Unpopular Opinions Thread

[Katy M]

2 minutes ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

Yeah, we can jump through hoops like assume a grown man had never eaten a pear, but I prefer stories that don't require so much heavy jumping.  : )

Well, the not knowing it was in the salad is the more likely of my two scenarios.  Maybe not as common as pears, but I was in my late 20s the first time I had honeydew or cantaloupe.  I didn't like them.  Found out my mom doesn't like them either.  Hence how I had never come into contact as a child.  So, if Rebecca and/or Jack had a hate on for pears, it wouldn't surprise me in the least that Randall could get to his 20s and never have eaten one.

[ItCouldBeWorse]

27 minutes ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

I personally wouldn't hire someone stupid enough to eat a fruit they're deathly allergic to on a job interview.  I thought that whole pears thing was hokey.

 

7 minutes ago, Katy M said:

12 minutes ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

Yeah, we can jump through hoops like assume a grown man had never eaten a pear, but I prefer stories that don't require so much heavy jumping.  : )

Well, the not knowing it was in the salad is the more likely of my two scenarios.  Maybe not as common as pears, but I was in my late 20s the first time I had honeydew or cantaloupe.  I didn't like them.  Found out my mom doesn't like them either.  Hence how I had never come into contact as a child.  So, if Rebecca and/or Jack had a hate on for pears, it wouldn't surprise me in the least that Randall could get to his 20s and never have eaten one.

Waldorf salads don't normally contain pears: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waldorf_salad

Since he's so allergic, Randall should have checked with the waiter anyway, but maybe he was nervous since it was an interview and forgot to do so.

Wouldn't it be interesting if Randall was hired because he had the near-death reaction and the company didn't want to be embroiled in any unpleasantness?  (Not saying that Randall wasn't qualified.)

Does this mean that Randall carries an EpiPen at all times?  He definitely should.  I wonder if Annie and Tess have been tested in case they're allergic, too.

[ChromaKelly]

On 3/1/2017 at 4:51 PM, topanga said:

I remember Rebecca crying soon after the babies were born. She said she was crying because she was having a hard time getting Randall to bond (he was still Kyle then), and he wouldn't take the bottle. Even during that teary conversation with Jack, she never mentioned the baby who died. Maybe some of the tears were for Kyle, but she wasn't able to articulate it. And this wasn't a miscarriage--not that miscarriages are easy--but this was a baby that was either stillborn or died due to childbirth complications. No way Rebecca and Jack wouldn't be affected, even though they were busy with triplets, one of whom was newly-adopted. 

The first couple birthdays for my twins were really hard. One of my daughters nearly died. Their birthday was always such a mix of joy and PTSD from her near death. I would have to go cry in a bathroom remembering how I was separated from her, not knowing what was going on, how she was rushed to another hospital. She had a hard time feeding once she was home and needed a lot of attention as well, which was difficult. My other daughter was healthy but colicky. I've had to handwave the whole preemie two surviving triplets and supposedly drug-exposed newborn thing. Rebecca would have been a complete mess and I'm back to no way would they have been allowed to take home Randall.

[Mrs. DuRona]

2 hours ago, mojito said:

My UO is that people don't see the possibility of situations and interactions beyond their experiences. 

OMG, so much word to this.  It can get very frustrating to read (repeatedly) "Oh, that is so unrealistic because no one would...".  Yes, in your experience that might be true, but for someone else it is totally plausible.  

I guess my big, huge Unpopular Opinion is that Toby's hyper-sexualized talk doesn't really bother me much.  Probably because my husband and I are fluent in innuendo/dirty talk.  I also feel that if it were a female character, it would be considered bold and exciting to have a woman speak so openly about sex.  Look at female comedians.  If a man makes a joke that is sexual in nature or crude, it's old and tired and lame.  When a woman does it, she's HILARIOUS!  Bit of a double standard, in my humble, unpopular, opinion.

[Aloeonatable]

Quote

 Its initial premise is all about stirring up feelings, and unfortunately, manipulation comes with the territory.

I had to look up the definition of manipulation because that word is frequently used in this thread to describe this show, it's creator and the promo department. Basically it means "making people do what you want" per the Urban Dictionary. Honest question: how does one tell if they, or anyone else, are being manipulated? If I don't cry ugly, or not at all, while watching the show, does that mean I'm not easily manipulated? If one feels strongly for some scenes in this show and not so much for other emotional scenes, does that mean when they do cry, those are true feelings?  I understand the heavy-handedness of some scenes in this show, but I never feel like I'm being manipulated. 

As someone upthread posted, with everything we watch or read we are supposed to feel. I think how we react to a story, whether on television or in a book, says more about us than it does about the show creator or writer. 

[ChromaKelly]

I don't know if this a UO or not, but I can't stand the folk soundtrack anymore. It's almost unbearably intrusive. There's this one guitar riff they use over and over and it's starting to bug the everloving crap out of me.

[luna1122]

All art is inherently manipulative, as the artists or creators are attempting to evoke a response or a reaction, often a specific one. It is, as I feel has been explained a lot here, the sledgehammery unsubtle kind of manipulation most of us in this thread object to. As also has been said, subtlety is not in this show's DNA. They don't attempt to hide that, either, or the fact that they are indeed hoping to manipulate us into being 'wrecked, brought to our knees, unable to breathe, needing a grief excuse to call into work the day after' blah blah blah. That works for some people, it doesn't work for those of us here. It's all heart, no art, IMO, as I've also said a few times. Nothing wrong with that, for many, for most, apparently. It just happens to generally leave me cold. And I'm not cold and heartless, I am moved to tears by art all the time. This show just does not do that for me. 

[Aloeonatable]

49 minutes ago, luna1122 said:

All art is inherently manipulative, as the artists or creators are attempting to evoke a response or a reaction, often a specific one. It is, as I feel has been explained a lot here, the sledgehammery unsubtle kind of manipulation most of us in this thread object to. As also has been said, subtlety is not in this show's DNA. They don't attempt to hide that, either, or the fact that they are indeed hoping to manipulate us into being 'wrecked, brought to our knees, unable to breathe, needing a grief excuse to call into work the day after' blah blah blah. That works for some people, it doesn't work for those of us here. It's all heart, no art, IMO, as I've also said a few times. Nothing wrong with that, for many, for most, apparently. It just happens to generally leave me cold. And I'm not cold and heartless, I am moved to tears by art all the time. This show just does not do that for me. 

I completely understand your feelings, and I acknowledge that the promo dept. is very heavy-handed in using hyperbole. I find it less annoying than amusing. 

Question: I've seen some posters on this thread also speak of "hate-watching" this show. Why would anyone waste their time watching a show they dislike? Just curious, not passing judgement. 

[luna1122]

6 minutes ago, Aloeonatable said:

I completely understand your feelings, and I acknowledge that the promo dept. is very heavy-handed in using hyperbole. I find it less annoying than amusing. 

Question: I've seen some posters on this thread also speak of "hate-watching" this show. Why would anyone waste their time watching a show they dislike? Just curious, not passing judgement. 

That one I don't get either. I see it all over the boards, and it does seem like a waste of time, but there must be some pleasure derived from it. (I don't hate  this show, I like it, I just don't love it.) There are shows I have a love/hate thing with, tho, so maybe I get it somewhat, now that I think about it. They're usually shows like Sex and the City and Girls and Girlfriend's Guide to Divorce, all of which offer things I admire and like and relate to or just get the guilty pleasure thing from and watch faithfully, but I often hate the characters, and come to the boards to vent and rage about them, which is....weird, really, but I do it.

Edited March 9, 2017 by luna1122

[OtterMommy]

On 3/9/2017 at 10:58 AM, Katy M said:

Yes, Kevin moved to NY for theater in general.  I don't really consider it a problem for him to embellish to a critic that he moved there specifically for that play because it's so great. 

I don't think there is a problem with Kevin embellishing his motivation for moving to New York.  I do think that there is a problem for Kevin to ambush a critic in his office to try to get him to come to his play.  From what I've heard, any behavior like that is considered highly unprofessional.  

And, shut up Sophie, it was in no way "charming."

On 3/9/2017 at 2:07 PM, Aloeonatable said:

I completely understand your feelings, and I acknowledge that the promo dept. is very heavy-handed in using hyperbole. I find it less annoying than amusing. 

Question: I've seen some posters on this thread also speak of "hate-watching" this show. Why would anyone waste their time watching a show they dislike? Just curious, not passing judgement. 

I'm not hate-watching this show, so I can't speak specifically here.  But I have hate-watched shows in the past.  Usually, they were shows that I had enjoyed in the past that had gone rapidly downhill.  My most recent foray into hate-watching will, I hope, be my last.  As usual, it was a show that I once loved that had spectacularly self-combusted in a way that still makes my head spin.  I had quit watching the show and then decided to come back for the last season, claiming I was "hate watching," thinking that would in some way be entertaining.  And, it wasn't.  It was depressing and heartbreaking and, ultimately, I "broke up" with the show after 2 episodes when I realized that I was in a funk for at least a day after watching it (and, really, my family did not need that!)

So, even though I've done it, I don't understand it.  But that's just me--when I watch a show, I get emotionally involved....and I would rather that hate is not the emotion in question.  However, others may have other motivations and maybe, for them, it works.

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, OtterMommy said:

I don't think there is a problem with Kevin embellishing his motivation for moving to New York.  I do think that there is a problem for Kevin to ambush a critic in his office to try to get him to come to his play.  From what I've heard, any behavior like that is considered highly unprofessional.  

And, shut up Sophie, it was in no way "charming."

My problem with it is not that Kevin's lying to the critic but that the writers are expecting the viewers to believe him at 8:07 that this play really is that important to Kevin and then believe him at 8:21 that no, it's Sophie that is really that important to Kevin, and so on.  It's just overuse of hyperbole to me.  Even Toby's padding is looking cartoonish to me.  I don't watch telenovelas but this is kind of what I assume they'd be like.  

I'm not hate watching.  I like a lot about the show but the writing is disappointing, which is frustrating so I complain about it.  You get invested in characters or themes or concepts in a show and hope it's going to be another fun, multi-season ride like favorite shows of the past so when it goes south, you feel a right to voice your displeasure.  I gave it hours of my time, I wanted it to be better.  

[luna1122]

15 minutes ago, OtterMommy said:

I'm not hate-watching this show, so I can't speak specifically here.  But I have hate-watched shows in the past.  Usually, they were shows that I had enjoyed in the past that had gone rapidly downhill.  My most recent foray into hate-watching will, I hope, be my last.  As usual, it was a show that I once loved that had spectacularly self-combusted in a way that still makes my head spin.  I had quit watching the show and then decided to come back for the last season, claiming I was "hate watching," thinking that would in some way be entertaining.  And, it wasn't.  It was depressing and heartbreaking and, ultimately, I "broke up" with the show after 2 episodes when I realized that I was in a funk for at least a day after watching it (and, really, my family did not need that!)

So, even though I've done it, I don't understand it.  But that's just me--when I watch a show, I get emotionally involved....and I would rather that hate is not the emotion in question.  However, others may have other motivations and maybe, for them, it works.

I'd really like to know what the show you're talking about is, if you care to share.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Mrs. DuRona said:

OMG, so much word to this.  It can get very frustrating to read (repeatedly) "Oh, that is so unrealistic because no one would...".  Yes, in your experience that might be true, but for someone else it is totally plausible.  

I guess my big, huge Unpopular Opinion is that Toby's hyper-sexualized talk doesn't really bother me much.  Probably because my husband and I are fluent in innuendo/dirty talk.  I also feel that if it were a female character, it would be considered bold and exciting to have a woman speak so openly about sex.  Look at female comedians.  If a man makes a joke that is sexual in nature or crude, it's old and tired and lame.  When a woman does it, she's HILARIOUS!  Bit of a double standard, in my humble, unpopular, opinion.

I have no problem with any of Toby's talk when it is to Kate.  I didn't like it this episode because it was in front of the whole family, including her mom.  That's where I'm like "Dude, tone it down." 

[talktoomuch]

@SlackerInc if you know nothing else about sharing that painful memory here, please know that it meant a lot for those of us struggling with death regrets. Time doesn't heal all wounds, but knowing you're not alone sometimes eases the chokehold.

On topic: my ongoing UO is i don't give not one single F about when or how Jack died. And I hate that the show has made that a "thing" knowing they still plan to have him in flashbacks after that. And that they told us in Epi 1 that he was dead but then backed off it to make it the season long arc.

As for my latest UO I love Randall to pieces. I truly do. And SKB is an amazing actor even with cheesy material. But if they don't shift focus to the other two of the Big Three soon (or at least balance it), they might as well start calling the show This Is Randall and His Sidekicks.

ETA: I hate-watch reality TV all the time. I detest attention seeking famewhores with no discernible talent, skill, or motivation beyond being on TV; stupid obviously scripted storylines "acted" out poorly by untrained actors; and women fighting each other for entertainment. But damn if I don't tune in just to disparage them. I don't know the why but it makes me happy. Maybe the whole "I'm so much better than these bottom feeders" thing? I truly don't know. 

Edited March 9, 2017 by talktoomuch

[OtterMommy]

13 minutes ago, talktoomuch said:

ETA: I hate-watch reality TV all the time. I detest attention seeking famewhores with no discernible talent, skill, or motivation beyond being on TV; stupid obviously scripted storylines "acted" out poorly by untrained actors; and women fighting each other for entertainment. But damn if I don't tune in just to disparage them. I don't know the why but it makes me happy. Maybe the whole "I'm so much better than these bottom feeders" thing? I truly don't know. 

Okay, I will admit that I do understand hate-watching reality shows.  There was a time when I was participating in some primo hate-watching of a certain porcupine-headed matriarch.  However, I've lost interest in reality shows in general and haven't really watched any for a few years now.

Quote

On topic: my ongoing UO is i don't give not one single F about when or how Jack died. And I hate that the show has made that a "thing" knowing they still plan to have him in flashbacks after that. And that they told us in Epi 1 that he was dead but then backed off it to make it the season long arc.

I'm in sort of the same place regarding Jack's death. He's dead, and there is nothing that's going to change that.  I would like them to get over the whole mystery of it only because, if they keep it up too long, it will start to hamper the plot of the Big 3 in the present day.

[HeyThere83]

8 hours ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

 I guess that's where the manipulation part comes in.  They skip the hard part, writing the foundation story, and expect us to believe we were shown these things because that's what the music and staging and direction suggest we were shown.  

 

This.....this. right. here.

I read an article from someone reviewing the pilot episode and she was somehow able to see this was how the series would go after just that one episode. She was spot on. Her opinions would probably go in the Unpopular Opinions of Reviewers category because most others called it brilliant, groundbreaking, phenomenal, etc. Oh, and of course to get the tissues ready.

[Aloeonatable]

2 hours ago, talktoomuch said:

On topic: my ongoing UO is i don't give not one single F about when or how Jack died. And I hate that the show has made that a "thing" knowing they still plan to have him in flashbacks after that. And that they told us in Epi 1 that he was dead but then backed off it to make it the season long arc.

I agree with the first sentence of this paragraph. I really don't care how and especially when Jack died. I do care about the fallout of his death, however, and how it has affected his children's lives. Rebecca's too, for that matter. This show is going to be around for at least 36 more episodes and the fact that Jack is no longer in the present day does not take away from his story. 

[kieyra]

Briefly, for those of us who are able to see the calculated/manipulative nature of this show, anyone feel like shouting out current shows that *don't* make you feel that way? I don't want the thread to go off topic, but it's clear there are a number of us having the same side-eye reaction and I'm wondering what we all consider a contrasting show. 

Right now I'm obsessed with Happy Valley, a Netflix import that really earns its emotional gut-punches. It's like Broadchurch meets Fargo meets Trainspotting.

[pennben]

44 minutes ago, kieyra said:

Briefly, for those of us who are able to see the calculated/manipulative nature of this show, anyone feel like shouting out current shows that *don't* make you feel that way? I don't want the thread to go off topic, but it's clear there are a number of us having the same side-eye reaction and I'm wondering what we all consider a contrasting show. 

That's a great question. Having just quoted Mad Men the other day in a comment in this thread, my mind went there and I actually think there is a great episode that I think can highlight the difference as well. It is the last episode of Season 1, "The Wheel".  We have spent the first season getting to know Don Draper. He has on the surface the perfect marriage but we've found out he cheats on his wife and that he treats her horribly although you can sense there was love there once, he stole another mans identity so he's not who he says he is, is a functioning alcoholic, blah, blah, blah.  He has to give a pitch to Kodak to get the advertising contact for their new product which show photo slides and advances from one slide to the next--the carousel.

We close the season watching his pitch...he's showing slides of a man and woman falling in love..getting married...having children. And while he shows snapshot after snapshot he's narrating their story.  Every single person in the room gets choked up at his presentation.  So does he, he runs home to to seek forgiveness from his wife, but she's already left and taken the children with her.  

To me 'This Is Us' is the slideshow from that episode, I see the manipulation, even though I may fall for it like the folks in that room.  Mad Men is much better at hiding the strings, in my opinion, because it told its story over the season and damn, by the end of the season I'm stunned that I'm holding my breath hoping the drunk, cheating, identity-stealing ass makes it home before his family left, only to be crushed like him when he was too late.

Also, the show never told me what was coming or how I was supposed to feel in any advertising....it essentially told us nothing in the ads for it and just let each episode speak for itself and build towards the story the show was telling each season.

Anyway, that's my example.  I hope it makes sense. 

Edited March 10, 2017 by pennben

[SlackerInc]

12 hours ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

I thought the set-up where a mailman comes to a mailbox at your house and not a community box every block or two was getting rare.

This might fit in with the well-observed point about how people tend to generalize based on their own experiences.  When I was a teenager, my family moved from Chapel Hill, NC to Duluth, MN and I had been used to curbside mail: you put up your flag if you have mail to send, they drive around in special little vehicles and pop the mail in.

Then in Duluth they brought it up to a box right next to your front door, and no more vehicles--instead, a carrier walked through people's yards.  I thought this was so bizarre and inefficient, but then I figured it was because it gets so cold up there, they didn't want to make people get on all their winter gear just to get the mail.

However, I now live in Missouri and we also get our mail at the door despite it being no colder than North Carolina.  So go figure.

12 hours ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

I guess it was a lot more recent than I thought.  This says in 2013 the USPS began phasing out traditional delivery.

http://www.reuters.com/article/usa-postal-delivery-idUSL1N0FT14T20130723

Interesting!  I would support this, even though it would be a little less convenient for me personally.  It looks like the bulk of the savings comes from going to curbside vs. doorside, so I'd think they should just stick with that as a compromise rather than doing the community boxes, which seem rather small.

11 hours ago, Lady Calypso said:

I can't help but compare this show to Parenthood, where the characters were all mostly unlikable but they were made to be right about everything 100% of the time and they were supposed to be great people. I can count on one hand the number of characters I liked on that show. At least with this one, we're supposed to see some of their actions as unlikable (I think).

Now I'm really getting on topic, because I have found myself one of very few people here defending Parenthood (which I still think is significantly and consistently better than this show, "Memphis" notwithstanding).  I don't know how you could say the characters were all supposed to be 100% right about everything, when they so often clashed with each other!  I thought that was one of the strengths of the show: that they had differences of opinion, but the show didn't "sell out" to make anyone obviously right or wrong.  It depended on your personality and point of view.  Sarah and Kristina had strong, even bitter conflicts on the regular.  Kristina was one of the most Type A, uptight, straight-arrow characters ever, while Crosby was super laid back and mischievous.  I found her insufferable (but very realistic to a certain kind of person we all know IRL) and loved Crosby, but a lot of people on that board related much more to Kristina and found Crosby irresponsible and unlikable.  Jasmine also was uptight for my taste, but a lot of people understandably felt she helped Crosby live a little more responsible, grounded existence.  Zeke had a sweet side, but tended to rant like an angry old white guy who's listened to too much talk radio.  Etc.

7 hours ago, Aloeonatable said:

Question: I've seen some posters on this thread also speak of "hate-watching" this show. Why would anyone waste their time watching a show they dislike? Just curious, not passing judgement. 

I don't really do this either, but as a couple people noted it's a big thing--especially with reality TV.  In particular, I've seen critics wonder if anyone is watching The Bachelor unironically (I think the answer is yes, but those are just very different people from very different social circles).  And if I understand correctly, the antecedent to this site was begun by people who hatewatched Dawson's Creek, although that was before my time.

Now, I don't know if @kieyra's question applies to me or not.  I don't criticize the show as harshly as most of you on this thread.  But I did go through a patch midway through the season when I was almost out due to some of the soapy plot contrivances (the worst was the return of Olivia and the love triangle they set up there to last about five seconds).  So, limiting myself to "realistic" straight dramas (no sci-fi or fantasy, no comedies, no crime-oriented shows even if they are really awesome like Breaking Bad, The Sopranos, The Wire, Boardwalk Empire, or Fargo), these would be my all-time faves that rarely seem heavyhanded or overly manipulative:

1. Six Feet Under

2. In Treatment

3. Parenthood

Three more that I wasn't sure about, in terms of whether they satisfied my criteria for one reason or another:

A. The West Wing

B. The Good Wife

C. Rectify

Also, if you ever get a chance to see the pilot for the 1970s drama family, it's a real treat.  Just absolutely stellar writing and acting, although the subsequent episodes didn't live up to the pilot (which was written by a novelist who never wrote another episode of television AFAIK).  For one episode, it was perhaps the best family drama on TV, ever.

Edited March 10, 2017 by SlackerInc
formatting

[chocolatine]

1 hour ago, kieyra said:

Briefly, for those of us who are able to see the calculated/manipulative nature of this show, anyone feel like shouting out current shows that *don't* make you feel that way? I don't want the thread to go off topic, but it's clear there are a number of us having the same side-eye reaction and I'm wondering what we all consider a contrasting show. 

Right now I'm obsessed with Happy Valley, a Netflix import that really earns its emotional gut-punches. It's like Broadchurch meets Fargo meets Trainspotting.

For me it's The Americans. The season 4 premiere aired right after This Is Us this week, and my, what a stark contrast. Don't get me wrong, I still like This Is Us, I like the concept and the acting by Sterling K. Brown and Chrissy Metz, but I *never* have the reaction to this show that the show obviously wants me to have. But the cold, hard realism of The Americans, coupled with the fact that my family and I were refugees from the Soviet regime, guts me every time.

[Guest]

I'm totally on board with Happy Valley and Mad Men being two excellent shows, in terms of writing.  Probably two of my favorite.  With The Americans also in my top 5 of all time!  

What was it that Mad Men did unique... Weiner insisted on not showing previews of the next week's ep, maybe?  You had to sit and listen to the closing music and just ponder the show, not get shoved into thinking about the next ep?   

I actually choked up a bit when the Survivors hugged each other on the beach in the first episode tonight.  Heh.  

But this is when tears streamed down my face for probably 3 minutes, to be honest.  I wasn't expecting it.  Surprise is what gets me, I guess.

Edited March 10, 2017 by Guest

[SlackerInc]

30 minutes ago, chocolatine said:

For me it's The Americans. The season 4 premiere aired right after This Is Us this week, and my, what a stark contrast. Don't get me wrong, I still like This Is Us, I like the concept and the acting by Sterling K. Brown and Chrissy Metz, but I *never* have the reaction to this show that the show obviously wants me to have. But the cold, hard realism of The Americans, coupled with the fact that my family and I were refugees from the Soviet regime, guts me every time.

The Americans is also one of my favorite shows of all time.  But "cold, hard realism" might be pushing it.  They take pains to make individual acts of spycraft realistic, and there is emotional realism in character interactions; but I'd wager there is not a spy alive who has done as much in their entire career as the Jennings have done just in the span of three years or so in show time.  And the Jared plot was super-unrealistic all across the board.

I think to compare and contrast with this show in an "apples to apples" manner, another show cited needs to be a drama about regular people who don't kill anyone or have advanced martial arts training or a secret room full of wigs and disguises or anything like that.  Kevin could be said to be something other than a "regular person", admittedly; but having him be the unfulfilled star of a really cheesy sitcom that he quit in the first episode (rather than a standin for, say, Ryan Gosling) makes it a little more grounded.

Edited March 10, 2017 by SlackerInc

[Aloeonatable]

2 hours ago, kieyra said:

Right now I'm obsessed with Happy Valley, a Netflix import that really earns its emotional gut-punches. It's like Broadchurch meets Fargo meets Trainspotting.

Love Happy Valley. Loved Broadchurch. In fact I often watch British detective series. Have you checked out Vera?

[luna1122]

Ooh, fun. I've liked plenty of sentimental but well done shows--I loved thirtysomething back in the day, and my so called life and I faithfully watch Nashville now (and I bring these three up as they share DNA with 'this is us'.....the showrunners of thirtysomething and MSCL are now the showrunners of the rebooted Nashville, and of course, Ken olin and timothy busfield both cut their teeth on thirtysomething.) I don't hate those kinds of shows (tho I never saw Parenthood, which this show seems to be most often compared to) and I did not intend to watch this one, based on the ads, that correctly conveyed the kind of show it was, and was intended to be, as it's just not my thing. but I got so curious about the twist in the pilot everyone was talking about that I couldn't help it, and then I liked the cast, so I stayed, whether I maybe should have or not.

But the shows I love are not sentimental. Which does not mean they don't evoke emotion. My fave of all is Hannibal, which is the most beautiful and brutal and artistic show to ever hit network TV, which is also probably why it also died there. That show shook me to my core, every week, and when it ended, I mourned it like a death. And it's not JUST because I'm obsessed with Mads Mikkelsen. I also love(d) justified, fargo, dead like me, veronica mars,  bates motel, six feet under, the days and nights of molly dodd, mr. robot, search party, arrested development, etc..and I'm always and forever the X-files bitch. I'm currently flirting with Legion and Riverdale. I won't argue that all of these shows are better than TIU, tho I believe they are. I just know they speak to me more.

I see a lot of people praising, in the main thread, the actor who played the mailman in the scene that made my eyes roll, and I won't take anything away from him, cuz I guess he was good, and I just wasn't detached enough from my scorn to appreciate him. But a scene in an earlier episode that I found superbly acted,  and by an actor I DID find utterly, completely riveting,  was mostly dismissed and disliked on the main thread: the co worker, played by an actor I admittedly already loved, Jimmi Simpson, on the roof, about to jump, til Randall talked him down. I found that scene kind of breathtaking, tense and almost like a play....and the chemistry between the two actors (who are real life friends) was palpable to me. But it got mostly a confused 'meh' in the thread.

Which all means...I don't know. That we like what we like, I guess. I like to be a little caught off guard. I don't want to be able to predict what's about to happen. I want unexpected magic and some incongruity and a little WTF-ness from my entertainment. But I do see a lot of folks saying that the world is WTF enough, so they just want something comforting and warm and touching in their TV shows and movies. I get that, too, tho I don't (usually) feel the same way.

Edited March 10, 2017 by luna1122

[Aloeonatable]

Another honest question: many of the shows, with a few exceptions, we posters have mentioned above rarely get the recognition during awards season(s.) Why do you think that TIU has been so honored, and after only a half a season? 

54 minutes ago, luna1122 said:

Which all means...I don't know. That we like what we like, I guess. I like to be a little caught off guard. I don't want to be able to predict what's about to happen. I want unexpected magic and some incongruity and a little WTF-ness from my entertainment. But I do see a lot of folks saying that the world is WTF enough, so they just want something comforting and warm and touching in their TV shows and movies. I get that, too, tho I don't (usually) feel the same way.

Yes, we like what we like and I'm sure there aren't many shows that are universally loved and can pass the test of time. In todays television universe there are just too many shows and I know that I have to be selective otherwise I would be watching tv 24 hours a day. 

[SlackerInc]

As you say, @luna1122, we're gonna like what we like.  But I think you're creating a straw man to say that people who like this show do so because it's predictable, safe, like eating meatloaf and mashed potatoes.  I would say that its weakest moments have been both when it has leaned into predictable TV cliches, but also when it has thrown seemingly random shit at us like Olivia suddenly returning and acting like a madwoman.

I liked Nashville a lot (except for the Dallas-style political subplots, which they got rid of because nobody liked them) for about a season and a half.  But then I thought it descended into really OTT soapiness, just throwing every melodramatic element at the wall at a manic pace, and I stopped watching after the end of S2.  Has the arrival of Herskovitz and Zwick changed things?  I never saw thirtysomething, but liked their shows MSCL and especially Once and Again, another show that's a good "apples to apples" analogue to this one as it's about everyday family drama.  (I'm still frustrated that I can't see the third season because I only discovered it once it was on DVD, and only the first two seasons have been released.)

[ClareWalks]

If you want to see an entire forum on this site full of hate-watchers, come visit us on My Big Fat Fabulous Life. I think we hate-watch because there is such an awesome community of snarkers here and we want to participate. It makes the show FUN to hate-watch. I wouldn't just sit home and watch MBFFL if I didn't have the folks here to complain about Whitney with.

[kieyra]

7 hours ago, Aloeonatable said:

Another honest question: many of the shows, with a few exceptions, we posters have mentioned above rarely get the recognition during awards season(s.) Why do you think that TIU has been so honored, and after only a half a season?

Briefly: because the television awards system is a joke, with a few standouts like Mad Men and Breaking Bad actually rising to the top. The same reason ratings don't equal quality.

A show like Happy Valley has zero chance of getting on the radar of Emmy voters, for example, if it was even able to qualify for anything. (Foreign miniseries maybe? No idea.)

[llewis823]

9 hours ago, SlackerInc said:

However, I now live in Missouri and we also get our mail at the door despite it being no colder than North Carolina.  So go figure.

Shout-out to another Missourian, SlackerInc! It was 72 degrees and beautiful here yesterday. Today it's in the 30's or 40's and we're expecting snow tonight. Like they say - if you don't like the weather here, stick around for a day or two! : )

[JudyObscure]

22 hours ago, Court said:

 I don't really know my mailman. But I do know the trashmen well. I stay at home and the kids get so excited when they come by. They wave,honk, and have even let them throw the trash in the back. The kids take them bottled water when it's hot. While this is unusual for some places, it's not  my town. 

I'm a bit obsessive about housework stuff so, even though my bin is always out and loaded, sometimes, when I hear the truck coming, I realize there's a few tissues in the bathroom waste basket and go running out with my little white bag to add.  When the driver sees me coming he guns the truck and races me to the bin.  I love that guy!

On topic;  at my mother's funeral, her hair dresser and a waitress from the local restaurant came up and told me great stories about her.  It meant a lot to me to think about the lives she touched.

I haven't seen "Happy Valley," yet but I know it's written by Sally Wainwright who writes, "Last Tango in Halifax."  IMO, Her writing is wonderful and her manipulation subtle because her characters are so wonderfully flawed, real and human.

Edited March 10, 2017 by JudyObscure

[Guest]

8 hours ago, luna1122 said:

Which all means...I don't know. That we like what we like, I guess. I like to be a little caught off guard. I don't want to be able to predict what's about to happen. I want unexpected magic and some incongruity and a little WTF-ness from my entertainment. But I do see a lot of folks saying that the world is WTF enough, so they just want something comforting and warm and touching in their TV shows and movies. I get that, too, tho I don't (usually) feel the same way.

I like a lot of those, too:  Hannibal, Fargo, Bates Motel, Breaking Bad.  

I'll add UnReal season 1.  And while I think it was horrible in the end, I have to admit Lost captured my imagination like no other show for many years.  

I too love the WTF-ness and being caught off guard.  I frequently like freshman seasons of shows because they are less predictable and more fresh and innovative.  Then they settle into phoning it in and relying on the familiarity of the characters or something, it seems like.  

[luna1122]

7 hours ago, SlackerInc said:

As you say, @luna1122, we're gonna like what we like.  But I think you're creating a straw man to say that people who like this show do so because it's predictable, safe, like eating meatloaf and mashed potatoes.  I would say that its weakest moments have been both when it has leaned into predictable TV cliches, but also when it has thrown seemingly random shit at us like Olivia suddenly returning and acting like a madwoman.

I liked Nashville a lot (except for the Dallas-style political subplots, which they got rid of because nobody liked them) for about a season and a half.  But then I thought it descended into really OTT soapiness, just throwing every melodramatic element at the wall at a manic pace, and I stopped watching after the end of S2.  Has the arrival of Herskovitz and Zwick changed things?  I never saw thirtysomething, but liked their shows MSCL and especially Once and Again, another show that's a good "apples to apples" analogue to this one as it's about everyday family drama.  (I'm still frustrated that I can't see the third season because I only discovered it once it was on DVD, and only the first two seasons have been released.)

I don't think I'm straw manning anything here...I'm not attempting to twist any fan's words or thoughts about why they like the show...I'm just stating my (unpopular, hence the thread) opinion. For me, it IS television comfort food. Which I like, but not the best or most or all the time, and it can get pretty bland. I get that that is not the perception of it for everyone, that they'd argue that it's not that AT ALL,  but it's mine.  

Nashville is still very soapy. I was gratified by the first episode or so that Herskovitz n Zwick had their hands on, it felt fresher and newer and more modern, but it quickly devolved back into soapdom. But they had to contend with the death of a major character, so maybe it was almost impossible to NOT be soapy.  I like soaps sometimes, so I don't hate it, and I like the cast, and I still have hope that it will find its place somewhere between soapy melodrama and actual good storytelling. We'll see. I loved once and again too, would love to watch it all again, but yeah, I read about the DVD issues. (And you brought up Family...I remember that, mostly, since we also talked about actors in small parts making impressions, as the first time I ever saw Micheal Keaton. He had a small role as a Christmas tree salesman, and I remember being, like, jolted awake by him. It was like watching electricity crackle across the tv screen, and I recognized him instantly a few years later when he got famous. Maybe that mailman's career will really take off now).

Winston9-DT3, I like Unreal too, tho yeah, it got kind of bad, and I loved Lost, no matter how off the rails it got, and it did. And here's where I'll eat my words about not liking predictability: I saw the final shot of Jack lying, dying on the island as the plane flew overhead coming a mile away, but when Vincent the sweet yellow lab came and laid down next to him, I cried harder, longer and snottier than anyone watching TIU. I could cry just thinking about it.

[mahree]

19 hours ago, OtterMommy said:

It was depressing and heartbreaking and, ultimately, I "broke up" with the show after 2 episodes

Was it too grimm to continue?  (sorry.)

[Crs97]

The current show most likely to draw out my strongest emotions?  The comedy Speechless.  It is hilarious and yet so on point about the challenges families who have children with special needs face.  Laughing through tears several times.

[Pallas]

12 hours ago, Winston9-DT3 said:

What was it that Mad Men did unique... Weiner insisted on not showing previews of the next week's ep, maybe?  

Nope, AMC ran previews. Intercut with the closing credits; there was even a specific, minor-chord piano cue to signal them.

[lavenderblue]

Mad Men's previews were famously vague, though -- isolated unrelated fragments, often largely from the least important moments of early scenes, no voice-of-AMC-god voiceovers -- and that was a Weiner directive IIRC. Quite different from "An episode that will play your heartstrings like a cello! America must watch. 'Buy stock in Kleenex,' says TV Guide. Next week, our national season of mourning begins."

Edited March 10, 2017 by lavenderblue

[Guest]

1 minute ago, lavenderblue said:

Mad Men's previews were famously vague, though -- isolated unrelated fragments, often largely from the least important moments of early scenes, no voice-of-AMC-god voiceovers -- and that was a Weiner directive IIRC. Quite different from "An episode that will play your heartstrings like a cello! America must watch. 'Buy stock in Kleenex,' says TV Guide. Next week, our national season of mourning begins."

Thank you!  That's what I was trying to remember. 

[Neurochick]

23 hours ago, luna1122 said:

And I'm not cold and heartless, I am moved to tears by art all the time. This show just does not do that for me. 

I don't like it when a show tells me what I'm supposed to feel.  

My UO about this past episode was Randall and his quitting his job.  I thought that part was stupid, I thought Randall was stupid.  He is a man with a family, a mortgage, bills to pay and he just ups and quits?  Why not tell the boss you need to take a leave of absence?  If Randall was as important to the company as he stated he was, he probably would have been allowed to take a leave.  

This show is one of the reasons I don't like a lot of network dramas.  Too many shows don't have enough time to develop characters and relationships so they shove everything into a few episodes.  So I'm being told how connected these people are, but I'm not seeing it, so it's frustrating to me.  

[SlackerInc]

9 hours ago, llewis823 said:

Shout-out to another Missourian, SlackerInc! It was 72 degrees and beautiful here yesterday. Today it's in the 30's or 40's and we're expecting snow tonight. Like they say - if you don't like the weather here, stick around for a day or two! : )

Right?   It's been especially insane this year. I think we have gone back-and-forth between 70s and 20s at least five or six times in 2017, no exaggeration.   And my wife's unpopular opinion (SWIDT?) is that she would just prefer it stay cold until it gets warm for good.   (But then, she is of Norwegian stock, from northern Minnesota, and misses that climate, so…)

[Guest]

5 hours ago, lavenderblue said:

Mad Men's previews were famously vague, though -- isolated unrelated fragments, often largely from the least important moments of early scenes, no voice-of-AMC-god voiceovers -- and that was a Weiner directive IIRC. Quite different from "An episode that will play your heartstrings like a cello! America must watch. 'Buy stock in Kleenex,' says TV Guide. Next week, our national season of mourning begins."

Here's a nice article about it.  http://www.vulture.com/2013/06/matthew-weiner-on-those-mad-men-promos.html

[HeyThere83]

8 hours ago, Crs97 said:

The current show most likely to draw out my strongest emotions?  The comedy Speechless.  It is hilarious and yet so on point about the challenges families who have children with special needs face.  Laughing through tears several times.

YES! Speechless is superb! Best new show of the season for me.

[luna1122]

4 hours ago, SlackerInc said:

Right?   It's been especially insane this year. I think we have gone back-and-forth between 70s and 20s at least five or six times in 2017, no exaggeration.   And my wife's unpopular opinion (SWIDT?) is that she would just prefer it stay cold until it gets warm for good.   (But then, she is of Norwegian stock, from northern Minnesota, and misses that climate, so…)

I'm with your wife. I love cold weather and would really prefer more if it, and lots of snow, which we rarely get here. 

[bitchin camaro]

9 hours ago, Neurochick said:

I don't like it when a show tells me what I'm supposed to feel.  

My UO about this past episode was Randall and his quitting his job.  I thought that part was stupid, I thought Randall was stupid.  He is a man with a family, a mortgage, bills to pay and he just ups and quits?  Why not tell the boss you need to take a leave of absence?  If Randall was as important to the company as he stated he was, he probably would have been allowed to take a leave.  

This show is one of the reasons I don't like a lot of network dramas.  Too many shows don't have enough time to develop characters and relationships so they shove everything into a few episodes.  So I'm being told how connected these people are, but I'm not seeing it, so it's frustrating to me.  

I guess my unpopular opinion is that it's fine to quit your job if you can afford to, and if you've made bank like Randall apparently has, surely you'd have enough savings to do for a while. I don't think having a job is the be-all-end-all and if I could spend one year (much less ten) making Randall-money, I'd bank it, and do whatever the heck I feel like doing for a while. 

[SlackerInc]

1 hour ago, bitchin camaro said:

I guess my unpopular opinion is that it's fine to quit your job if you can afford to, and if you've made bank like Randall apparently has, surely you'd have enough savings to do for a while. I don't think having a job is the be-all-end-all and if I could spend one year (much less ten) making Randall-money, I'd bank it, and do whatever the heck I feel like doing for a while. 

I'm with you, totally (surely not a shock given my screen name).  But I think people like you and me don't have the "grit" to get into that year of making bank to begin with.  There's the rub.

[pennben]

3 hours ago, bitchin camaro said:

I guess my unpopular opinion is that it's fine to quit your job if you can afford to, and if you've made bank like Randall apparently has, surely you'd have enough savings to do for a while. I don't think having a job is the be-all-end-all and if I could spend one year (much less ten) making Randall-money, I'd bank it, and do whatever the heck I feel like doing for a while. 

I'm totally with you on that.  My problem with those scenes was Randall acting as the aggrieved victim 'standing for his rights' against the 'big, heartless corporation' on his way out. He always could have quit but he loved the massive paycheck and other personal benefits that gave him. So, say thank you, it's time for me to leave, this isn't for me anymore. The need to be right and act as though he was wronged on the way out is what I had a problem with. 

Edited March 11, 2017 by pennben

[luna1122]

7 hours ago, pennben said:

I'm totally with you on that.  My problem with those scenes was Randall acting as the aggrieved victim 'standing for his rights' against the 'big, heartless corporation' on his way out. He always could have quit but he loved the massive paycheck and other personal benefits that gave him. So, say thank you, it's time for me to leave, this isn't for me anymore. The need to be right and act as though he was wronged on the way out is what I had a problem with. 

And do it in front of co workers, who were there in the office working at 1030 at night, and probably really had no time or energy or sympathy for Randall's entitled grandstanding. That really bothered me more than any of the rest of the scene. He's quitting a cushy job that afforded him many luxuries; he's not goddamn Norma Rae. 

[Guest]

Someone has to stand up for the poor inappropriate-fruit-and-typed-note recipients of the world!  

[bunnywithanaxe]

I'm gonna really throw my hat into the UO ring and confess I kind of feel for Sanjay. 

 

I though there was a brilliant nuance in the way they handled the whole job competition arc-- Randall immediately read their interference with his account as pure sabotage, and maybe getting one up on Randall is a perk for Sanjay, but ISTM that both the boss and Sanjay seemed to be operating from a place of concern. While the actors spoke lines that read like typical corporate manouvering, the tone of voices, the body language, the exchanged glances over Randall's head suggested that somewhere in there they were trying to find a way to tell Randall, "Dude, you're cracking. Take a breather and accept some help."

[ShadowFacts]

1 hour ago, bunnywithanaxe said:

I though there was a brilliant nuance in the way they handled the whole job competition arc-- Randall immediately read their interference with his account as pure sabotage, and maybe getting one up on Randall is a perk for Sanjay, but ISTM that both the boss and Sanjay seemed to be operating from a place of concern. While the actors spoke lines that read like typical corporate manouvering, the tone of voices, the body language, the exchanged glances over Randall's head suggested that somewhere in there they were trying to find a way to tell Randall, "Dude, you're cracking. Take a breather and accept some help."

It would have been better for the partner in charge, forget his name, to just do that in a straightforward, private way, in my opinion.  Save time, embarrassment and the risk of possible client loss.  I don't fault Sanjay and he did step right in at the teleconference where Randall froze, but the boss, yeah, poor management and not so much concern for Randall.  Let's pile some more stress on the guy who's cracking and see if it helps him and the firm?  It could have ended worse than it did.