Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Harry Baldman]

Ooh! I have one!

In Long Live The Queen, after you've summoned the Kraken to destroy an invading fleet of assholes, the Kraken goes on to ravage the seas, having nothing better to do. At this point you can choose to sacrifice a dear friend of yours (which I had on hand at the time, luckily for me) in a dread ceremony to placate the beast, and it totally works! The only real negative side effect is that you've done a very horrible thing to a person who absolutely did not deserve it, and some faint rumors after your coronation that you did something rather horrific to secure your reign.

[Neonivek]

Ok here is something for Mysteries that I wish more writers/directors would follow

Do NOT introduce new information, unless it is inconsequential, in the final section. It is the laziest thing you can do to make a mystery tight and near unsolvable purely by hiding the information from the viewer (sure Scooby Doo did it... but most of those weren't REALLY mysteries).

Now this isn't because "The viewer must be able to solve the mystery", though that certainly aids in what I say, but rather because think of what you are doing from a storytelling perspective. The Case is unsolvable! The hero is finished and there is nothing he can do...

The villain is put into the same room as the hero, his head hanging in defeat... and then, instead of a nice last second trick or breakthrough... The Hero suddenly unloads a bunch of evidence from his butt that he apparently had the entire time and immediately solves the case... PHEW it sure was easy!

Now there are some shows that do AT LEAST give last second reveals but do you know what they do? Actually show you the evidence before telling you what it is. Heck Sherlock Holmes is often a reverse of this, they show you the evidence but only he can tell you what it means. They don't suddenly pull from thin air that the villain was wearing a blue lapel the entire time.

---

To put it in context I am watching a police procedural show (BOSS)...

In it a student in a jealous rage murders her teacher who is dating three people (One teacher, and two students). She calls her friend who agrees to cover it up.

So she does a genius job at hiding the evidence (Bleaches the blood, heats the body to give false TOD, covers up finger prints, and even plants evidence on a suspect). When the police arrives she immediately puts suspicion on herself and an unrelated person, all this to keep her friend out of trouble.

And... It works... Pretty much completely. So how do they catch the real killer?

Ohh right by revealing... She was the murderer the entire time! How did they find this out? By making up new information last second to implicate her (narratively speaking). This isn't even ignoring the sheer amount of new evidence they dump on you all at once (90% of the evidence is given last second).

It actually hurts the mystery to have the girl who went so far to save her friend end up being the murderer. As well to make the motivation for BOTH murders to be jealousy.

The episode is focused so much on making you hate the villain... that it forgot it had to have a mystery or drama in there. It also required the villain to pretty much be an idiot constantly.

You know... The Pink Panther had a bunch of evidence last second... but that was a joke (and the case was solvable)

[Neonivek]

Ugh! I hate people who will constantly make you watch and do things that they want to do.

But are absolutely resistant to anything you want to do that they are even lukewarm about... No matter how little it inconveniences them. They are just dead set against doing anything you want to do.

You are aware that relationships are not just take right? I am not asking you to do something you hate...

--

By the by it works in reverse too... It isn't good if someone just does what you want to do all the time and never offers much in return.

There is a reason why being "Nice" is often a undesirable trait. It isn't because "People like jerks", but rather that being "Too Nice" is like being a ghost or a parrot. In a relationship of give and take, you are all Give.

[Reelya]

I just finished rewatching British Sci Fi show Blake's 7. Man, did that show lack a budget. That was clear in the sheer number of planets they landed on which had "devolved" back to medieval/cavemen/vikings and the like. They so clearly had access to the props department for Dr Who. Those were the weakest episodes: the ones where they ended up on "planet of hats" type planets. The best episodes involved complex plots to outwit the federation forces / theft and sabotage. They could have used a higher percentage of those, and less of the Star-Trek style "weird planets" ones.

Also, Cally, the telepathic action girl. Man, did they nerf her fast. First time you meet her she's presented as tough and resourceful, but basically from that point onwards she's the Damsel in Distress limp flower, always getting caught or otherwise overpowered. Even her telepathy becomes a liability (it makes her easy to mind-control, which happens all the fucking time. What's the point of being telepathic if it makes you a constant security risk. no wonder her race died out).

But the good points of the show were how morally ambiguous everything was. Without going into plot relevant stuff, one trick they used a couple of times was to teleport a bad guy away. But directly into deep space without a spacesuit, at which point the guys head explodes. It was done in such an off the cuff way that it was amusing. They liked it so much they used the trick (footage) twice. You really couldn't imagine someone on Star Trek basically murdering someone in cold blood by teleporting them directly into space at which point their brains basically explode out of their skull.

[Neonivek]

It might not be so much that she was "depowered" so much that she is suffering from the Worf Effect.

She gets defeated to show that the danger is serious yo ... But they do it so much you seriously question her qualifications.

[Reelya]

Unfortunately there was absolutely no hint of that. The "Worf Effect" requires that 'Worf' is beaten at something, i.e. that Worf fought and lost. But Cally usually didn't fight. She's just automatically overpowered because she's a woman, or mind-controlled because she's a telepath. They also switch the main point of her being telepathic to "empathy", with her being the main nurse on the ship for injured NPCs. So she's first introduced as a psychic version Worf, but quickly retoconned to be Deanna Troi.

A typical plot is that some alien lightyears away takes her over telepathically and uses her to take control of the ship. A comparison to ST:TNG would be as if Data was constantly being taken over by Space Hackers and trying to take control of The Enterprise, and they rarely showed Data's computer brain being of any actual use.

[Neonivek]

I've sometimes wanted to listen to covers and there is a odd trend of people who don't seem to understand the concept of... Acting as you sing.

Some songs indeed you just have to be sad or happy or just sing really well and the emotion and crux of the song gets through. I mean "Let it Go" doesn't really require any level of acting to really pull off, you just have to be a great singer (Note: This isn't a critique of the song)

Yet then we get songs from musicals such as "Mother Knows Best" from Tangled as a great example where no one can even get that song to work because they can sing it well but they can never get across the sort of disguised put downs the singer is meant to be doing, or the motherly unintentional putdowns they are meant to be disguised as. (Got two good covers though of the ones I heard)

As well covers of songs that are meant to be unpretty or a bit ugly when covered? A LOT of people will pretty them up.

Yet why do I bring this up? Well I was trying to find covers of "What's the use of feeling (Blue)" from Steven Universe. The song is secretly beautiful and I knew people would bring that out a bit more, but I wasn't prepared for the number of covers that kind of miss the point. Making it a long sorrowful song or some sort of weird love balad.

Now Covers do NOT have to be exactly like the original or project things in the same way. Yet if you are signing "Over the Rainbow" like it is a horror song (and it isn't ironic or have something to put it in context), your not going to pass it off. In fact, it is far better usually for the singer to make the song their own then to copy it directly... Yet they cannot ignore the song altogether.

[Neonivek]

So I am watching the latest DC animated movie and a problem is rather present in this one.

Yes sometimes having people die and get killed is a way to show exactly what the stakes involved are. Yet at a certain point not only does it get overly gratuitous but it ends up feeling like they are cooking popcorn and whenever a kernel pops someone dies.

So the start of the movie has three scenes of death

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

1st) A woman is on the phone when suddenly she sees demons and runs them down with her car, later revealing that she was seeing visions and actually was killing a large bunch of people... Leaving Wonderwoman to say she is the demon.

2nd) A Guy is about to shoot his family because he thinks they are demons... It is revealed that he killed his neighbors... Cut to seeing them murdered, died up, hanged, and bloody with Superman looking at the man angerly going "Why did you do this!"

3rd) A woman is ontop of a high church holding her baby over a ledge but can only see her baby as a demon. She is clearly sleep deprived and stressed not quite being able to do the deed but also wracked with guilt over giving birth to a demon. Batman comes and offers to take the baby and that she is clearly tired. The demon baby (who is a real baby) does a thing and she freeks tossing it over the edge. Batman saves the baby but the mother fell off the Church to her death... Leading Batman so apologize to the baby for not being able to save his mother. Show the mother on ground with blood yada yada.

Of these... Only the third was honestly any good... With the first being ok and the second being bad. It isn't the only scene where this occurs but... Well

The Dark Knight with the Joker had very few actual deaths... Yet there is a consequence of this. Not only was every single death that much more impactful... But it made every life saved that much more meaningful as well.

Also why is it that mind control is never the go to explanation for this? It happens all the time!

---

The other flaw I have is that it often feels like in order for some characters to stand out they have to make others useless.

The BIG problem with the last THREE Justice League animated movies is that they aren't about the Justice League. The one involving Aquaman just has the Justice League tagging along. The One about Young Justice/Teen Titans just sort of has them show up and ineffectually fight the villain. Finally this one has them basically never really factor in AND be rendered completely useless for no real reason.

[Neonivek]

BOO!!! BOOOOOO!!! Dang it Kid's TV show "Princess Sophia" You managed to annoy me vastly with today's "Message"

!!!SPOILERS FOR A SHOW YOU DON'T WATCH!!!

So here is the plot. Sophia and her friend Vivian are in a 5 man band at a interschool competition. Her band does middling but the professional musician there recognizes that Vivian actually has genuine musical talent that outshines everyone else and gives them a 10 (it doesn't win them the contest mind you). Now Vivian actually does have talent for music, it is likely going to be her vocation growing up, so don't color the rest in a "yeah she is talented, but she might not be interested in music"... No she is a prodigy with passion.

So he goes backstage and offers to teach Vivian. She turns him down because she is in a band and asks if there is a way he can teach them all (This is framed as "The right thing to do"). Yet when they actually go to the lessons he puts her in center, gives her a huge and difficult solo, and it becomes clear he only wanted to teach Vivian (NO DUH!). Whenever she fights his decisions he constantly talks about how she shouldn't hold herself back and that she needs to rise above her companions in order to become truly great, which would be baseless except EXACTLY that is happening, she really IS letting her friends limit how far she can go with her music.

Ohh and of course he is trying to steal her musical talent AND she turns into a total jerk... Why? Because if these two characters weren't being terrible people then the audience wouldn't be on the side of "Co-operation is better than being your best"

Which is my most hated form of persuasion media does... Presenting a weak argument so in order to win it they make the characters arguing it total jerks.

I know that as a TV show having Vivian just have private lessons and still be in the band wouldn't make for good television... But the audience knows the easy solution. Yeah a character can run out of milk and instead sneak onto a farm to milk some, but the audience is always going to know that buying it from the store is the easier solution.

Yet honestly I kind of wish the show would have shoved its head from its own butt and compromised with the ending. Have Sophia realize that Vivian really is as good as he says she is and that she always played down her talents in order to fit in the band... Throw out the solo but instead expand Vivian's role so she is playing more sophisticated pieces. Done! You have your cheap co-operation lesson, but you don't make it by basically throwing a prodigy's talent under the bus.

Bonus points? The Queen basically states that playing in a band sounds better than solo...

[Egan_BW]

why do you watch a children's television show neon

[Reelya]

Bonus points? The Queen basically states that playing in a band sounds better than solo...

Is Princess Sophia the Queen's daughter. Because this sounds like nepotism too. Throwing the talented girl under a bus to play second fiddle to some untalented child of the richclass oppressor.

[Neonivek]

why do you watch a children's television show neon

Princess Sophia is almost exactly what I want in a show.

It features a kind hearted character who wins people over through the strength of her character and wits, winning over friend and foe alike. AND being partially a musical helps too (I love musicals)

I am already watching Steven Universe... and any adult show (show for adults) would laugh at the premise of a main character not being a POS.

May sound silly but the movie that is like... the boiled essence of this is Disney's Pollyanna. Yet it is like loving Vanilla Icecream and so you try to drink essence of vanilla... Miight be a bit too strong.

And before you mention MLP... That show is AGGRESSIVELY Exterpersonal. It is Anathema to me!

[Neonivek]

When I think of old tired out plotlines one of the worst is specifically this!

Our main character finds out they have failed exactly one test and now needs to retake a class... typically this class being FAR below them (an adult in elementary or something along those lines)

Yet while I was thinking about how tired it was, I was like "Why isn't there a show out there that points out how stupid this plotline is? Typically they would just grandfather them in with this sort of clerical error" but then I remembered that Adam Sandler movie where this was the ENTIRE movie.

Yet why did Adam Sandler go through all of elementary and I THINK highschool? I mean he clearly doesn't need to do it, I mean he goes through elementary.

Ohh right! because the point wasn't that he couldn't handle the work so much that he has avoided and cheated his way through life and this was to show that he can and will put in the work... and along the way he learns some valuable lessons and becomes less of a jerk (typical Adam Sandler stuff)

So a lot of shows use that as the stepping point of an unrelated plot. Though I do find it funny how tired this plotline is just immediately. It isn't even that common (I think Recess did it).

It manages to be a plotline that was tired BEFORE you ever seen it! (the first movie to do it... is some old guy who goes to university or something)

[Reelya]

Are you thinking of Rodney Dangerfield's Back To School (1986).

But that plotline actually makes more sense when you read it. Rich guy's son is thinking of quitting college, so dad himself enrols in a course to show him the benefits (also the dad was a self-made man who never went to college before).

So really the only thing in common is "older person goes back to education".

[Neonivek]

Here is an important lesson taught by cartoons that has further UNFORTUNATE implications.

Girls cannot bully boys. You see, when a girl bullies a boy what they are actually doing is flirting. A boy's proper course of action is to just accept it or to immediately start a relationship with this girl.

Likewise if a man is being harassed and abused by a woman... it only means the woman loves him. The man should tolerate the woman's physical and emotional abuse and instead endeavor to make the woman feel even better about herself.

Likewise if you hear a man is being abused, you should immediately chastise him for not treating this woman better.

This logic goes further which is to say that homes that protect "abused" men should be shut down because in reality they perpetuate the emotional abuse of women.

---

For those who aren't catching on... I LOATHE that plotline.

It wouldn't be so bad if there was some sort of insight to it... and it isn't like guys don't do the same thing to SOME degree.

But shows always just skip all that... you know... character building... and instead go with "You know she likes you BECAUSE she bullies you". As if there was any other conclusion. Not to mention that any protests or call outs the male character does in response to this bully is considered WRONG! (because she likes you duh! that means bullying you is alright)

Hey Arnold At least gets around this for two reasons
1) It dips deep into Helga's personality and reasons for doing things
2) It doesn't pretend Helga is "ok" for bullying Arnold just because she likes him. In fact even when the characters accept Helga's bullying even to Arnold's protest... It only hurts Helga all the more (the one episode where Arnold blew up at Helga... She fully admitted to herself that it was her fault and it kind of destroyed her that she pushed him that far)

But what is kind of worse? I actually was in this situation in elementary school though where I was SOMEWHAT bullied by a girl who had a crush on me (somewhat because everyone was playing that stupid kick you in the legs game... I wasn't so it was still bullying)...

And let me tell you... Liking someone isn't an acceptable reason for bullying them. It isn't fun to be bullied and frankly when she finally admitted she liked me, I wanted nothing to do with her. Bullying someone isn't something to be rewarded because you like them.

I'd actually love a plotline where a girl bully's a boy and eventually he finds out she likes him... and then is like "No... I hate you... You are a bully" and the show doesn't take her side.

(Other closest one was Gumball... But the entire situation was different. He was being "bullied" by a girl, but they were friends and they were friendly pranks... It was both his friends who were forcing the whole romance aspect... and the adults who were forcing the whole bullying aspect... and the Lesson was that Gumball should have stood up for himself and actually spoke to this girl instead of allowing everyone else to escalate it or dictate it.)