What is he even talking about? If anything, stupid shows that are filled with stereotypes and offensive stuff last longer than decent shows. Twitter ripped Ginny & Georgia and Emily in Paris to shreds, but it only made millions of folks tune in to hatewatch. Meanwhile, good shows like On My Block don't get half the attention.
I don't get it. Advertisers are still advertising on these timeslots anyway, so what's the real problem.
I don't think that's the problem. I think they believe shows have a natural monetary arc (which they should be able to predict base on their data) and that that arc drops off considerably during the second season for the vast majority of shows so they choose to introduce new shows and monetize having more quantities of first seasons than investing (i.e. advertising a show) money into an existing show.The problem is that the studios will put money down on shows and then when people aren't watching, they'll cancel them because they're afraid they're losing money.
But shows in the 90s had more freedom to write things that people would “cancel” nowadays.Bye. There were plenty of successful 90s shows that didn’t rely on shock humor. They aren’t talented enough writers.
Bye. There were plenty of successful 90s shows that didn’t rely on shock humor. They aren’t talented enough writers.
But shows in the 90s had more freedom to write things that people would “cancel” nowadays.
That is not true at all . THERE ARE PLENTY of successful 90s shows that would have been cancelled in todays PC Society. Especially with all these streaming services bringing back old shows . It’s not uncommon to hear people comment that a show would have been cancelled in this day and age .
I agree! I’ve recently been binge watching 90s and 2000d shows such as the x files, the sopranos, freaks and geeks etcI mainly watch reruns of shows I grew up on. Something is missing in a lot of these newer shows. I'm not sure what it is, but they do not keep me interested past the first or second episode.
Spot on! A lot of ppl do equate blatant shock value with authentic creativity and artistic merit when it's the complete opposite. Reminds me of shows like Riverdale and Euphoria whom are notorious for these types of antics to deflect from the mediocre content.Cancelling is an excuse. It’s basically saying “if I can’t be offensive, I can’t write.” They just aren’t talented enough. Shock value is the new “creative,” like Lil Nas X and Cardi. That doesn’t land well on Primetime. New Hollywood sucks. The public isn’t watching the shows, movies, and listening to the music because it’s crap.
Maybe an episode or two but not the whole damn series. Keep coddling these talentless, special snowflakes hacks if you want but I stand by what I said. Hollywood never recovered from the writers strike.
Spot on! A lot of ppl do equate blatant shock value with authentic creativity and artistic merit when it's the complete opposite. Reminds me of shows like Riverdale and Euphoria whom are notorious for these types of antics to deflect from the mediocre content.
If you have to heavily rely on shock value for majority of your projects, you probably aren't that talented to begin with and the plot/storyline of your television series/film is more than likely mediocre b/c 9 out of 10 times, the shock value contributes nothing to the overall story and its only purpose is to garner attention (whether positive or negative) and create mass hysteria around the project.
This current generation seems to coddle and uplift a lot mediocrity in various art forms (music, film, etc,) way more than past generations and it's sad to see.
That's exactly his point. Studios will go with safe sh!t like Finny & Georgia or Emily in Paris vs things that are weird like Sens or OA. Or will have them and then cancel them before giving them a chance.
The problem is that the studios will put money down on shows and then when people aren't watching, they'll cancel them because they're afraid they're losing money.
I can list multiple instances where a show like Martin would have caused controversy in this society ( him making jokes about Pam , a dark skinned woman being a man, making a caricature of black women with shenenee and her friends etc ) you know woke Twitter would have zeroed in on that
You need to go back , read and try again if you’re implying that I want those things to come back . I was simply responding to somebody saying 90s shows weren’t problematic .I'm sorry but is that not an issue..? When you know better as a society, you do better as a society. I understand you found it funny in 1996, but in 2021 we are checking why those types of images are harmful to a minority demographic. Why is that even brought up as an example? Do you want these images to come back for the sake of your sanctified, holy and sacred sitcoms?
Should blackface make a comeback too or are we too PoLiTicAllY CoRrEct??
GOOD writers have the ability to write beyond stereotypes and caricatures, do they not? I'm not understanding the limitations..
this from the man who said he like to be called ni77ger in bed by the white/asian woman he sleeps with
I assume in his mind he was taking revanche at white society. It's a bit of a weird fetish, if you ask me.this from the man who said he like to be called ni77ger in bed by the white/asian woman he sleeps with
Facts!He's not like that anymore. He's a Good Black man now. Y'all don't like it when a Black woman past is brought up to devalue her opinions but do it to Black men all the time.
@Dale Rick Nor
@Bobby hope
@HopeAndSlop
@Ish Gebor
@SmoothAlpha
@MrMontessa
@LareonDurnam
I saw what I came to see! Lolthis from the man who said he like to be called ni77ger in bed by the white/asian woman he sleeps with
There's a misconception of what being pro-Black means. When as a BM you don't recognize BW's suffering and is totally disregard, it means you're not pro-Black.Facts!
Donald Glover been more pro-black since his ******* days.
There's a misconception of what being pro-Black means. When as a BM you don't recognize BW's suffering and is totally disregard, it means you're not pro-Black.