It’s one thing to be upset with your critics. That’s as old as Shakespeare. Sometimes they may have a point and still be jerks about it. Sometimes they’re jerks without giving any actual constructive criticism. And in current arguments you have the racists and sexists. My problem starts when you lump all angry criticism from critic and fans alike in with the jerks and racists/sexists, but that’s not necessarily what this installment of Trope Shark is going to be about. I’ll rant about that elsewhere. If you want to go on social media or interviews and complain about that, it’s up to you, but be sure you don’t lump legitimately angry fans in with the jerks. I’ve already discussed how this happens, and I may come back to this one more time before I’m done.
However, I don’t care what happens on social media. While critics and fans should be able to make their case nicely so should the creators. Often they do not. Where this trope comes in, however, is when the creators decide to give the middle finger to their naysayers within their own stories. From TV Tropes:
A specific form of Take That!, in which the producers of a show respond to criticism of the show through the show itself, either through subtle in-jokes that obliquely refer to the criticism, putting lines of dialogue into the mouths of the characters, or presenting parodies of their critics. The program may even break the fourth wall to directly address the critics.
Depending on the producer, this can come in many forms; gentle ribbing or parody of the critics and their position, pointed rejoinders, triumphant gloating, and — in extreme cases — over-the-top bile that leads to the strong assumption that the critics may have struck a delicate nerve (either that, or the producer just plain Can’t Take Criticism).
It’s those last two parts, especially the last one, where the problem starts, because that can just ruin your story for everyone else, even the ones that like you.
The Downside Of Binge Watching Culture
I still wish these two could have had their own adventure. Or a review web series.
Growing up networks or even syndicated channels would have a marathon. It would be one show or one franchise airing all day long. It was a good way for people to get caught up on a series they might have come in late on or see some favorite episodes again. This would be the exception rather than the rule.
And then Netflix came along.
At first Netflix simply worked as a main-away video store. It didn’t really allow for impulse video rental but if there was a movie you just had to watch this was the place to get it. As the internet allowed better quality streaming of video they led the way in streaming TV shows and movies, but they did so from the “box set” format, posting an entire series at once. That was fine for older shows being released on home video after they aired on television, but then they started having original series, that they would release an entire season at a time and only the whole season at once. That would keep people locked to their computers and smart devices to see the whole thing so they could get in on the discussion for the latest fan favorite. Said fan favorite didn’t really last nearly as long, and didn’t have the staying power of shows not released that way, like shows on HBO or other streaming services. While marathoning/binge watching isn’t new thanks to home video, it does alter the way we interact with entertainment, and not necessarily for the better.
With some swearing in his video, Geoff Thew of Mother’s Basement explains why binge watching may actually be hurting the way we interact with TV today, since although he doesn’t mention it in the video, it has caused more marathoning even on TV networks like HGTV and Tru TV.
Continue reading →
Tell others about the Spotlight:
Like this:
Posted by ShadowWing Tronix on February 26, 2020 in Streaming Spotlight and tagged commentary, Netflix.
Leave a comment