Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My career as a forensic scientist lasted 38 years until I retired from the NJ State Police. I worked with 100's of detectives and police officers over that time. While some were a little wacky and I admit I did not, for the most part, know a lot about their personal/family life, how come in most, if not all, of these detective series the detectives had f'ed up personal and family lives?
Yeah, I know that normal characters would make writing interesting scripts more difficult. But it seems that to be a character in one of these shows you have to have many personal issues!
They want viewers to sympathize with their characters. They engage more. Most more relatable "heroes" have some sort of Achilles heel, some vulnerability, one fatal flaw. If the character has a shady past or unhappy life, that also keeps the door for future storylines.
Location: Lakewood NJ/Murrells Inlet SC/ N. Naples FL/Swainton NJ
4,026 posts, read 6,541,995 times
Reputation: 3531
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riley.
Because in reality there is a high percentage of alcoholism and divorce within the law enforcement community. Really.
Perhaps. However the vast majority of detectives I had the pleasure to work with, as far as I could decern (however you never know what goes on behind closed doors), had normal personal and family lives.
One other thing that bugs me about the cop portrayals is the things that are overlooked. Like the unnecessary violence, the drinking and drug use, the use of official vehicles for personal use, etc. Yes I know the shows would be a lot more boring without that stuff but be aware, at least from my experience, none of that would be tolerated and, in many cases it would be one strike and you were out.
Perhaps. However the vast majority of detectives I had the pleasure to work with, as far as I could decern (however you never know what goes on behind closed doors), had normal personal and family lives.
One other thing that bugs me about the cop portrayals is the things that are overlooked. Like the unnecessary violence, the drinking and drug use, the use of official vehicles for personal use, etc. Yes I know the shows would be a lot more boring without that stuff but be aware, at least from my experience, none of that would be tolerated and, in many cases it would be one strike and you were out.
Well, none of us knows what goes on behind closed doors. And even though some law enforcement personnel have alcohol and marital issues, their day to day work is (mostly) by the book.
I can only speak to my 16 yr experience with my own agency. And the truth was, every single one of the individuals I knew was a dedicated public servant. That often comes with a price.
Are you kidding? Season 2 was TERRIBLE, and was universally panned. It was so bad, it left showrunners scrambling trying to regroup and bounce back, and put the show in limbo for quite some time. No way they are revisiting that dumpster fire.
Perhaps. However the vast majority of detectives I had the pleasure to work with, as far as I could decern (however you never know what goes on behind closed doors), had normal personal and family lives.
Same here. The one forensic detective I knew a little bit was the most normal, well rounded guy in the world, even though he dealt with some real horrors at work. And he hated most cop TV shows because he said, "They're really science fiction. That's not how police work happens."
Quote:
Originally Posted by tmozer
One other thing that bugs me about the cop portrayals is the things that are overlooked. Like the unnecessary violence, the drinking and drug use, the use of official vehicles for personal use, etc. Yes I know the shows would be a lot more boring without that stuff but be aware, at least from my experience, none of that would be tolerated and, in many cases it would be one strike and you were out.
It's a staple of the detective genre. Has been since the 1920s. "I got three slugs in me. Two are scotch and one's from a .38."
But yeah, it has gotten old to the point of cliche. It's actually one of the things I really enjoy about C.J. Box's Joe Pickett stories (the books, not the TV show). Joe is not perfect and definitely has his problems. But he's not an alcoholic. He didn't run over his best friend's dog. He loves his wife and kids. His wife and kids love him. He's just a very "boring" guy for the most part who has one fatal flaw: He has real integrity, and he will not let things go. That lands him in all sorts of trouble.
But the whole dark, twistedness of TRUE DETECTIVE is one of the big reasons I could never even get through Season 1. Characters with problems are one thing. But that was just misery porn.
I haven't watched other seasons of this show so don't have anything to compare it to, but I'll give anything set in the arctic a try, especially when eerie primordial or spiritual overtones are involved. Some of that will make the hair on the back of my neck stand up faster than anything.
I found much in the first episode confusing, dialogue muddy, events disjointed, interesting tidbits paraded across our line of sight, then discarded just as quickly. Was that part of establishing a sense of mystery or was it poor writing? The CGI animals were terrible. Having spent time in the far north and having "met" some of its iconic creatures and places in person, my biologist brain gets in the way so I can't suspend disbelief as well. BTW, that was an unbelievably fancy/cushy research station, especially if they were trying to suggest the events take place in Alaska.
One early little feature stuck in my craw to the point I got so preoccupied trying to wrestle it into place I missed the following bits. That caption announcing the last sunset of the year. What an awkward way to suggest winter's long twilights! I can think of multiple better ways to suggest extreme change in daylight than that. I despise poor research, especially about aspects so vital to a storyline. I get tired of shows that bend over backwards trying to convince us we're experiencing the far north. Up until that reality becomes inconvenient. One moment it's supposed to be bone chillingly cold, then for convenience's sake, suddenly it isn't. Note to self: I really should learn to be a bit more forgiving. This isn't a documentary. Exaggeration serves dramatic purposes, but it still gets annoying. For most viewers, the reality of the arctic in December is dramatic enough all by itself.
That's the same reason I can't watch most space fiction shows such as -cough- Gravity or For All Mankind -cough- I can't suspend enough disbelief to enjoy the show.
Same here. The one forensic detective I knew a little bit was the most normal, well rounded guy in the world, even though he dealt with some real horrors at work. And he hated most cop TV shows because he said, "They're really science fiction. That's not how police work happens."
It's a staple of the detective genre. Has been since the 1920s. "I got three slugs in me. Two are scotch and one's from a .38."
But yeah, it has gotten old to the point of cliche. It's actually one of the things I really enjoy about C.J. Box's Joe Pickett stories (the books, not the TV show). Joe is not perfect and definitely has his problems. But he's not an alcoholic. He didn't run over his best friend's dog. He loves his wife and kids. His wife and kids love him. He's just a very "boring" guy for the most part who has one fatal flaw: He has real integrity, and he will not let things go. That lands him in all sorts of trouble.
But the whole dark, twistedness of TRUE DETECTIVE is one of the big reasons I could never even get through Season 1. Characters with problems are one thing. But that was just misery porn.
I don’t consider season 1 “misery porn”; I think that is an ignorant misnomer. As another posted stated, the point of most movies and tv shows is to elicit pathos from viewers. So, creating a storyline with which viewers will not only identify but, also, feel sympathy for the characters who experience tragedy is important. In fact, it’s sort of the cornerstone of effective drama.
I don’t consider season 1 “misery porn”; I think that is an ignorant misnomer.
Perhaps. As I stated, I only watched 3 or 4 episodes before I bailed, because it was indeed misery porn. To me. But hey, to each his own. I get it. I hate polka. I still love Weird Al. Art is a matter of taste.
Quote:
Originally Posted by StarlaJane
As another posted stated, the point of most movies and tv shows is to elicit pathos from viewers. So, creating a storyline with which viewers will not only identify but, also, feel sympathy for the characters who experience tragedy is important. In fact, it’s sort of the cornerstone of effective drama.
There is a difference between have your character(s) be wounded --- psychologically, physically, spiritually, romantically ... whatever --- and the script purposefully torturing the character(s). Wounded characters are essential for great drama. We're all a little stained. But trying to watch Season 1 of this show, it seemed to be like the writers weren't interesting in staining so much as wallowing.
There is sometimes a fine line between drama and melodrama. TRUE DETECTIVE seemed to yell, "Cannonball!" and jumped deep into the melodrama pool.
And hey, if you liked that, good for you. Rock on. I didn't.
Perhaps. As I stated, I only watched 3 or 4 episodes before I bailed, because it was indeed misery porn. To me. But hey, to each his own. I get it. I hate polka. I still love Weird Al. Art is a matter of taste.
There is a difference between have your character(s) be wounded --- psychologically, physically, spiritually, romantically ... whatever --- and the script purposefully torturing the character(s). Wounded characters are essential for great drama. We're all a little stained. But trying to watch Season 1 of this show, it seemed to be like the writers weren't interesting in staining so much as wallowing.
There is sometimes a fine line between drama and melodrama. TRUE DETECTIVE seemed to yell, "Cannonball!" and jumped deep into the melodrama pool.
And hey, if you liked that, good for you. Rock on. I didn't.
No, I get it. To me, the characters and their situation were tragic. Nevertheless, I can understand how someone would feel like they were watching a train wreck. And who wants to see that, especially when there’s nothing you can do about it.
The one adjective that, I think, best describes season 1 is dark. I think that those of us who like season 1 are liking season 4 because it is also dark (haha, literally).
Liking it so far. The dynamic between the 2 leads are a little too familiar from season 1.
They sure doubled down on the supernatural angle. Hope it doesn't turn out to be another stupid cult.
A lot of this reminds me of Taylor Sheridan's 'Wind River'.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
