PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: nddons on January 23, 2016, 10:43:09 AM
-
I'm a huge fan of Ray Liotta (big Goodfellas fan too) and was excited to see him in a new cop series called "Shades of Blue." He plays a bad ass corrupt cop alongside Jennifer Lopez, also a corrupt cop (who I don't really buy in this role, plus she's a terrible actor).
So I saw the first couple of episodes, liked it, and taped the series. Then on this Thursday's episode 3, in the middle of a heated discussion in a hotel room, Liotta goes and KISSES ANOTHER GUY COP. Later they show the other guy showering presumably post-sex.
WHAT THE FUCK? It was totally unnecessary, didn't add to the story, and was simply gratuitous. It took a cool cop show and just made it gross. I don't get it.
Are we at the point where we have to be force fed homosexual behavior in a forced acceptance of it?
-
re-education camp takes many forms.
-
Are we at the point where we have to be force fed homosexual behavior in a forced acceptance of it?
Its not us/me. I'm not at any new point. Its the agenda of those that force feed us/me, that agenda is now to the point where gay Liotta is now on the menu. Makes me like him less.
-
I'm a huge fan of Ray Liotta (big Goodfellas fan too) and was excited to see him in a new cop series called "Shades of Blue." He plays a bad ass corrupt cop alongside Jennifer Lopez, also a corrupt cop (who I don't really buy in this role, plus she's a terrible actor).
So I saw the first couple of episodes, liked it, and taped the series. Then on this Thursday's episode 3, in the middle of a heated discussion in a hotel room, Liotta goes and KISSES ANOTHER GUY COP. Later they show the other guy showering presumably post-sex.
WHAT THE FUCK? It was totally unnecessary, didn't add to the story, and was simply gratuitous. It took a cool cop show and just made it gross. I don't get it.
Are we at the point where we have to be force fed homosexual behavior in a forced acceptance of it?
Conditioning.
-
I'm a huge fan of Ray Liotta (big Goodfellas fan too) and was excited to see him in a new cop series called "Shades of Blue." He plays a bad ass corrupt cop alongside Jennifer Lopez, also a corrupt cop (who I don't really buy in this role, plus she's a terrible actor).
So I saw the first couple of episodes, liked it, and taped the series. Then on this Thursday's episode 3, in the middle of a heated discussion in a hotel room, Liotta goes and KISSES ANOTHER GUY COP. Later they show the other guy showering presumably post-sex.
WHAT THE FUCK? It was totally unnecessary, didn't add to the story, and was simply gratuitous. It took a cool cop show and just made it gross. I don't get it.
Are we at the point where we have to be force fed homosexual behavior in a forced acceptance of it?
Conditioning.
I guess. But I've got to believe that the writers know that many of us have the ability to change the channel.
-
I'm a huge fan of Ray Liotta (big Goodfellas fan too) and was excited to see him in a new cop series called "Shades of Blue." He plays a bad ass corrupt cop alongside Jennifer Lopez, also a corrupt cop (who I don't really buy in this role, plus she's a terrible actor).
So I saw the first couple of episodes, liked it, and taped the series. Then on this Thursday's episode 3, in the middle of a heated discussion in a hotel room, Liotta goes and KISSES ANOTHER GUY COP. Later they show the other guy showering presumably post-sex.
WHAT THE FUCK? It was totally unnecessary, didn't add to the story, and was simply gratuitous. It took a cool cop show and just made it gross. I don't get it.
Are we at the point where we have to be force fed homosexual behavior in a forced acceptance of it?
Conditioning.
I guess. But I've got to believe that the writers know that many of us have the ability to change the channel.
Yabut the target audience has been primed to think "not that there's anything wrong with that."
-
Yabut the target audience has been primed to think "not that there's anything wrong with that."
There isn't anything wrong with that. Don't like where the show is going, don't watch it.
Expect to see more and more homosexual scenes in TV dramas. Writers have learned that overall it helps the show because it brings something new and different to the show. Some are sickened and leave the show, but many more stay to see what happens next. Basically, TV viewers have been there done that and there is nowhere else to go with characters that hasn't been done a million times before.
If you are truly repulsed by the show, the best thing you can do to send a message is never watch it again. The entertainment industry has never been better able to track viewer behavior than today. Trust me, if viewership suddenly falls off, they will tell the writers to knock that homo crap off on the next one.
In the history of "shocking things" in TV dramas, they have had to use to keep the buzz going-
- Married couples in the same bed.
- Interracial marriage.
- Couples out of wedlock.
- Cussing and foul language.
- Gratuitous violence.
- Loads of blood and gore.
- Full frontal nudity, both male and female.
- Most of the "natural" sex acts in the nude.
You can see were they don't have a lot of other places to go to "spice up" a series these days. They only do this stuff because it works. It gets people to keep watching and creates a buzz about the show. I'm OK with it, it is what it is. I do feel like the whole homosexual character is being way over played right now on lots of shows, but you can see what I mean about, where else to go? Particularly with a cop/detective drama, probably the most played out genre of all time.
Let's face it. Girls making out with girls is hot. Dudes with dudes is not. It's not fair, but that's the way it is and usually the ladies will back this up. Enough people bitch, and they will cut this crap out unless they have a real purpose to do so.
-
more proof that change isn't always better.
-
I'm a huge fan of Ray Liotta (big Goodfellas fan too) and was excited to see him in a new cop series called "Shades of Blue." He plays a bad ass corrupt cop alongside Jennifer Lopez, also a corrupt cop (who I don't really buy in this role, plus she's a terrible actor).
So I saw the first couple of episodes, liked it, and taped the series. Then on this Thursday's episode 3, in the middle of a heated discussion in a hotel room, Liotta goes and KISSES ANOTHER GUY COP. Later they show the other guy showering presumably post-sex.
WHAT THE FUCK? It was totally unnecessary, didn't add to the story, and was simply gratuitous. It took a cool cop show and just made it gross. I don't get it.
Are we at the point where we have to be force fed homosexual behavior in a forced acceptance of it?
Stan, it's very disappointing that our resident homosexual advocate from our former corner of paradise didn't make the trek over here. If he had, we could have developed a lively debate on the ins and outs of the unnatural acts that are part of being a homosexual male. Chris could then teach us dinosaurs that showing two homosexual males kissing is a critical step in early childhood development, and thus should be shown to babies in their cribs. This is 2016 for heavens sakes. We must mainstream every behavior practiced by 1 or 2 percent of our population. Discretion is so passé.
After reading Da8or's list, one is left to wonder what new "frontier" of "shocking" behavior is ahead of us in prime time.... Whatever it is, I won't be watching. Life is too short to spend time watching nonsense when there is so much to see and learn about in other venues.
-
Yabut the target audience has been primed to think "not that there's anything wrong with that."
Let's face it. Girls making out with girls is hot. Dudes with dudes is not. It's not fair, but that's the way it is and usually the ladies will back this up. Enough people bitch, and they will cut this crap out unless they have a real purpose to do so.
So where's the limit?
I'm not necessarily objecting to what is shown on TV, I'm objecting to the proselytizing of a non-evolutionary act as not just normal, but something to be celebrated and forced upon people under threat of incarceration and ruinous fines.
-
So where's the limit?
I'm not necessarily objecting to what is shown on TV, I'm objecting to the proselytizing of a non-evolutionary act as not just normal, but something to be celebrated and forced upon people under threat of incarceration and ruinous fines.
There is no limit. Nobody forces you to watch this crap, or show it to your children. It is voluntary entertainment that you actually have to pay for. When the Mormons come to the door to offer you salvation, you can opt to not answer the door, or tell them no thanks. The same is true if you think a TV show is proselytizing. Turn it off and watch no more.
-
I won't watch that crap that artificially promotes any of the Progressive agenda, meaning I don't watch very much.
-
So where's the limit?
I'm not necessarily objecting to what is shown on TV, I'm objecting to the proselytizing of a non-evolutionary act as not just normal, but something to be celebrated and forced upon people under threat of incarceration and ruinous fines.
There is no limit. Nobody forces you to watch this crap, or show it to your children. It is voluntary entertainment that you actually have to pay for. When the Mormons come to the door to offer you salvation, you can opt to not answer the door, or tell them no thanks. The same is true if you think a TV show is proselytizing. Turn it off and watch no more.
Funny how the Left doesn't live by that. Anything remotely "conservative", is mocked, condemned, and stifled. Talk radio is a prime example; also Fox News.
Your kids are going to be watching it. You OK with that?
-
Funny how the Left doesn't live by that. Anything remotely "conservative", is mocked, condemned, and stifled. Talk radio is a prime example; also Fox News.
Your kids are going to be watching it. You OK with that?
The left mocks and condemns for sure, but I see little evidence of stifling. Fox News, talk radio and Christian programming is all over the place. Anybody can get it. I listen to conservative talk shows frequently right in down town San Francisco.
As to my kids, I don't have any, but if I did, I would be fine with them watching this show once they reach an appropriate age. I would be far less concerned about the scenes of dudes making out than I would about the violence, language and questionable characters I assume are in the show. I have not actually watched this show and likely never will as cop dramas bore the crap out of me. My wife might watch it someday, that's more her thing.
I see absolutely zero point in shielding children from the realities of the world. They need to know what's out there and have someone to answer their questions about it rather than them discovering things all on their own. Kind of like teaching kids about handling firearms at a younger age is a good idea IMO, so is teaching them about media and adult situations. I think it's good for adults to watch their shows with their kids once they are at an age where they can understand all of it. Just like I would not put a loaded gun in the hands of five year old, I would also not let them watch Shades of Blue.
-
Funny how the Left doesn't live by that. Anything remotely "conservative", is mocked, condemned, and stifled. Talk radio is a prime example; also Fox News.
There have been many attempts to silence Limbaugh, including proposed laws, proposals to reinstitute the (unconstitutional) "Fairness Doctrine" and boycotts.
Additionally, most all of the attempts at "campaign finance reform" are intended to shut people up.
As Rush says, He IS equal time.
-
Yes, the left keeps trying to push the "Fairness Doctrine" which is anything but fair, as it is pure fascist censorship. The left is really good at naming things to absolutely LIE about what they really are. Like "common sense, and reasonable" gun laws. Duh.
-
Yes, the left keeps trying to push the "Fairness Doctrine" which is anything but fair, as it is pure fascist censorship. The left is really good at naming things to absolutely LIE about what they really are. Like "common sense, and reasonable" gun laws. Duh.
What "fairness doctrine" are you referring to? The only one I know of was the one that used to be a mandate by the FCC to ensure that broadcasters using the public's airwaves had to provide diverse points of view on a subject. In other words, back then the radio would have to put a guy like Limbaugh on air. They had no choice. The FCC Fairness Doctrine was done away with in 1987. Now broadcasters are allowed to air just one biased view. IMO, this has helped lead to the polarization of America.
-
Liotta is a good actor so he is playing the part he has.
That said, of course there is a gay theme.
LGBT represent objectively 1-2% of the population based on the best self-reporting available so of course they should represent ~20% of the characters on TV and in the movies (even kids movies).
They are over-represented by only an order of magnitude in pop-culture - what are you complaining about?
Homophobe!!
'Gimp
-
What "fairness doctrine" are you referring to? The only one I know of was the one that used to be a mandate by the FCC to ensure that broadcasters using the public's airwaves had to provide diverse points of view on a subject. In other words, back then the radio would have to put a guy like Limbaugh on air. They had no choice. The FCC Fairness Doctrine was done away with in 1987. Now broadcasters are allowed to air just one biased view. IMO, this has helped lead to the polarization of America.
So NBC, Comcast, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, AP, Reuters, NYT, PBS, NPR, Washpo etc are all liberal/progressive biased. They are by a wide margin the bulk of the medial. A small segment like Fox (which presents both sides, btw), and a few radio talk shows lean conservative.
The market keeps Rush, Fox, etc on the airways. The free market. The Democrats want to replace the market with the fascist Fairness Doctrine which mandates based on what GOVERNMENT THINKS IS "FAIR".
You've been in CA too long. ::)
-
I won't watch that crap that artificially promotes any of the Progressive agenda, meaning I don't watch very much.
Funny, but I've become my Dad. I watch sports and news and not much else, because most other stuff is crap.
-
The Democrats want to replace the market with the fascist Fairness Doctrine which mandates based on what GOVERNMENT THINKS IS "FAIR".
You've been in CA too long. ::)
Do you have a link to this Democrat "Fairness Doctrine" proposal? I haven't heard anything about it and I live in the belly of the beast.
BTW, all those other media outlets you posted with exception to NPR, are supported by the free market too. What does that tell you about the demographics and make up of our country? If there were more demand for conservative programing, there would be more of it.
-
I haven't heard anything about it and I live in the belly of the beast.
That explains it...
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/02/12/democrats-consider-reviving-fairness-doctrine.html
http://www.latimes.com/la-oe-anderson3-2009mar03-story.html
-
Do you have a link to this Democrat "Fairness Doctrine" proposal? I haven't heard anything about it and I live in the belly of the beast.
THIS PAPER (http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2007/05/back-to-muzak-congress-and-the-un-fairness-doctrine) goes back to 2007, although there have been more recent proposals.
-
BTW, all those other media outlets you posted with exception to NPR, are supported by the free market too. What does that tell you about the demographics and make up of our country? If there were more demand for conservative programing, there would be more of it.
Some like MSNBC are operated at a loss by their corporate masters like Comcast to spread a Progressive message. Google Brian Roberts.