Party of One: Unpopular TV Opinions

[proserpina65]

19 hours ago, Bastet said:

Not anymore; it's been replaced with the Great American Rescue Bowl, which will have dogs, puppies, cats, and kittens (presumably not all at the same time).  And, yes, it's on that dreadful Candace Creme Brulee (as Kathleen Madigan calls her) channel.

I don't love football as much as I love cats because I don't love anything as much as I love cats, but I love football.  So I am all about the Super Bowl.  I've watched a little bit of the animal bowls during commercials, but only on mute -- I can't stand the music or the stupid blather.

I like that the commercials are online now.  Since I'm watching for the game, not the ads, I'm not always looking at the TV during commercial breaks -- I may be getting some food, or fresh air, or going to the bathroom.  There's always an article somewhere the next day with all the ads embedded, so I can watch the ones I read about but didn't catch.  There are usually only a few I like.  And, my gods, every single movie advertised during SBs for many years now has made me think, "I would stare at a blank wall for two hours before I'd see that movie."  Nothing but car chases, explosions, aliens, and comic book characters.  Pass.

You missed "somehow Channing Tatum taking his clothes off to music saves the world" or whatever those Magic Mike commercials mean.

Did not know that about the Great American Rescue Bowl.  Thanks for the info.

[DoctorAtomic]

The superbowl is worth it for the lively chat thread here. 

4 hours ago, Haleth said:

This year we got a good game.  (I didn't care who won so the controversial call is irrelevant to me.)  The commercials were all duds and the halftime show was boring.  The game kept me entertained.

 

[Gharlane]

On 2/8/2023 at 2:26 PM, Kel Varnsen said:

The thing with Lost is that the stuff on the island was so much impossible fantasy that it would basically be impossible to realistically explain it. It's like Asgard in the Thor movies, where they try to pass off what they have and what they can do as really advanced science even though it makes no sense.

So when shows or movies like that have stuff like that happen I just remember the immortal words of Lucy Lawless: "whenever you notice something like that... a wizard did it".

unfortunately, the people who created Lost swore up and down that there would be a logical scientific explanation, no magic or "they're all in purgatory" explanation would be used. 

 

Yeah, right.🙄

[DoctorAtomic]

I think they were mad about the purgatory theory because it was actually a solid explanation. 

[Enigma X]

My UO is  just because viewers guess correctly where a plot/arc/ending is going don't change it to something out of left field. You can still make the journey interesting. I think Lost and GoT suffered from the need to try to shock viewers with their endings. I know not everyone hated Lost or GoT's ending, but this is just a general thought for all shows. 

[JustHereForFood]

1 hour ago, Enigma X said:

My UO is  just because viewers guess correctly where a plot/arc/ending is going don't change it to something out of left field. You can still make the journey interesting. I think Lost and GoT suffered from the need to try to shock viewers with their endings. I know not everyone hated Lost or GoT's ending, but this is just a general thought for all shows. 

Yes. Now with internet and forums where people can talk about each episode for months, it's almost impossible to create a plot twist that nobody will guess in advance. It might work somewhere where people don't expect any surprise, but not for something that is built on a mystery.

[sistermagpie]

1 hour ago, Enigma X said:

My UO is  just because viewers guess correctly where a plot/arc/ending is going don't change it to something out of left field. You can still make the journey interesting. I think Lost and GoT suffered from the need to try to shock viewers with their endings. I know not everyone hated Lost or GoT's ending, but this is just a general thought for all shows. 

So much this. Especially since viewers who really pour over shows often wind up just getting bored with the information they've got between seasons, then they start deciding that whatever way the show is going is "too obvious" so it has to be stupidly complicated. Changing things because people guessed it isn't a twist! Something being guessable isn't necessarily a bad thing--it means there's a logic and inevitability to it.

[Ohiopirate02]

32 minutes ago, JustHereForFood said:

Yes. Now with internet and forums where people can talk about each episode for months, it's almost impossible to create a plot twist that nobody will guess in advance. It might work somewhere where people don't expect any surprise, but not for something that is built on a mystery.

Even before the internet people have been able to suss out the "shocking" plot twist because there is a finite number of ways to twist any given plot.  If you read enough books, watch enough movies, and watch enough TV, you can spot the plot twist.  But, this does not lessen the enjoyment when the writing, directing and casting excel.  Showrunners just need to put their own spin on the twist instead of pretending that they were the first to come up with it.  

[Kel Varnsen]

20 minutes ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

Even before the internet people have been able to suss out the "shocking" plot twist because there is a finite number of ways to twist any given plot.  If you read enough books, watch enough movies, and watch enough TV, you can spot the plot twist.  But, this does not lessen the enjoyment when the writing, directing and casting excel.  Showrunners just need to put their own spin on the twist instead of pretending that they were the first to come up with it.  

Yea but before the internet, if you figured out the twist of a show you might have been able to share it with a small group of friends or  co-workers who may care or may think you are way too into that show. The book The Revolution was Televised talked about this in the chapter for Lost. Now if you figured out a twist or have a theory you can share it on message boards and social media with tons of other people who care. And if you are right you can be like "I knew it". And with so many people able to do that and play off each other's theories it has to be nearly impossible to come up with a mystery that is logical but doesn't get discussed.

[DoctorAtomic]

Even if you know the plot twist, the way it plays out can be interesting. That requires good plotting and writing though. It's easier to just plop something in there out of left field. 

 

[Mabinogia]

1 hour ago, sistermagpie said:

Something being guessable isn't necessarily a bad thing--it means there's a logic and inevitability to it.

And if your story and characters are any good, then it doesn't matter if everyone knows the twist. Does anyone out there not know how a rom-com is going to end? Does anyone not know that the superhero is going to save the day? Does anyone expect the plucky detective to not solve the case? And yet, we watch, because the writers made an effort to give us interesting characters, great dialog, an unexpected story. Unexpected doesn't mean OMG twists, it means, a character zigged instead of zagged and now you can't wait to see what comes next. 

I refuse to watch (or read in the case of books) anything that only advertises a huge twist you won't see coming. I want to watch and read things about fascinating characters doing interesting things even if I know exactly how it's going to end. 

That's not to say I don't love a good twist. One of my all time favorite shows was The Good Place, which had the most amazing twist I have ever experienced. Part of what made it such a jaw dropping, shouted so loud I scared the neighbours twist was that I had no idea there was a twist. I thought it was just a hilarious sitcom about people in the afterlife. If it had been advertised as this show with this twist you won't believe, I probably would have been bored by the twist. 

I just used up my daily quota of using the word twist so I'll stop now. lol 

But trying to shock your audience shouldn't be the main purpose of your show. That's how shows become ridiculous. 

[peachmangosteen]

4 hours ago, Enigma X said:

My UO is  just because viewers guess correctly where a plot/arc/ending is going don't change it to something out of left field. You can still make the journey interesting. I think Lost and GoT suffered from the need to try to shock viewers with their endings. I know not everyone hated Lost or GoT's ending, but this is just a general thought for all shows. 

This kind of in a way reminds me of Cruel Summer. The writers admitted they added in a last minute twist simply because they were afraid the audience wouldn't be happy that there wasn't a shocking twist. They didn't trust that the audience would be happy with the simple, logical ending they always intended. And it was a bad choice imo. 

[JustHereForFood]

1 hour ago, Kel Varnsen said:

Yea but before the internet, if you figured out the twist of a show you might have been able to share it with a small group of friends or  co-workers who may care or may think you are way too into that show. The book The Revolution was Televised talked about this in the chapter for Lost. Now if you figured out a twist or have a theory you can share it on message boards and social media with tons of other people who care. And if you are right you can be like "I knew it". And with so many people able to do that and play off each other's theories it has to be nearly impossible to come up with a mystery that is logical but doesn't get discussed.

GRRM is constantly bemoaning this, since people have correctly guessed his super-shocking plot twist of Jon being the son on Ned's sister and not Ned. He thinks that before the internet boom, only a handful of people would have guessed it. 

(Maybe he could have finished the series earlier and more people would have been mindblown, as expected. Just an idea.)

[DrSpaceman73]

4 minutes ago, JustHereForFood said:

GRRM is constantly bemoaning this, since people have correctly guessed his super-shocking plot twist of Jon being the son on Ned's sister and not Ned. He thinks that before the internet boom, only a handful of people would have guessed it. 

(Maybe he could have finished the series earlier and more people would have been mindblown, as expected. Just an idea.)

Yes he should quit whining about those things and the tv shows and finish the books. 

[Annber03]

4 hours ago, Enigma X said:

My UO is  just because viewers guess correctly where a plot/arc/ending is going don't change it to something out of left field. You can still make the journey interesting. I think Lost and GoT suffered from the need to try to shock viewers with their endings. I know not everyone hated Lost or GoT's ending, but this is just a general thought for all shows. 

This. Plus, it can be a good thing when the audience guesses where you're going, because it shows they're paying attention to the clues you're putting out there and are genuinely interested in putting this puzzle together. If I wrote a mystery and saw people getting that invested and paying attention to what I wrote like that, I'd be thrilled! 

[juno]

My West Wing Super UO list.

First off I will say I absolutely loved this show. But on my first rewatch since the series ended I have noticed a few things that drive me crazy.

1. I am an assistant and I hate when assistants are yelled at. Yelling at subordinates is horrible and that includes the constant MARGARET and DONNA. Calling their names should never be with voices raised.
2. Abby Bartlet is always mad at someone; horrible to watch her constantly berating senior staff or her husband. One of the most arrogant and angry characters I have ever watched.
3. As per #1, I really don't enjoy Toby's constant yelling at everyone when they don't agree with him.
4. Hate the Jr. High, passive agressive punishments that staff get for screwing up. Josh should have quit when he pushed the Senator over to the other side. Mandy getting the silent treatment with her paper that she created. It is the White House; don't punish staff, fire them or quit.
5. Drove me crazy that Sam Seaborn had so much chemistry with so many characters; like Malory and Aynsley but Sorkin would not make it happen. BTW the fact that the President promised to make Sam a senior advisor if he lost the election pissed me off as it did not happen. Losing Sam was a huge loss for the series.
6. Guest stars; the writing for guest stars was so good that it became painful to lose them (Mandyville). The process was bringing them in for 3 episodes, have them pushed to the front of the line for the episodes and then make them disappear. Matt Perry comes to mind, Mark Harmon, Emily Proctor, Connie Britton, Christian Slater also did really well and I wanted all of them to become regulars. I know that is not possible but still this is what I wanted.
7. Mind reading: somehow most charcters know what others are always thinking and can even finish sentences.
8. Ability to remember and recall massive amounts of information/data in full detail. Notepads-nope not needed, they remember everything, every detail of every event in present and history and can spout this information whenever promted. Assistants, interns, senior staff, junior staff all have this magical ability.

[Zella]

1 hour ago, Annber03 said:

This. Plus, it can be a good thing when the audience guesses where you're going, because it shows they're paying attention to the clues you're putting out there and are genuinely interested in putting this puzzle together. If I wrote a mystery and saw people getting that invested and paying attention to what I wrote like that, I'd be thrilled! 

Yeah to me it's a sign you're doing your foreshadowing correctly and developing your characters and plots in a way that makes sense. I love a solid shock ending. I usually guess the twist ending on things (and take a good deal of smug pride in it LOL), so I really enjoy when something genuinely blindsides me and knocks me off my smug plot-twist-guessing high horse, but it still has to be adequately developed to where I just missed the signs. Basically, they did their job, and I didn't do mine. If it's shocking for the sake of being shocking and truly comes out of nowhere, I am not impressed.  

1 hour ago, JustHereForFood said:

GRRM is constantly bemoaning this, since people have correctly guessed his super-shocking plot twist of Jon being the son on Ned's sister and not Ned. He thinks that before the internet boom, only a handful of people would have guessed it. 

LOL I like the books and the series well enough, but George really needs to climb out of his own ass. I've read the series twice (including once pretty early in the show's run before any spoilers were revealed about Jon's parentage), and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to guess that twist ending. I had it sussed out about halfway through the first book. There's one scene where Ned thinks about his kids and pointedly doesn't mention Jon. 😂

[DoctorAtomic]

I don't know why TPTBs or GRRM would be ticked if people guessed that Jon wasn't Ned's. Now you have two legitimate Targaryens. You don't really know what could come next. I didn't read the books, but the show was like, "hey look at Jon. Look!"

Now, the Red Wedding, I didn't see coming. If I hear that Rains song anywhere, I'm out. Do not pass Go. Get in the car. 

[sistermagpie]

3 hours ago, Mabinogia said:

That's not to say I don't love a good twist. One of my all time favorite shows was The Good Place, which had the most amazing twist I have ever experienced. Part of what made it such a jaw dropping, shouted so loud I scared the neighbours twist was that I had no idea there was a twist. I thought it was just a hilarious sitcom about people in the afterlife. If it had been advertised as this show with this twist you won't believe, I probably would have been bored by the twist. 

 

And to give a different pov on this, I only saw the first season of that show, but I guessed the twist of that season early on...and it didn't ruin anything for me! Because there was obviously more to it than the shock factor.

You can tell a twist that was well done by seeing if it's still great to watch a second time when it's not a surprise and it's just the story. Jon Snow's parentage makes perfect sense with the characters and causes a lot of issues at Winterfell. The secret doesn't have to be explosive. But it should be believable on second watch. And some of the best twists are ones where it's not just my reaction that matters, but the characters.

[DoctorAtomic]

I didn't see the twist in The Good Place until the end of the season when she was reasoning it out for the first time. Then, now that you know it, they could have fun with it. Take 812 - 'Yah basic!' *snaps fingers*

Babylon 5 has 'twists' per se, but anyone who watches the show says that the second viewing is better because you actually know, and how the plot plays out is actually more rewarding. 

[kiddo82]

4 hours ago, Mabinogia said:

But trying to shock your audience shouldn't be the main purpose of your show. That's how shows become ridiculous. 

The main show that ruined itself for me with this was 24.  Initially the left turns, while shocking, felt totally earned.  Some were downright traumatizing.  But as time went on they kept having to top themselves over and over again and it just wasn't fun anymore.  The big moments didn't feel as organic and were only there for water cooler fodder.

I never watched Lost but after being burned by other serialized mystery shows over and over again I've mainly learned my lesson that I am probably not going to be satisfied with the ending.  If it's something that looks like I might at least enjoy the ride then I'll try it. 

[Irlandesa]

5 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

Even if you know the plot twist, the way it plays out can be interesting. That requires good plotting and writing though. It's easier to just plop something in there out of left field. 

 

I agree. And good characters.  There's an Indian show on Amazon Prime called Made In Heaven and it was one of the most satisfying watches I've had in years.  The show revealed things about who the characters are and who they were in the past throughout the first season.    And I guessed pretty much every single revelation.

The reason why it was so satisfying is because of the show's character development. Every revelation perfectly aligned with what we knew about the characters and the choices they made.  By the time we learned something big about the past, the show had basically told it to us without spelling it out.

Another way a show can shake things up is by having the twist come sooner than expected.  So an audience might have guessed a big surprise and think they're going to have to wait until the end to get that speculation confirmed only for the twist to come midway through and make the fallout the interesting thing about the story.

5 hours ago, JustHereForFood said:

GRRM is constantly bemoaning this, since people have correctly guessed his super-shocking plot twist of Jon being the son on Ned's sister and not Ned. He thinks that before the internet boom, only a handful of people would have guessed it.

Maybe.  The thing is, there are going to be people who have read or watched a lot of TV, have seen a lot of twists and therefore are going to pick up on tropes authors use. 

But there are always going to the people who don't pick up on the clues or haven't read enough to have the same knowledge and will be shocked. You can't do something that has been done as often as unknown parentage and expect that it's going to surprise everyone.

[Shannon L.]

I'm not exactly sure if this is an UO or not, but I'm putting here based on comments that I've read:  With the exception of what Finding Your Roots does with DNA samples, Who Do You Think You Are? is a much better show.

[Enigma X]

1 hour ago, Shannon L. said:

I'm not exactly sure if this is an UO or not, but I'm putting here based on comments that I've read:  With the exception of what Finding Your Roots does with DNA samples, Who Do You Think You Are? is a much better show.

I prefer FYR but like both.

[proserpina65]

20 hours ago, JustHereForFood said:

GRRM is constantly bemoaning this, since people have correctly guessed his super-shocking plot twist of Jon being the son on Ned's sister and not Ned. He thinks that before the internet boom, only a handful of people would have guessed it. 

(Maybe he could have finished the series earlier and more people would have been mindblown, as expected. Just an idea.)

When in actuality any reader paying attention knew it by the end of the first book.

2 hours ago, Shannon L. said:

I'm not exactly sure if this is an UO or not, but I'm putting here based on comments that I've read:  With the exception of what Finding Your Roots does with DNA samples, Who Do You Think You Are? is a much better show.

Don't know if this is an UO, but here goes: I have no interest in celebrities' family trees or genealogy.  I'm interested in mine, and that of my friend's to a lesser extent (mainly because she's actively doing the research) but otherwise I couldn't care less.  Nothing against those who are interested; it's just not my bag.

[scarynikki12]

Just now, proserpina65 said:

When in actuality any reader paying attention knew it by the end of the first book.

Exactly. R+L=J comes from book readers who paid attention. I get it’s annoying to be constantly bugged about the remaining books but it’s his own fault. I hate his refusal to hire a ghostwriter to help out it all together.

[DoctorAtomic]

12 minutes ago, proserpina65 said:

Don't know if this is an UO, but here goes: I have no interest in celebrities' family trees or genealogy.

I don't either. The clips of the show I see all seem to be like they are digging up dirt on the person's ancestors for a gotcha moment as if they bear culpability. 

[Bastet]

33 minutes ago, proserpina65 said:

Don't know if this is an UO, but here goes: I have no interest in celebrities' family trees or genealogy. 

Nor do I.  I don't even care about my own, so I'm certainly never going to sit and watch some stranger learn about theirs.

[DoctorAtomic]

I'd be interested in my own, but I'm not giving my DNA away nor paying for it. 

[sistermagpie]

22 minutes ago, DoctorAtomic said:

I don't either. The clips of the show I see all seem to be like they are digging up dirt on the person's ancestors for a gotcha moment as if they bear culpability. 

Oh, not at all. Sometimes there are some villains that turn up--slaveowners usually--but not usually in the sense that the celebrity needs to feel complicit. More often the focus is finding some actual person along the tree who has a good story that they get to know.

[Mabinogia]

18 hours ago, kiddo82 said:

But as time went on they kept having to top themselves over and over again and it just wasn't fun anymore. 

That's the biggest issue with a show that gets too caught up in having shocking twists. That sort of storytelling is simply not sustainable. If it's a short form series, okay, but long running shows, or shows that started as limited run but kept getting renewed, get weighed down by the burden of constantly trying to outdo their last shocking twist until they become a joke. 

 

2 hours ago, proserpina65 said:

I have no interest in celebrities' family trees or genealogy.  I'm interested in mine, and that of my friend's to a lesser extent (mainly because she's actively doing the research) but otherwise I couldn't care less.  Nothing against those who are interested; it's just not my bag.

I'm interested in as far as, oh, so and so is related to so and so, that's cool, but not enough to watch an hour long show about it. Of course I also don't care to watch an hour of a celeb talking about their house, though I'm more than happy to look at a picture of their home to see if I'd like to follow some of their decorating choices. 

I feel that way about all those Flip My Fixer Upper Beach House Reno shows. I like to look at the homes, but I have zillow for that. All the drama shoehorned in to make it an hour-long program for ad money just annoys me. I just don't care for "lifestyle" television. 

[Shannon L.]

The reason I watch both, even though I like one better, is because I'm embarrassingly ignorant about much of our pre-WW2 and world history so I like that I can learn about historical events now through these shows.  I hated history so much I barely scraped most of the time, so I either remember the general events, but not the details or I forgot certain ones altogether.  It's also true that some things we never learned about at all.   

[scarynikki12]

Also shows act like the Shocking Twist needs to be death and/or destruction when some of the most effective ones are simply learning new information about a person. I maintain the most shocking and best season finale twist Grey's Anatomy ever did was Addison showing up and revealing herself as Derek's wife. An effective twist needs to resonate in the follow up episodes/seasons. Death and destruction can do that but the characters usually bounce back within a few episodes whereas twists like Addison have major impact for years.

[sistermagpie]

3 hours ago, Mabinogia said:

I'm interested in as far as, oh, so and so is related to so and so, that's cool, but not enough to watch an hour long show about it. Of course I also don't care to watch an hour of a celeb talking about their house, though I'm more than happy to look at a picture of their home to see if I'd like to follow some of their decorating choices. 

 

Happen to be watching FYR now since it's Tuesday, and I think what's funny about it is the celebrity themself is often only a hook to get you in, since they're a familiar person, but the stars of story are all these random people who were nobodies but doing amazing things just because they found themselves in whatever time and place. The celebrity lives by comparison are just stable by comparison, so you don't have to care about them to start with or even really know who they are. They're more there to cry a lot or cheer learning about people long dead. 

43 minutes ago, Shannon L. said:

The reason I watch both, even though I like one better, is because I'm embarrassingly ignorant about much of our pre-WW2 and world history so I like that I can learn about historical events now through these shows.  I hated history so much I barely scraped most of the time, so I either remember the general events, but not the details or I forgot certain ones altogether.  It's also true that some things we never learned about at all.   

Yeah, that's part of it. Big history events or even ones you don't hear about get experienced on an everyday human level. Sometimes there's surprises about the kind of things that really went on or even who they're really related to. 

The only one I remember hating was a certain politician who blathered on like he was giving a stump speech about America and values he didn't support at all. 

[peachmangosteen]

Are Who Do You Think You Are or Finding Your Roots streaming anywhere?

[Shannon L.]

34 minutes ago, peachmangosteen said:

Are Who Do You Think You Are or Finding Your Roots streaming anywhere?

I have an app called Just Watch and according to that, WDYTYA? is on fubo tv, Discovery+ (this is listed alone and through Prime Video), TLC, and Peacock (including Peacock Premium)

All seasons of FYR aren't on any one streaming service.  It says that you can get 4 seasons on hoopla, 2 seasons on Direct TV, and 3 seasons on PBS (although, I tried to find it on PBS and didn't see it, so it's possible that Just Watch isn't completely accurate or updated as frequently as it should be).

[Enigma X]

I watch Finding Your Roots online on PBS. I am not even sure if it is through my local PBS affiliate. I just did a search and was able to watch and bookmarked it. I can watch every week as it airs.

[topanga]

21 hours ago, proserpina65 said:

Don't know if this is an UO, but here goes: I have no interest in celebrities' family trees or genealogy.  I'm interested in mine, and that of my friend's to a lesser extent (mainly because she's actively doing the research) but otherwise I couldn't care less.  Nothing against those who are interested; it's just not my bag.

I see your point. But I find it interesting, especially when the celebrity is a person of color.  In most cases, black and brown people haven't been able to trace their ancestry in the US or before.

[Enigma X]

As a person who has been doing her family’s genealogy (DNA tests and all) since  2002ish. I find it interesting but understand that it is not everyone’s bag, even those who are into genealogy.

[DrSpaceman73]

It's like looking at someone's vacation photos. 

Great for you but....I'm not involved so hard to care much.  

 

[meep.meep]

I'd much rather watch geneology shows than those comic book shows (Marvel Universe?).  You get a little history with your prurient celebrity moments.

As someone mentioned above, with the firepower the shows can employ, particularly for African Americans, they can go back further onto people's family trees than most people can searching on their own.  And sometimes what they turn up is fascinating.

Gates did a show with Questlove.  They discovered that his first African ancestor in America was brought over on the Clotilda, the last slave ship, in 1860.  

 

[DrSpaceman73]

I also question how accurate some of those geneology shows are and how much they just make up for tv

You know they will 'find' something or the show is boring 

[meep.meep]

If they don't find anything, they don't produce a segment.

I come from a long line of farmers and door to door salesmen.  I doubt I'd make the cut.

[sistermagpie]

34 minutes ago, DrSpaceman73 said:

I also question how accurate some of those geneology shows are and how much they just make up for tv

You know they will 'find' something or the show is boring 

I think it's hard to look through people living through these times without getting anything interesting, especially since they don't have to be direct ancestors. Since the show's based in the US, there's not going to anybody whose history is just "well, you've been living in this village since time immemorial." Somebody always came to the US (or some place else in the US for indigenous people) at some point from somewhere under some circumstances, even if it's not something particularly shocking. Sometimes it's just your grandparent you knew for making cookies turned out to have sung with a big band or something. Or just imagining living in a time where you were in an orphanage for 2 years because of the depression.

Edited February 15, 2023 by sistermagpie

[Enigma X]

I (internet) know some of the genetic genealogist who work for the various shows. Before genetic genealogy blew up, it was a small hobby and everyone using it were in the same online groups and virtually nobodies (Cece Moore and Nicka Smith to name a few). We all knew each other. Anyway, they said the show vets celebrities by trying to do their paper genealogy before they even come on the shows to see if they can get anywhere. If they can’t, they will not ask them to appear. Now some celebrities have reached out to the shows.

Edited February 15, 2023 by Enigma X

[Ohiopirate02]

6 minutes ago, sistermagpie said:

I think it's hard to look through people living through these times without getting anything interesting, especially since they don't have to be direct ancestors. Since the show's based in the US, there's not going to anybody whose history is just "well, you've been living in this village since time immemorial." Somebody always came to the US (or some place else in the US for indigenous people) at some point from somewhere under some circumstances, even if it's not something particularly shocking. Sometimes it's just your grandparent you knew for making cookies turned out to have sung with a big band or something. Or just imagining living in a time where you were in an orphanage for 2 years because of the depression.

I have noticed that the collective we equate historical people as boring because they lived in the distant past.  Or because we only know our grandparents or great grandparents when they are elderly, we forget that they too were young and lived.  Digging into our pasts shows that often times our ancestors were a lot more interesting than what we initially perceived.  I live a rather mundane life with a fairly generic Eastern European immigrant background with one grandmother who was a WASP with roots dating back to the American Revolution.  But, when my aunt retired and she started digging into her heritage, she found some interesting information and confirmed some of my great grandfather's stories while disproving others.  I wish I had the Finding Your Roots resources to dig into my one great great grandmother because I've got questions about her and the biological father of her sons both my great-grandfather and his brother.  

[Bethany]

15 minutes ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

But, when my aunt retired and she started digging into her heritage, she found some interesting information and confirmed some of my great grandfather's stories while disproving others. 

Did your family accept this?  My daughter is very into genealogy and found out some stuff - nothing dramatic I should say - but stuff that directly contradicts some family lore my SIL is convinced is gospel truth.  Let's just say the conversation where my daughter tried to share this new info with her did not go down well!

Edited February 15, 2023 by Elizabeth Anne

[Ohiopirate02]

1 minute ago, Elizabeth Anne said:

Did your family accept this?  My daughter is very into genealogy and found out some stuff - nothing dramatic I should say - but stuff that directly contradicts some family lore my SIL is convinced is gospel truth.  Let's just say the conversation where my daughter tried to share this new info with her did not go down well!

My great-grandfather liked to tell a story or two and he spun a whole tale about how he came to America.  One quick Ellis Island Records search on whichever database you choose says that in fact was a lie.  He claimed he and his brother were stowaways and yet somehow they were included in the German and English passenger lists. The family lore that was proven was him being ethnically Jewish. My aunt did Ancestry DNA to try to fill in the massive blank that is my great-great-grandfather.  By the time she did this, the vast majority of the previous generation had passed and there was really no one left to object.  

[DoctorAtomic]

I don't think history is boring, but I'm just not too drawn in by the history of celebrities. I'd rather hear about you all tbh.

[DrSpaceman73]

1 hour ago, meep.meep said:

If they don't find anything, they don't produce a segment.

I come from a long line of farmers and door to door salesmen.  I doubt I'd make the cut.

You really believe that?  They don't produce it if they don't find anything?

.I don't. 

Even if they screen ahead for things and intersting people in the end it's 'reality tv'.  Neither those words, nor that phrase as a whole, screams 100% truth. 

Edited February 15, 2023 by DrSpaceman73