quote:

Originally posted by pisher:

quote:

If you haven's seen the episode then i understand why you compare the charecter with Cruella. But trust me that's not true. It's not like she killed the dog.

Well technically, Cruella hasn't killed any dogs either. Not in the original movie, anyway. Not one puppy got skinned in the animated feature. What was her final score in the live action remakes?

quote:

But i understand what you're talking about.I had this kind of problem with CSI this season. They had a great episode about dogfighting. And although i knew everything it's fictional i had trouble watching it.

I wouldn't have a problem with that, as long as they depicted dogfighting as a bad thing, and didn't glamorize it. I not only had no problems with a plot element on The Wire that dealt with dogfighting, I felt it really contributed to the show.

This is not dealing with a social issue, nor does it really tell us anything about the character, based on what I'm hearing--it's just done for cheap laughs and shock value. Well, fine--if people enjoy that, let them. If you don't, change the channel.

However, I'd have huge problems with anyone saying "You have to keep watching because this is great television and we need to support it." It's not, and we don't. Period.

The problem is that you don't know how the other viewers are reacting to these things. I was disturbed to see the dogs' mangled carcases in CSI (or was it L&O?) and who knows, maybe some sicko thought that was aesthetic and got ideas.
My red line is rape scenes. I will refuse to watch them, and I will complain. I have before. When a much loved character on a show I am a huge fan of got raped, I took it up with the writer and in public. The thing is, for victims of sexual assault, seeing those scenes can trigger very painful memories and emotions. Not to mention, once again, some sick bastards can get ideas or just get off on it.

quote:

I wouldn't have a problem with that, as long as they depicted dogfighting as a bad thing, and didn't glamorize it

They did just that, and it was one of the best CSI episodes ever. But still it's hard to watch this kind of stuff even if it's fictional. Somehow it's easier for me to watch people getting tortured and killed

She returned the dog to the seeing eye dog facility but it then followed her car home. Then Edie chastised her and she decided to make the best out of the situation and by the end the dog was sharing the bed with her and carlos. I don't care for the storyline either but at no time did she harm the dog.

quote:

Originally posted by robert:

quote:

Originally posted by vlis:
as a dog owner, what is it that she actually did to the dog?

quote:

Originally posted by Marc Berman:
I think Gabrielle has become completely unlikable. And the whole dog think only solidifies that. Personally, I was competely uncomfortable with the whole thing.

I was flipping channels so maybe i'm wrong, but she basically threw him out, and shw didn't do it very gentle

Oh and btw, Seeing Eye Dogs are very carefully screened for aggression issues--only the calmest and most unflappable dogs get through the program. Somebody not liking a Seeing Eye Dog would not be nearly enough to cause that dog to reciprocate. So really, it's the DOGS being insulted here.

quote:

She returned the dog to the seeing eye dog facility but it then followed her car home. Then Edie chastised her and she decided to make the best out of the situation and by the end the dog was sharing the bed with her and carlos. I don't care for the storyline either but at no time did she harm the dog.

And at no time did the story make any sense, or serve any purpose, except to tick doglovers off, and malign the whole Seeing Eye Dog program, which is a lot more important than Desperate Housewives.

[/QUOTE]
The problem is that you don't know how the other viewers are reacting to these things. I was disturbed to see the dogs' mangled carcases in CSI (or was it L&O?) and who knows, maybe some sicko thought that was aesthetic and got ideas.
My red line is rape scenes. I will refuse to watch them, and I will complain. I have before. When a much loved character on a show I am a huge fan of got raped, I took it up with the writer and in public. The thing is, for victims of sexual assault, seeing those scenes can trigger very painful memories and emotions. Not to mention, once again, some sick bastards can get ideas or just get off on it.[/QUOTE]

On this sensitive matters it depends on how the director presents them. Rapes actually occur, it's part of the reality so it's impossible not to mention this in TV or movies. I know it might be difficult for someone who went throigh this, but it's just as tough for someone suffering from cancer to watch this subject or for someone who had his parents killed in a car accident to watch or for someone who had his girlfriend or his mother killed. You can't have this subjects eliminated from the TV

quote:

Originally posted by tvchtw:
She returned the dog to the seeing eye dog facility but it then followed her car home. Then Edie chastised her and she decided to make the best out of the situation and by the end the dog was sharing the bed with her and carlos. I don't care for the storyline either but at no time did she harm the dog.

quote:

Originally posted by robert:

quote:

Originally posted by vlis:
as a dog owner, what is it that she actually did to the dog?

quote:

Originally posted by Marc Berman:
I think Gabrielle has become completely unlikable. And the whole dog think only solidifies that. Personally, I was competely uncomfortable with the whole thing.

I was flipping channels so maybe i'm wrong, but she basically threw him out, and shw didn't do it very gentle

True, the ending was not bad for the dog, hopw they won't torture her in the next episode

quote:

The problem is that you don't know how the other viewers are reacting to these things. I was disturbed to see the dogs' mangled carcases in CSI (or was it L&O?) and who knows, maybe some sicko thought that was aesthetic and got ideas.

Okay, and I don't like CSI (or L&O), but c'mon--Dexter showed pieces of human bodies laid out in an artistic display, and I'm sure CSI has done similar things on a regular bsis. Animal Planet has shows that constantly have images of the effects of genuine abuse.

This is getting silly. I'm leaving work early, so I can spend time with my dog.

quote:

My point is that I don't buy this 'relative happiness' argument. You're happy when the ratings stay the same or go up. You're not happy when they go down. You're particularly not happy when production costs go up while ratings go down.

Is there ANY high-profile show on television right now that brings 'absolute happiness' to their networks? Grey's Anatomy? No, series low last week. Office? No, season (series?) low last week. CSI? No, season (series?) low last week. American Idol? No, lowest numbers in 3 years.

Does this has something to do with people getting bored of Office, CSI, Grey's and Idol?

quote:

Originally posted by robert:

The problem is that you don't know how the other viewers are reacting to these things. I was disturbed to see the dogs' mangled carcases in CSI (or was it L&O?) and who knows, maybe some sicko thought that was aesthetic and got ideas.
My red line is rape scenes. I will refuse to watch them, and I will complain. I have before. When a much loved character on a show I am a huge fan of got raped, I took it up with the writer and in public. The thing is, for victims of sexual assault, seeing those scenes can trigger very painful memories and emotions. Not to mention, once again, some sick bastards can get ideas or just get off on it.[/QUOTE]

On this sensitive matters it depends on how the director presents them. Rapes actually occur, it's part of the reality so it's impossible not to mention this in TV or movies. I know it might be difficult for someone who went throigh this, but it's just as tough for someone suffering from cancer to watch this subject or for someone who had his parents killed in a car accident to watch or for someone who had his girlfriend or his mother killed. You can't have this subjects eliminated from the TV[/QUOTE]
Just because some things occur in real life, doesn't mean they have to be portrayed on TV. Networks and artists do have responsibility, and like I said, you don't know how other people react to certain images. The negative impact can far surpass the positive (not that there is much positive - unless you're one of the net's suits). That said, at times, L&O SVU manages to portray certain stories with much sensitivity and give voice to the victims, something that is still a rarity in the mass media.

Since we're on a TV forum and we're talking about animals i want to say something regarding the "science channels": is it me or the nature shows are getting more and more unfriendly towards the animals. Years ago i used to watch the BBC nature shows that had a lot of respect for the animals, but now all i see on Discovery or on Animal Planet are shows where the animals are treated really bad, and the trend i have to say it started with Steve Irwin. I acttually wouldn't let my kids watch thes type of shows, it's nothing educative in them

quote:

Originally posted by pisher:
They can't stay in business by spending more money for lower ratings, ...

Ssshhhhh ...Dawn Ostroff might be reading this board and you will completely ruin her day.

quote:

Originally posted by total eclipse:
AiA offers something BBT cannot offer - some degree of social commentary, even critique of American suburban snobbery and middle class racism.

quote:

Originally posted by total eclipse:
Just because some things occur in real life, doesn't mean they have to be portrayed on TV. Networks and artists do have responsibility, and like I said, you don't know how other people react to certain images.

How can you champion Social Comentary within a show, but in the same thread, chastise another series for depeicting characters as real people that do bad things?

quote:

Originally posted by TV-aholic:

quote:

Originally posted by total eclipse:
AiA offers something BBT cannot offer - some degree of social commentary, even critique of American suburban snobbery and middle class racism.

quote:

Originally posted by total eclipse:
Just because some things occur in real life, doesn't mean they have to be portrayed on TV. Networks and artists do have responsibility, and like I said, you don't know how other people react to certain images.

How can you champion Social Comentary within a show, but in the same thread, chastise another series for depeicting characters as real people that do bad things?

How can you purposefully misread posts the way you do?
One of nature's big mysteries, I guess. Read them all again, maybe then you'll figure out there is no contradiction at all.

Pretty simple.

One reason you like AiA is for its Social Commentary.

You feel that Just beacuse things happen in real life, they don't need to be seen on TV.

So, where is the line draw between Having Social Commentary and not protraying real life on TV?

quote:

Originally posted by total eclipse:

quote:

Originally posted by TV-aholic:

quote:

Originally posted by total eclipse:
AiA offers something BBT cannot offer - some degree of social commentary, even critique of American suburban snobbery and middle class racism.

quote:

Originally posted by total eclipse:
Just because some things occur in real life, doesn't mean they have to be portrayed on TV. Networks and artists do have responsibility, and like I said, you don't know how other people react to certain images.

How can you champion Social Comentary within a show, but in the same thread, chastise another series for depeicting characters as real people that do bad things?

How can you purposefully misread posts the way you do?
One of nature's big mysteries, I guess. Read them all again, maybe then you'll figure out there is no contradiction at all.