# Does a TV show have to be Plausible to be good? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [April 4, 2012, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-a-tv-show-have-to-be-plausible-to-be-good/617832 "2012-04-04T17:22:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![well\_he\_s\_back](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/3ab097/32.png) [@well\_he\_s\_back](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/well_he_s_back)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2012, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-a-tv-show-have-to-be-plausible-to-be-good/617832/1 "2012-04-04T17:22:19Z")
I’m pretty sure the answer is no. House has been pretty implausible from the beginning - the imaginary position House has at the hospital; the inappropriately dressed hospital administrator; breaking in the patients’ homes, etc. But it was still entertaining, at the beginning. Still, people complain if something really unrealistic happens in a show that has always strained believeability. Grey’s Anatomy Example - cries of foul when Meredith was reinstated at the hospital after breaking many, many rules. Show had done the same thing when Katherine Heigel’s character was reinstated after breaking rules. So - I generally let TV shows be a lot more implausible and get away with a lot more of this sort of thing than movies. Rarely do I find a show (The Good Wife, perhaps) where I don’t have to ignore stupid stuff that would never happen in real world. What do you guys think? Do TV shows (dramas) lose you when they stretch the truth too much? ---
**Author:** ![silenus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/silenus/32/166_2.png) [@silenus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/silenus)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2012, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-a-tv-show-have-to-be-plausible-to-be-good/617832/2 "2012-04-04T17:54:58Z")
Depends on the initial premise and degree to which the producers attempt to be “real.” _BtVS_ is going to get a much larger pass than _Blue Bloods_. ---
**Author:** ![Wheelz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wheelz/32/5718_2.png) [@Wheelz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wheelz)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2012, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-a-tv-show-have-to-be-plausible-to-be-good/617832/3 "2012-04-04T18:29:31Z")
Implausibility, in and of itself, is not a deal-breaker. But a show should be faithful to whatever internal rules and realities it has created for itself. Which is why – to use perhaps _the_ iconic example – we could easily accept the fact that Fonzie could turn on a jukebox by punching it, but we had trouble with him jumping over a shark on water skis. (Don’t ask me what the shark was doing on water skis.) ---
**Author:** ![Zeldar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/b77776/32.png) [@Zeldar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeldar)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2012, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-a-tv-show-have-to-be-plausible-to-be-good/617832/4 "2012-04-04T18:32:10Z")
> [@Wheelz](#): > > Implausibility, in and of itself, is not a deal-breaker. But a show should be faithful to whatever internal rules and realities it has created for itself. > > Which is why – to use perhaps _the_ iconic example – we could easily accept the fact that Fonzie could turn on a jukebox by punching it, but we had trouble with him jumping over a shark on water skis. > > (Don’t ask me what the shark was doing on water skis.) I had tried to say something like this before just quitting trying to respond. It all depends on the “universe” the show tries to inhabit. Plausibility is not some fixed standard for all shows. And it’s not a requirement for good TV (or movies). ---
**Author:** ![Candyman74](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ad7895/32.png) [@Candyman74](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Candyman74)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2012, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-a-tv-show-have-to-be-plausible-to-be-good/617832/5 "2012-04-04T18:33:21Z")
Yeah, like has been said above, depends on the universe. A superhero show isn’t plausible by definition, but you buy into it. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Devil\_s\_Grandmother](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/74df32/32.png) [@The\_Devil\_s\_Grandmother](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Devil_s_Grandmother)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2012, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-a-tv-show-have-to-be-plausible-to-be-good/617832/6 "2012-04-04T18:40:38Z")
> [@silenus](#): > > Depends on the initial premise and degree to which the producers attempt to be “real.” _BtVS_ is going to get a much larger pass than _Blue Bloods_. I’m with the others. House’s universe is consistent within it’s no-rule-for-doctors-who-are-just-that-good-self, as is the Buffyvese or other magical places. I’m far more annoyed when people on cooking shows do something impossible or even just unlikely. I was watching _Mexico One Plate At A Time_, and when Rick Bayless’s daughter finished grinding the chocolate and almonds, Rick nabbed the spoon away saying let me clean that for you. Any human (or Alton Brown) would have put that chocolate covered spoon in their mouth, but Rick just dropped it in the sink. Un-be-fucking-leable, IMHO. ---
**Author:** ![tdn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/94ad74/32.png) [@tdn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tdn)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2012, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-a-tv-show-have-to-be-plausible-to-be-good/617832/7 "2012-04-04T18:56:34Z")
Plausibility is not required for me to enjoy a show. I loved _Drive_, but it was completely unrealistic. But I love it when a show gets something surprisingly realistic when most shows don’t. Even better when it’s made obvious. _Seinfeld_ was great at that. ---
**Author:** ![RealityChuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitychuck/32/195_2.png) [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2012, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-a-tv-show-have-to-be-plausible-to-be-good/617832/8 "2012-04-04T19:29:50Z")
Plausibility is important within the show’s own universe. When it violates its own rules for the sake of a plot, then it turns me off. But if those rules remain consistent for that universe, it’s OK. Not counting comedy, where you can violate your own rules for a laugh (like Roger Rabbit being able to remove his hand from the handcuffs only when it’s funny). ---
**Author:** ![Nonsuch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nonsuch/32/2922_2.png) [@Nonsuch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nonsuch)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2012, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-a-tv-show-have-to-be-plausible-to-be-good/617832/9 "2012-04-04T21:16:12Z")
Depends on what kind of plausibility is being violated. I find myself increasingly turned off by fake-procedurals like The Mentalist and Bones not just because their characters are so wooden but because they have so little relationship to law enforcement, forensic analysis or pretty much anything related to how crimes are actually investigated and solved. The Mentalist may be quite internally consistent, but I can’t get into a show with a character who would actually be more believable if he had paranormal abilities. ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2012, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-a-tv-show-have-to-be-plausible-to-be-good/617832/10 "2012-04-04T21:21:15Z")
Cops with super-observation - not plausible. Monk, Columbo, Psych, The Mentalist, that dweeb on Law and Order the umpteenth… they see things that no one else sees and ignore the _15 other possible explanations for these things_ to find the killer right away. ---
**Author:** ![amarinth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3be4f8/32.png) [@amarinth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amarinth)\ **Post date:** [April 4, 2012, 11:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-a-tv-show-have-to-be-plausible-to-be-good/617832/11 "2012-04-04T23:59:33Z")
A TV show should be internally consistent - so if it’s always implausible in the same way, that’s fine. If it’s usually realistic, but then has implausibility come out of nowhere, that’s less fine. Of course, if a show is otherwise excellent and firing on all cylinders, one gross implausibility won’t break the show. If a show is more or less crap, something that’s only slightly unlikely will. ---
**Author:** ![Rubixcube](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Rubixcube](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rubixcube)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 1:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-a-tv-show-have-to-be-plausible-to-be-good/617832/12 "2012-04-05T01:15:10Z")
> [@Nonsuch](#): > > Depends on what kind of plausibility is being violated. I find myself increasingly turned off by fake-procedurals like The Mentalist and Bones not just because their characters are so wooden but because they have so little relationship to law enforcement, forensic analysis or pretty much anything related to how crimes are actually investigated and solved. The Mentalist may be quite internally consistent, but I can’t get into a show with a character who would actually be more believable if he had paranormal abilities. This is basically my opinion, I can accept something like FTL travel on Star Trek, but shows like CSI using what amounts to magic to solve crimes annoys me to no end. ---
**Author:** ![Chimi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/73ab20/32.png) [@Chimi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chimi)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 3:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-a-tv-show-have-to-be-plausible-to-be-good/617832/13 "2012-04-05T03:22:42Z")
> [@The\_Devil\_s\_Grandmother](#): > > Any human (or Alton Brown) would have put that chocolate covered spoon in their mouth, but Rick just dropped it in the sink. Un-be-fucking-leable, IMHO. Has Alton Brown been officially deified? I mean, I already worship him, but if he’s gonna start interceding, I’ll put on pants when I watch Good Eats… ---
**Author:** ![astorian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ad7895/32.png) [@astorian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astorian)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-a-tv-show-have-to-be-plausible-to-be-good/617832/14 "2012-04-05T14:10:52Z")
Even in a movie or TV show where we readily accept all kinds of absurdities and even impossibilities, characters HAVE to speak and behave in a way that makes sense. Since a few people have mentioned \*\*\* Buffy the Vampire Slayer\*\*\*, I’ll use that to illustrate my point. It’s a LOT easier to accept a suburban teenager having magical powers than to accept her saying lines or doing things we KNOW aren’t consistent with the way a REAL suburban teenager acts. The implausible is more damaging than the impossible. ---
**Author:** ![hogarth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hogarth/32/1773_2.png) [@hogarth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hogarth)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-a-tv-show-have-to-be-plausible-to-be-good/617832/15 "2012-04-05T14:21:55Z")
> [@amarinth](#): > > A TV show should be internally consistent - so if it’s always implausible in the same way, that’s fine. If it’s usually realistic, but then has implausibility come out of nowhere, that’s less fine. > > Of course, if a show is otherwise excellent and firing on all cylinders, one gross implausibility won’t break the show. If a show is more or less crap, something that’s only slightly unlikely will. That’s basically my attitude, although I’d add the specific point that I’d much rather watch a comedy that’s funny but not particularly consistent over a comedy that’s internally consistent but not particularly funny. ---
**Author:** ![Quercus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/7ab992/32.png) [@Quercus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quercus)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-a-tv-show-have-to-be-plausible-to-be-good/617832/16 "2012-04-05T16:31:07Z")
> [@The\_Devil\_s\_Grandmother](#): > > Any human (or Alton Brown) would have put that chocolate covered spoon in their mouth, but Rick just dropped it in the sink. Un-be-fucking-leable, IMHO. > [@Chimi](#): > > Has Alton Brown been officially deified? I mean, I already worship him, but if he’s gonna start interceding, I’ll put on pants when I watch Good Eats… You know, you don’t have to be a god to be something besides human. Go watch _Men in Black_, then come back and tell us you don’t think “human (or Alton Brown)” makes sense… (You know those are actors playing his ‘family’ on _Good Eats_, right? Uh-huh, you see where this is going.) ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-a-tv-show-have-to-be-plausible-to-be-good/617832/17 "2012-04-05T16:58:20Z")
> [@The\_Devil\_s\_Grandmother](#): > > I’m with the others. House’s universe is consistent within it’s no-rule-for-doctors-who-are-just-that-good-self, as is the Buffyvese or other magical places. But Foreman getting the Dean’s position was a WTF moment for me and makes it difficult to watch the show. So whats the difference? I think that if there is a simpler in-universe explaination that is (more) plausible, it hightens the sense of implausibility. For example on _House_, make Foreman the head of Diagnostics and a condition of parole that Greg work for Foreman and that Foreman can have Greg sent back. In the real world would Foreman be a head of Diagnostics? Never, but it does work in the \*House \*universe. So for me having Foreman as Dean is too implausible. ---
**Author:** ![Greg\_Charles](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/839c29/32.png) [@Greg\_Charles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Greg_Charles)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-a-tv-show-have-to-be-plausible-to-be-good/617832/18 "2012-04-05T17:14:34Z")
> [@astorian](#): > > Since a few people have mentioned \*\*\* Buffy the Vampire Slayer\*\*\*, I’ll use that to illustrate my point. It’s a LOT easier to accept a suburban teenager having magical powers than to accept her saying lines or doing things we KNOW aren’t consistent with the way a REAL suburban teenager acts. On the other hand, _Veronica Mars_, a Buffy without magic, still bore very little resemblance to real life, and yet was somehow a lot of fun anyway. I agree with the theory that internal consistency is more important than realism. ---
**Author:** ![ftg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ftg/32/2801_2.png) [@ftg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ftg)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-a-tv-show-have-to-be-plausible-to-be-good/617832/19 "2012-04-05T18:53:59Z")
I don’t buy _Community_’s premise at all. No way would those people stay together as a study group for a term, let alone 3 years. And the incompetence of the dean and others is so ridiculously bad for it to stay open. Who has a paintball game two years in a row? It’s just the funniest show on television. Going back to _Seinfeld_: No way would anybody remain friends with George. And we all know what a failure that show was. As Jerry would say: “Buy the premise, buy the bit.” But sometimes you don’t even have to buy the premise. ---
**Author:** ![salinqmind](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/3ec8ea/32.png) [@salinqmind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/salinqmind)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2012, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-a-tv-show-have-to-be-plausible-to-be-good/617832/20 "2012-04-05T23:10:33Z")
George and Kramer both have no problem getting girlfriends. Against all odds, you might initially think! Think some more, and you find it absolutely logical/plausible. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/does-a-tv-show-have-to-be-plausible-to-be-good/617832.md?page=2)