|
The Red Queen posted:Honestly I could see the baby being born as more of a ploy to bring their respective parents back into the picture. What happened to Leslie's mom anyway? When is the last time we saw her? She was never a very interesting or necessary character. I think initially they'd imagined Leslie as having some Michael Scott style issues with a withholding mother, but as season 2 kicked in and Leslie involved into the hypercompetent public servant she is today, her mom just seemed pointlessly mean and scenes with her were uncomfortable.
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2014 02:19
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 05:42 |
|
|
This whole baby plot feels like a fundamental misunderstanding of what fans even like about Parks and Rec. This show had dozens of great episodes where Leslie wasn't even in a relationship at all. Why do they think people want to see some domesticity fantasy play out?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2014 23:23
|
|
|
Javid posted:This will be tolerable if they have the sense to skip over the pregnancy mostly like they did with Spawn of Swanson. I agree, but I worry they think fans will feel cheated if they don't get a delivery episode for Leslie's kids. And you know, I love babies in real life and I generally don't mind baby plots in TV shows as much as most people do, but I just feel like Parks and Rec really drags whenever serialized stuff like this gets thrown in. How is triple-pregnant Leslie going to have time for any tilting at Pawnee windmills? And what about the episodes where everyone in the cast gets drunk, aka the best episodes? Leslie just sits those out next season? Boo forever.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2014 07:58
|
|
|
blue squares posted:Seems like nobody in this thread caught my favorite subtle joke of the episode: I caught that! It was the best thing that ever happened. I <3 you, parks writers.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2014 06:38
|
|
|
Sam Steele posted:Nah I did read it, the author's narrow definition of what behaviours and life stages being a sitcom-feminist can encompass was really stupid and there sure is a lot of stretching going on to say a line of dialogue, where a character boasts about the many difficult challenges she's overcome that have prepared her to overcome her next challenge, is somehow disempowering and negating all the character's growth and accomplishments. Her line as read in the show was actually pretty bad-rear end. The author was discussing the tv show in context of tv in general and lamenting that P&R has decided to go down a path so well-worn it's a cliche. A cliche that exists because of general discomfort in society about the idea of a woman finding fulfillment in anything other than childrearing. But you very clearly don't want to consider any perspectives but the one you walked in with, so why post about it?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2014 23:09
|
|
|
Paperhouse posted:Well for most people their children ARE more important than anything else. That's reality. And I'm not just saying that for women, it's the same for men too. It's not unreasonable to think that Leslie's own children would be more important to her than a festival or getting a pit filled in, is it? And it's not "telling millions of women that kids are the most important thing they could ever do", it's one fictional woman learning that she is pregnant and reassuring her anxious husband that they can do it, just like they've done everything else thrown their way in the past. Oh hey look, somebody refusing to factor in context again. In Context, Leslie's pregnancy is presented as "the most important thing" on the same show where a male character's brand new baby was barely more than an afterthought and exists almost entirely offscreen. In Context Parks is merely the latest in a long line of shows to treat childbearing as a mandatory step, invariably the final step, in a female lead's character development (Ann could have left Pawnee for career reasons or personal goals or anything a man might do but nope, baby. Chris got storylines leading up to his departure about his mental issues and friendship with Ben, but Ann's just babyin' it up.) Male characters get to right wrongs and fight enemies and ride off into the sunset. Female characters get babies. In Context, our media does not propagate a message that men are worthless and broken if they don't love and want children.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2014 01:28
|
|
|
I can't wait to see the futuristic wonders of 2017 Pawnee. Perhaps... third in obesity?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2014 10:27
|
|
|
Viridiant posted:Yeah, I don't really mind Craig as a character. He just doesn't seem to fit very well to me. He stands out a lot. He seems to be so much more of a gimmick character than the others. I'm trying to remember what my initial impressions of Chris were, though. I can see him seeming to be very much a gimmick character too at first, and Craig's only consistently been around for what, half a season? I think Chris didn't become wonderful to me until "STOP. POOPING." He really made sense as a character then. Maybe Craig will get his moment like that next year. Or a tragic sommelier accident will result in vocal paralysis.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2014 10:43
|
|
|
LividLiquid posted:I'll like the character a lot more if he starts showing some personality beyond a gay joke, sure, but it will always bother me that he is a walking, talking gay stereotype who causes people to continue thinking that all of us queers are a punchline of one kind or another. Yeah I'm 100% with you there. So maybe like, a champagne cork? Hits him in the neck?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2014 10:56
|
|
|
AnimeJune posted:I'd love an episode where he has to get throat surgery and is forced to find other means to freak out. The show has hit a few sour notes in the past - I skip "Sister City" every time it comes up in the rotation, for instance. This is why writing room diversity is so important - no matter how well-intentioned and progressive people are, if you're writing about an identity no one in the room has, a lot of assumptions can go unchecked. You need that other perspective to take a second look at things and go "did anyone notice this is horrible?" and ideally you need more than one person of that identity in the room, because otherwise people tend to keep quiet to avoid being shouted down. Comedy that plays really well within one community/setting can curdle into negative stereotype when it's put on national TV too, which I think might be part of the problem with Billy on the Street vs. Craig. If Craig was the first-ever TV character to read as gay and be a shrieking hyper-emotional perfectionist then it wouldn't be that much different than how it plays on the internet as Billy on the Street. On the internet no single perspective gets to define how people's identities are expressed and accordingly there's huge variation, but on TV Craig is just stepping into a mold shared by almost every gay character in TV history.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2014 19:21
|
|
|
A A 2 3 5 8 K posted:It's never been stated, but it seems like some people here have their finger on the pulse of the canon so let's just listen to them. Racist stereotype? Uhh, Jar Jar is an alien you guys, so until George Lucas literally tells us otherwise I don't know what you're all complaining about. Now if you'll excuse me, Dumbo is on and I'd hate to miss those wacky crows.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2014 05:25
|
|
|
The Red Queen posted:I had my doubts that the show could handle the triplets storyline well and they actually did it perfectly by not handling it at all. Really excited for next season now, really hoping they don't botch it they way Archer is fumbling with Archer: Vice. You aren't allowed to have doubts, didn't you hear.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2014 19:30
|
|
|
I'd love it if the show kept future-Pawnee exactly the same except for one tiny, incredibly science fiction thing.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2014 19:15
|
|
|
FactsAreUseless posted:Alta-Vista has made an unexpected comeback. I hope Tom sticks with his love of swag forever, and becomes the Disco Stu of the 2030s.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2014 07:47
|
|
|
Macaluso posted:I loved the episode, too many good things to say. So can I just say that I was TERRIFIED they were going to have Ron cheat on Diane with Tammy once she was introduced. The entire rest of the episode I was dreading that happening and I am so glad it didn't happen. I wasn't worried about that because we've already had an episode that directly addressed that fear. Tammy crashed Ron's woodworking award ceremony (he was nominated for "Chair") and Leslie went into crisis mode and did everything she could to keep Ron and Tammy apart, but Diane had a talk with Leslie about how she wasn't threatened by Tammy at all, and indeed Ron didn't give her the time of day.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2014 19:28
|
|
|
MrAristocrates posted:They also probably can't mention Hilary Clinton ever again. On the plus side, this may bring a merciful end to the awkward politician cameos.
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2014 04:12
|
|
|
Greyish Orange posted:This, and also April is tedious now - past mid-20s, apathetic goth attitude just seems really silly. That's been my big problem with her too. She can still be fun sometimes, but the whiny tone of voice and her vocal objections to anything that smacks of maturity is getting really grating. She's not a high schooler anymore, she shouldn't have to be wheedled into doing anything constructive.
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2014 22:07
|
|
|
Yeah I'm all right with this. And since they already used up the "The Return of Everyone!" finale this year, maybe next year's will be a totally new kind of finale.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2014 20:44
|
|
|
Jimbone Tallshanks posted:I figure it was they either do the timeskip or they introduce a wish-granting alien only Ron and Andy can see voiced by Alan Tudyk. Also played by him, a full-grown man in a sequined green jumpsuit whom no one else acknowledges.
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2014 01:22
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:Yeah, they don't really seem to know what to do with April. She's had moments of character development when she shows a passion for something, but she's immediately pushed back into acting like a sullen teenager because that's her sitcommy role. It feels pretty forced and artificial at this point, but the same could be said for a lot of the show at this point in my opinion. I'm really starting to think good comedies should die young, unless they're just joke machines like Seinfeld or 30 Rock where character development isn't really the point. I agree, I think the serialization trend that's been so great for dramas has really hurt the sitcom. We all look down on shows that hit the reset button at the end of every episode, but structurally sitcom characters can't really support that much growth. You can either handle it the way The Office did, where characters grow away from what they originally were and another character fills that role (The Office didn't do this well but I think they tried, like Andy and Erin becoming the new Jim and Pam), or you can ignore the problem like Parks and Rec does and have characters that have no reason to still be behaving like they are (April, Tom) or living where they are (Leslie and Ben, Tom). Ann and Chris actually should have been the least likely to leave, since Ann had roots in the town and Chris was city manager. I think they're doing a good job with Ron's character growth, since the marriage/kids angle has just allowed him to be himself with a new focus, but that only works because he's essentially a complacent character. Leslie and April have both been consistently shown to want more than the scope of the show has to offer.
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
Cloud the Cat posted:Hey Amigos, STOP. POOPING.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2014 09:34
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 05:42 |
|
|
Max22 posted:It's going to be a 13-episode season, so it makes sense that they'd hold off depending on what new shows get cancelled. I hope it's that godawful "COP MOMMY!" show that Debra Messing is starring in, presumably at gunpoint. There are billboards all over town here and I can never stop being sad for the perp on the left. "Mom! Mom! I got a modeling gig! Yeah I'm playing 'racially ambiguous personification of crime.' Tell grandma!"  And her arms don't line up in the three photos. Whyyy...
|
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2014 18:52
|
|