fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3696 ]

[ SECRET POST #3696 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3696 ⌋

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

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

(Jimmy McGill/Saul Goodman BCS/Breaking Bad, Rich Sanchez Rick and Morty)

__________________________________________________

03.

[Carrie Fisher with Irish comedian Aisling Bea, 8 out of 10 Cats]

__________________________________________________

04.

(Casey Neistat)

__________________________________________________

05.

[Yuri on Ice]

__________________________________________________

06.

[Digimon]

__________________________________________________

07.

[Criminal Minds, Dr. Spencer Reid]

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 14 secrets from Secret Submission Post #528.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 1 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

How strong is your suspension of disbelief? What throws you out of a show? What can you just accept?

Mine is really, really strong. I think I am just super oblivious.

As long as it's moderately well-executed, I don't give a single shit about realism.

It just has to stay true within the universe. Like, it's not specific suspension of disbelief in general, it's tied in to the specific show or 'verse.

I can suspend my disbelief of almost anything if the word-building and the rationalization from the characters support the crazy belief. Heck, I was able to buy that Hannibal could get away with repeated murder for 2 seasons! But then it reached the point where he had killed so many people that it was obvious that they'd be missed by the other characters/characters in their orbit that it became impossible for me to believe that he wasn't getting caught.

I don't like it when tv or movies set in historical time periods have really weird anachronistic clothing. I don't mean little things, like "oh, the hemline on that dress should be three inches higher", etc. I mean conspicuously off costuming choices. Reign is guilty of this, but so was The Other Boleyn Girl.

TBH, I notice when the costumes are off on small details too, especially if it's in the 19th century or later. Overall my biggest complaint is that people don't wear hats enough. Early/mid-19th century women of any means at all would usually wear a small decorated day cap indoors (example), and then a bonnet or hat outdoors. And men would always wear a hat outdoors.

But you can't see the actors' faces as clearly if they wear hats! It's the same reason armies have helmets, but your leads don't. *sigh*

Oh gosh, Reign doesn't even try at all and somehow I find it charming.

Depends on genre, and exactly what the narrative is trying to sell.

I mean, if I have a high familiarity with a particular topic - due to, say, my academic work and professional experiences - sure, it can throw me out. But I am usually pretty good about just going with the rules of a particular universe, and even if that universe is supposed to be the real universe, I figure all fiction needs to operate by its own rules. My only issue would be, when by the rules of that universe the plot seems to contradict itself.

So I have a history master's and I could absolutely go through historical dramas and point out all the inaccuracies, they don't bother me as much as they should. As long as it's consistent. On the other hand, something being conveniently hand-waived for plot purposes frustrates me.

Also, warrior women in skimpy armor with pencil-thin arms and high heels. That throws me out a little.

I think when it interferes with character or plot. Like, for a lot of police procedurals, I do not in any way expect them to be like real police. They will get away with stupid shit and wear inappropriate clothes and make crazy deductions that work, etc. But when that crazy deduction wasn't set up in the story, it's noticeable. However, if it's either consistent or a one-time thing, then it doesn't bug me. The only thing with police procedurals that can break my disbelief is when they decide to try another genre. I found that a lot in CSI Miami, which became more of a sci-fi show by the end.

Pretty strong. Like, yeah, I'll notice when something is so clearly unrealistic, and even comment on it sometimes if the discussion comes up.

But it's never really a reason for whether or not I decide to watch something.

I think I have a strong suspension of disbelief. Things that are most likely to throw me up are lawyers or cops acting badly but it being treated like what they did was perfectly okay. Most other things won't throw me out. Well, some historical inaccuracies will throw me out.

Edited 2017-02-16 00:22 (UTC)

Honestly, so long as characterisation remains good/consistent, I'll forgive quite a lot. Varies a bit depending on genre, mind. The odd plot point that depends on a blatant physical impossibility will throw me sometimes (I'm thinking of a particular story where the entire situation was dependent on a very much non-magical nine-year-old being able to get a full-grown very tall unconscious man across town on her own in a very short space of time).

I think it depends on the piece of media for me and how much I'm enjoying it, because I can handwave a lot of dumb-shit if I think the overall thing is fun. Also if something is 100% ridiculous to begin with it will also helps me to just ignore the stuff that isn't even remotely correct, because it never tried to be in the first place.

It's ridiculously strong, however what knocks me out right away is if something is established as taboo or against whatever culture is being portrayed (or whatever Fantasy Culture is being portrayed), and someone goes and does it, and no one gives a shit. NBD. Sure, last dude who did it was exiled into the frozen wastes, but you are special, main character.

TTTTTHBBBBXXXXX.

As long as it has some truth in television in it, I'm all right. The people who made the book/show/game/movie are there to tell a story, first and foremost, and be entertaining about it. Some things just are not that entertaining in real life (like CSI and House) so they have to sacrifice some realism in order to make it entertaining.

The only time it really bothers me is if the person didn't bother to do research, like at ALL, and it shows.

I have a strong suspension of disbelief. If I'm watching a TV show or a movie or reading a book, I'm in it for the entertainment factor, so I don't need it to be hyper realistic. My suspension of disbelief is certainly higher than my dad's. He ends up nitpicking the most minute things and it cracks me up.

The one thing I always think of in terms of throwing me out of a show is in Castle when Alexis tries out for the school musical (Grease) and finds that she doesn't have the time to commit to playing a leading role with all of her other extracurricular activities, so she decided to become the show's stage manager instead. I did theatre in high school (and had an unreasonably high strung director) and that just would not fly. Stage managers work so much harder than performers, I mean come on. If you don't have time for one, you definitely don't have time for the other.

On the other hand, when watching Gossip Girl with a friend, she got all up in arms about the teenage characters drinking alcohol in bars. Who cares? The first novel explicitly states that these kids get away with this illegal shit because their parents are rich and influential. And, for the record, I'm pretty sure she lodged this complaint during the pilot while Blair & Serena grab a drink. At Chuck's dad's hotel, so I have no doubt the staff are used to looking the other way. Oh, and also it's a dumb teen soap opera, so I really don't care that much about real world liquor licenses.

It's pretty strong...except for "realistic" lawyer shows. I couldn't watch How to Get Away with Murder when I was in law school. It was too inaccurate and seemed to take itself way too seriously. OTOH, Suits doesn't bother me because it's set up with a crazy premise and they sprinkle in-jokes, like the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in the pilot. I probably could've let HTGAWM go if Viola Davis hadn't kept showing up in court without a blazer (I kid).

Mine is pretty strong. But things like fucking katana blades in Not-Deadpool's arms in Wolverine Origins and his arms not being permantly penguiny just...nope. Couldn't do it.

My suspension of belief for a lot of "real-world" stuff is pretty strong; I can forgive a lot for the sake of ignoring the story. Although I do have a limit; I spent the last part of Doctor Who's S8 finale laughing hysterically, because the sight of the Doctor magically flying straight to the TARDIS with the key in his outstretched hand was just too much for even my suspension of belief to handle.

It's when a story breaks its own rules that I'm more likely to get thrown out, and it's a lot harder to come back from. After all, an author can't do anything about real-world things like gravity, standard police procedure, and how long it takes to heal from injuries, so sometimes they just have to ignore them to tell the story. But they made up the specific rules of their world, so they've got no excuse for breaking them.

I can believe whatever a show tells me to believe... until they break their own internal rules.

I get more annoyed by in-universe inconsistencies than real world to fiction inconsistencies.

Like sure Reid can dress like a college student and Morgan can wear casual-badass leather jackets. But if you had an episode where Hotch said the only reason he wears a suit every day is because dress code I'd be ?????? This is one of the reasons almost every time there was an episode about a character being out of control and going too far I tended to dislike it because it almost always just meant they were acting like Hotch and Morgan do every single episode! "He yelled at a suspect!" "Like Morgan's doing right this second?" "Yes but that's different somehow!"

It also always bugged me (and kind of came off as abusive?) that the show made it seem like Cuddy and the hospital keeping House around was this huge burden and a personal favor to him, at the same time as every other patient was super-famous and powerful and loved him. Just his mob favors alone should have taken care of Tritter in a heartbeat.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #3696 ]

Inspired by #7

Re: Inspired by #7

Re: Inspired by #7

Re: Inspired by #7

Re: Inspired by #7

Re: Inspired by #7

Re: Inspired by #7

Re: Inspired by #7

Re: Inspired by #7

Re: Inspired by #7

Re: Inspired by #7

Re: Inspired by #7

Re: Inspired by #7

Re: Inspired by #7

Re: Inspired by #7

Re: Inspired by #7

Re: Inspired by #7

Re: Inspired by #7

Re: Inspired by #7

Re: Inspired by #7

Re: Inspired by #7

Re: Inspired by #7

Re: Inspired by #7