Party of One: Unpopular TV Opinions

[janie jones]

On 3/19/2023 at 3:43 PM, Irlandesa said:

Some shows might have shown the episode titles but most didn't.  And TV Guide didn't usually include them because there was only so much space.  They'd leave a description or a title.

I didn't really pay attention until I got online and that's when I started learning titles for old episodes.

I think the TV schedule in my local newspaper used to put the titles in sometimes.

It seems like my unpopular opinion might be that the titles, or lack thereof, make absolutely no difference at all.

[Haleth]

15 hours ago, janie jones said:

It seems like my unpopular opinion might be that the titles, or lack thereof, make absolutely no difference at all.

To viewers maybe, but they serve a purpose in the industry.

[CoderLady]

Sometimes the episode titles are completely apropos. On the Australian drama A Place To Call Home, a character gets brought into the mix in the hope that she'll chase off another character. Not only is she unsuccessful at that but she goes on to be responsible for causing a shitload of misery and death to a whole lot of other people and becomes pretty near unstoppable. Episode title when she's introduced? "Cane Toad."

Edited March 25, 2023 by CoderLady

[proserpina65]

On 3/24/2023 at 8:44 PM, CoderLady said:

Sometimes the episode titles are completely apropos. On the Australian drama A Place To Call Home, a character gets brought into the mix in the hope that she'll chase off another character. Not only is she unsuccessful at that but she goes on to be responsible for causing a shitload of misery and death to a whole lot of other people and becomes pretty near unstoppable. Episode title when she's introduced? "Cane Toad."

Ah, yes, Regina.  How perfect.

[BlueSkies]

I had higher expectations for Schitt's Creek.  After 2 seasons I never re-watched it 

[juno]

59 minutes ago, BlueSkies said:

I had higher expectations for Schitt's Creek.  After 2 seasons I never re-watched it 

for me it cratered when Patrick showed up. It effectively killed one of my all-time favorite duos on TV, Stevie and David.

[juno]

One of my biggest UO is the amount of nasty, mean characters on tv shows. An example is Judith on Two and a Half Men.

There seems to be so many more bad guys on shows these days. I always thought that you need to have these characters in order to make the good guys look better and give them obstacles to overcome. But man it is getting harder and harder these days to wade through the nastiness of so many characters on shows today.

On Ted Lasso there are so many nasty characters and they are so mean that I am fast forwarding through their scenes. Don't care about the good guy overcoming the challenge of the bad guy or the redemption. Just don't want to watch Nate, Shandy, Zava, Rupert or Ted's ex on the show.

[Bastet]

1 hour ago, juno said:

for me it cratered when Patrick showed up. It effectively killed one of my all-time favorite duos on TV, Stevie and David.

I was surprised by how much I liked David and Patrick, since I'm usually bored or actively annoyed by romantic pairings on TV.  What I liked most is how Patrick and Stevie liked each other, and how seamlessly the three of them developed a trio friendship, because I was really worried David and Stevie's friendship was going to suffer.

[juno]

10 minutes ago, Bastet said:

I was surprised by how much I liked David and Patrick, since I'm usually bored or actively annoyed by romantic pairings on TV.  What I liked most is how Patrick and Stevie liked each other, and how seamlessly the three of them developed a trio friendship, because I was really worried David and Stevie's friendship was going to suffer.

I hear you. It wasn't Patrick and David that bothered me, it was all the scenes that David spent with Patrick he used to spend with Stevie. I really loved David and Stevie together. They had amazing chemistry.

[Wiendish Fitch]

 

2 hours ago, juno said:

One of my biggest UO is the amount of nasty, mean characters on tv shows. 

I'll take this a step further: I don't think unlikable or evil characters are always more interesting than characters on the side of good. For example, not only did I think Don Draper was an utter piece of shit, I also found him dull as tombs. 

Edited April 1, 2023 by Wiendish Fitch

[Spartan Girl]

10 hours ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

 

I'll take this a step further: I don't think unlikable or evil characters are always more interesting than characters on the side of good. For example, not only did I think Don Draper was an utter piece of shit, I also found him dull as tombs. 

And that’s why I take offense when people acting like making a character do a heel turn somehow makes them more interesting than they were when they were good. Especially if that characters is a woman. It’s not clever or good writing it’s just fucking lazy.

[kathyk24]

27 minutes ago, Spartan Girl said:

And that’s why I take offense when people acting like making a character do a heel turn somehow makes them more interesting than they were when they were good. Especially if that characters is a woman. It’s not clever or good writing it’s just fucking lazy.

Did you watch Grimm? The writers turned Juliette the hero Nick's girlfriend evil and it ruined her character.

[Enigma X]

I think good or evil characters can be entertaining if the writers give good material to good actors (need both), but I don't automatically find evil characters more compelling or a sudden plot change to make a good character evil (even with a good actor with good material) more compelling for no reason. I can get behind an evil character if the writing and acting are well done, and the plot really does call for a change if that is what was made.

Also, a UO, but I think it is okay to hate evil characters because they are evil, which is usually (or in the past has been) what the show aims for. The writing and acting (writer and actor) can still be adored for that performance while the character is hated. I think too many viewers cannot separate writing/writer and acting/actor from each other. So, if their favorite actor plays an evil character well, they will adore the evil character and make excuses for his despicableness. 

Edited April 1, 2023 by Enigma X

[juno]

13 minutes ago, Enigma X said:

I think good or evil characters can be entertaining if the writers give good material to good actors (need both), but I don't automatically find evil characters more compelling or a sudden plot change to make a good character (even with a good actor with good material) more compelling for no reason. I can get behind an evil character if the writing and acting are well done, and the plot really does call for a change if that is what was made.

Also, a UO, but I think it is okay to hate evil characters because they are evil, which is usually (or in the past has been) what the show aims for. The writing and acting (writer and actor) can still be adored for that performance while the character is hated. I think too many viewers cannot separate writing/writer and acting/actor from each other. So, if their favorite actor plays an evil character well, they will adore the evil character and make excuses for his despicableness. 

oh, yeah, I agree. I was talking about completely useless characters that bring nothing to a show but to make the protagonist look good. Having Nate on Ted Lasso doesn't make Ted Lasso look better it just makes the show suck more.

[Shannon L.]

I don't mind a show with mean/evil characters as long as there's a balance with good ones.  But, some shows seem to have few, if any, kind/fun characters and those are hard for me to get into.  I never continued with Succession because after the first episode (maybe I made it through two, I don't remember) , I hated all of them and wasn't in the mood to find out if it got any better.  My husband could continue watching Breaking Bad because he felt the same about that show.

[Bethany]

3 minutes ago, Shannon L. said:

I don't mind a show with mean/evil characters as long as there's a balance with good ones. 

I feel the same.  I couldn't watch the sitcom King of Queens because I disliked all three of the main characters.  None of them were evil but all three were selfish, self centred people with few redeeming qualities!  

[Enigma X]

I eat Succession up, but I know all the characters suck in their own way. The writing material, acting chops, and my entertainment level are all there for it.

Edited April 1, 2023 by Enigma X

[Wiendish Fitch]

It's not as if evil characters aren't entertaining, but it's not as if they can't grow tiresome like any other character. I used to love how over-the-top evil Nandor was on What We Do in the Shadows, but it was balanced by how hilariously incompetent he was, and how his plans would blow up in his face. Now? He's just... a jerk. I mean, he always was, obviously (what do you expect from a conquerer-turned-vampire?), but it's no longer funny, and I now wish Guillermo would just stake him and be done with it!

Mr. Burns on The Simpsons also had this effect on me... but I've bitched enough about The Simpsons, so no sense going into detail.

[Bethany]

Sometimes it's not just one character but a theme a show goes to far too often.  I watched the British soap Coronation Street for years until I reached the breaking point with the "serial killer on the street hiding in plain sight" plots.  Every couple of years they'd trot this out until you wondered why anyone in their right mind would ever continue to live on that street!  Apparently, according to friends who still watch, this is happening yet again.  For me it was just too over the top.

Edited April 1, 2023 by Elizabeth Anne

[Spartan Girl]

3 hours ago, kathyk24 said:

Did you watch Grimm? The writers turned Juliette the hero Nick's girlfriend evil and it ruined her character.

No, but that sounds awful.

Honestly, the only time I found the girlfriend-turned-evil trope tolerable was Barbara on Gotham, and only because Crazy Babs was more fun to watch than the whiny useless dishrag Barbara in the beginning of season one, not because she was suddenly more “interesting.”

[Enigma X]

3 hours ago, kathyk24 said:

Did you watch Grimm? The writers turned Juliette the hero Nick's girlfriend evil and it ruined her character.

I watched Grimm, and there was no reason to make her evil. The actress was also an awful actress. But the flip-flopping of most of the characters on Grimm was unnecessary.  From week to week, I never knew If we would get a good or a bad Captain Renard. The actor playing him, Sasha Roiz, is a good actor, by the way. That was not it. Also, I know what a gray character is, and his flip-flopping was not because he was gray. It was a writing issue.

[juno]

1 hour ago, Elizabeth Anne said:

Sometimes it's not just one character but a theme a show goes to far too often.  I watched the British soap Coronation Street for years until I reached the breaking point with the "serial killer on the street hiding in plain sight" plots.  Every couple of years they'd trot this out until you wondered why anyone in their right mind would ever continue to live on that street!  Apparently, according to friends who still watch, this is happening yet again.  For me it was just too over the top.

oh how I missed the days of Jack and Vera, Mike and Deirdre and the Websters.

[Bethany]

10 minutes ago, juno said:

oh how I missed the days of Jack and Vera, Mike and Deirdre and the Websters.

Don't forget Curley and "Rackle"! I adored the interaction between Mavis and Rita as well.  And of course there was the one and only Hilda Ogden.  There was humour and happiness on the street along with the obligatory angst and misery!  I started watching when the shows the CBC were airing were years behind ITV, right around the time Rita got mixed up with Alan Bradley and long term fans will know how that turned out!  

Edited April 1, 2023 by Elizabeth Anne

[juno]

11 minutes ago, Elizabeth Anne said:

Don't forget Curley and "Rackle"! I adored the interaction between Mavis and Rita as well.  And of course there was the one and only Hilda Ogden.  There was humour and happiness on the street along with the obligatory angst and misery!  I started watching when the shows the CBC were airing were years behind ITV, right around the time Rita got mixed up with Alan Bradley and long term fans will know how that turned out!  

Sadly, I stopped watching when Mike Baldwin died. Such an amazing era in Corrie had died. I loved all of them, Bette, Rita, Jack, Vera, Mavis and Derek, Curly and Raquel. Everyday I watched on CBC and if I missed I binged on Sunday.

[Bethany]

44 minutes ago, juno said:

Everyday I watched on CBC and if I missed I binged on Sunday.

Thank god for VCRs!  We used to tape them and then on Friday night we'd order in Chinese food and watch the weeks worth of shows.  We had little kids and no money to spend on babysitters so this was our date night. I stopped watching years ago but for awhile was aware of what was going on because I couldn't resist asking friends "so what's going on with so and so" but when I found out they killed off Hayley, one of my favourite characters, I lost interest completely. 

I don't say anything though as some of my friends are still Corrie addicts and I don't want to be that friend.  You know the  "how can you watch that drivel?" kind of friend!

Edited April 1, 2023 by Elizabeth Anne

[scarynikki12]

1 hour ago, Spartan Girl said:

Honestly, the only time I found the girlfriend-turned-evil trope tolerable was Barbara on Gotham, and only because Crazy Babs was more fun to watch than the whiny useless dishrag Barbara in the beginning of season one, not because she was suddenly more “interesting.”

Crazy Barbara was so much fun. I don't know the behind the scenes details but, based how things went on screen, the assumption is the producers saw the viewer reaction and had enough sense to recognize they needed to change course. And Erin had enough sense not to object to Barbara going from Jim's leading lady to a pre-Batman Rogue. I thought she was fine, if a bit dull, as Jim's girlfriend but she was fantastic as a bad guy.

Grimm was so frustrating. Yes Juliette wasn't well received by a lot of viewers but just as many assumed she would be incorporated into the main story once she found out about Nick and Wesen. She was a vet so the theory was she'd become a Wesen specialist and plenty were not only interested in such an idea but were looking forward to it since it seemed like a natural progression. Instead they shifted gears and killed Juliette while making Nick and his rapist Adeline endgame. The show fell off the rails so fast it's absurd and Juliette was a major casualty.  

The result of these two examples is I still have lots of love for Gotham while I inwardly growl when I remember Grimm. 

[Enigma X]

2 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

No, but that sounds awful.

Honestly, the only time I found the girlfriend-turned-evil trope tolerable was Barbara on Gotham, and only because Crazy Babs was more fun to watch than the whiny useless dishrag Barbara in the beginning of season one, not because she was suddenly more “interesting.”

Everything about Gotham was batshit, and I loved it! Well, everything but The Riddler.

[Bastet]

1 hour ago, Elizabeth Anne said:

 I stopped watching years ago but for awhile was aware of what was going on because I couldn't resist asking friends "so what's going on with so and so" but when I found out they killed off Hayley, one of my favourite characters, I lost interest completely.

I watched a soap, Guiding Light, throughout the '80s and halfway through the '90s.  About ten years after that, my mom - who still watched - called me at work to tell me they'd killed off Ross (a character who'd been there since the late '70s, and played by the same actor [the late, great Jerry VerDorn] the entire time).  Even though I'd long since paid no attention to the show, that news made me so angry my assistant asked me what was wrong the moment I stepped out of my office.

[Haleth]

20 hours ago, Enigma X said:

I eat Succession up, but I know all the characters suck in their own way. The writing material, acting chops, and my entertainment level are all there for it.

I like Succession because the writing is so good (despite overuse of F bombs), even though all the characters are terrible people. On the other hand I quit Yellowstone because the terrible people were not balanced by good writing or acting. I want to see where the Roys end up. The Duttons?  Could all go to the train station for all I care. 

[BlueSkies]

In terms of most talented cast members of SNL from the 90's/2000s when I still watched it it was Chris Kattan 

[Spartan Girl]

I don’t know if this is an UO but season 5 of The Crown was a huge disappointment.

[Zella]

6 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

I don’t know if this is an UO but season 5 of The Crown was a huge disappointment.

I really liked the first 2 seasons and have watched them both more than once, but I've never been motivated to watch any of the rest of it. 

[Kel Varnsen]

On 4/1/2023 at 11:03 AM, Shannon L. said:

I don't mind a show with mean/evil characters as long as there's a balance with good ones.  But, some shows seem to have few, if any, kind/fun characters and those are hard for me to get into.  I never continued with Succession because after the first episode (maybe I made it through two, I don't remember) , I hated all of them and wasn't in the mood to find out if it got any better.  My husband could continue watching Breaking Bad because he felt the same about that show.

I am good with a show if all the characters are terrible people. Archer was my favourite show for a long time and The Sopranos and Arrested Development (at least the Fox seasons) are both classic tv for me. And none of the main characters on those shows are anything close to what I would call good people.

[Mabinogia]

1 hour ago, Kel Varnsen said:

And none of the main characters on those shows are anything close to what I would call good people.

Yep, they can be horrible people but still make for great entertainment.

There is a difference between good people and good characters. Now, good people can be good characters if written well, and bad people can be bad characters if written poorly, but I always side eye people who think I'm wrong to love a villainous character because they're evil. I don't want these people to really exist, but it is fun to see someone who embraces their bad side in the safety of fiction. 

Edited April 3, 2023 by Mabinogia

[JustHereForFood]

On good and evil characters - it's also not original anymore if they make most, if not all of the good characters unnecessarily dumb, especially if the put honor before reason. And make the evil characters the clever ones. Sure, sometimes it happens but not always, good people can be smart or clever IRL and evil people can act dumb, for example when their judgment is clouded by jealousy or greed.

[kiddo82]

2 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said:

I am good with a show if all the characters are terrible people. Archer was my favourite show for a long time and The Sopranos and Arrested Development (at least the Fox seasons) are both classic tv for me. And none of the main characters on those shows are anything close to what I would call good people.

I like Archer a lot but I think the reason it worked is because the show knew all of them were terrible people.  It was never afraid to call that out and it was up to the audience to decide if they were okay with it or not.  What I don't like is when a character is clearly terrible but the show keeps letting that character get away with things because either the writers fell in love with him (99.9% of the time it's a him) or worse, the fans fell in love with him and now the producers are course correcting.  

[kathyk24]

I don't spend time with terrible people in real life so why would I want to watch them on television? I don't think characters have to be perfect but their good qualities should outweigh their bad qualities.

[Irlandesa]

43 minutes ago, kathyk24 said:

I don't spend time with terrible people in real life so why would I want to watch them on television? I don't think characters have to be perfect but their good qualities should outweigh their bad qualities.

Because sometimes I feel there's more hope for bad consequences for bad people on TV than there is in real life.

[ABay]

11 hours ago, JustHereForFood said:

On good and evil characters - it's also not original anymore if they make most, if not all of the good characters unnecessarily dumb, especially if the put honor before reason. And make the evil characters the clever ones.

This is the one that really offends me. There's nothing wrong with being smart. There's nothing good about being stupid.

[DrSpaceman73]

12 hours ago, kathyk24 said:

I don't spend time with terrible people in real life so why would I want to watch them on television? I don't think characters have to be perfect but their good qualities should outweigh their bad qualities.

That's the advantage of watching them. You don't have to deal with them in real life.  It gives you a window into what they are like without the consequences of personally being involved with them. 

It also gives you perspective that such people exist even if you don't see it in your own personal life or sphere

[DearEvette]

11 hours ago, kiddo82 said:

I like Archer a lot but I think the reason it worked is because the show knew all of them were terrible people.  It was never afraid to call that out and it was up to the audience to decide if they were okay with it or not. 

Yeah.  I liked Archer too but I hold it to a bit of a different standard.  It was a comedy and animated.  And a lot of what they did was hyper realistic and rather cartoony in nature to take advantage of it's mediium.  So there is a remove. 

 

12 hours ago, kiddo82 said:

What I don't like is when a character is clearly terrible but the show keeps letting that character get away with things because either the writers fell in love with him (99.9% of the time it's a him) or worse, the fans fell in love with him and now the producers are course correcting.  

Yes.  Not only can you tell when a writer blatantly falls in love with a character but some of this is predictable because a villain character with plot armor can be pre-loaded depending on who they cast as the villain.  If it is a popular actor or one who has a cult following or a reputation of playing 'cool' or 'badass' characters, you can almost write the hand-waves yourself that are going to appear for them in the storyline.

I hate this.  My narrative needs are simple.  A person who is a bad person and does bad things should be punished appropriately.  To make a story satisfying there should be justice meted out.  That is why people disappear into stories because they work out in way RL does not always.

[ABay]

As Oscar Wilde said: “The good ended happily, and the bad unhappily. That is what Fiction means.”

[proserpina65]

On 4/1/2023 at 2:11 PM, scarynikki12 said:

Grimm was so frustrating. Yes Juliette wasn't well received by a lot of viewers but just as many assumed she would be incorporated into the main story once she found out about Nick and Wesen. She was a vet so the theory was she'd become a Wesen specialist and plenty were not only interested in such an idea but were looking forward to it since it seemed like a natural progression. Instead they shifted gears and killed Juliette while making Nick and his rapist Adeline endgame. The show fell off the rails so fast it's absurd and Juliette was a major casualty.  

My unpopular Grimm opinion is that I liked Juliette and did not think that actress was particularly bad.  Not great, but not terrible either.  I did think the actress who played Adalind was pretty bad, though.  And I hated that they pushed Nick and Adalind together.  Honestly, it was the supporting characters who kept me watching at that point.

A friend and I just started rewatching Grimm, and I'm reminded of how fun it was in the beginning.

[SnapHappy]

On 3/31/2023 at 6:39 PM, juno said:

One of my biggest UO is the amount of nasty, mean characters on tv shows. An example is Judith on Two and a Half Men.

I always thought that too. 

And now, I find Marin Hinkle absolutely delightful as Rose in "The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel". 

Actresses that can make you loathe them in one role, then love them in another are so great to watch.  

[scarynikki12]

23 minutes ago, proserpina65 said:

My unpopular Grimm opinion is that I liked Juliette and did not think that actress was particularly bad

Same. I liked Bitsie a lot on Grimm and I love her on Superman & Lois. I thought Adalind was a great antagonist at first but was done when she raped Nick and was rewarded by becoming his baby mama and love interest. Her raping Nick and it being acknowledged before holding her accountable would have been fine but not rewarded. I hate that shit.

[Danny Franks]

19 hours ago, kiddo82 said:

What I don't like is when a character is clearly terrible but the show keeps letting that character get away with things because either the writers fell in love with him (99.9% of the time it's a him) or worse, the fans fell in love with him and now the producers are course correcting.  

Isaac in Sex Education was written so badly that the writers didn't even realise they'd made him a gaslighting manipulative Nice Guy who actively tried to separate Maeve from any support system she had, so she would rely only on him, and he could push his romantic interest on her.

Then, in season three, they seemed to try to rewrite the character as though he was a noble, misunderstood guy who got to proudly move on from his brief relationship with Maeve with a line about how he doesn't want to be her second choice.

He was never held to account for anything he did, and even when he admitted to Maeve that he listened to the voicemail Otis left, deleted it and never told her, she was mad at him for about two days before having sex with him.

I mean, the writing in that show went downhill rapidly when they started to pretend that Otis/Maeve weren't about 90% of the show's appeal in season one, but Isaac was definitely the worst addition.

7 hours ago, DearEvette said:

Yes.  Not only can you tell when a writer blatantly falls in love with a character but some of this is predictable because a villain character with plot armor can be pre-loaded depending on who they cast as the villain.  If it is a popular actor or one who has a cult following or a reputation of playing 'cool' or 'badass' characters, you can almost write the hand-waves yourself that are going to appear for them in the storyline.

Buffy the Vampire Slayer is a good example of a show where writers fell in love with a character and forced them into a more prominent role, and then forced them into an unnatural position as romantic lead and redemptive hero. I'm talking, of course, about Spike.

I've been tired of characters who are too cool, or too dreamy, to be hated for a long time, now. Even when they do terrible things, swooning fans will make excuse after excuse after excuse. I rarely get onto shows at the start, so the fandom often plays a role in whether I'll actually watch something. And there are plenty of shows that I'll avoid like the plague because of the way fandoms treat certain characters.

The "deliciously evil" trope is a complete turn off for me. It's one of the reasons I lost interest in Game of Thrones, and why I have no intention of ever watching the spinoff show, which seems to rely completely on people fancying Matt Smith as a charming psychopath.

Edited April 3, 2023 by Danny Franks

[peachmangosteen]

The more BTVS opinions I see the more I realize my #1 BTVS UO is that I love Spike lol.

[Anduin]

1 hour ago, Danny Franks said:

Buffy the Vampire Slayer is a good example of a show where writers fell in love with a character and forced them into a more prominent role, and then forced them into an unnatural position as romantic lead and redemptive hero. I'm talking, of course, about Spike.

Now there was a character who outlived his usefulness. During the episode Crush, I started hating him and never stopped. Due to overexposure, he retroactively ruined seasons two and four! Sure he was a fun villain at first, but I never saw the appeal beyond that.

However, I don't hate James Marsters. I've seen him in other things and he was fine enough.

[DrSpaceman73]

7 hours ago, ABay said:

As Oscar Wilde said: “The good ended happily, and the bad unhappily. That is what Fiction means.”

He would hate the end of American house of cards then. 

But then most people did.  So dumb.....it's a HOUSE OF CARDS.  Did the writers not get the reference to their own show?

[Anduin]

57 minutes ago, peachmangosteen said:

The more BTVS opinions I see the more I realize my #1 BTVS UO is that I love Spike lol.

I have a feeling that the fanbase is split pretty evenly, so both lovers and haters can claim their opinion is the unpopular one.