|
|
Joined: 4/30/2011
Posts: 662
|
I was suffering through my husband's special television selection The Walking Dead about a week ago, when one of my writing pet peeves came up. Now this is probably just me being too philosophical, or anal, but I can't stand it when characters use the "What about your humanity?" argument, especially in a situation that is supposed to be analyzing what is humanity. Humanity just means, "to be human." It has no specific connection with civility or our primal instincts. It does not mean "to be a good person." This confusion irks me so bad, it shows up in my short story "Red Autumn."
Oh yes, and then there is bad pacing and stupid character syndrome. I won't go there, but my husband's special tv selection brings out the worst in me.
So, is there anything that shows up in books, movies, or tv that hit the wrong nerve every time? It can be completely personal, or something that people should never, ever do in writing. It can be grammatical, or subject based. This is about your pet peeves, and while you're at it, let us know how you avoid them in your own writing.
|
|
Joined: 8/21/2011
Posts: 394
|
Well, with respect to television, I have many - which is probably why I stopped watching the major networks. I realize that TV is a visual medium, but I can't stand it when the female characters are done up from head to toe every single scene of every single day (even in the middle of the night, they wake up to that phone call or other disturbance with a full face of make-up). And what's with the high-heels? They're running all over the mean city streets in toe-pinching, Achilles tendon-shortening shoes. Seriously? Same thing with the perfectly coiffed guys who never seem to have a hair out of place and whose shirts and suits are always perfectly tailored. If my characters are running around, rest assured, they're dressed for it and they'll get grubby.
Character-wise, whether in books, TV, or the movies, I've found myself growing increasingly tired of the character whose sole purpose is to provide comic relief - not the ones who spin out truths with their wit, but, rather, the ones who just tell stupid jokes or do ridiculous high school level pranks regardless of the situation they're in. I'm not saying there isn't a place for comic relief every now and then, but those one-dimensional characters and their lousy jokes - Ack!
Another pet peeve: characters who come out of hiding too soon. Okay, what made you think the scary monster/psycho killer/enemy troops/invading alien/evil stepmother had left the scene that quickly? You deserve to be eaten/murdered/shot/probed/locked in the tower.
I could go on and on, but I'll stop there. Love to hear from other people.
|
|
Joined: 4/30/2011
Posts: 662
|
I don't watch a lot of tv either compared with other people for many of the same reasons. I have found a show that acknowledges the high heels and makes jokes about them. Are you familiar with Castle on ABC? The female detective likes to wear them because they make her feel pretty. Her coworkers say she wears them to be taller than the men. (She has more balls than the men.) Either way, I'm glad they talk about the heels.
Comic relief, sadly that has been around almost as long as plays have existed. So I don't think that's going anywhere anytime soon.
|
|
Joined: 10/20/2011
Posts: 350
|
I've had a few pet peeves with TV shows and commercials. I understand comedies have to rely on Rule of Funny, but sometimes I think they push it too far. Especially in shows aimed at children/preteens and how they portray adults.
I was watching the Nickelodeon show "Victorious" and the parents purposefully scheduled a vacation when their drama queen daughter had her wisdom teeth out, leaving their younger daughter to care for her. In the end, the sister gets these other girls to watch the older one and when the father comes home, these two strange girls are wrestling his daughter. He turns around and tells the wife to get back in the car. And he's a cop.
My father and I both hated that. Whatever happened to the children shows where the parents were actually capable?
|
|
|
|
Oh man...I have so many writing pet peeves LOL But I'd have to say my biggest one is what I call IDS, or Info-dumping Syndrome. Just as in life, a reader doesn't need to know everything right away. We don't walk up to people we just met and tell them our entire background so that they understand our actions and motivations. We let them learn it naturally as they get to know us.
This organic process is essential in storytelling, in my opinion. Of course, there does need to be a certain amount of exposition and back story that the reader needs to care about the characters and the story, but weaving it into the narrative is much more productive--and realistic!--than dumping all that info on the reader in one fell swoop.
|
|
Joined: 4/27/2011
Posts: 608
|
Television pet peeves? Show #4,717 revolving around a coterie of quirky-but-lovable coroner/police types who spend their time woodenly emoting while drilling/sawing/slicing into gray-fleshed corpses. While I'm trying to eat.
Also: What's with the whisky-gravel growl, squinted eyes and portentous poses, David Caruso? You're not Batman. You're not even Robin. You're some narcissistic, red-haired Irish beat cop Chief O'Hara keeps trying to place behind a desk before your diva-complex enrages a street thug and provokes him into planting foot-long stilettos into your freckled neck. And I don't mean women's shoes . . .
|
|
Joined: 3/12/2011
Posts: 376
|
For me, one of the biggest pet peeves are characters with the Idiot Ball clutched firmly to their chest. I understand that sometimes as a writer you need a character to make a questionable decision, or even a flat out wrong one, but give me some foreshadowing. Show me the character has an obsession with shoes before they refuse to run through mud in their new Choos, even though the evil maniac is about to catch them.
Another pet peeve, and this one is sort of personal, is that way most current media portrays very intelligent characters. I'm looking at YOU, Zach Addy, and YOU, Sheldon Cooper. The only times you see very intelligent characters who aren't completely socially inept are when they're evil *cough* Ozymandias *cough*. Where is Mycroft Holmes? Where are Jefferson and Paine? Hell, where are Carrera and Grey? Those last four are real people, which means they ought to be believable.
Moving away from that which makes me rant, I've had enough angst to last me a lifetime. It only makes it worse when the angst is mostly caused by angst. If I see another story where the entire plot would be over in ten minutes if two characters who *ought* to be talking to each other (close friends, friendly coworkers, happily married couples) refuse to tell one another things, I may burst. It's even worse when the same pair of characters do the same thing in the sequel.
|
|
Joined: 3/12/2011
Posts: 376
|
@Carl - but wouldn't it be so much *funnier* if they *were* women's shoes?
|
|
Joined: 4/27/2011
Posts: 608
|
Heh-heh! Indeed it would. 
|
|
Joined: 10/20/2011
Posts: 350
|
As a theater geek, I also get annoyed when a TV show or movie uses a hit musical to be the one the high school kiddies are doing even if a) it's well known that the rights to said hit show are not available yet or b) those kiddies are attending a high school in New York City. No school within a certain distance away from Manhattan is allowed to perform a show currently running on Broadway. So the remake of Fame where one of the characters is asked to play the piano in the school's production of "Chicago"? Impossible.
@Danielle: I dislike infodumps as well. Especially as I read a lot of historical fictions. Sometimes it reads like "I did my research--let me show you!" The author gets so bogged down in the historical facts as I reader, I wonder where the story went!
|
|
Joined: 4/30/2011
Posts: 662
|
Aww, but Robert, I like Sheldon. This is where I admit that I only like him because his friends are still relatively intelligent themselves and not entirely socially inept. (I said entirely.) Besides, genius types have a tendency to lack the capability of certain basic functions. I do agree that there does need to be some functional types running around, but I don't know how well they would do with conventional audiences.
As for characters with communication issues that would solve the plot, I totally agree. If one person with a piece of information that solves everything doesn't talk when they should, it drives me bonkers. I put that under stupid character syndrome.
I'm with Carl on quirky procedurals, but I'm totally guilty of my love for Castle as I have stated above. It never ceases to be entertaining for me. And Psych, which the Mentalist totally ripped off. But there is also a lack of cutting into corpses compared to the other shows, along with pretty solid female authority figures that are truly feminine, not a chick who acts like a dude. Psych introduced their female chief when she was pregnant, and I can honestly say I would not mess with that woman.
So many great answers. Keep it up.
|
|
Joined: 1/26/2012
Posts: 28
|
I also love Psych! The characters have a good blend of funny, smart, and slightly awkward, but not socially inept. And I have to stand up for Sheldon a bit in that I think his social ineptitude is a combination of genius and mommy issues. Love that show.
I think now that I'm a mother (or maybe just more mature) I'm bothered more and more by overly violent or sexual content on network/primetime shows-- especially those aimed at family. I enjoy some pretty graphic television (Shameless, Californication, House of Lies, The Borgias... all on Showtime), but I pay for that additional content, and it doesn't run until at least 9pm EST.
And I hate canned laughter. Let me decide when I'll laugh, please.
|
|
Joined: 6/28/2011
Posts: 188
|
Even worse than stupid character syndrome by itself, or angst-ridden plotlessness by itself, is when you combine stupid character syndrome with angst-ridden plotlessness. Why would I want to watch characters behave stupidly for no reason other than to create a terrible outcome that they can then express their angst over? This seems to be the entire writing vocabulary of "The Walking Dead."
In defense of Sheldon Cooper, while he is socially inept, I don't find his ineptitude to be in any way stereotypical. His obliviousness strikes me as original and inventive in almost all cases, which I think is part of his charm.
|
|
Joined: 4/30/2011
Posts: 662
|
The Walking Dead yet again! I think we should send this link to the writers. They might learn something.
A show that I have been quite happy with is Grimm on NBC. The characters do not suffer from stupid character syndrome, which is an A in my book. Even the "out of the loop" significant other is relatively intelligent and observant. Despite the MC's attempts at hiding his new life from her until he can figure out how to tell her, she has pretty much caught on. Oh yes, and it's clever. Vegetarian big bad wolf anyone?
|
|
Joined: 3/12/2011
Posts: 376
|
@LeeAnna, Herb - Don't get me wrong; I like BBT. However, my enjoyment of Sheldon comes from the actor's ability as a comedian, not the character himself. Also, there is the fact that BBT is a comedy, and comedies are generally peopled by caricatures, not characters. Rule of Funny, after all. That's kind of why I mentioned Zach Addy first.
Bones is a drama, and as such ought to do better than assuming "highly intelligent" = "socially awkward". If you watch, they set up a spectrum of all the characters. At one end is Zach, followed by Bones and then Hodgins. At the other end is Seely, followed by Angela and Cam. They added a few wrinkles recently with some of the newer interns, but the core characters still follow the spectrum of "Average IQ = Socially Capable to Savant IQ = Borderline Autism". The same spectrum can be seen in most of the lab procedurals you guys mentioned.
Compare that to the presentation of 'really bright guy' in Psych and the Mentalist. NO comparison, really. As I noted in my original post, this one is sort of a personal peeve, so I get a little more annoyed by it than I otherwise might.
Actually, this is a subset of a peeve I have with both books and TV shows. There's even a trope for it - "Did Not Do the Research". NONE of those procedurals you guys mentioned EVER get video games right. Considering how many of them have a 'gamer' character, you think they'd do at least a minimum of research. Protip - if you're writing video games after the nineties, don't use the term 'High Score'.
I've actually seen something similar in an Erotic Romance - in this case a story where a student comes back and has an affair with a former teacher. Note, and this is important, this was a high school teacher. My first reaction was "um, when does the 'teacher is fired for unethical behavior' part of the story happen?" Because K-12 teachers aren't 'not allowed to fraternize with students'. They're 'not allowed to fraternize with anyone who was EVER their student'.
So... yeah. Don't make the reader slog through your research notes, but be sure you *have* them.
|
|
Joined: 4/30/2011
Posts: 662
|
You're right about video games, Robert, but I've also noticed that even their "gamer" characters don't represent how important games are to some people's lives. I'm not talking people who are obsessed. I'm talking about people who come home to shoot things with their friends as they talk about their day over the mic. How many characters do you come across that are like that, period? Almost none that I've seen. Or who play games like some people read novels, and then talk about the story and characters with their friends. Video games often aren't represented properly to begin with.
|
|
Joined: 3/12/2011
Posts: 376
|
I forget where I saw it (Cracked.com, maybe?) but they commented that when it comes to Hollywood, video games are stuck in the 80s, when the basic game design idea was 'make sure the player puts in another quarter'. That was part of the same article which commented on how the 'technophile' shows like NCIS do things like 'two people typing on one keyboard'. Which, frankly, would get your hand broken. When it comes to personal space, a geek / gamer girl is more likely to include her keyboard than under her shirt.
Y'know, I think I've seen BBT do at least one 'socializing over headsets while gaming' thing. Which puts them one up on the procedurals. Kinda sad, really.
Riffing on Ella's family vibe, I can't stand kid shows that seem to assume the kids watching are either stupid, ignorant, or both. You can generally spot the shows by the MC and his friends. If, in the real world, you'd classify them as dangerously stupid, it's probably the type of show I'm thinking about. Of course, as a teacher I get annoyed by those shows because I'm now afflicted with a crop of students who looked on characters like Chowder and Spongebob as role models.
*shudder*
|
|
Joined: 4/30/2011
Posts: 662
|
Hey, I used to watch Spongebob. He's been out since I was in middle school. I wouldn't watch him now, or ever call him a role model, but that's my childhood.
I do agree that I've seen much TV that assumes that children, or teens, are stupid or just plain ignorant. I would like to see shows with capable teens that make smart decisions without being preachy, but that will never happen.
BBT does get the gamer thing right. They have done socializing over the headset. They've done what used to be called a lan party back before everyone could hook up to the internet via wireless. I should know, I have a gamer for a husband. He does adore his games so, and his game time. When he comes across a difficult to get japanese import, he turns his puppy dog eyes on me. Then there is my little brother who has his own group of friends who could be a less successful, more socially capable version of the BBT crew. Another show that gets the gamer thing right is the now off the air Chuck. I recommend. It's pretty good and only went 5 seasons.
|
|
Joined: 3/12/2011
Posts: 376
|
Oddly, while they apparently require a 'moral of the day' moment at the end, the latest round of cartoons on the Hub network are pretty solid in terms of writing, animation, and voice acting. Especially MLP:FIM. Not too bad for what are, essentially, half hour long commercials. 
|
|
Joined: 4/30/2011
Posts: 662
|
Good to know someone has tried. I'm a child of the 90s, i.e. the hay day of Nickelodeon. I miss cartoons that were fun and clever without trying to be politically correct. The biggie for me was Rugrats. My husband and I still reference it to this day.
Then in the early 2000s Cartoon Network had a thing for violent popular animes in the afternoon. I miss the days when it was okay for kids to see a little blood, but since parent don't sit down and explain what violence entails to children, I can understand why they might take it off the air, or censor it like they did with DBZ's fantastic reworking. (Wow that was one serious run on.) I guess what I'm trying to get at is that if it's okay to show superheroes punching things, is it okay to sugar coat it? That is one of my pet peeves. Violence that is okay as long as there is no blood. With the reworking I mentioned above, I did not approve of the censorship of the gore. Some pretty awful things happen, and cutting out the blood doesn't change that.
|
|
Joined: 3/12/2011
Posts: 376
|
Ayep. I can see if you didn't put them in the program to begin with, but editing them out? Not cool.
Actually, I get annoyed by 'deliberately incorrect' as much as I get annoyed by 'politically correct'. Just tell me a story. Give me engaging characters. Give me some cool visuals. Just don't try to lecture me and don't, please don't, try to gross me out. I'm a biologist, and I used to be pre-med. I've seen worse, if I really wanted to I could go looking for it. KTHXBAI.
Yep, I'm a bit of a cartoon snob, methinks. Also, a brony, but who isn't?
|
|
Joined: 6/28/2011
Posts: 188
|
I'm also going to stand up for Spongebob. Spongebob's friend Patrick has a number of personality flaws, as do Mr. Crabs and Squidward. But Spongebob himself is unfailingly pleasant to those around him, hardworking, conscientious to a fault, kind and responsible in his duties as a pet owner, as loyal as you'd ever want a friend to be ... I mean, his list of positive characteristics goes on and on, and his only downsides are that he is personally annoying and not especially bright (although a very diligent pupil whenever he is shown in school). Many episodes of Spongebob Squarepants contain clear object lessons as well. I never had any problem letting my children watch it -- and of my four kids, the one who watched it the most is the one who is the smartest and best-behaved. Probably a coincidence, but you never know...
As for violence in cartoons, I was a kid in the days of Johnny Quest reruns, so I'm pretty strongly against the brand of no-consequence violence that popped up in the late '80s and has continued to wrestle with more realistic violence ever since. It's fine with me if a show wants to avoid physical confrontations altogether, but if they occur, kids need to understand that they have repercussions. The current Star Wars animated series is not bad about that, but it suffers pretty regularly from stupid character syndrome too.
|
|
Joined: 4/30/2011
Posts: 662
|
Thanks for the Spongebob support, Herb.
Children do need to know that there are repercussions to violence. I'll use DBZ as an example again and its previously mentioned retooling. It is actually the second series involving the same protagonist. The first one, Dragon Ball (late 80s) was intended for children in Japan, so there are crude panty and flatulence jokes, but not much blood even with the violence. In the early 90s Dragon Ball Z was released, along with being far more brutal, there is kidnapping, genocide, murder, and some truly screwed up bad guys despite the vibrant color scheme. It obviously wasn't intended for children to begin with. It's more of a pre-teen to teen boys anime due to the lack of profane language and sexual situations.
Then in the last couple of years they recut it to take out the pacing issues (thank god!), rewrote the dialogue (it's way better), but then censored the carnage. This is where I got confused. Even in the Japanese version it was changed, so I know it isn't just a US thing. (As a side note, this show is more popular in english speaking countries than Japan.) Another thing that bothered me was altering the characterization of the anti-hero to make him look less brutal, but only slightly. Why fix the issues and then try to make it child friendly? There is still genocide and murder. There are still blows that look like they hurt. There are still guys in speedos. People are still getting holes blasted through their chests and blown to bits. There is still a nasty little bastard with a bend for revenge. There is still a 5 year old getting smacked around by his uncle. (Did I mention that this was primarily comedy?)
And now you know my nerdiness. I hope you get my point.
|
|
Joined: 3/12/2011
Posts: 376
|
I think we may have to agree to disagree on Spongebob. There are individual episodes that I think of as watchable, but for the most part? He just annoys me. I think part of it is the 'it doesn't matter if you *cause* the problems, as long as you're kind and good tempered, the problems will go away in the end, even if you don't *solve* them.
Y'know, that's it, that's my problem with Spongebob! Thanks, guys, you helped me spot it! Spongebob rarely if ever actually has to solve the problems he causes. He occasionally has to live through the side effects, but the problems themselves? They just go away.
I agree with you guys on no-consequence violence in cartoons, although... I also like a certain degree of non-lifelike slapstick. The kind of thing that dates all the way back to early Bugs Bunny stuff.
Regarding DBZ, I could never get past the pacing issues. Maybe I could give it another go if they fixed the pacing, but...
Ah, well. Like I said, I think we'll have to agree to disagree on SBSP. Although... as an interesting counterpoint to Herb, my kids get rammy and ill-behaved whenever they watch it.
What do you guys think of the 80s / 90s trend of 'cartoons are for children, and must have a moral at the end'?
|
|
Joined: 6/28/2011
Posts: 188
|
There were some notable exceptions to that trend in the '90s at least. I got a kick out of "Two Stupid Dogs," "Rocko's Modern Life" and "Rugrats," and of course, that was the first decade of "The Simpsons," which had a pretty solid six-year run before all the best writers left. (It still freaks me out a little that "The Simpsons" has been on for over 20 years. I remember fanatically taping every episode the first couple of seasons because I was sure it would be canceled any minute and I'd never get to see it again.)
I think we're closing in on the day when CG animation will stop being "for kids." I'm looking forward to that day (really wish it had come in the form of a CG John Carter, which would have been a vast improvement over the live-action one).
|
|
Joined: 4/30/2011
Posts: 662
|
Robert, I actually stopped watching DBZ in middle school because of the pacing issues. Then they came out with Kai las year, the retooling I told you about. It is pretty good despite the censorship of the gore. It fixes all the pacing issues. All the episodes have been released, so you won't have to wait. I actually went back and watched the sagas after Frieza of the original cut. The pacing is pretty good after the 30 episode fight scene. (I know fans that wouldn't even torture themselves to that again.) I personally like the Buu saga the best since everyone is a little more mature, minus the 8 and 7 year old bleach-blonde terrors. The Buu saga was not edited for Kai. Need any help, I've got sites. (Jesus, I'm an nerd. I blame my husband for sucking me back in. It's sad that I prefer me some Son Goku over Clark Kent.)
TeamFourStar releases a parody of DBZ on youtube.com literally called DBZ Abridged. It is one of the funniest things I've ever seen, and oh so messed up. I can't stop quoting it. It's really quite sad. Don't watch with children around due to language and content.
As for Spongebob being annoying, I agree. It depends on the mood I'm in. I don't have any kids yet, but I don't know if I could tolerate it.
I love me some non-lifelike slapstick. Bugs Bunny all the way! One of my favorite movies growing up was Who Framed Roger Rabbit. Still a fan.
Cartoons are totally not just for children. I appreciate some of them more now that I'm older because I get the references. I'm watching Fairly Odd Parents right now. Still love it.
The idea that each episode must have a moral at the end goes back to Everyman plays, so I don't know why people assume that they're only for children. Anyway, I don't really care for smack you in the face preachy lessons at all. Even as a child I had a vendetta against Barney. (Burn, you purple dino. Burn.) As you can see, I've always had a thing for adventure stories and violence.
Then there was Star Trek: TNG. Since it was on prime time when I was growing up, and my mom was a Trekkie, that is where I got my exposure to "lessons." That is also probably why I have an interest in fantasy and SF.
Anyway, morality is mostly society influenced anyway. Kids would probably learn more just from people, or characters, acting like good, capable people who solve their problems episode to episode instead of being told. Kids learn by example. That probably explains why the kids in South Park are so screwed up. (Sorry, I had to fit another show reference in there. That would be 5 in this post alone, I think.)
|
|
Joined: 3/12/2011
Posts: 376
|
What's interesting is that I can handle a little 'what have we learned today' schtick at the end if it's both folded in well *and* the lesson flows organically from the story rather than the story being forced from the lesson.
Forex - the Letters To Celestia from MLP. They're not always what you expect, and as of the second season each one is written 'in voice' for that character. They even make fun of the entire concept at the end of an early second season episode, where the MC goes crazy (literally - unkempt hair, thousand yard stare, maniacal grin) when she can't find anything to write about in time. The 'lesson of the week' in that one basically translates to 'Chillax. You can't learn something every week. Don't force it.'
Y'know, South Park brings up a peeve I mentioned, but it illustrates it both well and poorly. Well, in that the show's creators go out of their way to be shocking. Honestly, if you're trying to teach me something, shock away. If you're trying to tell a story, and it gets shocking, I'm up for it. When I realize you're just trying to see where my tolerance limits are, I tune out. It's a *bad* example in that it's funny enough that they get away with it.
Then again, I stopped watching regularly after the movie. Not out of any sense of moral outrage, but because... I just wasn't being amused any more. Now and then I'll watch an ep, but only if nothing better is on.
|
|
Joined: 4/30/2011
Posts: 662
|
Every once in a while they have good episode of South Park, so I still tune in regularly. The one last week was once of their more subtle ones, and I enjoyed it. Then again, humor is also subjective. I don't think Family Guy is funny, everyone else I know does.
I will say that "getting away" with something like South Park is a talent in itself. I watch just to see what Stone and Parker's screwed up minds can come up with that week. That can be it's own kind of entertainment to a writer. It makes me wonder where they get this stuff in 5 days (the length it takes to make an episode).
|
|
Joined: 6/28/2011
Posts: 188
|
Parker and Stone are brilliant, but they lost me with their Indiana Jones episode right after the fourth movie came out. I'm really, really hard to offend, but that one did the trick.
|
|
Joined: 10/20/2011
Posts: 350
|
I'm raising a thread from the dead!
A recent plot point on Smash got me seeing red. One new character is a young playwright and has a reading of his musical. The audience doesn't hear it, but the characters who took part in it tell us it is bad. They don't stick around to help him fix it though. It's pretty much "It sucks so you suck too." No one ever comes out and says that it's first draft so of course it's not going to be good. That if you aren't good on the first try then you should just give up. For a show about theater and the arts, it's quite disturbing.
|
|
|
|
oh wow. 
|
|
Joined: 4/30/2011
Posts: 662
|
Alex, Smash does a lot of things that kept me from watching the second season. I gave up.
On a different note, I went back and reread some of the previous posts. I have discovered another reason why I love Grimm. Recently they did an episode involving the development of an MMORPG. They tried really hard to get it right. They screwed up in a couple places, but they at least made gamers people. My gamer husband even approved.
Although, in general, that show tries really hard not to fall in a lot of traps that procedurals and urban fantasies have a tendency to stumble in. (I said tries.) I think it comes down to a focus on plot and character development. It helps that the MC doesn't whine or feel entitled to anything. He's far from perfect, but he at least knows he has to put one foot in front of the other to get anything done.
Enter another pet peeve I have: whining. It's the reason why I had to stop watching Supernatural. I get it. You're not happy. Shut up.
|
|
|
|
Anyone else watching Defiance? I threw a fit at the end of the second episode, wasn't happy with the third, and am debating whether I'll stick around for the fourth.
What got me in the second episode was the ending. Not the subject matter and how it was handled. The music. I'm still seeing red over that one. Whoever was in charge of the music chose to place a (really bad, imho) cover of Nirvana's Come As You Are over a funeral scene. I recognized the music in the first chord, and my first and single thought was, "Why WHY did they chose this music over this scene?"
It's like that new GE commercial with Agent Smith from The Matrix. Are people just picking up "this is so cool!" and not doing any further research??
I keep thinking, over and over because I just can't let it go, that Kurt Cobain is rolling over in his grave because his music is being abused like this. Here's a brief bit on what the song's about from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Come_as_You_Are_(Nirvana_song)#Composition_and_lyrics
For the record, the music wasn't good at the end of the third episode, either; I just rolled my eyes and turned it off.
|
|
Joined: 4/30/2011
Posts: 662
|
I have no idea how that makes sense. At all. I just listened to the song. Over a funeral, it would probably be more offensive than anything.
I agree with your observation that people need to do more research. I saw a trailer for a horror movie that used a song about suicide. Yeah, that was tasteless.
The Agent Smith one. That commercial creeps me out a bit.
|
|
|
|
To boot, the cover they used in Defiance was awful; I mean, it was just a horrific remake. Aside from not be appropriate to the story.
Yeah, that GE commercial doesn't do what GE wants it to do. Not at all.
|
|
Joined: 6/28/2011
Posts: 188
|
The "closing montage over an eccentric cover of an emotionally intense song" gimmick is fast becoming a cliche, and I'm sorry to see Defiance trying to wring dramatic respectability out of it. They did a pretty good job with that trick on Stargate: Universe, but even when it's done well, it gets old if you make it a crutch. In Defiance's case, they're not even doing it well.
Overall, it's not a horrible show - I'd say it's head and shoulders above drivel like Terra Nova or Revolution. But it hasn't yet found anything to really recommend it to me, and cheap stunts like the Nirvana song aren't going to keep me watching.
I haven't seen the Agent Smith commercial ... but then, I haven't seen the second and third Matrix movies either.
|
|
Joined: 4/30/2011
Posts: 662
|
I haven't watched Defiance, but I haven't watched much of the televised epic sci-fi because most of them have been let downs. I also have this nasty habit of sticking with terrible shows and letting them drive me crazy because they showed so much promise in the beginning (Once Upon a Time). I don't want to get sucked in again. My husband wants to watch Defiance, but I have politely not recorded it since he still has to catch up on the Walking Dead.
As for bad covers of good songs in TV, I agree it can be a terrible decision. Then you get a show that actually picks a song with lyrics that actually manage to fit. The pilot for Grimm used the original Sweet Dreams by the Eurythmics in the beginning (and even tied it into the plot). And at the end they used the Marilyn Manson version. They don't use popular songs very often (but they use originals when they do), so I can forgive whomever decided to do that. They get a pass for being a giant nerd.
|
|
Joined: 10/20/2011
Posts: 350
|
Well, for it's flaws, at least Smash chooses which songs it covers carefully and makes them appropriate to what is going on. Glee is hit or miss. Sometimes you can tell when someone just wanted a certain song in the episode so the writers had to create the scenario because it is really contrived. Or awkward, like the Glee kids singing "Do They Know It's Christmas?" to people in a soup kitchen.
|
|
Joined: 4/30/2011
Posts: 662
|
Yeah, still have no idea why I watch Glee. It's all top 40 hits now. I listen to a lot of alternative rock, and they don't do very much of that. I don't know if that's a bad thing, or if I'm happy they haven't ruined anything I love.
|
|
|
|
In Defiance's case, they're not even doing it well.
It's like they're not even trying.
cheap stunts like the Nirvana song aren't going to keep me watching
Right there with you. I'm going to watch the fourth episode, but after that I'm not so sure.
I haven't seen the Agent Smith commercial
Just for you ~> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXvi0LNihfo
I haven't watched Defiance, but I haven't watched much of the televised epic sci-fi because most of them have been let downs.
I watched the first twenty minutes of it and gave up. Then, I had people tell me, you gotta watch it. It got better, they said. Remember "the tv brick"? I still wish I'd had one at the end of that second episode.
As for bad covers of good songs in TV, I agree it can be a terrible decision.
In Defiance's case, it's like someone heard some "pretty words" somewhere in the song, decided they fit, and ran with it. Which is awful.
Grimm used the original Sweet Dreams by the Eurythmics in the beginning (and even tied it into the plot). And at the end they used the Marilyn Manson version.
I saw just that one episode of Grimm, and the only thing I liked about it was their choice of music and how well it was done.
|
|
Joined: 4/30/2011
Posts: 662
|
I saw just that one episode of Grimm, and the only thing I liked about it was their choice of music and how well it was done.
I like the show because just about everything about it is solid. When they misstep, it's usually in the research aspect, but it's minor. I admit the first season suffers from bad pacing, not even picking up until about half a season. Most people who don't like it just can't get into it. I get that. I think I like the show because the writers don't cut corners to get the easy drama, and the "explainers" are limited to the amount of time they can keep the MC's attention.
|
|
|
|
I admit, it's really difficult to get me interested in anything on television.
|
|
Joined: 4/30/2011
Posts: 662
|
I totally get that. Most of the new shows people watch I just kind of tune out, but my husband is not a reader. TV and video games is what we share, so I end up with a few favorites. My husband and I actually started watching Grimm around the time we couldn't afford to do anything but sit on our couch. And it gives my mom and I something to talk about on the phone.
Speaking of my mother, she has this rule that she raised my brother and I with. Don't judge a show until you watch the first season. It's a pretty good rule for the most part. Considering how many people interfere with TV show production, it can actually take a while for the production to gain its legs or start showing its flaws.
That said, if you refer back to my earlier posts, I have a very low tolerance for stupid characters, communication errors, and cheap drama.
|
|
|
|
yeah i've kept up with the whole thread i just have very low tolerance for tv. my grandmother's policy was - if you had time to sit in front of the tv, you had time to be doing something else. she'd turn it off, put a book in my hands and send me outside or give me a chore to do or something.
|
|
Joined: 4/30/2011
Posts: 662
|
I actually don't watch that much TV because I have other stuff, better stuff, to do. I maybe watch two hours, if that. I've gone whole days with no TV.
|
|
|
|
i often forget i even own one. seriously.
|
|
Joined: 4/30/2011
Posts: 662
|
I admit, that would be nice, but I love video games too much to forget I own one. On a side note, I don't see cable for days at a time. A good game will do that too you.
|
|
|
|
Yeah, the whole world disappears when I turn on The Sims 3 or Rollercoaster Tycoon 3 ...
|
|
Joined: 5/6/2013
Posts: 1
|
I'll admit it now, at one time I was a TV hound, now a days I have less and less time for it. Reality TV has become boring to almost irritating. When watching TV I'll actually watch something worth watching, an inspirational, uplifting show or comedy. Hallmark films are great to watch,they inspire me to write more, my biggest pet peeve is having writer's block, when nothing comes to you is the worst feeling. I'll also watch the history channel,always something educating comes from watching the history channel.
|
|
|
|