literature. Or fanfic is the only thing they read. It’s just like…there’s a whole WORLD out there. But whatever makes people happy I guess. 

[Ohiopirate02]

18 minutes ago, Cloud9Shopper said:

Honestly a lot of it (including my own) is just average, yet so many fic writers think they’re better than published authors or that they’re writing quality literature. Or fanfic is the only thing they read. It’s just like…there’s a whole WORLD out there. But whatever makes people happy I guess. 

I've enjoyed some fanfiction over the years, but I am not cut out for that part of the internet.  I've noticed that many fanfiction communities do not handle criticism well, and I need to be able to express my opinion.  There is a huge difference between constructive criticism and flames, but those differences are all but forgotten in the FF world.  Authors who only receive positive feedback never grow as writers and mistakenly believe they are better than what they are.  Negative feedback is just as important as positive.  

[Cloud9Shopper]

On 9/13/2022 at 1:57 PM, Ohiopirate02 said:

I've enjoyed some fanfiction over the years, but I am not cut out for that part of the internet.  I've noticed that many fanfiction communities do not handle criticism well, and I need to be able to express my opinion.  There is a huge difference between constructive criticism and flames, but those differences are all but forgotten in the FF world.  Authors who only receive positive feedback never grow as writers and mistakenly believe they are better than what they are.  Negative feedback is just as important as positive.  

I feel like a lot of fandom community in general can’t take nuance well regardless of whether they write fanfic or not. I’ve seen women in their 40s lose their mind when you suggest that their ship, in your interpretation, wasn’t the bestest love story ever and they seemed ready for divorce court. I’ve been accused of being sexist for not liking a female character or female lead when 1) I am a woman and 2) I like plenty of female lead characters and even supporting ones. I’m sure a lot of us have maybe gone too far with disliking a character but the people who make shows and characters such a central part of who they are and demand positivity all the time can also go too far. 

Because let’s face it. There’s probably not many people who go through life and say they love everyone they’ve ever met, never been annoyed by someone or didn’t gel with them. The same goes for characters. It’s OK to not click with them, and I’m so tired of some fans thinking “someone doesn’t like what I like = a personal attack on me.” 

[JustHereForFood]

Does anyone else think that maybe actors and shows should be limited to one award per show so that they can't win the same award every year for the same show? Or maybe just be limited for the next year after they win?

No, I don't need Stephen Colbert to beat John Oliver for an Emmy, why do you ask?

[Hiyo]

Nope. Let the best win every year, even if it means multiple wins.

[Mabinogia]

47 minutes ago, Hiyo said:

Nope. Let the best win every year, even if it means multiple wins.

The best doesn't win every year, the most popular or most "buzzworthy" does. It would be lovely if the best did win but then the "best" really is impossible to define since we all have a different idea of what makes for the best show. 

No entertainment award denotes quality, it just shows popularity so even if we just give the award to shows that haven't won it still won't mean they are the best shows.

[Irlandesa]

18 hours ago, JustHereForFood said:

Does anyone else think that maybe actors and shows should be limited to one award per show so that they can't win the same award every year for the same show? Or maybe just be limited for the next year after they win?

That'd get too intricate.  It's easy enough for the individual awards but when you factor in shows, it gets more difficult. 

The people who end up recognized for writing, directing, the overall show may change from year to year for a show.  I remember a host eventually bowing out from the individual host award they kept winning but left their show in because it was more than just them who put on the show.  Just because they wanted to step away from constantly winning doesn't mean they felt they could do that on behalf of the people whose hard work made their show what it was.

[Hiyo]

“The best doesn't win every year, the most popular or most "buzzworthy" does. It would be lovely if the best did win but then the "best" really is impossible to define since we all have a different idea of what makes for the best show.”

I think the best does win more often than not.

In any case, putting limits on how many times someone can win an award is just not a good thing.

[JustHereForFood]

3 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

The people who end up recognized for writing, directing, the overall show may change from year to year for a show.  I remember a host eventually bowing out from the individual host award they kept winning but left their show in because it was more than just them who put on the show.  Just because they wanted to step away from constantly winning doesn't mean they felt they could do that on behalf of the people whose hard work made their show what it was.

OK, that is a fair point.

[roseha]

Years ago John Laroquette stopped submitting his name to the Emmys after winning multiple times.  I'd be in favor of more performers following suit.  I think the best comparison is with the Tonys, no one gets awarded twice for the same performance in a play or musical even if they stay with the show for more than a year.

[Irlandesa]

1 hour ago, roseha said:

I think the best comparison is with the Tonys, no one gets awarded twice for the same performance in a play or musical even if they stay with the show for more than a year.

I don't think people can be even nominated twice for a Tony. I don't see the comparison, though. In a play, it's the same songs, same words and same performance.  TV (and movies) might be the same character but with different words and story arcs.

[Zella]

I do think that award shows can be lazy with their nominations and awards for the same people and shows over and over again, but I also think that the onus on correcting that is with the award shows themselves, not the actors who keep getting nominated and awarded over and over again. It's not their fault that the people doing the selections seem to have a shallow pool they pick from. 

[Ohiopirate02]

8 hours ago, Zella said:

I do think that award shows can be lazy with their nominations and awards for the same people and shows over and over again, but I also think that the onus on correcting that is with the award shows themselves, not the actors who keep getting nominated and awarded over and over again. It's not their fault that the people doing the selections seem to have a shallow pool they pick from. 

Yep.  The Emmy voters keep on voting for the same people over and over again.  I highly doubt they are doing their due diligence and actually watching every reel and then choosing the best performance from those reels and those reels only.  They are busy people with careers and families and their votes have to be in by a certain date.  They take shortcuts and vote based on past performances by the actors in question or they vote based on whatever buzz they see online.  It's the same thing that happens every year with the Oscars where voters are willing to admit to journalists that they do not watch all the nominees.  

[Danny Franks]

I'm not watching House of the Dragon but my girlfriend is. Every time I catch a few minutes of it, I'm even more convinced that it was written by a bunch of thirteen year old edgelords who want to make the 'most badass, cool show full of badass, cool characters ever.'

Just saw Matt Smith in a bad wig apparently cripple a woman then beat her to death with a rock. So cool and grown up.

Edited September 19, 2022 by Danny Franks

[bluegirl147]

15 hours ago, roseha said:

Years ago John Laroquette stopped submitting his name to the Emmys after winning multiple times.  I'd be in favor of more performers following suit. 

If I'm not mistaken I think Candice Bergen did the same thing after winning multiple times for Murphy Brown.

[DrSpaceman73]

3 hours ago, Danny Franks said:

I'm not watching House of the Dragon but my girlfriend is. Every time I catch a few minutes of it, I'm even more convinced that it was written by a bunch of thirteen year old edgelords who want to be make the 'most badass, cool show full of badass, cool characters ever.'

Just saw Matt Smith in a bad wig apparently cripple a woman then beat her to death with a rock. So cool and grown up.

It does seem more like game of thrones fanfiction.  

It's OK. It's not a bad show.  But for one thing there is basically one main storyline and nothing else. That's my biggest criticism.  Game of thrones, at times to a fault, you had a huge cast snd many simultaneous stories. Kept it interesting. This one It's singularly focused. 

[Haleth]

17 hours ago, Danny Franks said:

Just saw Matt Smith in a bad wig apparently cripple a woman then beat her to death with a rock. So cool and grown up.

That was his wife.  He wanted to be free to marry his niece.

[proserpina65]

My unpopular House of the Dragon opinion: I think Milly Alcock is great at playing a sulky, miserable teenager but terrible at giving Rhaenyra any other layers.  I'll be glad to see Emma D'Arcy take over next week.

On 9/11/2022 at 12:21 PM, Cinnabon said:

Yes! I feel the same when a show ends and some people post “what will I do now with my Wednesday nights?” Um, read a book, listen to music, talk to your friends and family, go outside? 

Go outside?  Egads, no!  But the other stuff?  Yeah.  Although I do know the feeling.

[proserpina65]

On 9/11/2022 at 1:27 PM, Mabinogia said:

Fair point. It also explains a lot about the state of television that people will basically watch whatever is put in front of them.

I think of myself as an active TV watcher. Whatever I watch, the story continues in my mind long after. I know that people who prefer books often reason that with books you make up the worlds in your head. I'm that way with television. My favorite characters live on in my head. I see television as just a visual book and since I'm more of a visual person, it is easier for me to tell stories with TV characters than with book characters. I do love reading, but I struggle to retain what I read. Made school a nightmare.

For some shows, I'm very much like you.  But there are times when I just want something I can occasionally glance at while I'm doing other things.  Yes, I could listen to music, but I tend to get too involved in the music to be able to do whatever else I'm working on.  I don't particularly like silence, at least not in the evening.

On 9/18/2022 at 4:00 PM, Hiyo said:

I think the best does win more often than not.

I think the most buzz-worthy wins more often than not, regardless of actual quality.

[Anduin]

3 hours ago, Haleth said:

That was his wife.  He wanted to be free to marry his niece.

Oh, well that excuses it. Gosh, HOTD sounds like a great show. I'm sad I'm missing it.

No, I have very little patience for Targaryen nonsense. While I'm fine with people liking what they like, I just fail to see the appeal.

[DoctorAtomic]

I don't get why they picked that particular storyline - the house in power fights themselves as to who is going to be in power. Something where they learn to master dragons to take power is more interesting to me because maybe way back they weren't the awful people they became so there's the tragic element to it. Or how they build the Wall. 

[DrSpaceman73]

1 hour ago, DoctorAtomic said:

I don't get why they picked that particular storyline - the house in power fights themselves as to who is going to be in power. Something where they learn to master dragons to take power is more interesting to me because maybe way back they weren't the awful people they became so there's the tragic element to it. Or how they build the Wall. 

Yes it's really a very clichéd storyline, probably literally the oldest in literature/ stories

Game of thrones again was also that story but it was a whole bunch of groups fighting for it. Not just one family.

There seems like a ton of untapped potential. The dragons just seem to be visual exploits and nothing more. 

[Hiyo]

It's Succession, but with dragons...don't get me wrong, I enjoyed GOT, and this series is ok...but there are so many more interesting eras they could have gone back to, and even places as well (Essos in general in just so untapped).

[Llywela]

On 9/4/2022 at 6:18 AM, Irlandesa said:

My favorite is when debates happen over the sins of the "good characters" and "bad characters" but they're so wholly out of proportion. 

Yes. This. And so many shows do it. They're like, "Sure, the villain is bad because they murdered a bunch of people/attempted to destroy an entire spaceship/city/world, or whatever, but although the hero foiled the dastardly plot, they failed to save everyone and had to kill a couple of villainous henchmen in the process, so really they are all just as bad as each other!" It is just such a false equivalence yet shows always seem to want us to take it seriously.

[Enigma X]

I find myself disliking characters I am either indifferent to or would like depending on the rabidity of their fandom. (This goes for celebrities and sports teams too.) Once I see a fandom going through complicated gymnastics to justify a character's actions, it is off-putting. I would rather the fandom say I like the actor who plays that character, so whatever they do is acceptable to me, or I like only good/bad guys; therefore, I am good with those actions. The gymnastics do not make you more enlightened. 

[bluegirl147]

19 minutes ago, Enigma X said:

I find myself disliking characters I am either indifferent to or would like depending on the rabidity of their fandom. (This goes for celebrities and sports teams too.) Once I see a fandom going through complicated gymnastics to justify a character's actions, it is off-putting. I would rather the fandom say I like the actor who plays that character, so whatever they do is acceptable to me, or I like only good/bad guys; therefore, I am good with those actions. The gymnastics do not make you more enlightened. 

I'm like this too.  I saw that a lot on soaps.  There would be a straight up villain but because he was attractive or funny fans would handwave his crimes away and then the writers taking notice of the villain's popularity would start the redemption arc.  

I watched the Sopranos when it was on HBO and did a complete re watch ten years ago.  After the re watch I realized I didn't like any of the characters.  I didn't like being made to feel like I was supposed to root for the bad guys.  And they were all bad guys. Now yes some were worse than others but they were still all bad.  

When it comes to celebs I am not good enough at yoga to bend myself into a pretzel to defend or excuse what I consider offensive behavior. I have a long list of people I once liked and now are dead to me.

[scarynikki12]

1 hour ago, Llywela said:

Yes. This. And so many shows do it. They're like, "Sure, the villain is bad because they murdered a bunch of people/attempted to destroy an entire spaceship/city/world, or whatever, but although the hero foiled the dastardly plot, they failed to save everyone and had to kill a couple of villainous henchmen in the process, so really they are all just as bad as each other!" It is just such a false equivalence yet shows always seem to want us to take it seriously.

::Once Upon A Time has entered the chat::

On the one hand we have Regina who (a short list in no particular order): murdered literally thousands of people, terrorized thousands more, raped Graham for decades, blamed ten year old Snow for the murder Regina’s mother committed, kidnapped and brainwashed an entire realm, abused her son, and tried to murder his birth mother.

On the other hand her victims didn’t invite her to their reunion party.

I think we all know who the worse offenders were here.

Seriously the show presented Regina not being invited to that party as a moment we should sympathize with her and be upset with the actual good characters. Many viewers went right along with it. This nonsense went on for the rest of the show and ended with all of her victims declaring her Dictator Of The Multiverse.

The same people who, again, were kidnapped and brainwashed by Regina for almost thirty years ended up celebrating her coronation as their all powerful dictator.

In a different world this would have been the basis for an epic horror story but instead it was played straight.

[DoctorAtomic]

I rooted for Tony Soprano because he was actually smart and good at his job and he was able to adapt when the idiots in the crew screwed up. Killing Christopher was exactly the correct 'business' move if you will. 

Sure, the context is what defines the show, and no one on the show could be considered good. Carmela knew exactly what she was buying in to. 

Characters don't have to be rock stars and the best of the best, but if they are objectively good at their jobs, I can buy in. 

I mean, Archer. Come on. But he kills it, whether he's blackout drunk or not. #TransferrableSkills

[bluegirl147]

10 minutes ago, DoctorAtomic said:

Sure, the context is what defines the show, and no one on the show could be considered good. Carmela knew exactly what she was buying in to. 

I have a friend who recently got into some legal trouble and his long term girlfriend is upset about it and doing the what will people think schtick.   I told mutual friends she is acting like Carmela. Wanted to benefit from what her man was doing but didn't want any of the bad stuff to reflect on her.

[Enigma X]

I freely admit I like some villains, some characters because a fave actor is playing them, some characters who are severely flawed, and some who are just shy of problematic (once over the threshold they are gone), but I don't try to make excuses for them.