mrv3000 | Die excuse, die!

Current Mood: hot

Die excuse, die!

How long have I wanted to smack the crap out of that tired Moonlighting excuse to keep couples in perpetual UST? A LONG TIME, THAT'S HOW LONG. Thanks to

surreallis for posting this link to a post on NPR's pop culture blog - they talk about EXACTLY THIS.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/monkeysee/2009/09/what_really_happened_to_moonli_1.html

I would put sparkly flashing lights around it, but I'm hot and tired and blinky lights would require way too much energy.

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

Not a lot of the couples on the Onion's list actually got and stayed together, though. I'd like to see a relationship that doesn't fizzle or end in tears but still remains sparky and dramatically interesting. Life doesn't end after marriage, after all.

THIS. OMG. I read something similar this summer and I too wanted to put big sparkly lights around it. How is this not common understanding?

The Bones creator today tweeted that the Moonlighting thing is NOT a motivation for anything they do, FWIW. (Unlike JAG, which strung us along for 9 years specifically because of the moonlighting fear. WTF.)

Wouldn't that be great? I think too many writers use that as an excuse to blow off any sort of "in a relationship" writing and keep it in perpetual UST, or feel the need to have something OMGDRAMATIC happen.

I've heard horror stories about JAG. Occasionally it would sneak into SG-1 fandom. :D

Huh. I never actually watched Moonlighting, so I just had to hear it as an excuse for years as to why R'ing the UST was a baaaaad idea. But seeing it all laid out like that... dudes, it wasn't the romance that killed it, it was the crappy situation and writing! Sheez. Get over it. I would love it if that excuse was never, ever brought up again. Ever.

I remember watching Moonlighting and the article is exactly right. It wasn't the getting together that killed it, it was the keeping them apart. And also the bit where the leads couldn't stand each other and it showed.

Ha! I remember it too and the keeping them apart was the reason I stopped watching. After awhile you just don't give a damn anymore.

Gwen and Rhys from Torchwood? Farscape? The married couple in Medium?

Edited 2009-09-19 04:52 (UTC)

IKR?!?! I saw MoRyan's original rant on twitter,(did you read her blog entry?) and I think it's so right
I'm pretty sick of the will-they-or-wont-they dance and they *need* to show some progress on bones or I might just give up too

I like how HIMYM has managed to do it, with marshall and lily progressing from 'dating' to 'engaged' to 'happily married'. and hopefully they won't ruin barney and robin this season.

There was a time when I was *seriously* contemplating doing this exact argument (although longer and with a lot more examples than just Moonlighting) for my Master's Thesis. I get soooooo sick of it. :-P

(Scarecrow and Mrs King? Kate Jackson got CANCER and couldn't work. Lois and Clark? The writers panicked at the last minute and started coming up with stupid storylines to keep them apart. Remington Steele? Haven't got that far yet, but from what I've heard, ditto. Almost all those shows that people throw in your face as examples of this "rule", NONE of them died because of resolving the UST. And with most of them? I can prove it!)

Successful married couple tv show-Hart to Hart. However I also heard that Cybil and Bruce did not like each other much and it is really hard to warm up to someone you can't stand. Now how true that was, I don't know.
But it is lazsiness on the part of the writers if they can't manage to come up with a story line -a good story line-involving married characters.

Ooh! This is another thing I like about HIMYM (YES YOU HAVEN'T HEARD ENOUGH YET) where you have Lily and Marshall basically married from the start and yet are still adorable, and the other relationships have so far followed a pattern of "a year of UST" followed by "a year of the relationship" which has so far worked really well. Even if Ted and Robin were kind of icky. XD

But in general, omg, I hate the Moonlighting thing. I mean, sometimes it's true - I find The Office a bad example since I lost interest in the show after Pam and Jim got together and became boring. But plenty of other shows have managed doing relationships. FOR INSTANCE: I could have watched the 'Ten and Rose' version of Doctor Who forever without getting bored.

EXACTLY. It's driven me up the wall to see people using "shows will die if you resolve UST - just look at Moonlighting." Nononononononononono.

*NODS* But yet that's somehow become somthing that's held up to keep perpetual UST.

I didn't read her blog entry. Heh. I don't watch Bones, but perpetual UST no matter what the show is ANNOYING.

And if the writing's good enough, you can make the transition.

HEH!!

I remember stupidity happening on Lois and Clark, although it's been too long that I don't remember the specifics. Anyway, I think that'd be fascinating to see a real analysis of "UST WILL KILL THE SHOW."

Awww, I remember Hart to Hart! But I didn't know that Cybil and Bruce didn't like each other before this. That really will translate on screen.

And I agree. Laziness. Or lack of skill.

HA! I've got the DVDs! Although I haven't started watching it yet. I'm still finishing off Chuck.

I don't watch The Office, so I can't comment on that. But I agree with you on the Ten and Rose Show. That's because while RTD sometimes is smoking the not-so-good-crack, he can write relationships extremely well - pretty much any kind/stage of a relationship.

Woo! And hurry up and finish Chuck! :D

To be fair to Jim and Pam, I think a large chunk of my apathy is that the show should have ended something like three seasons ago, and now just seems tired and trite. Which I think serves to show that it's more about the writing than OH MY GOD TWO PEOPLE IN A FUNCTIONAL RELATIONSHIP IT BURRRRRRRNS.

Because as you said, RTD did it, did it well, and does it consistently.

Thanks for the link! Haven't been around much because first there was Dragoncon and now I am the sick. :(

But I must point this out to you: at this icon comm's post, there is an icon of two dachshunds in the autumn. I thought you might like it. :)

http://community.livejournal.com/toocuteicons/32251.html#cutid1

About the blog post, which I haven't read yet. Just some SF&F couples to think about.

1) On Highlander, Duncan and Tessa were together from the start of the show, and as a long-time couple, it worked and it showed. The only reason the character left the show was because the actress didn't want to spend half-a-year in Canada away from her husband and kids back in Europe.

2) On Voyager, after the writers finally got Tom Paris and Belanna Torres married off to each other, they promptly became background characters. But then, that was about the time the show became "the HoloDoc and Barbie of Borg" show and all the other characters got sharfted. :(

3) O'Brien married Keiko on TNG, and then they transferred to DS9. They didn't always have an easy relationship, but what we saw it of, it seemed rather real. And Kira and Odo finally got together and that was lovely. :)

4) The X-Files--I'm not sure what happened here, because I stopped watching after the 4th season, but there was UST.

AWWWWWWW!!

On The X-Files - they were separated much of the time after they got together as well. (Well, DD pretty much went off the show.) But in the latest movie I found their relationship to be fascinating and they were very much together. Proof it can be done.

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

Die excuse, die!

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

re: UST and autumn icons

re: UST

Re: UST and autumn icons

Re: UST