Are you entertained?

Cafe Society
1

Easily, that is.

I am not. I’m one of the hardest people I know to be satisfied by any form of entertainment. When I like something-- and I do like a lot of TV shows, movies, books, plays, songs—I’ll re-watch or re-listen almost endlessly, but when I don’t like something, I really do not like it.

Lately, I’ve had a shorter and shorter leash. I’ve taken to watching the first 20 minutes of some TV show that’s been recommended to me, switching it off, and never again giving it another chance. Same with movies, books, etc. Life’s too short, and I can tell quicker than ever before if I’m going to like something. I’m just not easily entertained.

Today, I watched the first episode of Parks and Recreation for the first time, because someone in the “Breakthroughs” thread nominated an actor as some kind of comedic superstar (I think I was having my leg pulled—I’d never heard of the guy), and I bailed after 15 minutes. It was a show making fun of dimwitted low-level public officials, exposing them as vain, clueless, self-important but most of all really dumb. I guess it’s classified as cringe comedy? Not for me.

Last night, I watched the first hour of Equalizer 3 in the Denzel Washington series of action films, because I’d seen the first one and it was pretty good. But this one struck me as a cliched “good guy vs. an army of bad guys” flick, set in scenic Italy, and I quickly decided again “Not for me.” Washington seemed to be going to be going through the motions, for a nice paycheck and a trip to Europe.

I wish I were more easily entertained. But I’m simply not, and I have no control over what I enjoy and what I don’t. The older I get, the more I apply Sturgeon’s Law, “Ninety percent of everything is crap,” except I’d put that number higher, around 97%.

2

I don’t know if I’m easily entertained or just good at recognizing when something will appeal to me but it’s pretty rare I end up watching/ reading something I dislike enough to not finish it.

3

No, it’s not. It has characters who are likeable and, in many ways, competent, although they do of course have their quirks and flaws. But it’s a show that took a little while to hit its stride. I would have recommended starting with season 2. And, like most TV shows, you appreciate it more once you get to know the characters.

So now I wonder whether you really “can tell quicker than ever before if you’re going to like something,” or whether you have less patience for things that don’t grab you immediately.

4

I do need things to grab me pretty quickly. In the first 15 minutes, Amy Poehler seemed to be playing a dumb politician trying to please even dumber constituents alongside a couple of corrupt but none-too-bright colleagues. I get enough of that in my daily life.

5

Nah, not easily.

6

I thinks thats one of the draws of Parks and Recreations is that the characters are relatable. That and Amy Poeler is just a really comfortable person to be around. Myself, I never got into the show but appreciate that it is good quality entertainment for people that like that sort of show.

7

That’s my guess. I’ve known plenty of people who have decided after 15-20 minutes that they didn’t like something, and never gave it a chance to come into its own. Plenty of shows don’t reveal their entire hand right off the bat, and others take a while to become really good, and start out just ok in the first season. It’s the rare show that starts out at its best.

I mean, I’ve never seen “Parks and Recreation”, but I don’t think I’d judge a seven season, critically acclaimed, Emmy award nominated/winning show by the first 20 minutes of the first episode.

That strikes me as being a bit arrogant, to put it mildly.

8

Here are the three options:

  1. Things I suspect I will enjoy
  2. Things I suspect I will definitely not enjoy
  3. Things I have no opinion of and could go either way

I have only gone against my instinct on category 2 a few times, but without fail they were justified suspicions; I did not enjoy them at all. Category 3 is the largest, and results vary.

I try to be open minded in that I don’t want to dismiss something I don’t like as bad, instead I accept it’s just not for me.

Though some things really are bad.

9

I’m not easily entertained, but I can certainly waste hours web surfing each day — so maybe the issue is more attention deficiency than aesthetic discrimination.

I did not get into Parks and Rec or The Office (American) until watching clip collections on Youtube. And there are a ton of them on YT. That started with watching early Aubrey Plaza talk show interviews (Conan, Letterman). If those don’t appeal to you might not like P&R.

The other P&R heavy hitter is Nick Offerman (‘Ron Swanson’), who plays a very self-satisfied libertarian. So check out some clips of Ron Swanson or April Ludgate. The show’s first season was rough, but it got a lot better.

10

Would you appreciate a painting by focussing on the top left corner to the exclusion of everything else, or the first minute and a half of a symphony?

The first episode of a series has to do a lot of heavy lifting in establishing the setting, characters, plot premises and exposition. It may also be the pilot. In any case it is probably the least representative part of any series, which can unfold very differently once it knows the audience has established that Parks and Recreation is not a gardening show, or a documentary about fun-parks, and has this particular style of comedy.

Your approach seems the least likely way of finding out whether or not something genuinely is entertaining in a way that will appeal to you. Its pretty much like judging the merits of food by the packaging photos.

11

I know it’s not fair to judge a television series that depends on relationships and familiarity by the first episode. Or the second. Maybe it takes a full season. Or two.

But I’ll never find out. In a million lifetimes I can’t imagine myself watching a show I didn’t like for a full year on the faint hope that it will get better in season two. I can’t imagine why anybody would. What are you thinking after episode 11 is still not all that good? Maybe the next one? Isn’t that the thinking that drives gamblers into bankruptcy?

I don’t understand. People are different. I get that. You want to go hang-gliding, fine. Not for me, but I get it. Watching a television show you don’t think is good over and over and over baffles me.

12

I can be quick on the trigger, as well. But it’s my experience that a good show takes a long time to reveal itself, sometimes as long as an entire season.

I happen to be a fan of sitcoms, which are not considered a high form of entertainment. It’s true that a bad sitcom almost always starts and stays bad, while a great sitcom almost never starts off great. All in the Family and Cheers famously started very poorly in the ratings only to become classics. Seinfeld was #42 in its first full season and #3 by its third.

In the case of P&R the entire series was based around the process of Ron Swanson and Leslie Knope gradually overcoming their mutual dislike and developing a successful work and personal relationship.

13

I’m easily entertained and open to a range of content that others might not expect I’d enjoy. While I appreciate a good story, I’ve become less willing over time to wait for something to become interesting. There’s so much out there now that I don’t feel obligated to invest energy if the creators aren’t drawing me in from the start. This is often difficult because it seems to be the norm now to stuff works with characters that, to varying degrees, are repellent. It’s a bit like food—why struggle to like a vegetable you don’t enjoy when there are plenty you already love?

14

Me, too.

There are some options:

  1. If a show can be started and enjoyed at the point where it gets good, I’ll try that out: start at season 2. If you tell me, “Oh, Babylon 5 doesn’t hit its stride until the second season, but you’ve gotta watch the first season to understand why it’s so good,” I’ll nod and smile and spend the next thirty years not watching Babylon 5 (true story!)
  2. If a show requires me to accept not liking the characters for a bit, but is otherwise enjoyable, I’ll try that out. I turned off Schitt’s Creek ten minutes into the first episode and didn’t turn it back on for several years; but when I tried it again, accepting that it would take awhile before I didn’t hate everyone, I loved it.

That said, @Gailforce, I had the same experience as you had with Parks and Recreation. The first episode I watched, from the first season, was real bad. I tried again some time later, in the third season (I think), and thought it was pretty good. It was, for me, a great example of the first approach.

15

Yes, that was the example that sprang to my mind of a show that, according to everything I’ve heard, doesn’t get good until the second season but where you have to watch it in order (you can’t just skip to the “good parts”). Although I can think of books, or even series of books (I’m looking at you, Dark Tower) that I’ve had to struggle through for awhile before they started to get entertaining.

Your (and Exapno’s) “no thanks” response is certainly a legitimate one. It may come down to whether you find that first season entertaining enough, even if it doesn’t represent the show at its best.

16

My hearing is way messed up, so I have a hard time getting into new shows. I have hearing aids, but do depend on CC which can take something out of it.

But the main reason is you need to dedicate some time to a new show. Start at the beginning. For re-runs, I can start at any season and just watch because I know the characters.

17

I don’t mind if you find me arrogant. I hope that’s my worst transgression.

Life is short, and there’s plenty of shows that have grabbed me in their opener of episode one–Seinfeld, Cheers, Friends, Curb, and a few dozen others, to name only sit-coms that introduced characters I found interesting, complex, amusing and well-cast set in intriguing situations that they sustained over the next x seasons. Why waste my time stubbornly watching something that fails to grab me? I’ll sometimes watch a show that doesn’t sound like my cup of java because a person I respect recommended it–that’s why I watched P&R, in fact, and followed it up with Modern Family, which I gave two shows before rejecting it. (The middle dad was too cringey for me–I might have stuck it out if he had been played by someone less in my face with his in-my-face cluelessness.) Plenty of other shows, movies, documentaries, etc. to test out, and I don’t mind pulling out an old DVD of some series to rewatch, that I haven’t seen in years and have forgotten most of the fine details in each episode.

18

I am not easily entertained, because I have such narrow standards. I don’t enjoy watching things blow up, or car chases, or machines in space. I don’t find being frightened and tense enjoyable, either. But also can’t abide romcoms. Or coms at all – I find very few comedies funny (I hate cringe comedy). I don’t like watching sex or even kissing on screen. Gory violence? No.

What I do enjoy is complex characters, surprising plots, and impressive acting. This makes me a really hard sell. Right now, I am watching the second season of The Diplomat, which is tense but the lead characters are holding my attention. And, Extraordinary Attorney Woo, a South Korean drama series about a young autistic female attorney. Often quite odd, and there’s that semi-alien Korean culture thing going on as well.

19

Thank you!

20

TV shows can change immensely in quality from one season to the next, as new writers, cast, or other folks are brought in to the production. But a book is produced as a unit. If a book’s first seventy pages are badly written, that’s more than enough for me to put it down: the prose isn’t going to get any better. But if it’s just slow, I might give it time: the couple of hours I invest in reading it until it picks up can be well repaid.

That’s assuming it’s slow within normal parameters. If the author decides to spend a whole chapter describing (totally hypothetically) the ship’s crow’s-nest, only to reveal it’s the crow’s nest on another ship he’s talking about, because a crow’s nest is something you stand on, and then talks about other things you can stand on, before moving into talking about things that things stand on, and then the next chapter is all about the color white, yer gonna give me trauma and I don’t care how good the book gets I’m done.