TV Formula

I just noticed something. I'm sure all of you already have. I'm just late to the game.


Do you guys remember the MTV "Reality TV Show " "The Real World"? I was a big fan of the first few seasons. I felt that the show seemed to be "realistic" in a way how young people at the time felt. Their aspirations, goals and sometimes fights were all captured on film. The 7 people who were chosen for the show were all interesting. Professional dancers, rappers, artists, writers, doctors, and a few that worked regular jobs but had goals. Ine dude was actually dying. You know, regular people. Well, at least the first 5 seasons were like that.

The cast was always racially diverse. We had a black dude, an Asian woman, a Latina, and Caucasian women and men , gay and straight with past drug abuse issues in the mix.

This was the formula. It worked.

But started to notice something.


It was all becoming the same. Like the different people same problems. Same problems for the same "characters".

The black roommates seemed to get into racial arguments.

The Asians all seem to be doing the exactly or the exact opposite of what their parents want them to be.

The Latinas seemed to be depicted as "firey" lol, and confrontational towards other roommates.

White people seemed to be just there if they weren't gay or had a past drug abuse storyline.

It just seemed a bit scripted. I stopped watching. And over time, I stopped watching TV all together. Only because I felt overwhelmed with commercials.


Now with the internet and streaming services you can pretty much watch tv without commercials. I like that we can do that now and binge watch our favorite TV shows. Its rad.

I found a show called "Chopped". I'm sure you've seen it to.

But here is what I noticed. Its basically "The Real World" cast on every episode.

On just about every episode. There are 4 contestants.

It's always this.

A loud "sassy" black person.

An Asian woman who is at odds with her parents because she's a chef and not a doctor.

A gay or lesbian chef that makes it a point to tell you they are gay.

And a "firey" latina or latino with a sob story. Also, they will make it a point to tell you they are Latino.

They will throw in a caucasian former drug addict in the mix from time to time.


This show is awesome. The formula still works.

a reply to: galaga

tvtropes.org...

tvtropes.org...

tvtropes.org...

tvtropes.org...

tvtropes.org...

tvtropes.org...

I think that covers most of what you said.

a reply to: galaga

This is why I refuse to watch ANY such programmes.

We are being spoonfed a load of bollocks.

a reply to: galaga
It's called stereotyping.

To cast something, always means that something needs to conform to a container or form/shape. The stereotype is the container and the something is the person that fills the role.

We are susceptible to patterns and these stereotypes are known patterns. That is conforming to most people, what you see is what you get.

originally posted by: dug88
a reply to: galaga

tvtropes.org...

tvtropes.org...

tvtropes.org...

tvtropes.org...

tvtropes.org...

tvtropes.org...

I think that covers most of what you said.

Lol.

a reply to: galaga

I stopped watching mtv right before "the gay world" started. That channle use to own but was on it's way down the toilet a little before that time.

I watch Chopped from time to time, but I don't pay attention to the chefs. I pay attention to what's in their basket, and think of what I might do with it. I count it was a win if any one of the four use an ingredient like I would have. Then I watch what they do for ideas in our own kitchen.

So I guess for me it's about the food and not the people cooking it.

It is because they figured out people wanted the shows to devolve into fights and drama which brought higher ratings. Also, instead of using real people, they started casting people actually seeking fame.

originally posted by: ketsuko
I watch Chopped from time to time, but I don't pay attention to the chefs. I pay attention to what's in their basket, and think of what I might do with it. I count it was a win if any one of the four use an ingredient like I would have. Then I watch what they do for ideas in our own kitchen.

So I guess for me it's about the food and not the people cooking it.

You dont pay attention to detail.

a reply to: galaga

Hey Gal. Have you ever seen the movie ''Network"? Released in 1976 it is the story of a TV Network and how it was run while projecting how the future of TV could be.

In on scene, the new director of programming has her head programmer reciting off to her proposed programs for the following season. That programmer recites the very same premise, the very same characters, the very same everything other than the location of the proposed program. One city or another. One work space or another. Police or hospital or school, the whatever did not matter, the characters were all the same from one program of another. Just as you have noticed.

If you haven't seen it, oh, yeah, look it up. I think you could find it at least very interesting.

T.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: galaga

Hey Gal. Have you ever seen the movie ''Network"? Released in 1976 it is the story of a TV Network and how it was run while projecting how the future of TV could be.

In on scene, the new director of programming has her head programmer reciting off to her proposed programs for the following season. That programmer recites the very same premise, the very same characters, the very same everything other than the location of the proposed program. One city or another. One work space or another. Police or hospital or school, the whatever did not matter, the characters were all the same from one program of another. Just as you have noticed.

If you haven't seen it, oh, yeah, look it up. I think you could find it at least very interesting.

T.

I've heard of the movie. Now I really want to see it. 1976. Wow.

a reply to: galaga

Or I pay attention to the show for different reasons than you do. I pay attention to plenty of details, but they're all food related.

a reply to: galaga

The Film was either prophetic or a veiled hint as to what is going on.

We are being brainwashed with a plague of low brow programming designed to keep the masses dumbed down.

A shame people are only recently waking up to the programming BS.

a reply to: galaga

There is almost no point in the movie that is boring. It won almost all the top Oscars for that year. Best movie, best director, best actor, best actress, best supporting actress, etc.

If any of those older movies was predictive of the future of TV news, this one is it. Sadly, even though it won so many awards, most people did not take the ''crazy'' premises seriously enough at the time to prevent the morphing of our national news sources from news to entertainment and opinion.

So the acting is top notch and in particular, there is one scene where an actor named Ned Beatty plays the ''corporate boss'' and gives a lecture to a troubled news caster. Pure gold. Pure gold.

If you do get a chance to watch it, do yourself a favor and do it in one sitting and just go with it. It is a wild ride. Then, if you want you can use this thread to let me know your reactions. It's certainly in my top five of all time.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

It's easier to write stereotypes than it is to make fully realized, fleshed out characters.

The easiest one to point to is the gay character that they started having to have in almost every show for representation purposes. Almost all of them are the same over the top gay stereotype, and if they aren't, they have to mention that they're gay in every episode so the audience knows.

Another good contrast would be to look at the Winston Zeddimore character v. his update in the new Ghostbusters reboot. Winston was a regular guy who happened to be played by a black actor. The character was not necessarily especially written to signal to the audience that he was in any particular way "black" and aside from a few jokes he made that only worked because of his skin color (a reference to seeing s that would scare you white), his character would have worked with an actor of nearly any ethnicity.

But his reboot update was written in as a stereotypical black woman character.

Clearly, writing skills have degraded.

a reply to: ketsuko

I think that the things you point out are a result of the real ''cheapness'' of much of popular entertainment.
Stereotype characters. It makes it simple for viewers to just ''take it it''.
For me, this overly flamboyant ''gayness'' is a perfect example. Who acts like that, no gay people I have known . And a stereotype of the expressive ''black woman'' that we see so much. Pure stereotyping. It might be exactly the same as when those few black actresses could only find acting work by playing the aunt Jemima characters working in the kitchens with their aprons on.

This carries over into black men in black roles. How many are just playing a stereotype. But for that matter how many roles for white men are little more than just copies of the original John Wayne template.

Remember a couple of years ago when that Black Panther super hero movie was released? Oh the fanfare, oh the great move with great acting and great story line. I waited. When it finally came on a tube station I have access to I watched it for a bit and got about half way though mainly because of all the beautiful women in scanty costumes before I turned it off. No great story, no great acting no great movie. It was one more boring 'superhero'' movie. That's all.

Except for this notion that little black children need those black faces to look up to. Finding as you say, representation on the big screen. So yeah, let's give those kids a sense of inclusion with an all black super hero movie when what would be better would be to turn away from this whole thing of raising kids on ''super heroes'' in the first place.

And don't get me started on the ''southern okie'' stereotype.

And beyond those points are all of the actors that are willing to play those cheapass parts for a pay check. How many are willing to degrade their own race for a check, how many are willing to degrade their sexual preference. Worse yet is how many are so willing to degrade someone else's sexual preference or regionally grown affectations, all for that check and entrance into the ''celebrity'' realm.

Yeah, for as liberal as you think I might be, I have a lot of scorn for Hollywood.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

There is a clip somewhere on YouTube where were inteviewing the man who played Benjamin Cisko on Star Trek DS-9 about being a black Star Fleet Captain, and he made some comment about that I really liked. He said you don't play "black". He played Benjamin Cisko and that was it. Black is not a character trait.

These days in wokeness things that are merely demographic are being mistaken for traits: skin color, religion, sexual orientation, etc. That makes characters become stereotypes instead of fully fleshed out and interesting people. Sure, I'm sure every author knows whether or not a character is gay for example because it will subtly guide that character through the story, but unless there is some important point to the plot that hinges on that detail, the reader doesn't need to know and have it brought into the story explicitly.