Tropes that movies, etc. use that you hate.

[Owain Taggart]

I saw her on stage with Second City Toronto a few years ago. She was hilarious!

I think I remember you mentioning that. How awesome an experience that must have been! Yeah, she's a pretty good actress. She seems to be quite expressive as well.

@Owain Taggart you know the Subaru Crosstrek "urban legend" commercial where the woman holding the baby talks about the sound she heard it makes? Is that the actress who plays Ruth Newsome (Henry's wife)?

Yeah, they've been playing that one a ton lately. But I don't think it's the same actress, but I could be wrong. Interestingly enough, I had been watching Rookie Blue a few months ago, and that actress showed up in a couple of episodes. And the weird thing is, she acted pretty much the same way she had on Murdoch. This time she got to play a police officer.

Kind of makes me wish there would be a website where we could look up those in commercials.

 

[fireproof78]

Is anyone annoyed about the "religious character is evil" trope?

Can't stand it.

 

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

If you want to have the "character is single-mindedly focused on advancing their belief at the expense of everything and everyone else", actual religion is just a shortcut. There are plenty of things someone can worship like a religion by another name.

 

[fireproof78]

If you want to have the "character is single-mindedly focused on advancing their belief at the expense of everything and everyone else", actual religion is just a shortcut. There are plenty of things someone can worship like a religion by another name.

Indeed.

Almost anything can be, even without the religious trappings. I remember a phrase I read a while ago along the lines of "when you find what you can't joke about in a society you find what is sacred."

 

[Nerys Myk]

Is anyone annoyed about the "religious character is evil" trope?

It's usually part of the authority figure is evil trope, so no.

 

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

Not just religious leaders, but sold-out believers.

 

[Farscape One]

Is anyone annoyed about the "religious character is evil" trope?

Never annoyed by this because of how many times in real life this is accurate.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

One thing I hate in long running shows is the way they milk the will they/won't they tension for seasons upon seasons beyond the point you stop caring. And what I hate even more is when they get characters in a happy relationship, they are guaranteed to break it up in half a season minimum. They never let characters be happy and never let them move on with their life, and the pretty clear reason is laziness. They don't know how to write anything interesting if the character is not miserable and hung up their best friend. It's not exciting sexual tension, it's frustrating. Storytelling blue balls that drags on for nine years.

One of the reasons Michael Schur sitcoms are such a breath of fresh air, they actually let characters get together, be happy together and stay together until the end of the series.

 

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

I've read book trilogies where the second book features appearances by the first book's happily dating/engaged/married/pregnant heroes, and the third does likewise for both previous books, and sometimes it feels annoying to hear about them, sometimes it doesn't. (Like if the first book's heroes are related to or coworkers/friends of the next book's characters.)

I don't know why it feels weird sometimes and not others.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

If you want to have the "character is single-mindedly focused on advancing their belief at the expense of everything and everyone else", actual religion is just a shortcut. There are plenty of things someone can worship like a religion by another name.

I agree people are too quick to villainize all of a religion because of the bad behavior of some powerful religious people. But it's also hard to ignore that American politics have revolved around Evangelicals demanding religious persecution of anyone they consider immoral for the last several decades. And a lot of religious people who aren't as extreme pragmatically join forces with those extremists. So it's hard to keep representatives of those extreme political religious organizations out of television and movies as villains.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

They never let characters be happy and never let them move on with their life, and the pretty clear reason is laziness.

Blue Bloods has been doing that lately. Most of the Reagans are, except for Jamie, either widowers (Henry, Frank, Danny) or divorced (Erin) but we never hear about any of them REmarrying! Except for Erin and her ex Jack Boyle who it is pretty obvious are still in love and, were it not for Erin's run for D.A., probably WOULD be remarried by now.

But with the guys, why is it that Jamie's the only one in a happy relationship? Why haven't Henry, Frank or Danny gotten remarried? (And I'm really hoping they don't ship Danny with his partner Baez because they already did that with Jamie and Eddie.)

 

[Owain Taggart]

They never let characters be happy and never let them move on with their life, and the pretty clear reason is laziness. They don't know how to write anything interesting if the character is not miserable and hung up their best friend. It's not exciting sexual tension, it's frustrating.

Man, it feels even more exaggerated when you're binging the episodes. But yeah, I know what you mean. At times, it feels like it happens in waves, and you can almost predict when it will happen.

 

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

They're afraid if characters settle too early, it might be easier to end the series.

I hate the way Scorpion ended, by the way. No reconciliation between the characters (they had split as part of an unresolved season-ending cliffhanger). But it seemed like the team kept having the same arguments over and over before that.

 

[DarrenTR1970]

They're afraid if characters settle too early, it might be easier to end the series.

Oddly enough, the series 'Rhoda' had the lead character meet a man and get married before the first season was halfway over and the show scored its highest ratings, yet started to fall when viewers didn't want to see a happily married couple; so the writers gradually started contriving ways to separate them until the husband moved out and they eventually got a divorce between seasons three and four. The writers admitted that marrying them too soon was a mistake and the 'will they or won't they' should have lasted a season or two.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

They're afraid if characters settle too early, it might be easier to end the series.

I hate the way Scorpion ended, by the way. No reconciliation between the characters (they had split as part of an unresolved season-ending cliffhanger). But it seemed like the team kept having the same arguments over and over before that.

What about The Office, Parks & Rec though? It was just as good after Jim and Pam got together than before. And Leslie and Ben, and Jake and Amy.

 

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

As long as you have enough pairs. If it's the main pair off and on ad infinitum, .

 

[Rowdy Roddy McDowall]

They never let characters be happy and never let them move on with their life, and the pretty clear reason is laziness.

On the flip side, my utter hatred for WALKER: TEXAS RANGER only grows every hour. Probably because some stations insist on running it for FIVE hours. Chuck Norris is unfailingly perfect, endlessly invulnerable, undoubtedly happy, and dishwater-dull as only low-key ''actors'' can be, and there's not a single surprise in nay episode. I find that ten times as lazy, but I might be charitable.

Worse yet, he keeps beating up slumming once-great character actors as I barf at the injustice of it all.

 

[Nerys Myk]

On the flip side, my utter hatred for WALKER: TEXAS RANGER only grows every hour. Probably because some stations insist on running it for FIVE hours. Chuck Norris is unfailingly perfect, endlessly invulnerable, undoubtedly happy, and dishwater-dull as only low-key ''actors'' can be, and there's not a single surprise in nay episode. I find that ten times as lazy, but I might be charitable.

Worse yet, he keeps beating up slumming once-great character actors as I barf at the injustice of it all.

Maybe, don't watch it????
"Stations". How 20th Century.

 

[fireproof78]

Oddly enough, the series 'Rhoda' had the lead character meet a man and get married before the first season was halfway over and the show scored its highest ratings, yet started to fall when viewers didn't want to see a happily married couple; so the writers gradually started contriving ways to separate them until the husband moved out and they eventually got a divorce between seasons three and four. The writers admitted that marrying them too soon was a mistake and the 'will they or won't they' should have lasted a season or two.

I think the big barrier with romantic relationships in media is a reluctance to give characters a "happily ever after" trope, so will they/won't they creates simpler drama over having a couple endure.

 

[Rowdy Roddy McDowall]

Maybe, don't watch it????
"Stations". How 20th Century.

Maybe, don't RUN IT, stations I skip over.....OR suffer through the last horrifying 30 seconds while waiting for TOS to run on H&I. I stream Netflix, but there are limitations to every fomat, including streaming. (For example, Netflix films seem to be restricted to post-1960 and are almost all post-1980.)