To kick off the first week back, some of our staff would also like to share what they're lovin'! Joining me are:
Let's get started. :)
Sunday, June 5, 2016
Series: Summer Lovin' - Week 12
To kick off the first week back, some of our staff would also like to share what they're lovin'! Joining me are:
The Mindy Project 4x21 Review: "Under the Texan Sun" (Vacation All I Never Wanted) [Contributor: Anne]
"Under the Texan Sun"
Original Airdate: May 31, 2016
When will The Mindy Project learn?
I guess that question is kind of lofty because I've never known The Mindy Project to learn from its mistakes, even when it was at its best. But seriously, c'mon. When will The Mindy Project learn that its vacation episodes are not its strongest and are, in fact, some of the worst episodes the show has to offer?
I know what you're thinking: some of the best episodes — the "Santa Fe"s and the "The Deserts" and what have you — were so obviously vacation episodes. Episodes without the crutch* of romance, however, have also included "L.A." and "Road Trip," both episodes that pointed to some of the show's overall, grating flaws.
I'm disappointed the show decided to go this direction because I have been enjoying the past couple of episodes. On one hand, the show did use Peter and Lauren as a motivating factor for Mindy to move forward with her life, thereby showing some interest in long-term character development; on the other, the plot was anchored in the ridiculous reality that a neurosurgeon would not know that her husband was a) skipping work and b) stealing work storylines from Grey's Anatomy.
I'm also disappointed in Mindy, too. For all of her previous adventures, I cannot remember disliking her character more; in this episode, she's abrasive, aggressive, and childish to a new high. Often I enjoy when characters are at their worst, because I hate when characters are irritatingly perfect, but in this episode, Mindy got the worst kind of treatment: the hero treatment, the savior treatment, the treatment where she not only saved a relationship but also got propositioned sex by a man who accused her of harassment not twenty minutes before. When a character is treated in a way that does not coincide with their decisions, it is aggravating to be a viewer. Especially because Mindy is not really the beacon of strength that Peter and Lauren imagine she is; she, nor the show, can even address the weird moment between she and Jody, one way or another!
I guess it is good to know that The Mindy Project still has the ability to disappoint. I thought it had lost that long ago. This episode depended too much on the hope that I would enjoy Mindy and Peter together, but had no idea how to make that experience enjoyable. Instead we got to see — for the second time this — season what happens when Hulu gives the show too much creative license: a scattered plot and character development that feels disingenuous.
Stray Observations:
- * I have said this before, but what I mean is this: romance so frequently, especially at the beginning, is the perfect anchor for any television show to hide its shortcomings and be at its strongest. It's such an obvious, paved path to take that even going through the motions is exciting for a viewer. It's an immediate source of conflict and, when done right, is a really thorough analysis of whether or not two distinct people/characters can be compatible. It's why the Moonlighting curse even exists: so many writers do not know how to create a long-term relationship that mines character conflict without the steady "will-they-won't-they" anchor.
- I know when I initially wrote about "Road Trip" I was positive and said basically that I appreciated the show for trying something new. But that episode definitely hasn't sat well with me.
- I loved the Superstore universe tie-in! I would recommend that show to all who haven't seen. Summer Lovin', right Jenn?! [Jenn's Note: RIGHT!]
Outlander 2x09 Review: “Je Suis Prest” (Preparing For War) [Contributor: Rae Nudson]
“Je Suis Prest”
Original Airdate: June 4, 2016
Jamie has the men he asked for, but he certainly doesn’t have any soldiers. He and Murtagh put in place some training for the men his grandsire sent that includes learning how to march and shoot on command. Jamie knows that to defeat the British soldiers, the Highlanders will need to be as organized and disciplined. Or at least somewhat organized and disciplined – Jamie can only do so much.
The men Jamie has to work with are messy and inexperienced, and Jamie doesn’t have much help to get them into fighting form. Jamie does see the return of some family and friends, but the only help they bring are dirty feet and a bad attitude.
Everyone’s favorite sidekicks, Angus and Rupert, are back – along with Jamie’s uncle Dougal. No one is less pleased to see Dougal than Claire, but Jamie says he appreciates Dougal’s heart and commitment to the Jacobite cause. What Jamie doesn’t appreciate is the way Dougal ignores Jamie’s orders and acts like he knows better how to prepare an army to fight the British. Jamie has seen Redcoats in action, and Dougal hasn’t. Jamie is the laird of these men, and Dougal isn’t. But Dougal is obsessed with wanting to look good and continues to interrupt Jamie’s teachings with plans of his own.
Both Claire and Jamie shut Dougal down. Claire’s withering remarks of hello to Dougal (“It wouldn’t be Scotland without you, Dougal”) turn to words of pure disgust after Dougal threatens to tell Jamie about his proposal to Claire before Wentworth Prison. Dougal wants Claire to tell Jamie that Dougal would be an asset to the men, but Claire has no inclination to do him any favors and she definitely doesn’t believe he is an asset. After telling Dougal exactly how similar he is to the Greek God Narcissus, Claire tells him to eff off. (I’d like to think Claire is responsible for introducing all of Scotland to the F word.)
But this doesn’t stop Dougal from trying to take over any chance he gets. He interrupts Jamie’s speeches to show the men what a Highland Charge looks like, and he brings armed men into camp in the hopes that they will join the army. Jamie puts him in his place and tells his uncle that if he can’t follow Jamie’s orders, he can leave. Dougal does love himself, but he loves Scotland more, so he acquiesces.
Jamie is a good leader, but I find him a boring leading character. Jamie’s weaknesses are the kind you list in job interviews: He cares about people too much! This makes a great dream-hubby and general, but not the strongest leading role. He’s best when he’s with Claire, and Outlander is best when Claire’s inner life is the focus.
There was some focus on Claire, but not enough to turn the episode from just “solid” to “great.” Claire is suffering from PTSD from her time in World War II, and being this close to a battlefield is drudging up some of her worst memories. The flashbacks were nice to see more of Claire’s history, but it made me realize how much I’m missing flash forwards. What was the point of visiting Claire’s future in the premiere if the show hardly goes back there? I would love to see how the memories of training the Highland soldiers affects Claire in the 1940s.
The flashbacks were also a bit heavy-handed. When Claire is frustrated with Angus’s dirty feet, the show flashes back to her giving a speech on how to prevent trench foot during WWII. The flashback then cuts to Claire looking at Angus, only a young British soldier is sitting in his place. The audience should be able to make the connection between Claire and the soldier in her flashback without needing to see him literally take the place of Angus immediately after a flashback, so it seemed like an unnecessary trick. It would have been more powerful to have the solder show up separate from the flashback, to show that he’s in Claire’s subconscious even when she’s not thinking of him outright.
After hearing gunshots and collapsing on the field, Claire finally tells Jamie what she experienced and why she is struggling now. Jamie says she can go back to Lallybroch, but Claire says she never wants to be alone and helpless again. So she stays, as we knew she would. Claire would never be away from the action, even when the action brings her pain.
And it’s a good idea to keep Claire around. Not only can she use her skills for healing, but you never know when you need her quick thinking and acting skills. Just like last week’s display at Lord Lovat’s, Claire once again uses a performance to get what she needs. When a young soldier from the British camp tries to kill Jamie, Claire pretends to be a British woman taken hostage by the Highlanders. She pretends to plead for the boy and says she will give in to Jamie if he lets the boy go. Wanting to play the hero for an English waif, young William Gray tells Jamie everything about the British camp. When Jamie lets him go with his life, William says that he now owes Jamie his life. He also promises that once the debt is paid, he will kill him. I’m sure we will see William again.
This episode looked particularly Scottish, especially in the greens of the landscape and the characters’ clothing. The grass looks shockingly green against the blue skies and muted clothing, and the stunning landscape partly makes up for the lack of meaningful plot. I like seeing Jamie and Claire back in their Scottish clothing; they look much more comfortable and at home.
Aon rud eile:
- The new heading for this section is “one more thing” in Gaelic. At least, I’m pretty sure it is. If you know Gaelic, hit me up in the comments.
- Instead of war drums, the Highlanders have war bagpipes.
Saturday, June 4, 2016
Game of Thrones 6x06 Review: “Blood of My Blood” (The Season Takes a Breather) [Contributor: Melanie]
“Blood of My Blood”
Original Airdate: May 29, 2016
Well, the Game of Thrones streak has been solid this season, so much so that it took six episodes for the show to finally show some weakness. And it wasn’t even weakness per se, it was simply the closest thing this show has to a fluff episode. Next week will likely be the same as we gear up for the penultimate episode (hello Battle of the Bastards) and the resolving finale that will likely involve a cliffhanger. It’s crazy that we’re already over halfway done and that much closer to waiting another 10 months for more GoT.
This episode did see some interesting turns. So far I haven’t really given much care (or any really) to Sam and Gilly’s storyline but the Tywin Lannister levels of awful parenting and Sam’s bold decision to openly defy his father was actually pretty satisfying. And Gilly’s steadfast belief in Sam has made them possibly the healthiest couple we’ve ever had on this show. Baby Sam is also cute AF. Benjen Stark’s return (predicted by a friend of mine and some others) was well played (though it’s been five years so the satisfaction might have past my statute of limitations on caring). There’s a chance he has knowledge of Ned’s time in the War of the Usurper that might be useful and he does seem to have unfortunately intimate knowledge of the White Walkers.
Arya’s 180-degree turn on the Faceless Men was among the best things that happened this week. I was 50-50 whether she’d truly become No One, or abandon her chances at becoming a full-fledged assassin and take her training with her (and Needle). Maybe she can hitch a ride with Dany back to Westeros and start hacking some people up.
RECAP
The episode opens with Bran (still in his warg state) and Meera fleeing from the encroaching wights. Bran has visions of Aerys’ murder, wildfire in the capital, Craster’s son becoming a White Walker, his fall from the tower, and a dragon flying over the Red Keep. Benjen Stark then appears to fight off the wights and lead Meera and Bran to safety where he explains that he nearly became a White Walker before being saved by the Children of the Forest. He tells Bran he must control his abilities as the Three Eyed Raven to stop the Night’s King (in the show referred to as Night King) from coming south.
Sam and Gilly arrive at Horn Hill where Sam’s mother and sister are ecstatic at the sight of Gilly (whom they believe to be a northern common person) and baby Sam. His father, however, is less kind. Over dinner Randyll berates Sam until Gilly challenges him and inadvertently reveals herself to be a wildling. Randyll is offended but Sam’s brother and sisters defend them and excuse themselves from the table with Gilly. Later that night, they sneak off with the baby and the Tarly ancestral sword Heartsbane.
In King’s Landing Mace Tyrell leads the Highgarden forces into King’s Landing on the day of Margaery’s Walk of Atonement. Jaime joins him and they confront the High Sparrow, who reveals that Margaery has atoned in private for her sins and she and Tommen have formed a theocratic alliance with the Faith Militant. The Tyrells realize the High Sparrow has won and Jaime is relieved of his duties as Lord Commander and ordered to capture the Blackfish at Riverrun. At the Twins, Walder Frey is likewise concerned by the Blackfish’s hold on the keep and orders his sons to use the Blackfish’s nephew, Edmure Tully, as a way to sue for control of the castle.
Across the Narrow Sea, Dany and Daario discuss her role as a conqueror as they march to Meereen. They note they will need 1,000 ships to ferry her consolidated forces across the ocean. She spots a gust of wind and rides ahead alone before return astride Drogon and declares she chooses all the Dothraki as her bloodriders instead of the traditional three. She asks them to give her the Iron Throne in exchange and the entire khalasar unanimously agrees.
SECONDARY MATERIAL
We’re well past the point where anything from the book is truly useful but it is interesting Daario pointed out 1,000 ships specifically, considering that number of ships was floated by Euron Greyjoy an episode or so ago. I think the connection there is obvious at this point and we do know Victarion Greyjoy (who seems to be omitted from the show at this point) was sailing Dany’s way with that many ships last time we checked. It’s possible Yara and Theon will do the same and arrive in Meereen just in time for the siege of it.
We did get to see a cool look at the events at the end of the War of the Usurper this week, in quick bursts anyway. Back in season 1 they did film Rickard and Brandon Stark’s death scene in the throne room but ultimately omitted the footage, so we might actually get to see that this time around after we got a quick glimpse of the Mad King himself seconds before Jaime committed the kingslaying. We also had a tiny throwback to the Tower of Joy (which still needs to be resolved). And that dragon flying over King’s Landing has been a vision Bran’s seen since back in season 3 and might be one of the only ones that is a look into the future, rather than the past.
THEORIES
This episode didn’t do much to further or disprove any theories, really. It confirmed Benjen Stark is alive and pseudo confirmed the theory that he became a White Walker (at least partially before being saved). Since GoT hinges on duality, I’d postulate the dragons themselves may have been created as an antithesis to the White Walkers. The creation of the snow zombies is likely what threw the seasons out of balance (years of winter is a massive nope) and the dragons are their natural opposites. We know that the Night’s King and his other three (two? didn’t we lose one?) horsemen cannot be burned by normal fire so it’s possible dragon fire might do the trick. Traditionally, the dragons were discovered in the Fourteen Fires in Old Valyria and taught magic to the shepherds who became the ancestors to ancestors to the Valyrians. The rest of it is shrouded in mystery and leaves room for some speculation. No matter what, we could really use those three dragons up north right about now.
Brienne and Jaime reuniting at Riverrun is going to be EVERYTHING. Maybe Jaime can finally leave the twincest behind, or at least reaffirm a bromance with Brienne. It’d be extra cool if Jaime and his army went rogue, joined the Blackfish, and marched up to Winterfell to give Jon and Sansa a hand. It’s entirely possible, and would be cool AF, but also be super complicated. So we’ll see on that front. Either way we may see the demise of Ramsay Snow and Walder Frey in one season, which would be amazing.
Check back every week for more updates!
Friday, June 3, 2016
Beauty & the Beast 4x01 Recap: “Monsieur et Madame Bete” (The Beginning of the End) [Guest Poster: Bibi]
“Monsieur et Madame Bete”
Original Airdate: June 2, 2016
This episode opened with us getting a glimpse of Cat and Vincent in newlywed bliss. I love the chemistry between Jay Ryan and Kristin Kreuk, so naturally it was a delight to see these characters married and finally happy! ... Or so we think.
What we soon find out is that Cat doesn't want to leave their Parisian hotel room because she is paranoid Vincent will be outed as a beast, even after DHS swept all evidence, beast files, and everything else under the rug. (Again: or so we think.)
We then cut to a clip of J.T. with his students, asking them to pick topics and one of his students unknowingly enlightens him. The student wants to do research on beasts because well, he read it on a blog and knows they’re real. J.T. understandably freaks out, because this means DHS didn’t get everything off of the Internet and his best friend (and the whole team really) can be outed. He immediately goes to the one person who can help provide some clear perspective on this: Tess. When Tess doesn't provide him with the support he’s looking for and dismisses his claims of a threat and exposure, he reaches out to Heather. In an attempt to include Heather in the storyline, he enlists her crisis aversion expertise. They then come up with a plan to break into the blogger’s home and send a few posts in order to control the content he puts out. A little ridiculous, I know.
Back in the Parisian countryside, Vincent has finally gotten Cat to leave their hotel room and, while on a bicycle ride, Vincent senses the slow beating heart of a person on the verge of death. Vincent speeds to the scene, leaving Cat in the dust. He then discovers an accident with a couple and an overturned car. Vincent has to beast out to save them before the car catches fire. What was once an empty road now somehow becomes a road with multiple people taking videos of Vincent and his heroic gesture. When the police arrive on the scene, Cat tries to diffuse them, but she knows the husband saw Vincent beast out and she can't contain the footage that the bystanders have.
J.T. And Heather, meanwhile, are enacting quite possibly one of the worst plans they have ever had in the apartment of the blogger. Unfortunately when they arrive, they are too late and are met by a strange man who is clearly not the tenant. Heather finds who we assume to be the blogger dead, and the guy tries to kill them. Heather is injured and J.T. has to call Cat and Vincent to return home early from their honeymoon.
I get that Heather was injured, but maybe J.T. should’ve waited for a full report from the doctors before telling Cat and Vincent to come back because there is a threat looming. Maybe having just a little more information could’ve gone a long way in this scenario. However, with this being season four and all, we know how J.T. operates, and I really wouldn’t have expected anything less.
At the hospital, Tess is understandably concerned about and upset with J.T. for taking the law into his hands and coming up with this insane plan. They are supposed to be moving forward in their relationship and in their lives, and this is a huge step backward for them. While Tess is over J.T.’s jumping the gun antics, we all also know this is why she loves him. It is in this scene that Tess can sense that J.T. misses the craziness that comes with hunting beasts. But he assures her that is not it, and that he is genuinely worried about the new threat that is out there. Tess, being the incredible best friend that she is, wants Cat and Vincent to enjoy their honeymoon and worry about beasts after they've had a few days off to relax and enjoy being newlyweds. So she sends J.T. to try to convince them to go back to Paris, but the damage is done. After a lengthy airport lecture, Cat and Vincent are back for good and diving headfirst into looking for the killer.
Tess and Cat track the killer to DHS (which, by the way, there weren’t nearly enough scenes with Cat and Tess this episode and I am going to need more), and just like that, they walk in to find Agent Russo dead (RIP. He was a huge help to Cat and Vincent last season) and all beast files and information downloaded. The killer naturally escapes and the team looks to Cat and Vincent to come up with a better plan of finding and stopping him.
After this encounter with the killer, Cat and Vincent fear that Heather is in danger. They go home where they find her in their bed having a great time with a handsome paramedic who works with Vincent. As awkward as that was, Heather made a really good point once she was caught — she needs to have a life. They all do.
Cat attempts to give her the best sisterly advice, but at what point will their lives never be in danger? Cat and Vincent are constantly on the run from something or someone. When will the entire team ever lead happy and “normal” lives? Should everyone be expected to put their lives on hold until the threats are stopped?
So Cat talks to Vincent and realizes Heather is right. They can’t keep asking everyone to put their lives on hold for them. They decide to attack the threat, just the two of them and use Cat as bait to lure the killer to Vincent. Even in a crowded square and with Vincent on high beast alert, this seems like a terrible idea. They assume the killer doesn’t have beast powers, but this dude is definitely a trained assassin and he knows very well how to capture his prey. Cat ends up getting captured — which we all anticipated — and Vincent goes to J.T. and Tess for help. They find Cat in a warehouse where she tries to slow the killer from murdering her by claiming she knows nothing about beasts.
Cat gets herself out of the chains (Kristin Kreuk kicks butt in this scene), and Vincent arrives to save the day. Ultimately, he kills the guy and Cat covers it up on the police report, just like old times.
In the end, J.T. is honest with Tess and informs her that he doesn’t feel like he’s making a difference in the world (J.T., you are a brilliant scientist who is shaping and influencing the youth of today, so have some confidence!) unless he is hunting beasts. She says she understands and supports him, but I have a feeling that this will test their relationship in more ways than one as the season progresses. J.T. tends to react emotionally first, before really coming up with a plan, so this will continue to bother Tess who comes up with plans to take down criminals every day for a living.
Of course, Cat and Vincent finish their honeymoon by bringing Paris to their rooftop, and all is well. For now, at least.
This episode all in all was what I would expect from Beauty & the Beast. I’m sad it’s the final season, but curious to see where it will go. Will this season’s theme be about beast hunting? Will Cat and Vincent every get their happy ending and normal life? Will Tess and J.T. survive moving in together and fulfill his greater purpose? Will Cat and Vincent have a baby? Will a major character die this season? Will we get expanded storylines for Heather?
I guess we’ll have to tune in to find out! Share your theories and thoughts about the premiere in the comments below.
Wednesday, June 1, 2016
The Bachelorette 12x02 Roundtable: Villains Gotta Vil [Contributors: Chelsea, Alisa Williams, Rae Nudson]
The group dates start this week on The Bachelorette, and so do the hijinks. JoJo was saved from a burning building, insulted by a Chad, and flown to the Golden Gate Bridge. Chelsea, Alisa, and Rae have some thoughts.
Let’s talk about Chad. What do you think?
Chelsea: Chad is the definition of toxic masculinity, and the producers are playing him up so hard. I cringe most of the time he’s on screen and am ready for him to get the boot. He was becoming too much during the episode and I would’ve liked to see more of the other guys. I think he’s gonna go during the two-night event next week, probably on day two. You can only keep a villain so long before people get tired of him, and I, for one, am already tired.
Alisa: Chad is a conundrum. On the one hand, he’s completely deplorable. On the other hand, he’s been flinging truth bombs at everyone within a bachelor mansion-radius since he arrived. He’s completely right when he calls out the guys for gushing all over JoJo, a woman they met about five seconds ago. But he does it in such a toxic way that it renders whatever truth he has to say completely worthless. Plus, this is a “reality” dating show. This is how it goes. Did you think you were going to come on here and educate America on how true love is supposed to work? Because that’s not why we tune in to this show. I agree with Chelsea that he’s gonna go next week. As he should. Villains can only vil for so long. Even on reality TV.
Rae: Yes, I agree with all of the above. The point of the games on a group date is to be nice to JoJo — obviously JoJo doesn’t think all of those men are actually in love with her. So to use that to paint everyone else as crazy and yourself as the only man with any integrity because you refuse to say something nice about your date is pretty insulting and rude. Guys like Chad know how to twist the situation to put everyone else on the defensive. Remember how he said he didn’t know any confident women? That’s because he chooses to surround himself with insecure women because it’s easier to pull this off with people who don’t trust themselves. I loathe Chad.
I am, however, sorry for his loss and sad that his mom died because I am still a human person. To me, that sort of explained what he’s doing on The Bachelorette — after a big loss, I could see a person wanting to shake up their life a little bit and not want to lose out on love. But grief is not a license to treat people like trash, and it seems like Chad’s issues go way deeper.
He reminds me of Tony the Healer from Kaitlin’s season. What is it about men who feel the need to play it cool and remind everyone that, hey, they don’t even know this girl yet, so she’s not that special? They act like the bachelorette has to prove herself to get these guys to stick around. I agree that for a relationship both people need to figure out if they actually like each other, but Chad, I have news for you: JoJo doesn’t need to prove her worthiness to you, and she’s got guys lining up to take your place.
I also think the two-night event next week will end with Chad leaving the show. At least that’s what I’m hoping.
What do you think about the group date activities of firefighting and competing at ESPN?
Chelsea: I thought they were cute but nothing special. You can tell the show wanted to take Jordan down a notch because he came out of the gate too strong on week one. The whole date spiraled into "let's attack Chad," and while I loved the guys being honest about him being a jerk, it just gave him too much attention and let him play victim. He makes me miss Olivia.
The firefighter competition was more fun to watch even though Grant had an unfair advantage (HE FIGHTS FIRE FOR A LIVING). I don’t see Grant going far though. His bio online insults Harry Potter, and I don’t need that kind of negativity in my life. Luke really disappointed me with how big of a sore loser he was. You lost to a real firefighter, calm down the whining. I loved that Wells got some time to shine even though he was struggling hard the entire time (ja feel, bae. Ja feel.)
Alisa: Okay firstly, Chelsea’s comment about Grant insulting Harry Potter just made me race to read his bio and now I hate him. Grant, I thought we had something, but no.
As for the dates, well... I always find the group outings so cringeworthy. There are often tears, someone always gets injured, and there’s a lot of moping and whining from the losers about how they should have won whatever sordid competition was set in front of them this time. It basically reduces everyone to the maturity level of high schoolers.
I get why group dates exist. You can’t go on one-on-ones with everyone. But I just wish the group dates still centered around something a little more normal, so JoJo could get to know what these guys are really like. Fighting fire is a great way to show off the guys’ muscles, but I don’t know that “rescuing” her off a rooftop is really something that equates to anything that will actually happen in her impending five-month engagement to whomever wins.
Rae: I was really gunning for Grant to win that firefighter date because I want to believe that firefighters are the best at being firefighters. I am not surprised that a veteran came in second place. I feel like both of these group dates are very stereotypical manly men dates. Maybe it would be more fun to make them try knitting or cook JoJo a meal? Better yet, get them to do all of your laundry to see if he’s really a keeper. I don’t think “most athletic” is the number one quality I’m looking for in a date, but I guess the group dates do reveal who plays nice with others. And Wells almost died for JoJo. That’s gotta prove tenacity at least.
If you were planning a Bachelorette date, what would you do?
Chelsea: Popcorn. Cookies. Pasta. DCOMs in a movie theater. Contestants would win that date with me after a DCOM competition. They’d have to guess my top three DCOMs, then the top three winners of that would advance to the second part of the competition, which would be DCOM trivia. I’m all about that romance, y’all.
... Or a picnic in the park and playing with puppies.
Alisa: Harry Potter trivia night (that one’s for you, Grant). But seriously, a night in with a stupid-silly comedy, board games, some popcorn and definitely puppies.
Rae: Alisa, Harry Potter trivia is the only trivia I have ever done well at. I would so much rather go on Chelsea and Alisa’s group dates than any the Bachelor franchise that have ever had. A movie marathon sounds fun, or volunteering at an animal shelter, or, I don’t know, a game show? They should have a Bachelorette Chopped.
Bonus question: You have one group date rose to give out, who gets it?
Chelsea: Wells is already winning this for me. He’s my type of person, as I too could not do strenuous exercise or fight fires. He’s a cutie and he tried. Big fan. He’s number one in my heart even if he’s not perfect for JoJo.
Alisa: I still adore Christian. He’s silly and smart and seems to have a really big heart. And I totally didn’t mean for that to rhyme but I’m gonna embrace it because Christian is worthy of poetry. And puppies. And roses. Really, all the things. Just give Christian a puppy wearing a collar made of roses and holding a love poem in its mouth.
Rae: Oh, boy. Who was the boy who made it snow? I thought that was cute, I'd give my rose to him. You know what else was really cute? When the men who were left at home on group dates all hung out together and wrote a song for JoJo. My favorite part of any Bachelor/Bachelorette is when all the contestants start being friends with each other.
Fandom Has Always Been Broken (And Always Will Be), But My God, It Is Beautiful
Recently, Devin Faraci wrote a piece entitled “Fandom is Broken.” If you have the time — and patience with some very asinine remarks and deep swerves into irrelevant issues and unfair comparisons — you should read the piece. While I found some of his comments to be compelling and accurate, the fact is that Faraci places social media at the forefront of what he deems to be a “broken” fandom. His hypothesis is that fandom is currently broken and that the reason it is broken is because social media has caused its users to become narcissistic and entitled, demanding what they want when they want it from creators. Even if he doesn’t flat-out say this (and quite a few times, he comes very close), that is the implication. Faraci’s argument is that people who clamor because Captain America is no longer who they were told he was — no longer seemingly a part of the narrative they had connected with and the creators had depicted — are “entitled,” and “lesser than” fans who are simply just demanding what they feel they are owed, regardless of whether or not a creator deems it to be integral to the narrative at large.
I want to use this piece in order to pick this argument apart, bit by bit. I can see, in some instances in the piece, where Faraci is coming from. I’ve seen a lot of problems in the fourteen years I’ve been involved with Internet fandoms. And so I want to talk about the problems, certainly. But I also want to talk about the notion that these fan reactions are completely unfounded or “petulant,” as Faraci claims them to be. So let’s break down my discussion into a few, easy-to-digest segments.
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN FANDOM ACTUALLY DOES THROW A TEMPER TANTRUM
I first want to start off with the negative, because I do think that Faraci makes a few attempts at something resembling a point. I hope, of course, that I cover this topic with the kind of tact that he lacked. Because Faraci does make a point about sects of fandoms who act entitled. I’ve felt that way about a lot of fandoms, including the Arrow fandom recently, whom I love dearly. I’ve seen tweets going so far as to say that because their favorite romantic pairing endured so much angst throughout the course of the season, restoration of that pairing is owed back to the fans next season (and the pairing owed back to them in a happy, permanent state to boot).
The line that any fandom toes in terms of social media and engaging creators is dicey. And it causes even those of us with the best of intentions to slip into what Faraci so scathingly describes, especially when posts or tweets use words such as “deserve” or “owe.” But I, of course, know that these desires stem from something that is not evil or self-centered as Faraci claims. And yet, rather than trust writers and the writers’ narrative, some fans decide to take it into their own hands to try and push creators toward a resolution that they feel is appropriate. Why does this happen? It happens when fandom loses faith in the writers and creators of something they love, plain and simple. The fandom would not be tweeting, asking for a happy romantic pairing if they believed the show would give it to them organically. They’re scared (and with good reason, often) that the show or movie or book they care about and defend won’t honor the thing they fell in love with to begin with.
It’s not just Twitter, however. I’ve seen message boards over a decade ago demand the creators that a character be killed off so that a non-canon ship could become a possibility. I’ve watched as friends have endured taunt after taunt and vile threat after vile threat for vocalizing the fact that comic book television adaptations are not the same thing as the comic books themselves. I’ve seen some pretty dark things in fandoms, and I’ve seen evidence of how fans can become a bit too proud of the thing they feel they’ve orchestrated. Sometimes fans do inappropriately attribute a show’s success or failure to something they like about it — a character or a romantic pairing or a storyline. And sometimes they conflate their personal preference with the success/failure of a particular show or story.
I’ve seen fans clamor on social media, wanting the things they want just so they can be appeased. I’ve seen petitions and more petitions, and hashtag campaigns (positive and negative). And so when Faraci calls out people who simply extend their hands to creators and say, with the voice of a child, “gimme what I want now,” I get that. I do. Because I’ve seen people like that in fandoms throughout the time I’ve been involved with it. I’ve seen people threaten to leave shows because characters are killed off. I’ve seen people stomp their feet because the season finale didn’t end the way they thought it should. I’ve seen a lot of things.
And while I take a lot of issue with fans who tweet creators, demanding that they act like their puppets and do whatever the fans want, whenever they want it, I think that Faraci is skirting a giant flaw in his theory — namely, he is inappropriately equating certain fans’ reactions to creators’ decisions as nothing more than just entitlement. But — more often than not — this is simply not the case.
FANDOM IS PROBABLY SMARTER THAN YOU
While there is some of this “entitlement” prevalent in fandom as I noted above, the vast majority of fans do not get vocally upset without just cause. Instead, they become enraged with creators when these creators make erratic, out-of-character decisions for the sake of ratings or network approval. Take the new controversy surrounding Captain America being a HYDRA double agent, for instance. Faraci cites this in his piece as an example of how fans act petulant, just wanting a happy ending for their hero and no drama. In accusing fandom of reacting because they don’t understand story or the purpose of it, Faraci manages to insult a huge fanbase who has a very valid criticism and a very firm grasp on the idea of a heroic narrative. Nothing about this narrative — about what the creators presented to be true about Steve Rogers/Captain America in the comics — makes sense. Nothing about the way that the How I Met Your Mother EPs ended their series made sense. And the fandom, in both cases, called the creators out on their fatal flaws.
Fandom is astute, and we know story better than the general public. We’re able to track narratives and character progression/regression. So when Oliver Queen lies after years of progress and opening up, the fandom becomes upset. The creators are backsliding their characters in order to serve a shoddy narrative that makes no sense, given everything they told us to be true of their characters and motivations. When fans criticize the thing they love, it’s not because they hate creators — it’s because they LOVE their “thing” so much that they understand it on a very personal level. Faraci brushes aside the notion that this is why fans get upset. He says as much in his piece. Instead, he decides that the reason people become irate is because they’re irrational — because being too close to creators and having too much access has given them a sense of power.
CONSUMERISM AND FANDOM
Faraci claims that fandom has become “consumerist” and that this is what has caused the decline in quality of products like television shows, movies, etc. I think he grossly misunderstands the world of business if he believes that fans are the ones who have the ultimate say in what creators do or do not produce, and is even more obtuse if he believes fandom is ultimately pulling network executives’ strings. In fact, here is what he claims:
I wish this was the part of the essay where I come to you with a hopeful pep talk about how we can all be better, but I just don't see a positive solution. If anything, I see things getting worse – creators walling themselves off from fans while corporate masters happily throw vision and storytelling under the bus to appease the people who can get hashtags trending.As I read through this article, this is the part that really infuriated me because I literally do not understand where the evidence for this statement above comes from. At all. Pop culture has always been a consumerist sphere. That’s exactly why magazines and comic books and television and film studios are BUSINESSES. Creators may be removing themselves from social media, but the idea that corporations “throw vision and storytelling under the buss to appease the people who can get hashtags trending” is the end result of creators removing themselves from social media is rather head-scratching. Where is the evidence of this happening? And in certain circumstances, why is this idea of network executives gaining the ear of the fandom via creators being presented as a bad thing?
I’ll take Community as an example. For all of its faults later on, this is a show that incredibly and impeccably bridged the gap between consumer and ownership. For a few years, Community was this tiny little show on NBC that garnered nowhere near enough ratings or eyeballs for NBC executives to remotely care about it. The series premiere garnered 7.89 million viewers in the U.S. By the second season premiere, only around 60% of that original audience was watching. And by the time the season five finale aired on NBC, that number was abysmal (2.87 million).
NBC had absolutely no reason to renew Community unless it was making them money. Networks are businesses, after all. And when an episode aired in season three where a character named Abed claimed his favorite show would be on for “six seasons and a movie,” that phrase and the hashtag #SixSeasonsAndAMovie became a rallying cry for the online fandom. But what was extremely interesting was to watch how the progression of the hashtag went from being a thing fans used to talk about the show, to a thing that the show used at the end of the following season. #SixSeasonsAndAMovie came full circle — started by the fans, it was eventually integrated into a part of the show’s canon, embraced by the creators in the best way possible. And that hashtag birthed a movement that ended up saving the show. The fandom caught the ear of the creators, but only because of that immensely close connection with the EPs and the cast themselves.
The fandom didn’t stop there, though. In order to save the show, they knew they would need more than a hashtag. But the hashtag became the foundation of a movement — a way to strategically figure out what was necessary to save the show. Namely: advertisers. NBC did not “appease the people who would get hashtags trending” because they got hashtags trending. In fact, it’s extremely odd that these and Sony executives even cared a little bit about the Community fandom. Quite frankly, network executives don’t need to listen to fans. But that brings us to my next point...
FANDOM IS PROBABLY SMARTER THAN YOU, REDUX
Fandom is becoming much smarter than Faraci gives us credit for. Because we’re graduating with business degrees and combining our love for our television shows and ships with logical and practical methods for being heard is the norm. The Community fandom rallied together, but did not directly tweet NBC executives. Sure, they staged an event outside of the Rockefeller Plaza in New York City, but whenever the show aired, the fans were smart enough to watch live and tweet the advertisers. Because we were intelligent enough to know that we should follow the money in order to follow the success or demise of our favorite show. We didn’t tweet the advertisers because we wanted to change the minds of the creators or stop them from following through with a story or a plot. We contacted them because we wanted to prove that our devotion was real, and that it was worthy of investment.
Fandom is still — and will always be — reactionary, for the most part. Creators produce things, we respond to them, and then that is it. Most fandoms will never have such a large influence and sway in terms of storytelling that creators end up with their hands tied by network executives who demand they listen to the fans’ whims and wants. I could be completely off-base here, but I sincerely doubt that the fans are the ones in charge of creators like puppet masters. Network executives, movie studios, and those who are financial backers of these products are.
Network executives don’t have their ear to Twitter, either. At least none in my experience do. It’s my assumption that they have far too many other higher-level decisions to make than follow a trending hashtag and make decisions based on @stuckylover95 and his or her followers. Network executives follow the money, so storytelling initiatives can — and often are — controlled by what executives believe will earn them the most money in the long run, whether or not that actually reflects fandoms’ wants. Sometimes executives want to shake things up and creators have no say in that, it’s true. Sometimes creators get fired because they push back on what network executives demand. Sometimes writers and creators do have to bend to the whims of network executives who see what people talk about in their homes and on social sites.
But Faraci’s gross misunderstanding of how the entertainment business works (or at least his presentation of it) unfairly paints fandom as the one, loud problematic voice that leads to bad products. Bad writing leads to bad products. Bad timing leads to bad products. Bad decision-making leads to bad products. But I feel like you’d be hard-pressed to find an executive or a high-up creative influencer out there who would say that it is because of users on Facebook that they forced their creators to reconstruct a narrative and, as a result, the entire trajectory of their product changed. That might be true in some instances, but those are very few and far between, as far as I’m aware.
If anything, executives enjoy sticking with what works, rather than arbitrarily shaking up the status quo because of a trending Twitter hashtag. They want to earn money consistently, after all.
OWNERSHIP OF FANDOM
I also want to address something that I found problematic (shocker) in what Faraci said:
The corporatized nature of the stories we consume has led fans - already having a hard time understanding the idea of an artist's vision - to assume almost total ownership of the stuff they love.The problem is that Faraci ONLY presents the idea of “ownership” as a negative thing. If you, as a creator, are able to construct a narrative or craft characters that your audience feels personal ownership of, then you’re absolutely doing the right thing. Any creator or artist will tell you that. You WANT people to care about your show or your book or your movie. The worst thing that could happen is for your audience to sit back and do nothing. You want people to be so invested that they lean into your stories and become engulfed in them. Obviously, people should be able to separate fiction from reality, but that’s whole other post.
The problem here is that Faraci defines “fans” as “people who already have difficulty understanding an artist’s vision and only latch onto something that connects to them personally.” Then, by this definition, he assumes the problem is that people take things far too personally and cannot separate their love and obsession from the purpose of the artist’s vision. Except, again, we’re not talking about the decision to have a character go to a party in a scene or drink coffee black, instead of with sugar.
Fandom becomes vocal when the creators begin steering their narrative in a way that is contradictory to everything fandom has been told to be true. And Faraci’s absolutely appalling and patronizing view of fans lends him to believe some pretty dangerous things: namely that if a fandom is vocal about something they dislike, it must be because they’re too attached and can’t understand an artist’s vision. It’s like standing side-by-side in a gallery with Faraci, after being promised to see a painting of the Mona Lisa. Instead, you’re met with a gross misrepresentation of the work of art — something that vaguely resembles the thing you loved but being sold to you as identical. And when you vocalize the fact that this is not the thing you fell in love with, Faraci turns to you and says: “Ugh, of course you think that. You love the Mona Lisa too much. You just don’t get the artist’s vision, do you?”
Of course, that’s absurd! The problem is not in the final product, but in the way that everything we know to be true of the Mona Lisa would not match this thing we are told is identical to it. And so it is true with fandom: we do not, for the most part, get vocal without just cause. We understand characters, because we love them and have followed their narrative journeys. So when a comic book says that Steve Rogers has been a double agent for HYDRA this entire time, the fandom becomes enraged. They’ve been happily consuming what they believe to be a narrative about justice and heroism, only to be told that it was all a lie. That’s the kind of fandom betrayal that led to such a vocal reaction — from all of the critics, too — after the How I Met Your Mother series finale. The creators destroyed everything they told the fandom to be true of their characters for the last nine years, all for the sake of some original plot that they planned when they assumed the show would only last three years.
Creators WANT fans to take ownership of their art — that’s why actors and creators love seeing fanart and fanvideos. It’s why fanfiction has boomed since the Internet appeared. Community writer Megan Ganz was astounded when she attended an art show years ago which was comprised of fanart that had been made about the show, featuring its characters. For her, the idea that a fan would see something she created and be spurred to create their own works of art was touching and revolutionary. It inspired her and gave her hope. That is why fandom is vocal, Faraci — because we have seen the good that our creators can do, and we recognize when something in the narrative is amiss.
We engage because we care, not because we hate.
PROBLEMATIC FARACI IS PROBLEMATIC
These fans are treating stories like ordering at a restaurant - hold the pickles, please, and can I substitute kale for the lettuce? But that isn't how art works, and that shouldn't be how art lovers react to art. They shouldn't be bringing a bucket of paint to the museum to take out some of the blue from those Picassos, you know?Faraci spends some of his piece bragging about confronting his tormenters, like it’s something we should applaud him for. The whole problem with this article, really, is the irony in the fact that Faraci wants to be lauded as someone who is brilliantly calling out “problems” — it’s evident in the way he writes this piece, separating himself from fandom by defining them as the “other” and himself as the lone ranger that he feels he deserves to be excluded from the problem. And though maybe he hasn’t ever sent a death threat to someone on Twitter or mailed in a hateful letter, that doesn’t mean that Faraci can simply pretend he isn’t a part of a fandom — any fandom — and therefore not a part of the problem.
But this idea that he presents us with is nothing new, and Faraci presents it like it is some revolutionary concept. The idea of “mob mentality” (which is what fandom is, when it is at its very worst) has been around for centuries. And therein lies the problem with Faraci’s argument — or, at least, with the way he presents it: there is absolutely nothing original about his content or what he is saying; he is simply choosing to talk about it in the most patronizing, insulting way in order to gain readership.
This “Fandom is Broken” article could have been a vehicle for Faraci to really express some genuine concerns. Instead, his patronizing voice damages all of his credibility. He’s looking down, high and mighty, with disgust on something he feels is broken and deplorable, all while reaping its benefits. How do you think we found your piece, Mr. Faraci? Oh, that’s right — social media. You can’t claim to write an inflammatory piece and “not know” it would blow up the way it did.
And nothing irritates me more than people who pretend they’re something they are not.
CONCLUSION
Fandom has been driving wedges between creators and themselves for ages. Because when you break them down, fandoms are comprised of PEOPLE. Of course fandom is flawed, Faraci — people are flawed! Ever since there was an idea or thought to behold, people have held opposing views on those thoughts and ideas. Before the Internet, people argued face-to-face (and they still do). Now, it is simply easier for those who disagree with opinions and beliefs to express them within 140 characters. Creators and actors and social influencers are closer to us than ever before, yes, but that does not mean that they have not had issues with fans until now or that the issues are somehow getting worse. Fandom was broken long before Faraci’s piece and it will continue to be broken. A broken system is broken because it’s made up of broken people, not because the ideas — necessarily — are broken.
Do people within fandoms occasionally overreach or overestimate their reach when it comes to influence on a television show, movie, or plot thread in a comic book? Absolutely. But this is not the first time this has happened. Before the social media boom, people wrote letters and stalked their celebrities and stood outside of movies, rallying with handmade posters. Let’s not pretend, Mr. Faraci, that social media is what has made fandom broken (or more broken). Your favorite creators are more accessible, yes, but faulting fandom at large for problematic individuals is the kind of overgeneralization that is dangerous in our day and age. And to disassociate form it and believe yourself to be somehow above that kind of problematic thinking is even worse.
But you know what? Passion is amazing. And that’s the best part of being in a fandom: the energy and their desire to influence. Fandoms have done so much good, too, but Faraci doesn’t talk about those fandoms or their efforts in his post. He doesn’t talk about the way fandoms have raised incredible amounts of money for amazing causes. He doesn’t talk about how they use their talents in order to help give back to the people who give so much to them. He doesn’t talk about their innovation or the way they’ve united together. He doesn’t discuss the fact that they help and support one another, rallying together when someone is hurt or in need. He doesn’t talk about the friendships formed, the marriages that have happened, or the way that creators have reached out to people in fandoms in order to express how much they care.
Fandom is broken. But it was not recently broken. It was broken the moment the first person who disliked something in a fandom decided to do something unproductive as a way to resolve it. That is when fandom broke. Not with the invention of Facebook or Twitter. And not when Faraci wrote that article.
And while fandom is broken, it’s still beautiful. Absolutely, positively, freaking beautiful. And nothing will ever change that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
