fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2836

⌈ Secret Post #2836 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

02.

[Dragon Age 2]

__________________________________________________

03.

[Jojo's Bizarre Adventure]

__________________________________________________

04.

[Hemlock Grove]

__________________________________________________

05.

(Asaji Saki, Elisabeth das Musical)

__________________________________________________

06.

[Agatha Christie's Poirot]

__________________________________________________

07.

[Sawtooth]

__________________________________________________

08.

[Miley Cyrus]

__________________________________________________

09.

[Teresa Giudice, Real Housewives of New Jersey]

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 024 secrets from Secret Submission Post #405.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

04. http://i.imgur.com/eRIQSX5.jpg
[Hemlock Grove]

This show is weirdly awful but it's like a train wreck you can't stop watching.

I hate when people trot out the "X only exists to advance to the plot!" whining. It's FICTION. EVERYTHING exists to advance the plot or characterization of the main characters. And also, it's TV. Where there are massive constraints on time and availability and not every character can have a novel's worth of development, or even an episode's worth, because there are other things to attend to.

Read a book if you want less of those factors.

This is true, but it misses a big point that while things are included to advance the plot, in good writing they make sense independently of that fact. There's still an internal logic in a fictional world, and if you don't adhere to it or support the things that happen, readers tend to notice your writing is crap. Your argument is like saying no character can ever be OOC because everything anyone writes with a character is in character.

Oh, and this happens in books, too, so your attempt at "omg read a book" snobbery falls pretty flat.

It's not "'read a book' snobbery" it's an acknowledgement that books have more leeway when it comes to expanded characterization. But fuck you very much for that judgment.

DA

Why not respond to the rest of the comment, anon?

Because...the rest of the comment didn't inspire a new comment?

So you admit you're wrong, then.

Well, I'm not sure how you read that into what I said, but if it makes you feel better.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2014-10-09 00:15 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) - 2014-10-09 03:29 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) - 2014-10-09 06:07 (UTC) - Expand

Sure, they have more leeway, but that doesn't mean good writing and characterization are things that automatically happen, any more than they happen in TV shows or movies.

But I guess getting angry with me helps you avoid the rather major point you missed.

Hey, don't blame me because you failed a very basic rule of communicating a point: Don't give other leads to run with.

Yes, others are to blame for your evasion.

Providing a logical opposition to your argument is a lead to run with. Don't blame others just because you are unable to respond or unwilling to acknowledge that your initial argument is highly flawed.

Darn-tootin' it is, but if you didn't read so poorly, you might have noticed I said "don't provide OTHER leads to run with." The implication being to not do that if what you want is for people to respond to the first thing you said.

But you all are boring me now.

(Anonymous) - 2014-10-09 00:18 (UTC) - Expand

(Anonymous) - 2014-10-09 03:23 (UTC) - Expand

I kinda agree. Some mediums are less able of providing certain aspects than others. If you like visuals (and that's not less complex in many ways), watch movies/tv series; if you want more complex characterization, read a book. not that good writing isn't able to pull off those aspects in other mediums, but there are certain strengths to every medium.

I have absolutely no idea what this show is about, but this secret REALLY MAKES ME WANT TO WATCH IT. It sounds like the most awesome crack ever.

It's fucking insane. It's a supernatural/horror show on crack with some of the most bizarre, atrocious writing you'll ever see, with occasional moments of brilliance. (The werewolf transformation is the coolest ever, but not for the faint of heart.)

I marathoned it around season 2 and was so confused as to why I couldn't stop watching.

Edited (accidentally a word) 2014-10-08 23:38 (UTC)

I'm not sure I have the spare time or energy to get into it, but maybe I'll, like, randomly watch an episode from the middle of a season one night without knowing wtf is happening. That's my favorite way to try out shows -- they're ALWAYS enjoyable when watched like that.

Oh god, I can't even imagine what that would be with Hemlock Grove because the show barely makes sense even when you watch from the beginning. I've got to watch shows in order so that would never fly with me, but it does sound like a laugh!

It did the opposite for me and dropped my interest to zero :(

She's not very good at mitigating the sexual tension between the two male leads considering that she leads them into a threesome.

Yea, MTE. I didn't like her much (though I can understand freaking out about sudden lactation, especially blood) and her plotline was wacky even for this show, but instead of mitigating sexual tension or pushing the two characters apart she kind of brought them together.

yeah but somehow, as long as there's a chick, a threesome can't ever mean anything gay.

Uh...are you trying to bring logic to Hemlock Grove?

After season one's fuckery, if things made sense, I'd be worried.

This show sounds like a R-rated version of Teen Wolf which is equally cracktastic and absolutely fails at making any sense in its plot lines ... but I will admit my first thought at seeing this secret was "hmm, bit of a nip slip there, what channel is this showing on again?"