…the produced were just leading the audience around by the nose.
Ha! Had the same reaction watching the two pilots. It's TV that makes people who don't want to think think they're smart because they were made to "think" about all the contrived nonsense.
So I find programs about science to have nothing I don't already know, but the pictures and videos are pretty, at least.
You're absolutely right, but a show that wins an Emmy or is even just nominated will get an increase in viewers thus increasing the revenue of it's network. I didn't only mention those shows because I think they're good I mentioned them because they're different. CSI was fresh and different when it came out, but instead of the networks looking for the next 'fresh and new' idea they instead gave us CSI:Miami and CSI:New York, meanwhile there are tons of ideas out there.
What you're saying is true. But again, this is entertainment. It doesn't have to be logical, or intellectually stimulating, etc. it just has to be fun. When we get together with friends, how often are we discussing philosophy? Is rarely happens. Friends are there to enjoy, even with silliness. The same thi g is true for entertainment. I like a number of shows that I know are less than perfect, but they're fun to watch. And that's all we have the right to ask from entertainment. The question of quality is never the real issue, just whether we enjoy it. I hate the false intellectual position some take about the quality of Tv. It's more snobbism than anything else. A sense of "I'm better than you because I won't watch that stuff."
Ha! Had the same reaction watching the two pilots. It's TV that makes people who don't want to think think they're smart because they were made to "think" about all the contrived nonsense.
I had to think about that before I understood it. But I think you are taking too much out of what you see. Entertainment is for enjoyment, not for analysis. If you watch something, and all you can think about are the problems, then you fail to understand the point to it. I like CSI, which is a program brought up here. I do understand how much is nonsense. I know too much about the science to take all of what they do as fact. Yet, I enjoy the shows. So sometimes, I can slap my hand over my eyes in frustration over some analysis they've done on a machine that hasn't been invented yet. But still, the shows are fun. You just have to let that pass.
I don't see why you have problems with this. It's all in the fun, even the "contrived nonsense." Sometimes, that's the best part of it. It's why there are movies that are so bad that they don't receive a single good critical review, but are big hits. It doesn't have to make sense, it just has to be fun. If you watch with an ever increasing sense of outrage, as you apparently do, then you will never enjoy anything entirely, because I've not yet found anything that was completely correct, including the movie "Lincoln" which has receives all those accolades. Plenty of errors in that.
If you watch with an ever increasing sense of outrage, as you apparently do, then you will never enjoy anything entirely…
That's why I don't watch. I prefer a plot without holes. Yeah, leave it open-ended at the end. Keep the audience guessing. Done right, that can often be better than tying it all up.
But when the plot itself is dependent on things that are never addressed in any form (and which can even change mid-story), why bother? It's not an issue of 1:1 accuracy with reality, it's an issue of having internal accuracy.
That's why I don't watch. I prefer a plot without holes. Yeah, leave it open-ended at the end. Keep the audience guessing. Done right, that can often be better than tying it all up.
But when the plot itself is dependent on things that are never addressed in any form (and which can even change mid-story), why bother? It's not an issue of 1:1 accuracy with reality, it's an issue of having internal accuracy.
That you're pretending there is no objective measure of quality makes this argument pointless. There is.
No, there isn't. Once we talk about social matters, all objective measurements go out the window. When it comes to popular entertainment, what matters is whether people, those the entertainment is aimed at, enjoy it. Sometimes critical comments agree with that popularity, and sometimes, they don't. Should this matter to the people who partake of that entertainment? No, of course not. If you want to pretend that there are objective measurements, that all critics are equally capable, or that they even qualify to judge certain types of entertainment, then fine, you can allow yourself to be fooled by that. But most of us aren't. If we like something, we don't, and shouldn't be concerned by what some outside "critic" thinks of it.
Comments
Originally Posted by melgross
…the produced were just leading the audience around by the nose.
Ha! Had the same reaction watching the two pilots. It's TV that makes people who don't want to think think they're smart because they were made to "think" about all the contrived nonsense.
So I find programs about science to have nothing I don't already know, but the pictures and videos are pretty, at least.
Ain't that the truth…
What you're saying is true. But again, this is entertainment. It doesn't have to be logical, or intellectually stimulating, etc. it just has to be fun. When we get together with friends, how often are we discussing philosophy? Is rarely happens. Friends are there to enjoy, even with silliness. The same thi g is true for entertainment. I like a number of shows that I know are less than perfect, but they're fun to watch. And that's all we have the right to ask from entertainment. The question of quality is never the real issue, just whether we enjoy it. I hate the false intellectual position some take about the quality of Tv. It's more snobbism than anything else. A sense of "I'm better than you because I won't watch that stuff."
I had to think about that before I understood it. But I think you are taking too much out of what you see. Entertainment is for enjoyment, not for analysis. If you watch something, and all you can think about are the problems, then you fail to understand the point to it. I like CSI, which is a program brought up here. I do understand how much is nonsense. I know too much about the science to take all of what they do as fact. Yet, I enjoy the shows. So sometimes, I can slap my hand over my eyes in frustration over some analysis they've done on a machine that hasn't been invented yet. But still, the shows are fun. You just have to let that pass.
I don't see why you have problems with this. It's all in the fun, even the "contrived nonsense." Sometimes, that's the best part of it. It's why there are movies that are so bad that they don't receive a single good critical review, but are big hits. It doesn't have to make sense, it just has to be fun. If you watch with an ever increasing sense of outrage, as you apparently do, then you will never enjoy anything entirely, because I've not yet found anything that was completely correct, including the movie "Lincoln" which has receives all those accolades. Plenty of errors in that.
Originally Posted by melgross
If you watch with an ever increasing sense of outrage, as you apparently do, then you will never enjoy anything entirely…
That's why I don't watch. I prefer a plot without holes. Yeah, leave it open-ended at the end. Keep the audience guessing. Done right, that can often be better than tying it all up.
But when the plot itself is dependent on things that are never addressed in any form (and which can even change mid-story), why bother? It's not an issue of 1:1 accuracy with reality, it's an issue of having internal accuracy.
See, you're doing exactly what I'm saying.
Originally Posted by melgross
See, you're doing exactly what I'm saying.
That you're pretending there is no objective measure of quality makes this argument pointless. There is.
No, there isn't. Once we talk about social matters, all objective measurements go out the window. When it comes to popular entertainment, what matters is whether people, those the entertainment is aimed at, enjoy it. Sometimes critical comments agree with that popularity, and sometimes, they don't. Should this matter to the people who partake of that entertainment? No, of course not. If you want to pretend that there are objective measurements, that all critics are equally capable, or that they even qualify to judge certain types of entertainment, then fine, you can allow yourself to be fooled by that. But most of us aren't. If we like something, we don't, and shouldn't be concerned by what some outside "critic" thinks of it.