Faux Life: Things That Happen On TV But Not In Reality

[Ohiopirate02]

2 hours ago, WinnieWinkle said:

I almost always have to grit my teeth and ignore it when sitcoms deal with money issues.  On Big Bang Theory they acted like these notable scientists at a prestigious university were earning a pittance (even though they spent a small fortune on take out food and comics in almost every episode). On Everybody Loves Raymond they acted like a Lt in the NYPD was earning so little that in one episode he was reduced to eating baloney pie.  Ugh.  I guess what it comes down to is either writers have no real clue what people outside Hollywood actually earn or (and this is the most likely) they don't care and they will say anything if it serves the plot.

I always got the feeling that Leonard and Sheldon blew their money on stuff.  That apartment is jampacked with stuff, and some of those collectables and comic books are expensive.  I also figured they were buying top of the line electronics as well.  

I do agree about Robert on ELR because he spent seasons living at home with Marie and Frank.  He should have had thousands saved up, but he was almost always broke.  I do think that episode where Robert is reduced to eating baloney pie was just a one-off.  So many sitcoms do that where the characters suddenly have money problems that magically disappear by the end of the episode.  Shoot, in the final season Robert and Amy have enough money to buy Marie and Frank's house.  

[WinnieWinkle]

17 minutes ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

I always got the feeling that Leonard and Sheldon blew their money on stuff.  That apartment is jampacked with stuff, and some of those collectables and comic books are expensive.  I also figured they were buying top of the line electronics as well.  

If they'd focused on them being short of money because of where they were spending their money I could have bought it - what bothered me was the way they continually emphasized throughout the course of the series that the guys were making very small salaries.  That did not make one tiny bit of sense and was pretty insulting to anyone working in sciences in universities - but also to their audience who, for the most part, would have been making less money than these guys!!

[janie jones]

Were they supposed to be making small salaries? I never got the impression that they were supposed to be short on cash, especially since Leonard can pay Penny's bill's too. I do remember one episode in which the lady upstairs asks Penny if physicists make much money and Penny didn't think they made much, but that's the only time I can think of when they talk about Leonard and Sheldon's income.

[WinnieWinkle]

22 minutes ago, janie jones said:

I do remember one episode in which the lady upstairs asks Penny if physicists make much money and Penny didn't think they made much, but that's the only time I can think of when they talk about Leonard and Sheldon's income.

It comes up a lot in the later seasons.  Bernadette constantly points out that Howard makes peanuts and when Penny first starts working as a sales rep for the pharma company it is stressed that she now makes more money than Leonard does.  Aside from Raj eventually (who is suddenly destitute despite his university job when he stops getting an allowance from his father) it's not like they don't spend money on whatever they want.  It really is a faux life where their incomes make little sense and I probably give it way more attention than the writers ever did!

Edited January 26, 2021 by WinnieWinkle

[Quof]

1 hour ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

Shoot, in the final season Robert and Amy have enough money to buy Marie and Frank's house.  

Because the asking price was what Frank and Marie paid for it, 50 years ago.  Something in the neighbourhood of $20,000

[janie jones]

18 minutes ago, WinnieWinkle said:

It comes up a lot in the later seasons.  Bernadette constantly points out that Howard makes peanuts and when Penny first starts working as a sales rep for the pharma company it is stressed that she now makes more money than Leonard does.  Aside from Raj eventually (who is suddenly destitute despite his university job when he stops getting an allowance from his father) it's not like they don't spend money on whatever they want.  It really is a faux life where their incomes make little sense and I probably give it way more attention than the writers ever did!

I know about Howard, but the question was about Leonard and Sheldon. Just because Penny later made more than Leonard doesn't mean Leonard never made much.

Raj, who knows. He lived in a dinky apartment. He wasted money buying couture onesies for Howard and Bernadette's baby, but he obviously wasn't buying nice stuff for himself.

[WinnieWinkle]

7 minutes ago, janie jones said:

Just because Penny later made more than Leonard doesn't mean Leonard never made much.

Totally agree and if the show had just stuck to making the point that the two women working outside the university environment made more than the guys I'd have been fine with that.  My problem was they went further than that and suggested all through the series - but especially in the later years - that working as scientists in a university like Cal Tech meant they were not earning good salaries.  Which was laughable given the way they all spent money over the years, but also laughable if anyone wants to take the time to research how much scientists.engineers working at the level these guys did would be making.  Just like Robert on Everybody Loves Raymond is a Lt in the NYPD with a wife who has been working full-time for years but somehow their combined incomes is puny compared to the one income Ray Barone family?  So unrealistic!  

21 minutes ago, Quof said:

Because the asking price was what Frank and Marie paid for it, 50 years ago.  Something in the neighbourhood of $20,000

Which is also one of those classic "for this episode only" moments - we're supposed to believe that Frank Barone who worked as a bookkeeper and also as a real estate agent wouldn't know the current value of their house?  

[Quof]

I think the point was they were only looking to be made whole, not make a profit on the appreciated value.

[meep.meep]

1 hour ago, WinnieWinkle said:

Totally agree and if the show had just stuck to making the point that the two women working outside the university environment made more than the guys I'd have been fine with that.  My problem was they went further than that and suggested all through the series - but especially in the later years - that working as scientists in a university like Cal Tech meant they were not earning good salaries.  Which was laughable given the way they all spent money over the years, but also laughable if anyone wants to take the time to research how much scientists.engineers working at the level these guys did would be making. 

The show's point was that people outside academia/government (the guys are at CalTech and JPL), the people working in private industry make lots more money.  Bernadette and Penny worked for a pharmaceutical company and got paid more than Howard and Leonard.  Leonard and Sheldon made enough to loan Penny money and buy her expensive things (a car) without tightening their belts at the beginning of the show, so they weren't making peanuts.

The truly odd thing about money and the show was that at the beginning, Penny, a waitress at the Cheesecake Factory, could afford a 1 bedroom apartment in Pasadena all on her own.

[WinnieWinkle]

Another one that bothers me is how quickly people get over someone's death.  I can think of exceptions but for the most part a loved one dies and by the next episode it's all good.  Sometimes never mentioned again.  I think this gives people who've been lucky enough not to lose someone close to them a very false idea of what grieving can feel like.  

[Ohiopirate02]

10 minutes ago, WinnieWinkle said:

Another one that bothers me is how quickly people get over someone's death.  I can think of exceptions but for the most part a loved one dies and by the next episode it's all good.  Sometimes never mentioned again.  I think this gives people who've been lucky enough not to lose someone close to them a very false idea of what grieving can feel like.  

Death should not happen in a sitcom.  It is never handled realistically.  Even in dramas, most shows fall into melodrama when dealing with grief.  I have experienced loss in my life and while I have cried in the shower, I have never drank myself into a stupor or felt the need to destroy my stuff as I yell that my best friend was taken too soon.  Grief is a process where you have good days, bad days, and moments where you are unexpected hit with feelings.  And, it can last for years.  

[Katy M]

23 hours ago, meep.meep said:

The truly odd thing about money and the show was that at the beginning, Penny, a waitress at the Cheesecake Factory, could afford a 1 bedroom apartment in Pasadena all on her own.

But, on the other hand she couldn't pay her electric, cable and internet bills, or pay to get her car fixed, and on one occasion she was dodging the landlord.  So, maybe the apartment was out of her budget range.  Or maybe her father gave her some rent money.

[DoctorAtomic]

1 hour ago, Ohiopirate02 said:

Death should not happen in a sitcom.

What if it's a piano falling on you? 

[meep.meep]

If death shouldn't happen on a sitcom, we would never have had the Chuckles the Clown episode of the Mary Tyler Moore show. 

[auntlada]

49 minutes ago, meep.meep said:

If death shouldn't happen on a sitcom, we would never have had the Chuckles the Clown episode of the Mary Tyler Moore show. 

Or Henry's death on MASH.

[Browncoat]

Or Ernie's death on Cheers.  Of course, in that case, the actor died, and not to mention his absence would have been odd.

 

[WinnieWinkle]

37 minutes ago, auntlada said:

Or Henry's death on MASH.

Oh god that was probably my first experience with a main character dying - totally shocked me to pieces.  In the context of a show about war that one totally worked for me though.  

[meep.meep]

You are all missing my point.  Of course death is horrible.  But the Chuckles the Clown episode of Mary Tyler Moore Show is widely regarded as the funniest thing ever filmed.  And it only works if Chuckles dies so that Mary can inappropriately laugh at his funeral.  Death is necessary for comedy.

[Stats Queen]

4 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

What if it's a piano falling on you? 

To every rule there is an exception.

[kiddo82]

On 1/26/2021 at 10:51 AM, WinnieWinkle said:

Speaking of teenagers, I've lost count of how many times the slacker teen who never went to class and never cared about school at all will suddenly, at the 11th hour, pull the impossible off and end up getting accepted into university - and usually because they've secretly been hiding their brilliant mind all along.  I loved Family Ties so much because they did not do that.  They never turned things around at the last minute and made Mallory into a misunderstood genius.

Zack Morris got into Yale.  🤷‍♀️

[DoctorAtomic]

Was Zack a poor student though? 

[Stats Queen]

I think the point is, as viewers we watch sitcoms to escape from our actual lives. Depending upon what is happening in your life (like losing your brother and his wife less than a year apart), a sitcom allows you to laugh amid the sorrow. Of course, this if only my personal thought around sitcoms and why I watch them. Others may be different. (I do watch the real housewives to totally take a break from reality.)

When an actor/actress portraying someone on a sitcom dies unexpectedly (or anyone that dies unexpectedly) that is amazing sad and heartbreaking. Imagine how sad and heartbroken us viewers are, that has to be nothing compared to the loss, sorrow and heartbreak of the person’s fellow cast members, the writers and the crew - this was a person they intimately knew and loved. 

Personally, I felt like Cheers and Big Bang Theory did a wonderful job of paying tribute to the sudden loss of important people. Been a long time since I watched Cheers, but I thought Big Bang Theory did a wonderful job at celebrating Howard’s mother for quite a while.

When Henry died during MASH - it was heartbreaking. Hubby and I just started rewatching from the beginning. MASH, while a comedy was also about war, so it in today’s parlance might be considered a dramaedy (seriously, don’t know to spell that - comedy that is a drama).

Chuckles The Clown was awesome, because everyone was so sad and Mary had no reaction but lost it at the funeral. That was very real because sometimes our reactions during sad times are incredibly inappropriate and uncontrollable.

 

 

[Irlandesa]

I think my opinion on death in sitcoms has evolved.  Things like Mary laughing uncontrollably or the giggle loop on Coupling work for me.  And when I was a kid, I think I loved the emotional release and shock something like Carol's boyfriend (Matthew Perry) dying because of drunk driving on Growing Pains.  Whew, what a lesson.

I'm less interested in that kind of lesson as I get older. 

Edited January 28, 2021 by Irlandesa

[kiddo82]

27 minutes ago, DoctorAtomic said:

Was Zack a poor student though? 

I don't know if we know specifics about Zack's grades but I'd bet he was no better than a C student who only got by on his charisma.  He probably copied a lot of homework off of Screech too.  And skipped school.  A lot.  He also almost didn't graduate because he was short a credit.  He was the definition of a slacker student who was by no means unintelligent, just unenthusiastic.  

 

Re:  Death on Sitcoms.  It's a great release when done right.  The way NewsRadio handled Phil Hartman's death remains one of the best for me.  Straight dramas tend to have more melodrama surrounding loss whereas sitcoms can strike a more realistic balance.  And even if it seems like everyone forgot about the person who died an episode later, I'm forgiving as sitcoms tend to be very episodic.  We don't know that the characters don't have bouts of grief between them.  

Edited January 28, 2021 by kiddo82

[andromeda331]

1 hour ago, kiddo82 said:

I don't know if we know specifics about Zack's grades but I'd bet he was no better than a C student who only got by on his charisma.  He probably copied a lot of homework off of Screech too.  And skipped school.  A lot.  He also almost didn't graduate because he was short a credit.  He was the definition of a slacker student who was by no means unintelligent, just unenthusiastic.  

 

Re:  Death on Sitcoms.  It's a great release when done right.  The way NewsRadio handled Phil Hartman's death remains one of the best for me.  Straight dramas tend to have more melodrama surrounding loss whereas sitcoms can strike a more realistic balance.  And even if it seems like everyone forgot about the person who died an episode later, I'm forgiving as sitcoms tend to be very episodic.  We don't know that the characters don't have bouts of grief between them.  

Yes, when its done right on shows it can be great.  I think it depends on who died. If its a distant relative or someone not really close to its fine that their back to normal in the next episode. But when its someone close to the character its weird when their already back to happy in the next episode. If their going to kill off a character it needs to count more then an episode. They don't need to be sobbing in every episode but it they shouldn't be back to happy in the very next episode as if nothing happened. Or at least kill off the character at the end of a season and mention in the opener about mourning and moving on. On Home Improvement they kill of Jill's dad in the second to last episode of season six and the next episode is back to normal. His death isn't mentioned again until the next season at Christmas. Its just weird. Rizzoli and Isles killed off Susie and then never mentioned her again.  

[ABay]

The 2 shows I remember most clearly handling the death of an actor well are Barney Miller when Jack Soo died and Murphy Brown when Colleen Dewhurst died. They were the perfect combination of tears and laughter. On Barney Miller they completely broke the 4th wall and talked about Soo as an actor with clips of Yimana, on Murphy Brown they addressed the loss of the character.

[Zella]

4 hours ago, ABay said:

The 2 shows I remember most clearly handling the death of an actor well are Barney Miller when Jack Soo died and Murphy Brown when Colleen Dewhurst died. They were the perfect combination of tears and laughter. On Barney Miller they completely broke the 4th wall and talked about Soo as an actor with clips of Yimana, on Murphy Brown they addressed the loss of the character.

That Barney Miller episode is superb. 

[Blergh]

Since I brought up Lassie re talking about the recently deceased Cloris Leachman, I might as well go into how unreal that show became.

 

When it debuted in 1954, it had the premise of Lassie being pet of a pre-teen boy named Jeff Miller(Tommy Retig)  being raised on a farm by his widowed mother Ellen (Jan Clayton) and his paternal grandfather George (George Cleveland) while having adventures with the title character. OK, but between both Miss Clayton and young Mr. Rettig wanting to do other things after a few years (and Mr. Rettig becoming an adolescent), they decided to keep the audience interested by having the family informally adopt a small orphan boy called Timmy (Jon Provost) with the idea of Timmy eventually becoming Lassie's new fave human.

But in the middle of the 1957 season, the elderly actor George Cleveland suddenly died  so they had to rework the premise. Long-short is that even though the authorities had let the late Mr. George Miller and his daughter-in-law Ellen informally adopt Timmy, they decided that Ellen could NOT remain the child's parent- despite she having nearly raised her own son Jeff fairly well (which somewhat reflected adoption laws for many parts of the US at that time) . Also, Ellen and Jeff decided they wanted to strike out for Capitol City (the show's otherwise nameless blah big city) and sell the family farm instead of attempting to hold it down. Lucky for them a young couple named Paul and Ruth Martin not only were interested in buying the farm but also were interested in adopting Timmy. Despite the Martins being newcomers to this community (and having done little if anything to vet them re being ideal adoptive parents), the authorities greenlit them becoming Timmy's new folks! Ah, but what to do about Lassie? Despite Lassie having been his boon companion for quite a few years, Jeff decided to let Lassie choose whether she wanted to stay on the farm with the Martins and Timmy or adjust to city life with the mother and her growing son. Lassie instantly decided on staying on the family farm with barely a goodbye to Jeff (and, despite promises of visiting each other on a regular basis, this would be the last time Lassie or Timmy would interact with their remaining original human family). Lassie, of course, winds up rescuing Timmy quite a few times for the next six years but then the PTB decided the that Timmy was getting a bit too old for that so they had it that the Martins accepted a permanent new job in Australia but ,while they had no problems taking Timmy with them, they had to leave Lassie behind due to quarantine regulations (though that entire storyline got retrotrashed when they had Jon Provost as a regular character in the 1989 revival) .

Lassie became the pet of several forest rangers in succession before becoming a feral dog, having her own puppies (despite always being portrayed by a male dog) , then finally finding another ranch family in the years ahead before that show's cancellation in 1973

How's that for the ultimate faux series?

[dalek]

On 1/25/2021 at 12:06 PM, Brookside said:

In police procedurals where the good guys are racing to catch the bad guys, there is always a parking space exactly where they need it, despite being in New York, Chicago, or some other overcrowded city.

I've always maintained that the most fantastical element of The X-Files was the ease with which Scully and Mulder found parking spaces in Georgetown.

[ShortyMac]

Characters don’t have siblings, unless they show up for personal angst, and drama. (True a lot of the time, if the show doesn’t focus on a singular family)
 

If a character’s parent was a firefighter or police officer, they more than likely died in the line of duty. 

[DrSpaceman73]

3 hours ago, ShortyMac said:

Characters don’t have siblings, unless they show up for personal angst, and drama. (True a lot of the time, if the show doesn’t focus on a singular family)
 

If a character’s parent was a firefighter or police officer, they more than likely died in the line of duty. 

Or at least shot 

[Mabinogia]

17 hours ago, ShortyMac said:

If a character’s parent was a firefighter or police officer, they more than likely died in the line of duty. 

If a character is a police officer they either had a parent who was a cop or someone important to them died and the case was never solved and they have dedicated their life to solving it. No one on TV ever just hears a cop speak at career day and thinks, "sure, I'll do that!" The cop family one isn't too bad, I know from experience that it can run in the family, but the "unsolved loved one murder", well, I hope that isn't common IRL.

[Zella]

3 hours ago, Mabinogia said:

If a character is a police officer they either had a parent who was a cop or someone important to them died and the case was never solved and they have dedicated their life to solving it. No one on TV ever just hears a cop speak at career day and thinks, "sure, I'll do that!" The cop family one isn't too bad, I know from experience that it can run in the family, but the "unsolved loved one murder", well, I hope that isn't common IRL.

The unsolved murder one is a backstory that I have come to really loathe. On procedurals that I otherwise enjoy, the episodes I hate the most are always the unsolved backstory ones. Monk, Castle*, The Mentalist.  As much as I enjoy crime shows, when I see that the protagonist's backstory is an unsolved murder in the family, it makes me now nope out before I even start. 

And incidentally, though I do know quite a few cops--and families of cops--I can't say I know any of them with the unsolved murder in the family. Nevermind the professional ethics issues of investigating a case that involves your family. 

*I stopped enjoying Castle in its later seasons when it became unwatchable. But I liked the first few seasons and found them fun. Except for those damn black hole episodes about Beckett's mom. 

Edited January 30, 2021 by Zella

[DoctorAtomic]

I think Monk actually did a good take on it and wouldn't lump it in with the Mentalist. 

[Zella]

18 minutes ago, DoctorAtomic said:

I think Monk actually did a good take on it and wouldn't lump it in with the Mentalist. 

It was better quality, but I personally didn't find it any less tedious. 

Edited January 30, 2021 by Zella

[Irlandesa]

2 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

I think Monk actually did a good take on it and wouldn't lump it in with the Mentalist. 

Monk was a great show and did nice work when it came to grief and loss.  But I did think the episodes around Trudy's murder were some of the weakest.  I think they would have been better served if she just died a normal death. 

The white whale ( although to its credit, they did play on that with Dale The Whale) trope can really work initially but too often shows drag it on too long or don't really have a plan.  Both of those applied to Monk, IMO. 

[merylinkid]

6 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

he white whale ( although to its credit, they did play on that with Dale The Whale) trope can really work initially but too often shows drag it on too long or don't really have a plan.  Both of those applied to Monk, IMO. 

Never more true than in the Mentalist.   Red John was the dumbest of the "Big Bad" storylines ever.   It just went on and on.   It was clear there was no plan.   They even "caught" him one season.   But then they didn't really.   By the end the guy had so many minions in so many places that you wondered by CBI was the only law enforcement agency involved in catching him.   Then who it turned out to be was just so implausible.   They could have done so much with the premise " fake mentalist who is really good at reading people helps cops solve crimes."   Would have been great right there.   But nooooooooo they had to go with the "lost his family and now wants to help the cops catch the killer."

[Zella]

8 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

Monk was a great show and did nice work when it came to grief and loss.  But I did think the episodes around Trudy's murder were some of the weakest.  I think they would have been better served if she just died a normal death. 

The white whale ( although to its credit, they did play on that with Dale The Whale) trope can really work initially but too often shows drag it on too long or don't really have a plan.  Both of those applied to Monk, IMO. 

I think a backstory of his wife dying and it not being a murder would have worked better.

But yes it is the way those storylines are dragged out and how meandering they often are that turns me off. Though they weren't my favorite episodes of Monk, I will concede that the show did a better job than The Mentalist and Castle, both of which screwed it up fantastically. 

2 hours ago, merylinkid said:

Never more true than in the Mentalist.   Red John was the dumbest of the "Big Bad" storylines ever.   It just went on and on.   It was clear there was no plan.   They even "caught" him one season.   But then they didn't really.   By the end the guy had so many minions in so many places that you wondered by CBI was the only law enforcement agency involved in catching him.   Then who it turned out to be was just so implausible.   They could have done so much with the premise " fake mentalist who is really good at reading people helps cops solve crimes."   Would have been great right there.   But nooooooooo they had to go with the "lost his family and now wants to help the cops catch the killer."

Ugh that reveal made me so angry. Just ridiculous. If it had been one of the suspects in particular, it would have worked for me, but the guy they picked was atrocious. Totally ruined my interest in the show. 

[meep.meep]

Didn't they have to have that plot on The Mentalist to separate it from Psych?  Essentially they are the same show, but this way The Mentalist was supposed to be focused on this deep dark mystery versus Psych which was played for laughs.

[DoctorAtomic]

The main character on psych faked being a psychic to get out of trouble because his dad taught him to be super observant. So I'd say it's different because he wasn't reading people but finding actual clues. It's more in line with Monk, and at the end of the run they revealed they're in the same show universe. 

It was a lighter show, though they did solve crimes. 

I remember over here we were all rolling our eyes about the not-catching Red John. The actual catching of him before they copped out was legitimately quite good. 

[Zella]

41 minutes ago, meep.meep said:

Didn't they have to have that plot on The Mentalist to separate it from Psych?  Essentially they are the same show, but this way The Mentalist was supposed to be focused on this deep dark mystery versus Psych which was played for laughs.

I never watched Psych so don't have a basis for comparison, but I remember The Mentalist having quite a few light episodes. I watch a lot of heavy stuff so that on its own isn't a problem for me, but I thought the show was at its best when it was being breezier. The Red John ones tended to be the darkest episodes and often struck me as tonally at odds with the rest of the show. But my memory of things tend to be very impressionistic. 

Random: I watched The Mentalist with my grandpa, who really enjoyed Simon Baker's performance. One time, we were driving along, and out of the blue, he asked me, "Who's the little guy who knows when you've done things?" After a very long pause in which I tried to figure out what he was talking about, I said, "The Mentalist?" "That's him!"

So, Simon Baker will always be "the little guy who knows when you've done things" to me. 

31 minutes ago, DoctorAtomic said:

I remember over here we were all rolling our eyes about the not-catching Red John. The actual catching of him before they copped out was legitimately quite good. 

Oh God this is all starting to come back to me now, but yes, I remember that plotline being better handled in the beginning.

In the end if it had been

Spoiler

Malcolm McDowell

, it would have all been good for me, partially because I really liked the actor in the role but also because I could see him as a viable suspect. 

Edited January 30, 2021 by Zella

[Mabinogia]

9 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

Monk was a great show and did nice work when it came to grief and loss.  But I did think the episodes around Trudy's murder were some of the weakest.  I think they would have been better served if she just died a normal death. 

I loved Monk but I was disappointed in the whole Trudy's death storyline. I don't think the show needed that particular crutch. The character of Monk had enough going on with his OCD, with being kicked out of the police so he had to be a PI. It didn't need his dead wife's death being a mystery. They could have just had Trudy dead so Monk is a widow which explains why he needed a "handler" um, assistant. 

My least favorite Monk eps are the Dale the Whale/Trudy's death ones. 

I gave up very quickly on The Mentalist when I realized that Red John shit was going to drag out. 

I loved Castle for about two seasons but again, I couldn't care less about Beckett's mommy angst. 

Really, investigating crime is angsty and dramatic enough, why the need for some albatross backstory hanging over the show?

 

[DoctorAtomic]

2 hours ago, Zella said:

I never watched Psych so don't have a basis for comparison, but I remember The Mentalist having quite a few light episodes. I watch a lot of heavy stuff so that on its own isn't a problem for me, but I thought the show was at its best when it was being breezier. The Red John ones tended to be the darkest episodes and often struck me as tonally at odds with the rest of the show. But my memory of things tend to be very impressionistic.

That's my assessment of the show as well. I didn't like the Red John garbage because it was All About Jane. The ensemble cast was very good and I preferred when the teamwork was front and center. They didn't always need Jane to solve the case, though he always contributed as the main character. 

I'd say Psych is more dramedy with some good, emotional moments in there. It's a story really about strong friendships and the relationship with the main character and his dad. It's not like the breezy episodes of the Mentalist, which were enjoyable. Also many many many 80s references. And singing. And pineapples. 

I thought Monk did a good job because in the end, the death of Trudy had nothing to do with him. It was about the news story she was working on. That gave Monk some space to move on and at the end of the show, he was still solving cases, but he was clearly in a better place. With the Mentalist, all the Red John was just relentless.

[Mabinogia]

28 minutes ago, DoctorAtomic said:

With the Mentalist, all the Red John was just relentless.

I didn't last long with the Mentalist, but the whole Red John thing does remind me of the Miniature Killer on CSI or that annoying British chick on Law & Order Criminal Intent in that I think they were going for that whole "cat and mouse" back and forth vibe, the whole matching of wits, good vs evil, superhero vs criminal mastermind thing. Trouble is, where that works in a 2 hour movie that ends with our hero finally getting the best of the villain, it becomes absurd on years long TV shows where you have to start questioning how good a cop/pi/genius our hero is that they STILL can't seem to capture someone who is so obsessed with them that they are practically begging to be caught. 

Jane, Grissom and Goren all ended up looking like morons to me and I couldn't take them seriously after letting the Big Bad get away over and over again. 

[DoctorAtomic]

To be fair, on the Mentalist, they 'caught' Red John early. If they ended there with him, or maybe one copycat, it would have been fine. iirc over here or when it was the other place, we were all commending the show for taking the direction of beating the Big Bad so early in the run, *and* it had been someone we had known on the show before. 

I mean, Dexter had a different Big Bad every season; even before the finale, the big bad in the last season was quite good, so they were able to still be fresh with the same basic concept. So, Jane could have had another protagonist pop up; maybe someone they put away years ago or someone he screwed over after Red John when he was still a con artist. I think we were mostly disappointed in the lack of originality because they really *did* do something interesting, but copped out. 

[Zella]

5 hours ago, Mabinogia said:

I didn't last long with the Mentalist, but the whole Red John thing does remind me of the Miniature Killer on CSI or that annoying British chick on Law & Order Criminal Intent in that I think they were going for that whole "cat and mouse" back and forth vibe, the whole matching of wits, good vs evil, superhero vs criminal mastermind thing. Trouble is, where that works in a 2 hour movie that ends with our hero finally getting the best of the villain, it becomes absurd on years long TV shows where you have to start questioning how good a cop/pi/genius our hero is that they STILL can't seem to capture someone who is so obsessed with them that they are practically begging to be caught. 

Jane, Grissom and Goren all ended up looking like morons to me and I couldn't take them seriously after letting the Big Bad get away over and over again. 

That Law and Order: CI plotline ruined the show for me too. 

[GaT]

11 hours ago, merylinkid said:

Never more true than in the Mentalist.   Red John was the dumbest of the "Big Bad" storylines ever.   It just went on and on.   It was clear there was no plan.   They even "caught" him one season.   But then they didn't really.   By the end the guy had so many minions in so many places that you wondered by CBI was the only law enforcement agency involved in catching him.   Then who it turned out to be was just so implausible.   They could have done so much with the premise " fake mentalist who is really good at reading people helps cops solve crimes."   Would have been great right there.   But nooooooooo they had to go with the "lost his family and now wants to help the cops catch the killer."

You probably weren't a "Pretty Little Liars" viewer, so you don't know about "A". "A" was all knowing, all seeing, & everywhere. They thought they caught "A" a number of times too & when the very final villain was finally revealed, it was so stupid I thought I was going to have a heart attack. 

[Irlandesa]

5 hours ago, DoctorAtomic said:

I mean, Dexter had a different Big Bad every season; even before the finale, the big bad in the last season was quite good, so they were able to still be fresh with the same basic concept. So, Jane could have had another protagonist pop up; maybe someone they put away years ago or someone he screwed over after Red John when he was still a con artist. I think we were mostly disappointed in the lack of originality because they really *did* do something interesting, but copped out. 

If you look at it another way, Dexter's big bad kept changing because Dexter was ultimately his own show's big bad.

[GreekGeek]

On 1/27/2021 at 9:06 PM, Stats Queen said:

Chuckles The Clown was awesome, because everyone was so sad and Mary had no reaction but lost it at the funeral. That was very real because sometimes our reactions during sad times are incredibly inappropriate and uncontrollable.

 

I don't recall everyone being sad; the focus for much of the show was their making jokes about how Chuckles died (stomped to death by an elephant while dressed in a peanut costume). Mary was the one who was solemn up until the funeral, when she was overcome by giggles. Then when the minister gave her permission to laugh, she started sobbing. That was true to life for me.

[DoctorAtomic]

21 minutes ago, Irlandesa said:

If you look at it another way, Dexter's big bad kept changing because Dexter was ultimately his own show's big bad.

Oh, for sure. I did want him to 'get away with it' just not like they did. I was just saying that the main person he was after each season were all solid actors and good characters. So they could have done that on the Mentalist.