Do execs really think Viewers are Morons?

...or is it just something the Internet tells us?

I really don't believe in this viewpoint, and Ive yet to see something done with the pretense of "Kids are dumb, they won't notice".

Case in point: 4Kids. Yeah yeah, snap at me all you will, but I once saw this video that plays this up largely, while I can think of more valid reasons behind things, mostly the factor that one culture's idea of "kid-friendly" is different from another. One country says it's okay for kids to see things like smoking and nudity, another says otherwise. So if you're importing a work to the latter, what do you do? You alter it so it complies with your country's rules.

Some of what 4Kids does is unnecessary, other things they do is very much necessary for the new viewing audience.

However, I guess it depends on what the execs view as what will get them the most money. And yeah, that means appealing to very, very large audiences, which means they might need to dumb some parts down. This is only in place when they dumb so far down as to start losing more audience members than gaining.

The thing about making witty signature lines is that it first needs to actually be witty.

Of course, now most of us can only notice the differences in dub because the internet exists. I believe Networks won't get away with screwing the program up to much anymore in the future.

I sincerely doubt this is a common mindset (rainbows and unicorns)

There are probably cynical execs out there that don't give a damn, true.

Most, however, are more likely concerned with minor issues like 'how will this appeal to the broadest number of viewers/demographics?' and 'do we need to make changes to get the broadest number?'

It's complicated. TV is for 'everyone', right? That leads you to two different ideas

1. Everyone will find something they'd like to watch during the 'week'

2. Everyone will like everything we broadcast

And that, children, makes a big difference in what you see on television

The terrible downside to multiple identities: multiple tax returns

You do know that 4Kids also censored english words in the background like "Exit" on exist signs right?

As for a non-4Kids example....

****ing I Am Legend...they ruined that movie specifically BECAUSE the Viewers Are Morons...or atleast the test audiences were all morons...hence they assume the rest of the population will be too.

If the Viewers aren't morons for needing the ending of I Am Legend to be butchered just for them, I don't know what they are...

edited 3rd Mar '11 6:20:05 PM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

I agree with Signed.

I guess you could say I sign on with Signed.

Heh heh.

At first I didn't realize I needed all this stuff...

Signed: There's a trope for that.

"Who wants to hear about good stuff when the bottom of the abyss of human failure that you know doesn't exist is so much greater?"-Wraith

Wow...theres a trope that showcases the results of Viewers Are Morons....

---

• reads* the first entry...

WAIT, the REAL ending is controversial!?! Realizing your enemies aren't actually immoral bloodthirsy monsters, and that you're the only monster all along is considered CONTROVESIAL?!?!

Did Will Smith make that decision or something?

edited 3rd Mar '11 6:31:29 PM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

Nope, test audiences.

At first I didn't realize I needed all this stuff...

Most people don't want to think when watching movies.

It's the reason amazing movies like GATTACA failed.

edited 3rd Mar '11 6:33:10 PM by Chagen46

"Who wants to hear about good stuff when the bottom of the abyss of human failure that you know doesn't exist is so much greater?"-Wraith

Someone ought to make a movie that TRICKS viewers into gradually thinking, instead of letting them keep their brains off or letting "thinking" be a prereq.

At first I didn't realize I needed all this stuff...

But it doesn't much brains to understand the ending of I Am Legend!

There is a crater in my wall with the shape of my head in it.

Bah screw it, if the test audience didn't screw up, some Hollywood executive would have done something to it anyways.

---

Now I'm thinking if the remake of Clash Of The Titans had anything to do with the test audience not liking whatever possible ending it may have had before, hence the screwy plot...or maybe it was just really bad writing.

Why couldn't they make Hades a sympathetic god for once...

edited 3rd Mar '11 6:39:58 PM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

Dude, Complaining About People Not Liking the Show much?

Companies make money by giving people what they want. You can't really complain about that. I Am Legend wasn't a low-budget art film; it was a blockbuster release. They needed to recoup their investment. If the test audiences hated it, then changing it is perfectly justified.

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.

I suspect part of it due to a trope I've been calling "viewers want to be entertained". Traditionally shows prominently featuring the misadventures of less intellectual characters (The Simpsons, Two And A Half Men, etc.) often fare better than shows with more intellectual themes. Likewise, slapstick comedies with happy endings often do better at the box office than critically acclaimed films. As a result, the steriotypical fictional film critic regards the masses as lesser beings.

However, you also have moderately intellectual shows like Law And Order, CSI, and even Star Trek, which have strong followings, but they ARE second - tier in popularity to the shows that require less thinking.

There's a phenomena I heard about on a radio show where the guy was saying that the songs that elicited strong emotion were loved by many listeners but a big turn off to others. So somewhat more emotionally bland songs tended to get played more often at the expense of "more powerful" music. On a plotline point of view. Slapstick comedies and other "entertainmant for idiots" may be more popular simply because it appeals to a larger portion of the audience.

I also think there's such a thing as a Genius Redneck - this is the person that is very smart, they just don't see the point in talking about things that have few practical applications when they could be making money, partying, etc. - unlike most of the people on this site.

In the end, IMHO, the art - film lovers, Hard SF nerds, etc., will always be outnumbered by these people who aren't looking for intellectual complexity.

edited 4th Mar '11 8:52:29 AM by FrodoGoofballCoTV

^^ I'm complaining that all the test audiences for that movie were complete morons. I'm not complaining that they don't like the ending, I'm complaining that their stupidity ruined a completely good film.

It doesn't take a genius  ^*

to understand what the original ending was.

---

I'm not a big sci-fi or star trek fan, but didn't star trek's popularity come mainly from Sulu's voice, Spock, and the whole Star Wars fad that people were going through at that time...I'll also be honest, I have no idea which came first, Star Wars or Trek.

edited 4th Mar '11 4:22:11 PM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

<offtopic factoid> Screenwriter Gene Roddenberry wrote a screenplay proposal for Star Trek in 1961. The first broadcast was on September 22, 1966. Star Wars was almost exactly a decade later. Director George Lucas began work on the idea in 1971, and the first film was officially released on May 25, 1977.

Spock and Sulu were popular characters, but it was probably the moon landings that did the most to boost Star Trek's popularity amung the general public IMHO. </offtopic factoid>

edited 4th Mar '11 5:06:43 PM by FrodoGoofballCoTV

TBH, I don't think that the lack of appreciation people generally have for "deeper art" is really a natural part of the human mind. Deeper art can be just as entertaining (much more so, in fact) than less deep art. I think that there must have been some intentional social engineering project at some point to make people tune out of a wide range of art.

At first I didn't realize I needed all this stuff...

I think Inception does...something with audience intelligence in some way. From what I heard, it's anitiformulaic, or it requires paying attention...things like that

I know this is illogical but can't there be a balance somewhere? There very few shows that strike between Viewers Are Morons and Viewers Are Genuises. Remember you are not only showing your work but you are entertaining the viewer, if you put in too much technobabble the viewer will be turned off and may feel dumb for not knowing this stuff and nobody wants to feel stupid. But at the same token, there are some shows that disguise themselves as intelligent but are actually quite shallow when you think about it. Why can't there be shows that are not only entertaining but have plently of genius bonus that makes the viewer feel like 'hey, I learned something today'?

edited 5th Mar '11 11:09:43 AM by G.G.

In other words, Edutainment for a broader audience?

To shift the topic a bit. I think the reason the original I Am Legend is considered controversial because of the dash of Humans Are Bastards in it.

edited 5th Mar '11 1:09:55 PM by DoomTay

I vastly preferred the "alternate ending" to I Am Legend. It's a crying shame they changed it.

"I don't know how I do it. I'm like the Mr. Bean of sex." -Drunkscriblerian

By alternate ending, you mean the original one?

What was so "controversial" about the real ending anyways? The vicious monsters turned out to be reasonable humans and the main character is the real monster for killing them in their sleep and experimenting with them? Calling that the controversial ending is what I call Fridge Horror...or some other better fitting trope.

In fact, no, the real ending isn't even a case of Humans Are Bastards, it's Neville Is a Bastard since he's the only one whose doing all that, he just happens to be human.

---

As for the original post...I think executives try to use Viewers Are Morons to dumb down certain aspect of film is because many(not all) of the audience does not like realizing that they're not as smart as they think they are. As a result of that, they review the movie negatively, yet blame other aspects of the show to hide that they just don't get it. Some people thought Inception was Mind Screw.

---

PS-if a movie's original ending was changed because the test audience thought it was too depressing for their liking, would there be a trope for that? Or is it also Viewers Are Morons?

Like hypothetically, a war epic that ends with the good guys winning a Pyrrhic Victory being changed to the movie cutting during the middle of an epic battle(which would end with a Pyrrhic Victory)

edited 5th Mar '11 2:51:57 PM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

I believe you're thinking of Focus Group Ending

The Golden Compass might be a tangential case. According to that article, where the movie ended, the book continued into things that made it a not-so-happy ending

edited 5th Mar '11 5:00:10 PM by DoomTay

The Golden Compass was such a dissappointment, that was one of my favourite books in english...and they couldn't even be faithful with it in the movie.

It had so much potential to be a good movie. I especially wanted to see what tiny elephant/cows would look like if they travelled on wheels(or were they coconuts? I forgot, so long ago) in the later two books.

edited 5th Mar '11 5:04:21 PM by Signed

"Every opinion that isn't mine is subjected to Your Mileage May Vary."

If the article is anything to go by, that's where you can blame the execs.