TV Talk: The Q Word

[yourlibrarian]

Regardless of how much we like certain shows, it is sometimes commonly acknowledged that the writing isn’t very good. What constitutes bad writing to you? What makes a show seem well written?

Comments

[lycomingst]

How the info dumping is handled is important to me. If it's too obvious it seems lazy to me. Also, consistency in characters. If it's established that a character is, say, afraid of heights, don't have him running around roofs six episodes later.

[yourlibrarian]

OMG yes, that drives me crazy. If you want to change the character, have them evolve, whatever, then fine. But you need to show it happening.

And yes, exposition can be tough but it can also be used for characterization if done well.

[starfleetbrat]

I think there are a lot of ways writing can be bad, but the ones that get me are stereotypes. Like I am watching a cop show, and they say something is indicative of a suspect being a bad person but its only that they live with their mother, or they don't have social media. Apparently being broke and not having a facebook account is a red flag for being a killer.

Or where younger people have to teach people over 50 how to use the internet or use their computer. Home computers have been a thing for 40 years. I'm pretty sure most adults today know how to use a computer.

[yourlibrarian]

Certainly those who came of age in the 1990s are likely to. And yes, apparently keeping to one's self is a sign of mental instability in cop world.

[yourlibrarian]

One of the thing that bothers me is lack of follow-through with storylines. It's particularly egregious if it happens in a shorter season whereas in a longer one it could probably get lost in the clutter. But I have seen several series have excellent ideas for a season arc and then just abandon them or wrap them up in a few episodes. Why not develop these ideas?

[shadowkat]

I'm into dialogue. Bad or poorly written dialogue will annoy me - particularly if the characters sound all the same. To a degree - they might have the same slang? But usually they sound different.

Television and film tend to depend heavily on dialogue. Dialogue to tell us who the characters are, and to push the plot forward. Poorly written dialogue just sits there, dead in the water. Exposition heavy dialogue - can get that way.

Say what you will about Whedon's shows - but he was good at dialogue, as is Aaron Sorkin (West Wing), the writers behind Gilmore Girls, Bunheads, and Etoil, the writers behind The Good Wife, Good Fight and Evil, the writers behind Game of Thrones, and Shondra Rhimes writers (Bridgerton, Grey's Anatomy, The Residence, and Scandal).

Bad dialogue tends is often seen in a lot of plot heavy/exposition heavy procedurals, which is a shame. The Wire - is an example of a cop procedural with excellent dialogue.

Situation Comedies live or die by the dialogue. And it's important to frame and deliver the lines accurately.

I'm trying to think of television shows with bad dialogue? It's usually clanky and can make you cringe. The characters sound the same. My attention wanders. An actor can sell it to a degree - but not completely.

Harrison Ford and Carrie Fisher notoriously changed the dialogue of all their scenes in Star Wars. Ford once famously exclaimed to Lucas - "People don't talk like this George" then he shortened the lines. George Lucas sucked at dialogue, he was great at world-building, and special effects, also character development, but bad at dialogue.

[yourlibrarian]

Agreed, there are definitely dialogue oriented shows where the "voice" is distinctive and the show centers around it. Plus, as you mention, delivery matters a great deal, particularly in comedic shows or episodes.

[executrix]

I was going to post "Y'know, George, you can type this shit but you sure can't say it" as a benchmark. I just watched Rogue One for the first time* and recited it like "The Force is With Me, I am with The Force."

What I want to see from a show is interesting people (not necessarily people I agree with;I like plenty of shows where everybody is just as dislikeable as TPTB intended) and I want to see them expressing themselves. What do they want, what are their rationales?



*How do you overthrow a dictatorship? Asking for a friend.

[shadowkat]

Yeah, it's important to have layers in characters. The villains should be interesting and likable and most importantly, not see themselves as villains. Some of the best villains - I find myself almost rooting for?

And if you are going to do an anti-hero series where everyone is unlikable - say Succession? We need to dig down on motivation, what makes the characters tick, and find a way to make the characters relatable and interesting. (I've been told Succession succeeds at this? I've not been able to get into as of yet, so wouldn't know?)

Lucas actually made Darth Vader interesting, regardless of his inability to write dialogue.

Andor has some interesting villain characters in there.

*non-violently, slowly, bit by bit, and apparently with a lot of lawyers. [ ie. more the Good Wife than Star Wars] Well, unless you want to go the full WWII route [aka Star Wars] - and I really don't - millions died in that conflict, and most of them on German soil.

[executrix]

I like Succession a lot, because I was interested in seeing what those awful people would do next. However, I find that it doesn't re-watch well.
I don't necessarily empathize with well-characterized villains, although I do want to see what their motivation is besides "they're evil."

[tinny]

Harrison Ford and Carrie Fisher notoriously changed the dialogue of all their scenes in Star Wars. Ford once famously exclaimed to Lucas - "People don't talk like this George" then he shortened the lines. George Lucas sucked at dialogue, he was great at world-building, and special effects, also character development, but bad at dialogue.

I didn't know this, but it's hilarious! Go Harrison and Carrie! \o/

[shadowkat]

Mark Hamil was jealous - he had to do all these exposition heavy lines, that made no sense.

[svgurl]

For me, consistency and character growth is important. Does this decision and the consequences make sense within the context of the show and line up with what else has happened in the past? If a certain plot is made into a big deal and ends without a worthy conclusion, it's bad writing. Also, I can acknowledge that character growth not being linear is more realistic, but if a character is making the same bad decisions repeatedly or is doing this that aren't "true" to what has been established in the past without valid reason, I do chalk it up to bad writing too.

Good writing is not exactly the opposite of all of that, but somewhat closer to that. Like, what's realistic in one show may not be in another but the choices need to make sense.

[yourlibrarian]

Yes, a verse needs to be true to itself, in both development and situations. It's one reason certain crossover stories can work and others just can't.

[tinny]

I don't think I have much to add here. Consistent characterization, good (and a little humorous) dialogue, a bit of depth to the worldbuilding. You'd think that's not much, but a lot of shows fail at even that.

I despise over-reliance on tropes - at least make the characters individual somehow, not all stereotypes.

Also, cultural things. For some reason, I don't connect with most cdramas, either because the characters act in ways I can't empathize with or because the stories are based on classical stories/tropes that I don't know. I love learning about them, though, so that might improve with time. :D

[yourlibrarian]

Yeah, by the number characters can only succeed if you've got really strong plots. Even a clever premise or deep mystery is hard to overcome that.