Okay - one thing for me is women in “uniform” or scientific roles that have their hair flying all over.
I HATE IT. for the love of all that’s holy can you pin it back before you examine the crime scene or before you head out on that battle simulation?
Hair off your face does not look bad. Get over it, or hire actresses with better shaped skulls.
It dries me nuts that everyone’s attractive on (scripted) TV. With some exception, but the rule is that Everyone. Is. Hot.
(That’s a pretty big generalization, and maybe not what the OP was looking for. But it bugs me. I’m sure there are plenty of average-looking, non-toned, maybe even mildly overweight people out there who can act. In some shows, even the extras all have perfect bodies.)
Although some exceptions can be made if the star of a sitcom is a flabby, average-looking-at-best comedian. But he’ll still have a knockout wife.
Can I say that is one thing I like about Medium - they all look pretty average.
In Hollywood no one is less than a 6.
My wife and I call it “TV-ugly”. Someone who you would actually find to be quite attractive if you met them, but who looks ugly surrounded by regular TV people.
Disappearing infants!!
Every show has episodes or entire seasons revolving around the pregnancy and culminating with the birth.
But once they bring baby home they suddenly disappear, left only to be mentioned in a passing “oh, she’s sleeping” or “oh, she’s with grandma”.
Or “Oh, she put on five years of growth during the 3-month hiatus”…
Unresolved plolines. I loved Soap but the husband was a murderer and, after the initial story arc, it was never mentioned again.
Recycled I Love Lucy plots in a show advertised as “fresh” & “innovative”.
This drives me nuts on cop shows. Yes it’s a gritty seamy drama that dares to take you into the dark side of police work. You’ll see alchoholism, trauma, exhaustion, and the lowest depths of criminal behaviour. So how come every single policewoman is a total babe? NYPD Blue, I’m looking in your direction.
People who’ve just finished having sex jump out of bed… and they’re wearing underwear… how does that work, exactly???
The Tracy Ullman show did a hilarious sketch abut this years and years ago.
It was a writer’s meeting for a sitcom about a preteen girl. The writers and producers are all pitching her ideas for upcoming episodes. The girl reveals that since she is getting older her bed time is later. This has enabled her to see a lot of late night tv, including reruns of “I Love Lucy”. She calls them on ripping off old Lucy episodes.
“I never understood why an eleven year old was working in a chocolate factory anyway.”
My one big problem with popular network shows is: Shitty dialogue.
All the procedurals have the lamest, most uninteresting things coming out their “characters” mouths.
“Alias” would be intersting if it was at all sardonic or witty. It’s not. So it is unwatchable for me.
Give me snark like a Whedon show. Give me poetry like Deadwood. Give me witty banter like the Gilmore Girls. Give me word play lik Arrested Development. Give me SOMETHING anything that I can quote the next day.
Or every semi-talented comedic actress who’s touted as the next Lucille Ball. :rolleyes:
To get even more specific than the OP, I stopped watching Malcolm in the Middle a couple of years ago. Not because of the writing or the acting. It’s just that I noticed that every time they switch to a new scene there’s a SWOOSH noise. Once my brain latched onto that it was all I could friggin’ hear and it drove me nuts. No more Malcolm for me.
I hate dialogue where you have one character talking to a peer - they work in the same field, have been doing very, very similar jobs for as long as we’ve seen them, etc. - and explain basic, basic things to each other. I mean, for technical or otherwise jargon-heavy shows I can understand the necessity of making things make sense to the audience, but this is a challenge that some shows just don’t handle well at all.
I’ve always been reluctant to post this, for fear of being viewed as some militant P.C. haranguer. But here goes…
Will & Grace: This year is, what?, eight years the show has been on the air and (to my recollection) they have never, ever mentioned AIDS. As far as I know, there was one passing reference to getting an HIV test, but it was quickly glossed over. A show centered around two gay guys who’ve both been sexually active since the 1980s, in NYC no less, and yet this doesn’t seem to touch their lives at all.
Mind you, this wouldn’t bother me half as much if seemingly everyone connected with the show gushes about how daring & progressive it is. But daring & progressive pretty much amounts to making sly references to the fact that Grace owns a vibrator. Big whoopee.
Mucking with the original format of a good show in order to keep it ‘fresh’. I’m not watching this season of The Amazing Race because it’s the ‘family’ version. Just destroyed the whole dynamic for me.
No, I think it’s perfectly fair to point this out!
Wow–I never realized this. It’s kind of a disservice to its audience, huh? I think we should be talking about AIDS wherever we can get away from it. Avoiding the subject doesn’t mean it goes away as a societal problem. Any gay man of that age who lives near a large gay community would know some AIDS victims, right? In my world, that’s just the way it is.
Gawd. I don’t think there are any “progressive” shows on TV thse days. I hate it when anything’s touted as being “progressive” when it just means “a little less PC” or “containing racial/sexual jokes that your kids hear on the back of the schoolbus anyhow.”
If that’s the case, then Howard Stern is the most progressive man in the entertainment industry.
The entire premise of “The Apprentice” is nuts. I’m in senior management. The Apprentice is about Nielsens, not executive competency. I can think of any number of associates who would blow away Trump’s vaunted field were the competition to involve real world issues. On his show, they wouldn’t fare so well.
And, yes, I’m a regular viewer of The Apprentice. :rolleyes: