[QUOTE=randwill]
Really? So you’d be in favor of censoring all negative comments about the show in these threads? And be left with giggling fanboys/girls talking about how hunky Sawyer is and how hot Kate is and that this is the greatest show in the history of television, ect?
[/QUOTE]
Only when they’re repetitive enough to piss people off and divert the thread completely.
[QUOTE=randwill]
My original comment, at the top of the thread, was just intended as a little snarky fun.
[/QUOTE]
Oh good. Because I’m all in favor of some good clever snarky humorous witty fun!
I do presume you mean this one?
“I boldly predict that on tonight’s episode, somebody will con somebody.”
Or did you possibly mean this one from last week’s thread?
“I boldly predict that this week on “The Sting”, eh, that is, “Lost” . . . several people will get conned!!!”
Or was it this snarky fun from episode 3.14, three weeks back?
["Sooo. Nikki and Paulo were . . . wait for it . . . it’s coming . . .
I recently decided to start opening my lecture classes with a joke, to lighten the atmosphere for my college students. Boy did I have them in stitches that first week! They laughed and laughed… But I don’t know what’s happening. It’s only been about 4 or 5 classes, and I keep opening with a joke, but they just sit there stony-faced now. I don’t understand. I had them rolling in the aisles that first class or two. Could it be my delivery?
I wonder if it would help if I learned a second joke…
[QUOTE=randwill]
So you’d be in favor of censoring all negative comments about the show in these threads?
[/QUOTE]
Come, Sherman, and let us set the Wayback Machine for the long-ago years of 2003 and 2004, when there was a program called Star Trek: Enterprise appearing on our televisual device.
Enterprise was, to put it kindly, a relentlessly mediocre show. Occasionally it was pretty good, but more often than not it was average or worse. Compared to Lost, certainly, it was high-definition camel snot. And yet, every week, I, and at least a hundred other people, watched, and discussed the latest developments here on the Dope.
I was not especially kind to the series. When it was good, I said so, but when it was not, I tore into it.
But here’s the thing: It was not done out of unkindness. I really wanted the show to be better. And I didn’t judge anyone else’s enjoyment of it, either. I expressed my opinion, forcefully at times, but always in an engaged manner. Because I wasn’t dismissing the show; I spent a lot of time thinking about it, taking it apart, considering what the showrunners were trying to do and whether they were succeeding, and indeed whether their evident objectives were interesting, or if there were better ways of telling their stories.
See here, for example. I thought it was a middling installment, and I said so; and I explained why, at length.
Ditto here, commenting on a different episode.
I go on at even greater length in deconstructing yet another episode. I carefully (some might say laboriously) untangle the threads of the plot, element by element, considering each point and each twist, and suggesting a rebuild to improve the storytelling. And this last is for an episode I sort of liked.
Is the pattern starting to become clear? I’m invested in the show. I may have problems with it, serious problems, which I am not shy about sharing; but my comments are clearly rooted in a desire for the show to be better. Why else would I devote so much time and mental energy to such in-depth analysis?
Moreover, even as my faith in the show was being buffeted by subpar episode after subpar episode, I stayed open-minded: when I thought it was actually good, I was very happy to say so.
But there’s even more to it than that: Even when the show was decidedly blah, I knew there was still a good reason to watch: participating in the social circle that had developed around the show, and getting to hang out, virtually, with the other viewers. Keep reading down that same thread; the discussion of the plot may be incomprehensible babble to you (and it sorta was at the time, too), but notice, even though most of us didn’t especially like the episode, the tone of the thread is still light and playful and fun. We could have been dour, negative hand-wringers; but instead, we just said, yeah, that was pants, so instead of dwelling on it, let’s make jokes about Nazis and Airplane! and Joan Rivers.
Ditto here, in the chitchat on the first page before anyone’s actually seen the episode. We don’t really have high hopes, so we get started early on the silliness. If the show is great, well, that’s a bonus. If not, the tongue-in-cheek tone is set, and there’s no meanness to the eventual criticism.
And as it happens, that show was really, really bad, one of the worst of the entire series, as will become clear if you read down the thread. But, see, the fair-minded, even-handed approach gives one the freedom to unload both barrels into the stinker. One earns the right to a highly critical blast, I believe, if one’s previous comments, positive or negative, have been coming from a place of engagement and investment. I’m not just standing on the sidelines, pissing onto the playing field.
(And at risk of repeating myself: Keep reading down the thread, and you’ll see that once we’ve dispensed with commenting on the crappiness of the show, we drop it entirely and go back to goofing off and having fun.)
In short:
There is a huge difference between being critical and being negative.
Does this make sense to anyone else but me?
And I should also say, man, it is a trip going back and reading those old threads.
–waves at all the old Enterprise Dopers–
Oh, I think I know the whole reason behind Juliet’s covert mission…
To cause a “pregnancy scare”, if you will. The Others will now know which of the Losties are pregnant, since they will be coming to her to find out what’s going to happen to them and how to stop it.
If nothing else, they’ll be asking for injections.
-Joe
Well the show has gotten repetitive with the emphasis on cons and deceptions every week so mentioning it the last few weeks was sort of my idea of a humorous way of criticizing this.
Given the trends in this thread, let me preface by saying I like the show, think the basic premise is great, and occasionally it’s something really extraordinary for tv. But my complaint about this particular episode is just that I felt I was being treated as if I were slow-witted.
In the flashback to Desmond’s days in the abbey, the discussion of Abraham and Isaac seemed like obvious foreshadowing. I thought, Ah, that theme of testing, choice and sacrifice will be revisited when he decides whether to save Charlie yet again. And I was right – Desmond feels he failed the test by not sacrificing Charlie. Then I thought, I hope they don’t make him say something to explain how those two parts of the show reflect the same theme, but, they did. Irritating.
(What order were they, anyway? Black robes, so, not Franciscan. Possibly Dominican.)
When we saw that the parachutist was wearing a helmet and mask, did anybody really expect her to be Penny? Honestly, I would have been totally surprised if they hadn’t tried to surprise us. (Since there are so many significant names on the show, I’ve been hoping that Desmond’s true love being named Penelope would mean that they’d eventually be reunited after his odyssey.)
Bad luck about the helicopter. Yep, real shame. Maybe it’s impossible for aircraft to operate properly close to the island. And Desmond was unsuccessful in trying to sail away; so maybe the Others used a submarine because it was the only way to make the trip.
[QUOTE=Cervaise]
There is a huge difference between being critical and being negative.
[size=1]Does this make sense to anyone else but me?
[/QUOTE]
It makes perfect sense. And it was said very well. Unfortunately I doubt it will do any good. I appreciate the effort though.
[QUOTE=Loach]
It makes perfect sense. And it was said very well. Unfortunately I doubt it will do any good. I appreciate the effort though.
[/QUOTE]
Yup. I’m sure we’ll subjected to more “clever” and “humorous” observations that will have an appreciative audience of one.
-Joe
[QUOTE=Baldwin]
When we saw that the parachutist was wearing a helmet and mask, did anybody really expect her to be Penny?
[/QUOTE]
Not at all. I’m sure we were all hoping to be surprised to find out who it really was. Like, I don’t know, maybe Charlie’s long-ago ex-girlfriend, the daughter of the guy from whom he stole the whatsit tchotchke while he was still chasing the dragon. That would have been a pretty good Whoa moment, followed of course by lots of HeyWaitAMinnitWha.
(Actually, I was sort of idly thinking, as the helmet came off, that it would be a great surprise if it did turn out to be Penny. That would have been unexpected. “Thought we were gonna zig, dintcha? Psych!”)
[QUOTE=Cervaise]
snip
–waves at all the old Enterprise Dopers–[/size]
[/QUOTE]
Who are you callin’ old ? :dubious:
Oh, wait a minute…Never mind.
[QUOTE=Cervaise]
Come, Sherman, and let us set the Wayback Machine for the long-ago years of 2003 and 2004, when there was a program called Star Trek: Enterprise appearing on our televisual device.
[/quote]
Okay, this comparison speaks to me. I had/have the exact same appreciation for both Enterprise and Lost. (Also, my participation in Lost and Enterprise threads is pretty similar: Rarely.) But I read every thread for both shows, at least once I found this board.
Here’s my counterpoint: I, and I’m guessing randwill (plus maybe SenorBeef) rate the quality of Lost exactly the same as you rated the quality of Enterprise. With Enterprise, concensus was that it was a crappy show but dammit we (few) liked it anyway! With Lost, however, the nerd police are out in full force to declare it to be the greatest show ever, and don’t you dare adopt a snarky posture regarding it, you dirty heathen.
That is the disconnect. Your selection of Enterprise was ideal evidence to defend randwill. Let’s look at his first post in this thread, post #4:
Now imagine that his mindset when posting that is the exact same mindset of NoClueBoy’s [post=4274244]first post[/post] in an Enterprise thread, post #2:
I defy you to draw a meaningful distinction between the two posts. And the “belaboring your point” issue is being selectively applied to randwill. You’re not seriously suggesting that NoClueBoy only referenced a “reset button” once, are you?
Of course not. The reset button was ongoing snark mocking the crappiness of not only Enterprise, but the Star Trek franchise in general. In the same way, randwill’s ongoing “wait for it: a con!” snark mocks the crappiness of Lost.
The problem isn’t randwill’s snark. The problem is how overly serious the thread participants are. Lighten up already. Accept the fact that Lost isn’t the greatest thing since sliced bread. It’s an enjoyable hour of television at best. Snarking on it should be half the fun.
Embrace the crappiness and you just might come to appreciate randwill’s snark. As an added bonus, maybe your coworkers won’t roll their eyes so much about (general you) your obsessive devotion to a crappy sci-fi show.
The only difference between Lost and Enterprise is the production value. Plot and scriptwise, they’re about even. Hell, at least Archer and the gang asked questions and actively pursued answers when presented with mysterious circumstances. I’d go so far as to call Enterprise more believable than Lost.
And anyone who doesn’t classify Nikki and Paulo as con artists are off their rocker.
Ellis Dee, excellent post. I heartily agree.
For once, I watched Lost Wednesday night at it’s regular time, came here to see what people were saying and what did I find? One post by randwill which took me an eye-blick to pass by, and the rest of the first page was filled with the usual lurv-it-or-leave-it.
I just wanted to say I like the way the shows changed over the last few eps, but with Loach & Merijeek on patrol, I’m scared to say too much.
[QUOTE=levdrakon]
I just wanted to say I like the way the shows changed over the last few eps, but with Loach & Merijeek on patrol, I’m scared to say too much.
[/QUOTE]
Oh, wah.
He’s still welcome to start a “Lost Still Sucks” thread. Probably won’t get the audience he’s seeking, though.
He’s being a dick. Some people, including me, don’t appreciate it. Last I heard, I wasn’t required to pat him on the head and tell him how clever he is.
-Joe
[QUOTE=Merijeek]
Last I heard, I wasn’t required to pat him on the head and tell him how clever he is.
-Joe
[/QUOTE]
Oh man! I’m totally implementing that when I achieve world domination… everyone must pat me on the head and tell me how clever I am. Man, that is gonna be sweet !
[QUOTE=levdrakon]
Ellis Dee, excellent post. I heartily agree.
For once, I watched Lost Wednesday night at it’s regular time, came here to see what people were saying and what did I find? One post by randwill which took me an eye-blick to pass by, and the rest of the first page was filled with the usual lurv-it-or-leave-it.
I just wanted to say I like the way the shows changed over the last few eps, but with Loach & Merijeek on patrol, I’m scared to say too much.
[/QUOTE]
As I understand it criticism of “Lost” is still welcome here as long as it’s not negative. :rolleyes:
One thing I’ve learned is that Doper “Lost” fans are much more seriously devoted to their show than Doper “24” fans. Half the fun of any episode of “24” is coming here to make fun of it’s illogic, inconsistencies and general silliness. Which has been much easier this season.
[QUOTE=Merijeek]
Oh, wah.
He’s still welcome to start a “Lost Still Sucks” thread. Probably won’t get the audience he’s seeking, though.
He’s being a dick. Some people, including me, don’t appreciate it. Last I heard, I wasn’t required to pat him on the head and tell him how clever he is.
-Joe
[/QUOTE]
As long as I’m paying my membership fee I’m welcome to post my feelings about this show anywhere I want as long as I follow the SDMB rules which, by the way, have something to say about you calling me a “dick.”
[QUOTE=Merijeek]
He’s still welcome to start a “Lost Still Sucks” thread. Probably won’t get the audience he’s seeking, though.
[/QUOTE]
I don’t think anyone who starts a snark-only or lurv-only thread is going to get the audience they’re seeking. Look at the latest Jericho threads. The snark is largely gone, the lurv just ain’t cutting it, and now you’re lucky to get a handful of posts before the thread dies.
[QUOTE=randwill]
As I understand it criticism of “Lost” is still welcome here as long as it’s not negative. :rolleyes:
[/QUOTE]
You have some comprehension issues with that “I understand” thing, then, huh?
[QUOTE=OpalCat]
You have some comprehension issues with that “I understand” thing, then, huh?
[/QUOTE]
As I understand it, snarkiness is frowned upon in here as well.
[QUOTE=randwill]
As I understand it criticism of “Lost” is still welcome here as long as it’s not negative. :rolleyes:
One thing I’ve learned is that Doper “Lost” fans are much more seriously devoted to their show than Doper “24” fans. Half the fun of any episode of “24” is coming here to make fun of it’s illogic, inconsistencies and general silliness. Which has been much easier this season.
[/QUOTE]
Here’s the thing, though. I don’t like the show much anymore. I feel like the writers have conned us (ha! see! every con they do in a show is just rubbing it in how they duped us into watching this stuff). I recommend against watching it to people who ask me.
Yet I still say it’s pretty clear you’re thread shitting. The kind of snark you’re talking about can be fun - if you come up with creative, funny, new criticisms specifically related to each week’s episode and have fun with it, you would probably be much better received. But you just state the same criticism every week, and it’s more caustic than funny.
Edit: Maybe you do more along the lines of the snarky/campy/fun stuff and I just don’t remember. When I see what you write, I only remember your weekly “SOMEONE’S GONNA GET CONNED!” post.
Maybe you mean to be more light/funny than you come off as, in which case I’d work on your delivery. Cause mostly it just seems bitter, like you’re trying to ruin everyone else’s enjoyment of the show, rather than trying to make fun of it in an amusing way.