The one in which I talk about tv couples
Okay because I cannot move past my current obsession with The Office I am going to talk about television couples for a little bit. Sex is, of course, the basis to most films and television shows. Usually they are not the primary theme (unless you are watching porn) but 99.9% of times sex will be a theme in there somewhere.
Watching tv is, when you think about it, a pretty voyeuristic activity. You don't sit there watching tv or a movie thinking that it isn't real life. Obviously normal people don't sit there actively believing that it is real either. You logically know it isn't real but that doesn't stop you becoming invested in the characters and caring about what happens to them. You believe IN it, even while you know it isn't real. (If that makes sense.) So, the fact that we sit and watch the lives of these 'people' is really rather voyeuristic. (Particularly in some of the R rated stuff when you are watching people have sex.)
Right, so far we have learnt that sex is a theme in 99.9% of all movies and television shows. We have also learnt that watching tv and film is a voyeuristic activity, something we do to escape from our own lives and live someone else's, even if it is only for a little while. Then add into the mix the fact that love is a concept most people believe in and experience in their lives (even the 'guys' guys who try to pretend they don't believe in it). While, in real life, people don't only have sex with someone they are in love with (some do, but the majority of people, in the Western world anyway, don't) in the fictional world (again, unless it's porn) people generally want love to be the reason for sex.
Looking at all of this you can definitely see why people find it so important that the characters they imagine working well together actually get together. Television producers particularly, capitalise on the fact that this is what they viewers want to see. Even if they haven't set the scene from the beginning, when they see that a particular couple are sparking interest amongst the fans suddenly sexual tension will be written into the story. A couple of examples of this that spring to mind are Grissom and Sara on CSI and House and Cameron on House. The writers/producers became aware that the fans saw a certain amount of natural chemistry between those characters and so wrote some in as well. This is the point where you get the "will they/won't they" scenario. A scenario which can go on for YEARS without being answered. (When the writers have contrived a couple right from the beginning the will they/won't they scenario probably started immediately from the first episode.)
Back when I was a teenager two shows I loved were Friends (still love it!) and Lois and Clark. Both of these had will they/won't they couples right from the beginning. (I think I am going to refer to the will they/won't they thing as wtwt from now on for simplicity) Ross and Rachel were presented to us as a possible couple right from the moment Rachel ran into Central Perk in her wedding dress and we could tell from the look on Ross's face that he was 'in love' with her. (Characters on tv are always in love rather than just having silly crushes like we do in real life.) Lois and Clark were even more obvious since everyone pretty much knew about them already from the Superman movies.
I think in the case of both shows it took around 3 years (actually just under 3 I think, mid to late 2nd season) for these characters to actually get together. In the case of Lois and Clark it lasted (not that the show lasted much longer). Ross and Rachel didn't last past the 3rd season but fans never lost hope. We finally saw them get together in the last episode of the last season. (In a move that was very well thought out by the writers.)
The trouble with the couples with the amazing sexual tension, the couples that the majority of fans are dying to have get together, is that once they are together the show loses it's appeal. Often the general, everyday lives of a couple are not all that interesting. I think perhaps the exception to this rule, the genre that can get away getting their couple together early on is the comedy. Comedy can still be there when a couple gets together. Too much drama though? That just gets lame and unrealistic.
You can look at The Nanny as an example of a comedy that couldn't pull off getting their couple together. The tension between Fran and Mr Sheffield was there from very early on (maybe even the first episode, I'm not sure) and fans were DYING for them to get together. Eventually they did and people stopped watching. People thought that's what they wanted but after they got it, it lost it's appeal. Perhaps better writers would have been able to keep the magic of the show alive but, alas, The Nanny didn't have better writers.
I think the reason the writers of Friends split Ross and Rachel up again was to keep the fans wanting more. I have faith that the writers would have been good enough to keep the magic alive even with this couple properly together for the rest of the show but I really, really love how it turned out so I'm not complaining. I don't know for sure but I think Lois and Clark ended up failing because Lois and Clark got boring where Lois and Clark with plenty of sexual tension and the fans wondering will they or won't they (damn it, that didn't seem like a good place for my wtwt abbreviation) would have probably stayed interesting.
On The Office (ha! You knew I was going to bring it up at some point right?) Jim and Pam are the big wtwt couple. Throughout the first 3 seasons we've seen Dwight and Angela hook up and Michael and Jan hook up. I've got to say that neither of these were couples I saw coming before the episode they were revealed in. But while all this coupleness was going on there was still no Jim and Pam. We thought there was hope at the beginning of season 3 when we found out Pam had broken off her engagement to Roy. But, sadly, it seemed her and Jim weren't talking. THEN when they finally were talking damn Jim had gone and got himself a Karen already. The end of season 3 left us with Jim asking Pam on a date. Those veterans to tv land, and particularly tv coupledom, know that this does not mean we'll actually have a PB&J in the 4th season. The writers could have just been psyching us out. (PB&J is Pam Beesly and Jim by the way, also known as Jam.)
I have every faith that the writers of The Office are clever enough, and good enough at there job to make Pam and Jim work as a couple. I do not think the show will be ruined if they are a couple. Okay I have been holding back information since a lot of the people who read this are Kiwis and season 4 hasn't been released here yet. BUT if you don't mind spoilers and feel like keeping on reading then scroll down and I'll tell you the outcome of PB&J.
THEY ARE DATING!!! It is so damn cute! Pam and Jim are actually the personification of love. If you want to know what love is - look at them. Hell, I know they are just actors but I have never seen actors pull off in love as well as Jenna Fischer and John Krasinski do in their portrayals of Pam and Jim. These two getting together can only make the show better.
Ha! And now I am off to watch episode 2 of season 4! Yay :) share this: facebook
Watching tv is, when you think about it, a pretty voyeuristic activity. You don't sit there watching tv or a movie thinking that it isn't real life. Obviously normal people don't sit there actively believing that it is real either. You logically know it isn't real but that doesn't stop you becoming invested in the characters and caring about what happens to them. You believe IN it, even while you know it isn't real. (If that makes sense.) So, the fact that we sit and watch the lives of these 'people' is really rather voyeuristic. (Particularly in some of the R rated stuff when you are watching people have sex.)
Right, so far we have learnt that sex is a theme in 99.9% of all movies and television shows. We have also learnt that watching tv and film is a voyeuristic activity, something we do to escape from our own lives and live someone else's, even if it is only for a little while. Then add into the mix the fact that love is a concept most people believe in and experience in their lives (even the 'guys' guys who try to pretend they don't believe in it). While, in real life, people don't only have sex with someone they are in love with (some do, but the majority of people, in the Western world anyway, don't) in the fictional world (again, unless it's porn) people generally want love to be the reason for sex.
Looking at all of this you can definitely see why people find it so important that the characters they imagine working well together actually get together. Television producers particularly, capitalise on the fact that this is what they viewers want to see. Even if they haven't set the scene from the beginning, when they see that a particular couple are sparking interest amongst the fans suddenly sexual tension will be written into the story. A couple of examples of this that spring to mind are Grissom and Sara on CSI and House and Cameron on House. The writers/producers became aware that the fans saw a certain amount of natural chemistry between those characters and so wrote some in as well. This is the point where you get the "will they/won't they" scenario. A scenario which can go on for YEARS without being answered. (When the writers have contrived a couple right from the beginning the will they/won't they scenario probably started immediately from the first episode.)
Back when I was a teenager two shows I loved were Friends (still love it!) and Lois and Clark. Both of these had will they/won't they couples right from the beginning. (I think I am going to refer to the will they/won't they thing as wtwt from now on for simplicity) Ross and Rachel were presented to us as a possible couple right from the moment Rachel ran into Central Perk in her wedding dress and we could tell from the look on Ross's face that he was 'in love' with her. (Characters on tv are always in love rather than just having silly crushes like we do in real life.) Lois and Clark were even more obvious since everyone pretty much knew about them already from the Superman movies.
I think in the case of both shows it took around 3 years (actually just under 3 I think, mid to late 2nd season) for these characters to actually get together. In the case of Lois and Clark it lasted (not that the show lasted much longer). Ross and Rachel didn't last past the 3rd season but fans never lost hope. We finally saw them get together in the last episode of the last season. (In a move that was very well thought out by the writers.)
The trouble with the couples with the amazing sexual tension, the couples that the majority of fans are dying to have get together, is that once they are together the show loses it's appeal. Often the general, everyday lives of a couple are not all that interesting. I think perhaps the exception to this rule, the genre that can get away getting their couple together early on is the comedy. Comedy can still be there when a couple gets together. Too much drama though? That just gets lame and unrealistic.
You can look at The Nanny as an example of a comedy that couldn't pull off getting their couple together. The tension between Fran and Mr Sheffield was there from very early on (maybe even the first episode, I'm not sure) and fans were DYING for them to get together. Eventually they did and people stopped watching. People thought that's what they wanted but after they got it, it lost it's appeal. Perhaps better writers would have been able to keep the magic of the show alive but, alas, The Nanny didn't have better writers.
I think the reason the writers of Friends split Ross and Rachel up again was to keep the fans wanting more. I have faith that the writers would have been good enough to keep the magic alive even with this couple properly together for the rest of the show but I really, really love how it turned out so I'm not complaining. I don't know for sure but I think Lois and Clark ended up failing because Lois and Clark got boring where Lois and Clark with plenty of sexual tension and the fans wondering will they or won't they (damn it, that didn't seem like a good place for my wtwt abbreviation) would have probably stayed interesting.
On The Office (ha! You knew I was going to bring it up at some point right?) Jim and Pam are the big wtwt couple. Throughout the first 3 seasons we've seen Dwight and Angela hook up and Michael and Jan hook up. I've got to say that neither of these were couples I saw coming before the episode they were revealed in. But while all this coupleness was going on there was still no Jim and Pam. We thought there was hope at the beginning of season 3 when we found out Pam had broken off her engagement to Roy. But, sadly, it seemed her and Jim weren't talking. THEN when they finally were talking damn Jim had gone and got himself a Karen already. The end of season 3 left us with Jim asking Pam on a date. Those veterans to tv land, and particularly tv coupledom, know that this does not mean we'll actually have a PB&J in the 4th season. The writers could have just been psyching us out. (PB&J is Pam Beesly and Jim by the way, also known as Jam.)
I have every faith that the writers of The Office are clever enough, and good enough at there job to make Pam and Jim work as a couple. I do not think the show will be ruined if they are a couple. Okay I have been holding back information since a lot of the people who read this are Kiwis and season 4 hasn't been released here yet. BUT if you don't mind spoilers and feel like keeping on reading then scroll down and I'll tell you the outcome of PB&J.
THEY ARE DATING!!! It is so damn cute! Pam and Jim are actually the personification of love. If you want to know what love is - look at them. Hell, I know they are just actors but I have never seen actors pull off in love as well as Jenna Fischer and John Krasinski do in their portrayals of Pam and Jim. These two getting together can only make the show better.
Ha! And now I am off to watch episode 2 of season 4! Yay :) share this: facebook
This entry was posted
on Friday, October 05, 2007 at 10:16 PM.
You can skip to the end and leave a response.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment