Audience-Alienating Premise cleanup

That's another shoehorned move from Family-Unfriendly Aesop courtesy of Harley Quinn Is Great.

Edited by mightymewtron on Sep 16th 2020 at 2:30:52 PM

I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.

At this point, I'd say they should be called in so we can talk.

Their edits seem to have moved away from transplanting those entries after it was called out on ATT. Not sure if calling them back in would be productive in that case. But we should probably do it as a formality to avoid borderline-edit-wars.

I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.

Not gonna lie, the premise of Idiocracy has massive Unfortunate Implications in my view. Still, most of the audience doesn't seem to have a problem with it.

Edited by DoktorvonEurotrash on Sep 17th 2020 at 4:12:49 AM

Plus, that premise can't turn off audiences as it's the sort of thing you need to watch the film to know about.

Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness

Bringing up the following examples from AudienceAlienatingPremise.Film:

• Sony Pictures is infamous for producing and releasing films with off-putting premises that are quite oftencritically reviled on release, generate controversy pre-release and bomb as a result of said controversy, especially after 2014:
  • While Happy Madison Productions' films tend to attract audiences, they've also made a few that appeal to no one:
    • The Master of Disguise fell fully into this. Only children would appreciate the broad comedy of farts, butt jokes, and someone named Pistachio Disguisey acting like a turtle and slapping people in the face. Only adults could get impersonations of Quint, Tony Montana, or Groucho Marx. Though it did make a modest profit, it was panned by critics and audiences alike and star Dana Carvey's film career was derailed for years.
    • Bucky Larson: Born to Be a Star promised viewers the story of a masturbating Manchild with a tiny penis attempting to become a porn star. It turned out the audience of people interested in seeing a buck-toothed man in a sweater vest repeatedly pleasure himself was very small indeed, and the film made less than a third of its budget back, on top of being critically savaged.
    • Jack and Jill: Adam Sandler playing twin brother and sister doesn't exactly spell award winner. Add immature Toilet Humor derivative of Sandler's films in general, Adam Sandler's growing poor reputation and negative stereotypes towards Mexicans together, and you get this movie.
    • That's My Boy is about the survivor of statutory rape at the hands of a middle school teacher and parental abuse at the hands of his father. Decades later, he's an unemployed alcoholic, and he hasn't spoken to his now-adult son of said rape in years. It's a comedy starring Adam Sandler. Critics, and much of the potential audience, found the setup far too serious to be funny, and it never recouped its budget.
    • Part of the reason Pixels was off-putting to fans is the presence of Adam Sandler, whose films in the New Tens (particularly Jack and Jill as mentioned above) have not exactly given him a positive reputation. Others felt that the reliance on 80s games and/or references could also alienate both younger audiences (who won't get said references) and older audiences (who are more likely to be familiar with the Video Game Movies Suck problem). The film's extremely sexist depiction of women as prizes doesn't help. Unsurprisingly, the film received a negative critical reception and bombed at the box office, and wound up being the last Happy Madison film distributed by Sony, with their later films being distributed via Netflix.
  • Despite being based on a beloved comic book property, The Amazing Spider-Man Series suffered from this:
    • This is likely a reason why the films were less successful than the previous Spider-Man film franchise and Marvel's own film franchise. It's a Continuity Reboot mixed with an Ultimate Universe, only a few years after the previous franchise ended (that still holds a lot of fans and nostalgia), made at least partially in order for Sony to keep the film rights, and thus keep it out of the hands of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. It also puts focus on a plot-point from the comics that was controversial with fans (his parents' legacy), reimagines and/or redesigns a significant amount of characters from the comics, and seems to draw a ton of inspiration from The Dark Knight Trilogy, Blade, and the X-Men Film Series rather than the light-hearted and often cheesy tone of the previous films from the previous trilogy of Spider-Man films. To be frank, there's a lot about these films that turns people away before they even see them.
    • The sequel became subject to this by unashamedly featuring three supervillains, which is generally not seen as a good thing by audiences after Batman & Robin (especially after a similar issue was part of the Franchise Killer of the previous trilogy, Spider-Man 3), and kept people from seeing it. The sequel also switched tone from dark and gritty to Lighter and Softer like the Marvel Cinematic Universe, which only furthered suspicions that these movies were heavily influenced by a corporation following whatever the current trend is. Then, the alienation went even further with the movie's borderline Cruel Twist Ending, which killed off a character that people considered to be one of the good things about the movies and resulted in a number of people being discouraged from watching the movie again.
  • Even before it was pulled from release (and was later released anyways through YouTube), Sony considered the Seth Rogen / James Franco movie The Interview to be this. It's about two talk-show hosts who invite North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un for an interview, which the CIA takes as a chance to assassinate him. As it turns out, a film that advocates or appears to advocate the assassination of a world leader is pretty radioactive even when that leader is an acknowledged despot. Leaked documents show that various foreign countries outright refused to distribute or even show the movie, and that the Sony executives felt that the level of Gorn and Black Comedy would completely alienate most American audiences anyway. While they did praise Rogen's performance, the general consensus from just about everyone at the company seemed to be "How the hell did this get made?!"
  • Ghostbusters (2016) became infamous for this. The fact that it was a Continuity Reboot with an all-female cast who unceremoniously replaced the originals rather than a continuation of the first two films did not sit well with the Ghostbusters fanbase, which wasn't helped by the fact that a planned Ghostbusters 3 was reportedly cancelled in favour of greenlighting this movie or that die-hard fans had been on-again-off-again taunted with the prospect of a proper third sequel for thirty years. The fact that it came out during a very contentious election year, as well as the underwhelming trailers and all the bad publicity caused by all the flame wars over the film's direction and cast resulted in casual moviegoers being turned off from seeing the movie as well, leading to it bombing at the box office despite a mixed to positive critical reception. It's rather telling that a major selling-point of Ghostbusters: Afterlife is that it's a direct, if distant, sequel to Ghostbusters II that goes out of its way to ignore this version.
  • Passengers (2016) suffered from this: the premise (which was not revealed in the publicity) is about a man who is prematurely woken from Human Popsicle status on a slower-than-light colonist starship, leaving him doomed to spend his entire life alone aboard it as the only awake person. After about a year of this, he selects a woman who seems most attractive to him and wakes her up, making her believe that her awakening was an accident as well, and they play out a completely straight romance story because they have literally no-one but each other to spend time with. However, the idea of a man ruining a woman's life just because he couldn't stand isolation and wanted her as a romantic partner, lying to her about it, and getting rewarded for it with everything he wanted, outraged critics to the point that some of them spoiled the whole thing in their reviews and told the audience not to watch it on any account, which worked, though the popularity of Chris Pratt and Jennifer Lawrence drew in enough international viewers to make it profitable.
  • Holmes & Watson: Sherlock Holmes has already been parodied to hell and back, so a low-brow, narrow and redundant parody will not draw in many viewers these days (particularly since the film it's parodying came out nearly a decade prior). Not helping matters is the growing disinterest in Will Ferrell's typecasting as a hyperactive manchild, or the fact that John C. Reilly was costarring; they'd already starred in two other films together for Sony/Columbia (Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby and Step Brothers), causing many to dismiss Holmes & Watson as a blatant attempt to recapture lightning in a bottle. The film was universally panned upon release as one of the worst comedies ever made and flopped at the box office.

I don't think TASM counts, since it's just essentially "a new Spider-Man movie series with a slightly different interpretation." Heck, even the MCU is a 2010s take of the Ultimate Universe concept.

"Holmes and Watson" may count, because the extreme low brow Sherlocke Holmes humor really turns people off.

Edited by RAlexa21th on Sep 17th 2020 at 12:40:30 PM

Where there's life, there's hope.

Eh, I think the entry makes a decent case. It's not just that it comes across as redundant, but also that some of the major areas where it does try to set itself across from the previous Spider-Man films are unappealing.

My own takes on the Sony examples:

The Master of Disguise: Keep as the low-brow childish jokes and the adult parody doesn't appear to mix.
Bucky Larson: Keep. Dare I say — what were they thinking?
Jack and Jill: Cut (or add context). The movie may suck, but nothing in the description really cries "audience-alienating". Negative stereotypes are sadly still a dime a gross in film, and, well, what negative stereotypes are they talking about? This might be AAP with more context, however.
That's My Boy: Keep. See Bucky Larson above.
Pixels: I'm on the fence. I did like this movie, but the description does point out that there are too many factors that limit the audience.

TASM: Unsure on this one.

The Interview: Cut. All it talks about is the controversy. Besides, hasn't something similar already been done? Also it simply sounds like it is Overshadowed by Controversy.
Ghostbusters (2016): Keep, as it is way too much of a change (and that it "replaced" the original timeline) and that the original is too well-known.
Passengers: Cut — while what happened was pretty insulting to most audiences, the premise didn't appear to be alienating.
Holmes & Watson: Cut — just sounds like a very poorly-done parody. As noted, Sherlock Holmes has been parodied many, many times, so nothing alienating there.

I'm leaning against Pixels because I think the premise did engage people - they just found it wasted. The part about women being trophies is also not part of the premise, just the plot.

The Passengers example is interesting. If the trailers deliberately mislead audiences about the premise, and they're no longer interested when they hear the actual premise, does that count?

I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.

I think The Master of Disguise one reads more like Uncertain Audience.

SoundCloud

It's more like Never Trust a Trailer. I don't think a premise could turn away an audience if it wasn't even known what the premise is? Or lied about?

Edited by Tabs on Sep 17th 2020 at 4:34:08 AM

Okay so I've cut The Master of Disguise, Jack and Jill, Pixels, The Interview, Passengers and Holmes & Watson, and kept Bucky Larson: Born To Be A Star, That's My Boy and Ghostbusters (2016).

Still like a few more opinions on whether The Amazing Spider-Man and The Amazing Spider-Man 2 qualify.

---

And whilst I'm here I'd like to bring up this example from Gotham High:

• Audience-Alienating Premise: Gotham High was quickly criticized by many Youtubers for trying too hard to appeal to fringe minority groups and for being a cliche Teen Drama story with Batman characters slapped on after the fact.

I really just want to say "cut for lack of context".

Cut as no evidence it actually alienated (underperformed in ratings).

YMMV.Metroid Other M:

• Audience-Alienating Premise: Early on in the game's development, there were several skeptics against the idea of having a Metroid game with cutscenes and dialogue. Fusion might have dipped its toes into these waters before, but it was also one of the main not-so-fondly-remembered aspects of that game. Supposedly this was an attempt to appeal to the Japanese audience, a market which historically has had less enthusiasm for Metroid in comparison to Nintendo's other franchises, and who typically prefer linear games with tightly woven narratives over more open-ended, exploratory experiences. It didn't work that well though - while it did okay in Japan, it didn't really outperform previous Metroid games by too much, and it bombed everywhere else.

I intend to cut as the backlash was due to the execution of the story as opposed to the premise (what was revealed pre-release). It sold well early until the unpopular story became known suggests the premise isn't the issue. Thoughts or objections?

During the wick check, I actually highlighted that example as misuse. I believe I said something like "People hated the game for the story it told and the way it handled its characters, not because it's a Metroid game with dialogue and cutscenes. Metroid Fusion and Metroid Prime 3: Corruption had both and did quite well."

So leave for now until cleanup decides what to do?

This is from the Metal Gear Survive page.

• Disregarding the entire Konami drama with Kojima's departure, and the ex-Kons health insurance controversy, the very premise of Survive was already in question, since there's no demand for another open world survival game with zombies. Being a Metal Gear game that dropped the series' traditional formula for the aforementioned survival game mechanics didn't help the game's case.

I already thought it was credible on its face. But, after checking the Wikipedia page on its sales statistics that show as much as a 95% from Phantom Pain's sales in the UK, generally poor performance elsewhere, and Konami quietly avoiding talking about it, it seems like a fairly open and shut case. I bring it up only because it bizarrely doesn't seem to be listed on the Video games sub page for the trope currently.

Edited by DDRMASTERM on Sep 24th 2020 at 12:45:27 PM

Agreed, the premise was divisive at worst, some genuinely were interested in fleshing out Samus as a character. It’s the execution that was the problem.

Edited by DDRMASTERM on Sep 24th 2020 at 12:58:03 PM

So whatever the hell this is is on Quantico

• Audience-Alienating Premise:
  • Many viewers found the idea of a pair of twins posing as a single person inside Quantico to be so gratuitously absurd that the whole show is tainted by it. On the other hand, it's also been called "delightfully insane" by others. And thankfully, the FBI regains a little of its credibility by having the twins be there at the director of the facility's behalf.
  • Another subplot that's truly divisive and kinda starting to actually alienate viewers is Simon's pretending to be gay, not to mention when the reason is revealed it comes off as rather self-serving and offensive (it was so he would be left alone).
    • Simon's confession has also managed to offend The Zionist Organization of America, but for different reasons.
    • This got worse with the show's one real gay character turning out to be a Dirty Coward who preferred aiding terrorists and framing Simon as an oblique hint to the others over just turning himself in for the misdeeds he was being blackmailed for, and then promptly dives out a window when he's caught.
    • Not to mention the Mormon character having the Dark Secret of having committed statutory rape while on a mission. This would be basically impossible, due to missionaries not being allowed to go out alone.
  • The utter lack of racial and sexuality diversity in the male regular cast, especially when compared to the female regular cast and the fact that neither minority males (Jacob Artist's Brandon [black] and Rick Cosnett's Elias [gay]) have a major or a three-dimensional role. Elias is even revealed to be a Dirty Coward traitor and commits suicide to avoid paying for his mistakes in a storyline that many called out for being trite, stereotypical and downright homophobic, some claiming it being even worse than if Elias was revealed to be the Evil Mastermind terrorist. The one regular that was promoted as gay (Tate Ellington's Simon) is revealed as actually straight, and is actually shown as more competent and overall a better character once he stops being gay.
    • This aspect is much improved in the second season, with multiple new minority males that get much larger and more fleshed out roles. Similarly, Harry being gay is never treated as a liability.
  • The more traditional twin Raina being sidelined for the more "occidental" twin Nimah after the twins are revealed as such to the other NATs is also a heated topic of discussion.
  • The fact that, in order for the show's plot to work, the FBI needs to be dumber than a bag of rocks, or the myriad of ways the show tries to ape How to Get Away with Murder.
  • After "Clear" aired, many fans were unhappy with Alex saying that everyone who was at Quantico when Alex started training were suspects, including three characters who were introduced just one episode earlier, since that could lead to a Shocking Swerve similar to Elias in the winter finale and basically wimping out of having one of the series regulars actually be the main terrorist.
  • People also seem to get really annoyed by the fact that every time one of the recurring/regulars is shown being shady and/or in cahoots with the villains, they're all being blackmailed with something.
  • The high imbalance between past and present storyline, especially since it tends to heavily skew in favor of the former, and many people get confused since the flashbacks aren't very far away in time from the present.
  • The stupidity of Alex apparently being 'too visible' for the FBI, but being offered a job with the CIA right after the earlier fact was stated in the season finale.

What ?

"That's right mortal. By channeling my divine rage into power, I have forged a new instrument in which to destroy you."

Just...just cut it.

Currently Working On: Incorruptible Pure Pureness

Cut it. Should the Metroid: Other M one be cut as well?

If you need to explain why it’s alienating in that much detail, then there’s something very wrong with its credibility as an example in the first place. Obvious cut.

Edited by DDRMASTERM on Sep 24th 2020 at 3:58:01 AM

@Ferot_Dreadnaught Sorry for charging ahead, but I listed some evidence in my previous post. But to reiterate, it saw sales drop by as much as 95% from Metal Gear Solid V in one report and Konami notably didn’t talk much about it in a sales report.

I think Other M can be cut — it sounds like "OK premise, horrible execution".