Quote:
Originally posted by TheVoiceXtina
No, i get that point but most of those shows were carried by Men, predominantly. I'm referring to shows that have a FEMALE as the lead, as the main breadwinner, as the one who the show internally and externally revolves around. I mentioned those actresses purely bc they were at the top of my head but point being, we don't need a new "revolutionary" show. What we need are "revolutionary" characters that can become beacons of hope for our, and future generations.
Some of the content released in the last 4 years has been brilliant, to tell you the truth. I get that some are offshoots of previous plots (like, what isn't) but i don't think that neccessarily is the driving force now. Scandal is, very often, repetitive, quite far-fetched and very annoying when they speak sodamnfastlikepleasecanigetawordinedgeways but its the performances of the actresses/actors that keep millions tuned in every week.
|
Almost all of today's (female) characters are not revolutionary - that is my point and I'll stand by it. In fact, most of them just follow the leads of the characters that have been played before. The only change is that now the females are protagonists but like I said - does it really matter when ultimately they just can't live up to the quality we have already experienced (which is why they just aren't revolutionary).
I never came for today's quality of shows. Obviously, I agree there have been a few brilliant things been done on TV in the last few year. But even then, most on here give the credit to the completely wrong shows or for the wrong reasons. Scandal is a good example for that - there's nothing innovative or exciting about Olivia Pope.
