Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Forced diversity in recent shows/movies. They always have to have that one character that is gay or trans and it’s too obvious and on the nose. (Example: Bros)

I miss 20 years ago when a gay character just existed and wasn’t heavily stereotyped and over the top.

Genuinely curious what show/movie you are thinking of when you say this. I can't think of any examples.

Monroe on Too Close for Comfort way back in the 80s.

Nobody even addressed his sexuality directly. And he was the real star of the show.

Anonymous wrote:Forced diversity in recent shows/movies. They always have to have that one character that is gay or trans and it’s too obvious and on the nose. (Example: Bros)

I miss 20 years ago when a gay character just existed and wasn’t heavily stereotyped and over the top.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They seemingly never repeat outfits. Ever.

Roseanne was perhaps the first and only show where people wore outfits more than once.

And yet all the flannels on Roseanne are from ll bean. (Most of Becky’s clothing in the new series is from nordstrom—yes, nordstrom sells bedazzled rose embroidered jeans) So unrealistic!

The most realistic clothing were the suits on the office, so ill fitting, it captured the average American office worker style so well

LL Bean flannels last forever so it makes sense to have a handful for life.

but the family on roseanne is trapped in a cycle of generational poverty, they can't afford to pay their mortgages, they certainly aren't investing in "quality" clothing

Here's an unrealistic aspect of the conners--I am confused by the high school son's "trying to get a scholarship so he can go to college" plotline. Presumably the family is very poor, so wouldn't they qualify for the Illinois Commitment at a place like UIUC where he'd gt free tuition and fees for four years because his family earns less than 67k a year? https://osfa.illinois.edu/illinois-commitment/

Those Halloween episodes— gnarly as they were — were also unrealistic from a money standpoint.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Forced diversity in recent shows/movies. They always have to have that one character that is gay or trans and it’s too obvious and on the nose. (Example: Bros)

I miss 20 years ago when a gay character just existed and wasn’t heavily stereotyped and over the top.

Genuinely curious what show/movie you are thinking of when you say this. I can't think of any examples.

NP the Lieutenant on “Bosch” was a lesbian, no fuss.

The A-Team (although that is 40 years ago). Mr. T just was who he was.

Leverage.

I’m sorry……what?? 🧐🧐

I mean they didn’t make a fuss about him being a negro.

Well neither did Star Trek about Uhura.

Anonymous wrote:When Rory and Lorelei exclusively eat burgers and pancakes and don't exercise and remain super super skinny.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone wears shoes in the house: drives me nuts (we’re a shoes off house)
seconding the full sit down breakfast before school and work: who does that???
never repeating outfits: grrrr, at least reuse, remix items! such waste and really reinforces the desire for fast fashion
bedrooms are HUGE: The only bedroom that seemed a normal size was the Brady boys, made total sense for Greg to move to the attic


Wow, never realized how many pet peeves I have, lol!

Shoes in the house isn’t unrealistic, though…you just don’t do it at your house.

It is unrealistic that everyone wears shoes all the time. Most families I interact with are shoes off in the house houses.

Anonymous wrote:Everyone wears shoes in the house: drives me nuts (we’re a shoes off house)
seconding the full sit down breakfast before school and work: who does that???
never repeating outfits: grrrr, at least reuse, remix items! such waste and really reinforces the desire for fast fashion
bedrooms are HUGE: The only bedroom that seemed a normal size was the Brady boys, made total sense for Greg to move to the attic


Wow, never realized how many pet peeves I have, lol!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Forced diversity in recent shows/movies. They always have to have that one character that is gay or trans and it’s too obvious and on the nose. (Example: Bros)

I miss 20 years ago when a gay character just existed and wasn’t heavily stereotyped and over the top.

Genuinely curious what show/movie you are thinking of when you say this. I can't think of any examples.

NP the Lieutenant on “Bosch” was a lesbian, no fuss.

The A-Team (although that is 40 years ago). Mr. T just was who he was.

Leverage.

I’m sorry……what?? 🧐🧐

I mean they didn’t make a fuss about him being a negro.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The absence of clutter in most people’s homes.

The really nice neighborhoods most people live in.

NYC apartments — all of them.

Kids living in totally walkable neighborhoods and able to roam at will at very young ages.

This isn’t unrealistic outside the US.

Anonymous wrote:Forced diversity in recent shows/movies. They always have to have that one character that is gay or trans and it’s too obvious and on the nose. (Example: Bros)

I miss 20 years ago when a gay character just existed and wasn’t heavily stereotyped and over the top.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They seemingly never repeat outfits. Ever.

Roseanne was perhaps the first and only show where people wore outfits more than once.

And yet all the flannels on Roseanne are from ll bean. (Most of Becky’s clothing in the new series is from nordstrom—yes, nordstrom sells bedazzled rose embroidered jeans) So unrealistic!

The most realistic clothing were the suits on the office, so ill fitting, it captured the average American office worker style so well

LL Bean flannels last forever so it makes sense to have a handful for life.

but the family on roseanne is trapped in a cycle of generational poverty, they can't afford to pay their mortgages, they certainly aren't investing in "quality" clothing

Here's an unrealistic aspect of the conners--I am confused by the high school son's "trying to get a scholarship so he can go to college" plotline. Presumably the family is very poor, so wouldn't they qualify for the Illinois Commitment at a place like UIUC where he'd gt free tuition and fees for four years because his family earns less than 67k a year? https://osfa.illinois.edu/illinois-commitment/

Anonymous wrote:Lately, several shows/ movies have one black parent and one white parent with a mixed kid. Sure that happens in the real world, but it seems so forced in shows. Like have a black family or white or whatever. It seems like a way to increase audiences.