Absolutely Fabulous: The whole cast. Saffron, dogged good guy or generic university socialist who sponges off her mother? Edina, crazy new age retro hippy and Unsympathetic Comedy Protagonist or resourceful modern woman who likes to have fun and has to put up with a zoo of people with weird quirks, including family who sponge off her? Mother, dealing with the problems or later life or was never quite right (she held Edina with rubber kitchen gloves at birth, after all)?
The Systems Commonwealth in Andromeda: beneficent, Federation-esqe near-utopian, intergalactic civilization? Or bungling, incompetent, bloated, brutal, elitist and imperialistic civilization headed by a bunch of full-of-themselves jackasses who viewed the non-Vedrans as cannon fodder and abandoned the galaxies when they were needed the most, and whom the galaxies are better off without? (Inspired by The Cynic's Corner.)
From Angel, there is Jasmine. Is she good or evil? Just look at the section for her on the Headscratchers page.
Wesley: Romantic, intelligent guy who's made some questionable decisions, or Too Dumb to Live obsessive stalker?
Connor: Ax-Crazy with a serious case of Oedipus Complex, or unable to overcome his distrust from being trained to hate Angel from infancy and clinging to the only person in his life who's nice to him?
Holtz: Obsessed manipulative villain willing to drag everyone down with him or a noble man driven to violence by Angelus? Despite being a villain, Holtz is often portrayed as having perfectly valid points that not even Angel can argue with. What happened to him was heinous and unforgivable. Angel knows that better than anyone. His concern often seems to be with innocents and he never deceives his followers about his intentions. He doesn't use Violence unless he has to, and he is well aware of the shades of grey involved in what he is doing.
Howling Mad Murdock of The A-Team: Genuinely crazy to the point of institutionalization, or a talented, eccentric actor with a guaranteed meal ticket? Interestingly enough, the film portrays him as perfectly sane during the trial, and the next time we see him, it's in a mental institution. So he was deemed fit to stand trail, but is suddenly unfit during sentencing? Curious.
An Intended Audience Reaction in Babylon 5, concerning Centauri Ambassador Londo Mollari and Narn Ambassador G'kar. According to legend, at the very beginning of the series, JMS had the two flip a coin to see which one would be "the hero" and which one "the villain", then swore them to secrecy. Both begin with a serious case of Fantastic Racism (mostly directed at each other), and both eventually undergo a Heel Realization, but which (if either) of them is the hero is entirely up to the viewer. Given that they're good friends and on the same side by the end, it's arguable whether the question even means anything.
The final episode of Galactica 1980, did Cy have a genuine HeelFace Turn? Or was his change in behavior the result of Starbuck's inexperienced reconstruction of the Cylon Centurion.
Many viewers seem to think Bill Adama is an incredible leader whose history is one long string of Crowning Moments Of Awesome. Another theory is that he's an asshole. Let's see: this man lied to everyone about knowing where Earth was. (Oh sure, it was to give them hope. How long could it possibly have lasted, and how much worse did it make the inevitable discovery?) He's frequently threatened violence against people under his command, most often a woman half his age. He's committed what was, depending on how the Colonial government works this week, a military coup. He's forced a man under his command to beat him up and then used it to make everyone in the room feel guilty for a mistake that he made! Adama is no great leader — though he may be a Magnificent Bastard for getting everyone to think so. The funny thing is that the show makes him out to be a great leader and a jerk.
Helo — his decision to sabotage the plan to wipe out the Cylons. Was he a moral paragon of humanity keeping his friends from doing something they regret, or an arrogant prick who put his personal pride above the survival of the human race? The question becomes muddier once one realizes that all but two deaths from that point on are a direct result of that choice and therefore Helo's fault.
Sheldon Cooper seems to have Asperger's Syndrome, despite the creators denying this. He displays the usual signs of Asperger's: heightened vocabulary, lack of caring towards people's feelings, monologue-like speeches, difficulty in understanding social norms, obsessions, altered brain chemicals with coffee, etc. He could be "Clark Kenting" to what he thinks all geniuses should be, copying a professor/doctor/whatever who had Autism whom he idolized when he was growing up in a highly religious part of Texas. Now he has become the mask. He has stated twice that his mother had him tested for insanity; signs of being on the autistic spectrum should've popped up, and so he might not have autism. On the other hand, a personality disorder is not "insanity" - and given that Sheldon is extremely Literal-Minded he may be just reacting to the terms "insane" or "crazy" only. Also, his mother mentioned (in S05E06 "The Rhinitis Revelation") after confirming that she had him tested as a child and he's fine:
"Although, I do regret not following up with that specialist in Houston."
Those sound more like symptoms of TV Asperger's than real Asperger's.
The entire male cast shows many of the very same tendencies, just to a lesser degree. Leonard is the most socially savvy and has a vast understanding of human psychological conditioning, but that doesn't make him any less awkward than the other guys in a social setting.
Given that, according to Sheldon, his mother had him tested, and that this presumably occurred when he was a child, it is possible that he has a personality disorder that cannot be diagnosed in children and that would not have shown up until he was an adult.
Or he was successfully diagnosed with autism as a child and, quite simply, no one feels the need to bring it up on any regular basis.
There have been lots of hints (some subtle, some not so subtle) that Sheldon's family life was not exactly ideal: his father was an abusive drunk and his mother uses religion as a form of denial. Losing his father no doubt added to the trauma. And then there was the analogy Sheldon once drew between schmoozing wealthy university donors for grant funding to being molested in the back of a van...which was probably a little ''too'' descriptive for the otherwise overly literal Sheldon to be making an extended metaphor. One gets the impression that Sheldon's childhood was horror even leaving aside the bullying he experienced as a result of his obnoxious personality. Combined with at least three severe emotional breakdowns we've seen him have, Sheldon's arrogance and aloofness may well be a defense mechanism which is breaking down over time.
Another aspect of his home life that might be affecting his social ability: Sheldon is extremely logical and scientific. His mother is The Fundamentalist. He was raised by someone who, from his perspective, believes in irrational superstitions that there is no evidence for. He would have been terrified at living with and being raised by a person who went around talking about, or even to, a being that doesn't exist; imagine hearing the story of Abraham (almost) sacrificing his son, and worrying that your own mother will act this out on you.
It gets worse when Sheldon talks about how his grandfather was the only one in the family who ever encouraged him to pursue science, and how his father and siblings treated him. Sheldon's mom is usually played as nice, but some of her comments, which border on racist, if unwitting, really show she's not all that better from Leonard's mom, just on the other side of the spectrum(Science vs. Religion). She's a fundamentalist who seems to have a very old-fashioned and limited view on the world, which she took just to compensate for her husband's cheating and uses it as a crutch to keep going. She could be just ignorant, but sometimes she seems like an unbuilt form of DoloresUmbridge. Everyone just tends to look the other way because she's nicer than Leonard's mom and tends to put a leash on Sheldon's antics, but she may very well BE the reason for Sheldon's antics. She's once described him as "one of God's special children", so she thinks, or at least once thought, he was retarded or insane, and seemingly preached this idea to Sheldon's sister. Sheldon's slightly autistic behavior could be the result of being treated as one, despite and because of his genius intellect.
Asperger's Syndrome only got added to the DSM-IV in 1994, so if Sheldon was tested earlier in time...
In at least a few parts of the world, it was not recognised until the last few years.
It's worth noting that just as Autistics have varying levels of intellectual functionality, Aspergics also have varying levels of social functionality - some can limp along with encouragement, and some, like Sheldon, can be almost crippled by their literal thinking.
Completely alternate Sheldon interpretation: He's a genuinely nice person. He's genuinely concerned when he thinks Penny's been hurt, runs to get her and takes her to hospital. Rather than just telling Leonard that he wouldn't cover for him sleeping with Priya, he constructed an elaborate and detailed cover to help him. When Leonard lied to Penny about her singing, Sheldon could again have simply said he didn't care and told the truth, but instead chose to follow through and help. He went to great extremes to get Howard's forgiveness when he'd ruined his chances of getting security clearance. When he felt that it would be construed as disloyal to have dinner with Penny, he almost killed himself trying to keep both she and Leonard happy. He couldn't ignore the possibility that Amy was hurt when he didn't hear from her. As much as he may pretend otherwise, he actually cares about his friends. When given the option of being trapped in one of the coldest parts of the planet with anyone, he chose his three friends. He maybe even values their friendship more than any of the rest of them and, even if it may be seen as condescending, is the least frequent to ever intentionally insult any of them (try watching an episode and counting the number of insults Sheldon gives that would actually be considered an insult to his mind, then compare them against those Leonard makes).
The relationship of Penny and Leonard: Romantic Plot Tumor or a romance hindered by best intentions? for the tumorness, see the first season finale. Leonard badgered her to go out with him around the end. And then she dumps him in the second episode and with someone else by the ep after that. And in the third season they get together and seem happy until they break up over Penny not being able to say "I love you" to Leonard and Leonard badgering her over the span of the ep. Is Penny just a Satellite Love Interest who just goes on about how Leonard thinks of her as stupid whenever they argue to win a fight or really new to dating intelligent guys? And is Leonard a whiner who really can't be in relationships because he never really learned love from his mother?
In the episode of Bernadette wanting Howard to move in, was Howard pulling a Batman Gambit? He knew Bernadette would keep bugging him about moving in but he wasn't ready (possibly to save money on his engagement ring) so he had to make a plan. Move in, piss her off by his neediness and make her stop. Notice that in his explanation he said he wrote an email to his mother about moving out and her saying she never reads email since she doesn't know how to properly work a computer.
Is Penny secretly a Trekkie? Most of the times that she accidentally reveals a geeky side, it has to do with Star Trek. See her mentioning Leonard and the guys not "having their shields up" to the new neighbor; she recognized Leonard Nimoy on sight when he came into the restaurant and got his autograph; she was able to contradict Sheldon's claim about the Kobayashi Maru by knowing that "Kirk cheated"; and most tellingly, she tries to comfort Sheldon with an anecdote from the Star Trek movie, that he missed when he and all the other guys were in the arctic. With all of them gone, did she actually go to see the movie on her own initiative?
Back to Sheldon: He's not nearly as smart as he thinks he is. He grew up a Big Fish In A Small Pond and has taken that attitude to college and now to his job at USC, but now he's surrounded by people who were similarly large in similarly small pools. Making an elementary math mistake on page 1 of a paper is a good example. He also doesn't have a Photographic Memory as he claims, or else he'd know that his Not the Fall That Kills You Superman explanation is completely at odds with what actually happens in the film.
From Big Brother, Brendon is either a naive fool who fell in love with a bad girl (Rachel) or a Woobie because he is going to be stuck dealing with Rachel, an uber diva, for the rest of his life.
We're supposed to see the main character of The Big C as an uptight woman who becomes liberated by her impending death by incurable cancer; unfortunately quite a few critics see her as a selfish woman who cares so little about her family (Manchild husband and Jerkassteen son; she doesn't have any friends) that she doesn't bother to explain her abrupt change in character. Everyone else is justified in thinking she's just an incredibly rude person.
Bones: Asperger's Syndrome, while not mentioned in the show itself, would explain an awful lot about the behavior of both Zach and, to a lesser degree, Bones herself. Zach appears to be a textbook case of a moderate-functioning Aspie (at least, before his revelation in the Gormagon story arc). Temperance "Bones" Brennan appears to be a high-functioning Aspie, combined with the sort of Ivory Tower mentality common to professional academics. If tested, both would be found to have Asperger's, though Zach would have more markers of having the disorder. Both also are locked in the empiric mindset of scientists, rejecting almost all outside stimulus as irrelevant to how they should act towards others, especially those "unequal" to themselves, as well as anything not recorded and accepted as fact or definite to science. Word of God confirmed that for Zach and implied for Brennan. From series creator Hart Hanson: "If we were on cable, we would have said from the beginning that Brennan has Asperger's. Instead, it being a network, we decided not to label a main character, for good or for bad. But those elements are in there."
Juan Borgia is an useless, violent coward Jerkass in both. In TB this is because he has deep insecurities and an inferiority complex born of his belief that he might not actually be the son of Rodrigo, combined with Middle Child Syndrome and Daddy Issues in general, and serves as an Annoying Younger Sibling to Cesare. In B:F&F, Juan is a Big Brother Bully to Cesare (their order of birth is still disputed among historians, each show going with a different theory) and a bona fide Entitled Bastard who has no doubts about his paternity.
Giulia Farnese is a quiet, passive TrophyMistress in TB (who still uses her charms to seduce other men when needed, however). In B:F&F, she is an ambitious woman who has no qualms about using her relationship with Rodrigo to better herself and her family and spies actively on Lucrezia.
Della Rovere in TB is a Hero Antagonist bordering on Knight Templar that wants to purify Rome by getting rid of the Borgias, and is appalled by the brutality unleashed by the French after he gets them to invade Italy. In B:F&F, he is a (somewhat minor) Jerkass that obviously wants the Throne of Saint Peter for himself and an unashamed agent of French imperialism.
In TB, Giovanni Sforza is an Entitled Bastardrapist who hates the Borgias but marries one for money, manipulated by Lucrezia and the Pope into declaring himself impotent for additional shame. In B:F&F, he is an insecure Nice Guy that is really impotent, used as a pawn by his wife and family.
In TB, Alfonso of Naples is a cackling, nearly hyperactive punk that hams it up. In B:F&F, he is a passive, defeatist oaf.
Was Walt right about his former business partners Elliot and Gretchen all along when they dismiss his role in the founding of Grey Matter on the news? Or were they just simply doing damage control for their company by distancing themselves from a known criminal? Also, did they really betray Walt, or was Walt just simply blaming them for his own failings because of his ego?
Is Skyler simply a normal woman thrown into a very stressful and less than ordinary situation that she can't cope with, or a Control Freak looking for any method to put Walt under her thumb out of some form of twisted love?
Joss Whedon himself presented an Alternate Character Interpretation for the series by saying that the ending of sixth season episode "Normal Again" (in which Buffy hallucinates that she's a patient in a mental hospital and has been imagining the entire "vampire slayer" gig) might be the truth. On the other hand, that statement could just be Joss being Joss.
Who says it has to be firmly one way or the other? What if it's two worlds, and the Buffy in each hallucinates being the other?
Maybe Buffy is actually Joss, who has been imagining himself as a beautiful young blonde who fights vampires. In that episode, the vampires suddenly vanished, but the blonde girl delusion was still in place.
This can typically be resolved by an alternate character interpretation of Joss and the other show creators themselves: Did they explicitly plan out a fantasy horror show and pitch it to the network with the concept that it really was just about a sad delusional girl, avoiding any foreshadowing of the concept and then revealing the secret intent in a miscellaneous episode six years down the road, which was followed by not really bringing the concept up again? Or is it more likely that the writer of the episode just thought it was the coolest twist to have the premise of Buffy being insane be plausible with the last ten seconds of an episode? Of course, even the assumed answer of Buffy really being the Slayer has this episode violating canon with its very premise of Buffy being checked into an insane asylum when she first start fighting vampires. You would have thought the "outing" of her being a Slayer in the Season Two finale would have provoked a different response from Joyce if she had brought up fighting vampires before.....
Just how stupid is Buffy and how much of her "stupidity" is fake?
Was Buffy's season 6 relationship with Spike his taking advantage of her post-heaven depression and manipulating her away from her friends for his own selfish desires, her taking advantage of his helpless romanticism to get a punching bag and sex toy, both at once, or a genuine loving relationship? Fanfic has supported all of these. Everything about them is subject to Alternate Character Interpretation. When did she fall in love with him? Did she fall in love with him? Why did he tell her she didn't? Did he want his soul back to be good enough for her, to say "sorry," or because he wanted to sleep with her again? And let's not go into what he was thinking during the Attempted Rape...
Pre-souled Spike: a sensitive romantic too shy to admit to his true feelings, suffering years of cruel physical and mental abuse from Buffy? Or an evil, selfish, violent vampire consumed with a psychotic obsession for Buffy, who should have staked him years ago? James Marsters has said that he played Spike as being attracted to Buffy from the beginning.
Some fans even go as far as suggesting the creator Kate Atkinson and writers Jennifer Schuur should give her a HeelFace Turn scenario.
Charmed the show, the Charmed Ones, and everything else is the creation of an insane Piper, inspired and encouraged by her roommates.
There are two competing alternate theories about Columbo (other than Obfuscating Stupidity). One is that he's a Genius Ditz. The other is that he isn't that smart at all, being merely of average intelligence. He himself claims in one episode that the main reason he's successful is that he's a professional with years of experience in hunting murderers, while most of the murderers he captures are amateurs who are doing it for the first time and thus making rookie mistakes.
Either that, or (as he freely admits) Mrs Columbo solves all the crimes when they talk about it over dinner (which he probably cooks, given that he's shown quite a proficiency and interest in cooking on a number of occasions). Assuming she exists (Falk himself once claimed that Mrs Columbo is Columbo's way of being nice to the criminals with the added get out clause should someone claim conflict of interests that "it's not me, it's my wife who likes them").
Is Columbo a Manipulative Bastard? He's overly nice to people in a bloodhound sort of way; he convinces people that he's just a country bumpkin more interested in whatever 'hat' the villain wears than solving the crime, only to reveal in the end a cold detachment and clinical mind that the bumpkin persona allowed free reign. He plays with the feelings of the criminals, making them like him (more often than not) or at least pity him and drop their guard, or he pushes them subtly and continuously to the point where they break.
Pierce. The show itself goes back and forth on whether he is inherently and fundamentally an unlikeable Jerkass or whether he's just a lonely but socially inept old man who just wants to have friends but doesn't know how to acquire or keep them and who ends up lashing out because people exclude him, or something in between; a running theme is Jeff and Annie debating this very problem, with Jeff taking the former side and Annie taking the latter side. It's worth noting that while Annie is often shown to be overly naive and idealistic at times, Jeff himself has a consistent problem with not treating his friends as well as he should, and can be especially and deliberately cruel to Pierce. It does, however, nevertheless point out that regardless of whether it's one, the other or both, many of Pierce's problems nevertheless remain his own damn fault, and that whichever one is true he still can go way too far with being a jerk (see "Advanced Dungeons and Dragons" and "Intermediate Documentary Making" for examples).
Yet another Asperger's interpretation that sometimes pops up is Grissom on CSI, due to his reclusiveness and the way he collects insects and animal stuff in his office. Although if he were one, he likely wouldn't be as severe as some other characters in other series.
Is Dexter a good person doing bad things, or a bad person doing good things? Then there's the other controversy. Is Dexter Morgan a genuinely emotionless sociopath doing his best to simulate normal relationships and emotions? Or is it more a case of deep trauma and denial warring with his feelings for friends and family? Or did he start out as the former and is now slowly turning into the latter? Or is he just so good at pretending to be human that he's begun to fool himself?
Harry Morgan. Cop who turned a budding serial killer into a force for good, or heartless bastard who ignored the psychological needs of a scarred boy?
Dollhouse has a couple of much-debated interpretations:
Bennett: Vicious, cruel, cold-blooded torturer who plays with Dolls like toys, and is bent on hurting Caroline? Or tragic, damaged, and mentally-scarred genius who was betrayed by someone she deeply cared about and possibly loved? Or both?
Although Topher is usually considered an ur-Woobie, he's the series's most morally culpable character in some interpretations, bordering on monstrous (though hardly completely so). Of all the Dollhouse employees, runs the argument, only Topher has the intellect and imagination to understand the technology's full philosophical implications—and he whole-heartedly embraces them. Even at the end, his brokenness and remorse are wholly based on the technology's this-worldly unexpected consequences.
De Witt explicitly sees him as totally amoral, caring only about science and not about people, though she recognizes the necessity of such people to the functioning of the house (and that assessment may be exaggerated, based on his later actions).
De Witt: The cold reality is that everyone here was chosen because their morals have been compromised in some way. Everyone, except you. You, Topher, were chosen because you have no morals. You have always thought of people as playthings. This is not a judgment. Youve always taken very good care of your toys, but youre simply going to have to let this one go.
Debra: Is she a poor, unfortunate woobie and heroine, or is she a smug, abusive bully who never gets called out on her arrogant, abusive and condescending behavior?
Marie: Depending on your POV, she is either: an Evil Matriarch who doesn't care about anyone other than herself OR a person who—while admittedly insensitive—is a genuinely good person whose rude behavior is merely there to mask her deep insecurities OR a concerned mother who sees how her daughter-in-law abuses her son, and is desperately trying to get Ray to realize that he'd be better off without Debra.
Father Ted: The show is nice and peaceful and relatively harmless. Or so it seems. Craggy Island is effectively a prison island, to which the characters have been sent by Bishop Brennan, who hates them. Ted was sent there because he stole money from the church, Dougal was sent there for 'the blackrock incident' that involved "irreparable damage" to the lives of several nuns, Jack was sent there for being an alcoholic pervert, and Mrs Doyle was either sent there or escaped there for killing her husband (though this is only hinted at). The characters of Johnny And Mary actually form a sort of metaphor for the series - it's all happy to the general public but behind the scenes, something dark is going on.
Is Dougal really as stupid as he seems or does he have schizophrenia? Or is he a criminal mastermind with a some sort of nefarious plan who is playing Ted and everyone else through Obfuscating Stupidity?
Jayne is suspected of Obfuscating Stupidity - and Obfuscating Disloyalty. It's posited on the WMG that he is completely loyal to Mal, and there is evidence that he only betrayed the Tams because he considered them a threat rather than crew.
River is almost nothing butAlternate Character Interpretation. How much of her actions are taken up by her madness, post-traumatic stress, Mind Rape mental trauma, and her psychic powers? How does she perceive the world around her? How do her Psychic Powers even work? There are also questions and interpretations relating to her murdering her counselor/interrogator in The R. Tam Sessions. Was she doing it because she had been ordered to do so? Was she doing it because she was insane? Or was she lashing out at her torturers in the only way she could?
After reading an article about Kaylee on "The Hathor Legacy" and noticing that everyone reflexively leaped to Kaylee's defense upon someone saying that she sympathized more with Simon — and nearly all of Kaylee's defenders said that "Sure, Simon's under a lot of stress, but that doesn't mean he has to be so THOUGHTLESS when he talks to her!" — one wonders if Kaylee's the messiah that everyone treats her as, or a sweet but naive girl that desperately needs to realize—horror of horrors—that Simon doesn't always think before he talks. It's possible that Kaylee might not be as innocent as she seems, apart from being far more experienced than might be thought at first. She might have a very dark streak. In an unfilmed script called "Dead or Alive," Kaylee actually indicates either that someone is hunting her down for something she's done, or that she's entirely capable of taking bloodied revenge if she ever had to.
Some Frasier fans suspect that Daphne might have been secretly in love with Niles as long he was secretly in love with her, but repressed and concealed her own attraction better than he did. Certain moments, such as the time she ill-conceivedly sort-of-tried to seduce him in "Daphne Hates Sherry", her behavior towards him in several episodes such as "First Date" and "A Midwinter's Night Dream", and her suspiciously sincere words and actions in "Moon Dance" make it difficult to be sure that her feelings for him were really as innocent as everyone assumed.
Martin Crane: Long-suffering but loving down-to-earth father, or emotionally abusive and utterly ungrateful Jerkass?
Is Maxwell Smart a bungling idiot who gets by entirely by luck, or is he secretly a highly-competent (and somewhat sociopathic) superspy who only acts like an idiot because he enjoys destroying expensive property and annoying the Chief? With his surprising success rate, he knows full-well that CONTROL is never going to fire him.
The same question could be asked about Inspector Clouseau.
The characters on Gilligan's Island are the manifestation of the Seven Deadly Sins. Supposedly, creator Sherwood Schwartzconfirmed this ACI. Generally: Lust = Ginger, Greed = Mr Howell, Sloth = Mrs Howell, Pride = Professor, Envy = Maryann, Wrath = Skipper, and Gluttony = Gilligan, though sometimes Skipper is both Wrath and Wrath or Mrs. Howell is Sloth and Gluttony, leaving Gilligan as the red-clad Satan whose Obfuscating Clumsiness keeps them imprisoned on the island! Another version has Gilligan as Sloth (always sleeping in his hammock) and Mrs. Howell as Gluttony (in the sense of overindulge instead of overeat, hence why she took so many clothes, hats, jewels, etc., for a three-hour boat trip.)
Interpretation for Gilmore Girls: Lorelai and Rory are self-absorbed and are given a lot of leeway by almost everyone they know and almost the whole town of Stars Hollow. The only exceptions seem to be Lorelai's parents and Jess (of all people). Lorelai styled herself as a young and cool mom, but she gave bad parenting advice, and she came off to some as extremely immature and judgmental. Luke and the whole town are oblivious to this. Dean gave off emotionally abusive vibes in his scenes with Rory, especially considering that he cheated on his wife with her. The only people who got positive character development were Paris and Jess.
It's not at all hard to flip the POV and see Emily Gilmore's view of matters. It would take only a very slight adjustment of the storyline to make Emily the voice of sanity, and someone Rory should model herself after rather than her mother.
YMMV. Lorelai is clearly intended to be flighty and immature. But she is, without a doubt, a great mother. She encourages Rory when she doubts herself and always makes herself available for help and guidance (ex. Forcing Rory to go to Chilton, being her study partner when Rory gets her first D, helping her decide which college to go to and then encouraging her to go to Yale even though they'd both been at odds with the elder Gilmores over Rory going there). And Lorelai seems to be the only one capable of calling Rory out when she does something wrong or stupid (Sleeping with married Dean, dropping out of Yale). Wordof God has stated that she would sometimes get complaints that Lorelai would do/say things that no mother would do and explained that Lorelai wanted to make sure when she had Rory, that her child always felt respected, loved unconditionally, and free to make her own choices, because that's something that Lorelai felt was lacking in her own childhood. So that could account for her very laid-back attitude towards parenting. She's there when it counts, but for the most part let's Rory do her own thing. Indeed Rory and Lorelai's relationship with one another is, arguably, the most balanced and stable relationship either of them have over the course of the show.
Glee has a lot of this due to having a huge fanbase that can either over-identify with characters or completely hate them and there's enough leather pants for everyone. To be fair, the creators seem to purposely encourage the fans to have competing interpretations of the characters. It's just part of the fun of the show.
Is Brittany really just stupid, or is she also delusional? Among other signs, she believes her cat has been reading her diary. With the episode 'Night of Neglect', a common interpretation is that she's a Genius Ditz mixed with a Cloud Cuckoo Lander.
Though an episode actually showed her cat (on screen) using a computer mouse, so while we have no confirmation that it read her diary, it's clearly smarter than the average cat.
Also, could the same be said for Santana and (to a lesser extent) Rachel?
"Lesser extent"? Rachel's introduction to the series involved her accusing her drama teacher of inappropriately touching (sexual harassment implications) a boy from Glee club because he gave him a solo that she wanted.
For the relationship of Santana and Brittany, is Santana an abusive partner in the making? She seems eager to emotionally sway Brittany to her side of an argument no matter what said conflict is, and makes her believe she can do no wrong and makes sure she still remains loyal to her.
Is Finn Hudson Obfuscating Stupidity or is he (pardon the pun) Too Dumb to Live? People are also polarized as to his appearance; sweaty sack of potatoes or actually not that bad looking?
The most contested character interpretations of Glee however fall squarely on the characters' sexualities/romantic partners. One of the most polarizing characters is in fact Rachel Berry. Finn and Rachel a sweet high school romance or is she just manipulating him in order to ascend the ranks of high school popularity? Do Quinn and Finn have genuine feelings for one another or is she just using him like Berry wants to? And why is the head cheerleader (Quinn Fabray) drawing semi-erotic pictures of loser Rachel Berry in the school bathrooms? Lez yay or run away?
In Goodnight Sweetheart, is Gary Sparrow a genuinely nice guy trying to do the right thing by two women, or he is a heartless jerk having his cake and eating it and manipulating his best friend for his own goals? A Dream Sequence episode shows that Gary seemed to be aware of the latter.
Blair, Serena and Chuck on Gossip Girl. Fans disagree wildly on which girl is mature, empathic and "just in a bad place right now", and which one is an immature, selfish bitch. And as for Chuck... Misunderstood, mistreated good guy and just the best boyfriend ever, or sociopathic, deranged attempted rapist? Depends on who you ask.
Chuck's attempted rape of the 14(15?) year old wasn't the first time he's committed such an act. If anything, the rape was supposed to be her 'initiation' to the High School's 'Society' which many of the popular girls have gone through, as in, the complete ordeal without the benefit of being rescued.
Yea on the first bit, nay on the second. Blair was the so-called "Queen B" of their school, and she was a virgin until she was 17 and lost it, incidentally, to the Chuck in question.
As the show heads into the ending, there will be no character development for the main characters, or at least those from the Upper East Side. Blair will always try to gain shortcuts instead of putting in work, Chuck will never let go of his daddy issues, Serena will always be a Mary Sue who gets everything handed to her on a silver platter and Nate will always have boring plots.
Is Dan the Only Sane Man or is he just a judgy, condescending, creepy stalker?
Meredith on Grey's Anatomy. Strong feministic character, or selfish, unfeeling bitch?
Season 4 of Hannah Montana finds Miley Stewart, now an 18-year-old high school graduate going through personal changes, ruminating on her future, choosing to stabilize her offstage life by abandoning the carefully controlled, glittery, perfect-perfect "Hannah Montana" pop star persona that made her famous since she was a small child, and revealing herself as a human, flawed, less glamorous teenage girl. She is unfairly scrutinized and harassed by the press, her image is somewhat damaged, she finds she cannot lead an ordinary life or escape from the pressure or the paparazzi, many of her longtime fans and their parents are disappointed in her, and she has to learn to perform and conduct herself in this new incarnation. Her fanbase is reluctant to accept her new artistic and personal directions, though Miley decides she alone must go in a direction she feels happiest in regardless of the backlash, and ultimately, she takes time off to begin the next chapter in her life away from the spotlight and her "Hannah" past. Perhaps a metaphor for Miley Cyrus' own career?
Peter Wingfield played Methos, the world's oldest Immortal on the Highlander TV show. In an interview given shortly before the end of the series' run, he commented that it would make sense if it were to be revealed that every single thing his character had ever done on the show had been a manipulation to get Duncan MacLeod into a position where he could kill him. Wingfield added that he didn't personally believe this to be the case, but noted that it would fit perfectly with what we knowof the character, and that he'd have no problem playing such a scene if the writers decided to go that route. In a seperate interview, one of the staff writers claims that the character of Methos was not originally intended to be quite so dark, that Wingfield played the character as having his own agenda, and the writers decided to run with it.
There are good arguments that both Colonel Klink and Sgt Schultz are not as quite as idiotic as they appear. This is especially true for Schultz, who clearly is well aware of some of the activities Hogan's crew is carrying out and actively assists them in some cases.
It's stated that before the war, Schultz was CEO of a major toy company in Germany, showing he must be a smart guy. Also, Klink makes it clear he's no fan of the Nazi system, especially the SS. Thus, both men have a vested interest in seeing the Allies actually succeed.
There's also the theory that while both know (or at least highly suspect) what Hogan's up to, they realize that if they report a secret spy operation has been happening right under their noses, they'll be (at best) court-martialed or (at worst) sent to the Russian front. Thus keeping quiet about it keeps their own skins intact.
Jack Simpson, a sadistic bully who tormented his fellow midshipmen in episode "The Even Chance". There are plenty of speculation about the ominous and vague lines other characters say in regards to him ("You don't know half what he's capable of") and the question of what, exactly, he'd been doing with the other midshipmen prior to Horatio's arrival. There is implied sexual abuse in the show's canon. Fans also like to explore why the lieutenants were not effective in dealing with him.
Lt. Eccleston from "The Even Chance" who served aboard Justinian and also Indifatigable. He seems nice enough and fairly competent on the first glance, but on a second thought, he's not that great and his behaviour is open to interpretation. Eccleston severely punishes Horatio for getting beaten up — and asks who he fought with — just after Simpson came back. He then pairs Simpson and Horatio up and sends them on a shore mission together. He later does it again when he puts Simpsons in Horatio and Archie's boat for the operation of capturing Papillon. Is he so clueless? Or so monstrously sadistic? Does Eccleston know about the abuse? If no, he's incompetent and shouldn't be in the Navy, and certainly has no place to serve under the top notch captain like Pellew. If he knows and does nothing to stop it, he's beyong useless and beyond evil and just as sadistic as Simpson. Or could Simpson have power over Eccleston as well, perhaps with a dirty little secret of his own?
In Series Two, there is an Ambiguous Situation resulting in the Riddle for the Ages. It regards the interpretation of how Captain Sawyer fell down the hatchway. The question of whether or not it was an accident leads often enough to the secondary question, whether it was in the nature of any of the characters present to actively push the captain.
Captain Pellew is prone to such a treatment. In Series One, he is universally loved, and everybody is impressed and awed by his character and his abilities. He's the definitive Captain and Father to His Men in the show. In Series Two, his reputation suffers a serious blow because of his apparent favoritism and lack of concern for other officers other than his darling Hornblower. Series Three suggests further that honesty might not be an integral part of his character and that his morals might be compromised by the Navy's machinations. Some fics try to find deeper meaning in his lack of concern for other sailors, and many Fix Fics in Alternate Universe try to absolve him and have him explain his intentions, actively help the ones who were damned by the unfair trial or atone for his deeds.
House: In "Need To Know", did House leave Stacy because a) he was being self-sacrificing, b) he didn't want to go through the heartbreak of five years ago again, c) he wants to keep being miserable, d) he hadn't forgiven her for what happened with the infarction and wanted to hurt her, or e) all of the above?
Another one occasionally brought up in context is whether House honestly cares about his patients and wants to find out what's wrong with them to help them, or if he just sees them as puzzles to be solved, not caring whether he helps or harms them in the process. And then there are all the permutations of the combination of the two, such as "he cares about some but not others", or "he does care but also sees them as something to be solved at all costs."
Many fans believe that even though House is a jerk, he does genuinely care about those around him (evidence in the episodes "Euphoria" and "Wilson's Heart") and his patients. On the other hand, we have "Last Resort", when House put Thirteen's and the other hostages' lives at risk by giving the gun back to the disarmed hostage taker just because he wanted to solve a medical mystery and didn't want the SWAT team to interrupt him. Or the way he treated the patient from the episode "Who's Your Daddy?" Apparently the writers of the show don't struggle for consistency here.
Maybe House cares only about those whom he's close to, and everyone else is a puzzle.
House still showed that he is a decent person in "Who's your Daddy" because he did not reveal to him the girl was not his biological daughter because that revelation would have harmed both that father and the girl. It could be argued that he acted as he did because he was concerned for his friend.
Maybe House does genuinely care about people, including his patients, but has one great weakness (puzzles (or vicodin)) that sometimes causes him to mistreat the people he cares about. Like a person!
A prominent argument has been created over Dr. Wilson's character. After Wilson practically asked his best friend to sacrifice his life for Wilson's girlfriend and then held said best friend responsible for her death for a while even though he had done what Wilson asked (it was already too late by then), some people feel that he's not as nice as he seems. There are online communities devoted to exploring the darker sides of his character.
This could be considered canon if you consider the last developments about his schizophrenic brother and how he constructed his "nice guy" persona as a huge overreaction. As House himself said:
"You're all persona".
Yes, but even then there's still room for interpretation. What's under the persona? Nothing (the literal meaning of House's statement, but likely not what House meant)? A normal human being who is no more and no less bastardly than most of the PPTH staff? A Chessmaster attempting to manipulate everything, including House, for his own personal gain?
This was hinted at even earlier, in season three, when he gives advice to Foreman on how to tell a patient she's dying, which includes directions on just when and how to touch a patient's arm so she feels comforted. The scene can be interpreted as Wilson being so practiced at telling people how to die that he's reduced it to a science, or as Wilson being a master of faking sincerity. (Remember, if you can fake that, you can fake anything... It's almost a pity Wilson didn't stick with acting.)
About House caring, Wilson claims from the first episode that the real reason House refuses to meet with patients is that, if he does, he'll begin to care about them as human beings, and then he'll hesitate when it comes to ordering the crazy dangerous treatments that are often the only chance to save their lives. About Wilson caring, in the fourth season episode "Frozen," the patient—a psychiatrist trapped in Antarctica and communicating via webcam—remarks on the oddity of Wilson's friendship with House, since the latter has such a bad reputation among his colleagues and the former has "a perfect score." When Wilson asks if she thinks House is secretly a lot nicer than he seems, she replies that she thinks Wilson is secretly a lot less nice than he seems. She qualifies, saying "indiscriminate niceness is overrated," but yeah.
Regarding Thirteen, was her reluctance to reveal things about her personal life just self-preservation as suggested, or did she initially want to appear mysterious during the application process to make herself seem more intriguing to House? It's also noted that she reacts more strongly to the revelation of some of her secrets (her potential Huntington's diagnosis and House's subsequent pushing of the issue really hits a nerve, but when the staff finds out she is bisexual she is almost amused) than others, suggesting that perhaps she only wants to be unattached and impersonal because she thinks it's the safer option. There's also a potential Freudian Excuse in there, given her childhood.
Nina Martin was sometimes seen as an abusive Jerkass to her friends and Fabian, because of how often she would yell at or push her friends around, and these people also tend to see her as a Karma Houdini, because of how she was never called out on what she did. There are also debates as to whether or not her absence in season 3 improved the show, or worsened it. She as also been guilty of being called a Mary Sue, due to her Chosen One status, the way that the show usually paints her as being in the right even when she acts like a jerk, and how she would often have to be saved by her True Companions (usually Fabian), yet never had to really fight for herself before.
On the other hand, Nina fans tended to paint Joy as a Jerkass instead, due to the way she was obsessed with winning Fabian's affections, which of course meant hurting Nina. By the time she tricked Fabian into kissing her, a large portion of the fandom had made her The Scrappy. There is also another camp that believe that she was always a sympathetic character who actually deserved Fabian more than Nina did, and saw her actions as cries for attention more than anything else.
In season 3, was Mara a sympathetic Jerkass Woobie or a formerly sympathetic character who Took a Level in Jerkass and had no right to do what she did to Joy and Jerome? Much of the fandom seemed to lean to the latter, but there are still people who believe the former.
Sam Puckett of iCarly displays classic signs of sociopathy such as a lack of empathy and guilt, a parasitic lifestyle (leeching money off Carly and the gang), impulsiveness, poor behavior control (always beating Freddy and everyone else), being manipulative (any time she makes up a plan), being emotionally shallow, a poster child of juvenile delinquency, superficial charm, need for stimulation (the eagerness of her wanting to hurt someone or make them suffer) as a way to relieve boredom. Also Carly could know this already and willing to exploit it as she rarely has qualms about Sam beating Freddie mercilessly on any occasion and the fact that in "ILookalikes" she doesn't bother letting Spencer get beat up and go against his wishes a lot of the time. She could be a two-faced bitch that just manipulates people to get the highest ratings on the internet for her show in a smaller case of sociopathy.
The Les Yay on this show is so thick you can cut it with a knife and the entire show can be seen as two girlfriends and their Lez Bro.
The fact that Jonah kissed Carly because Sam wouldn't kiss him or put out speaks a lot about Sam's true character: A girl who is brash and mean in public, but doesn't kiss her boyfriend in private, at least until she's gained their trust. Maybe underneath her tough exterior is a very sad, lonely, insecure girl. Or a secret lesbian. Or just a Tsundere.
Is Carly the Alpha Bitch of her school? She has Sam as The Dragon and Freddie, a guy who will follow her to the end of the earth as her clique. The trio are treated very differently by the principal than regular students would. Carly also goes out with the hottest guys at the school who other girls want even if she is younger than them, the trio is legitimately famous, all are incredibly beautiful, other girls know she has Freddie wrapped around her fingers, Carly has a massive apartment, loads of money and freedom from typical parental influence. It's easy to see how the less popular students at the school might envy and/or dislike her, Sam and Freddie.
I Dream of Jeannie This is the ultimate fantasy about a master and slave, all right... Just who is the master, again? The first episode alone has Jeannie threatening to turn "her master" into a serpent, angrily demanding to know what another woman is doing there, and refusing to leave and release her new boytoy from her clutches. Jeannie's the one holding the proverbial whip — she takes over Tony's life, and there's nothing he can do about it.
In traditional Arab fairy tales, being the "master" of a djinn has always been a precarious position to be in, so perhaps this interpretation is more apt than can be told on first blush.
This is, perhaps, further supported by one episode where Major Nelson asks her to act more like a Jeannie from Arabian Nights. She reluctantly obeys...and becomes even worse.
Jeannie's sister. Homewrecking troublemaker or a bored, unhappy slave whose sister naively rubbed her freedom and her attractive master's lack of demands in her face? Of the two masters of hers who appeared on the show, one was an ugly, ancient chainsmoker who imprisoned her most of the day and threatened to whip her, and one was a brute who was never there and pulled her around by the hair when he was. Then when the second one accidentally stumbled onto one of her events, his decides in a split second to kill her. She was only spared cause Rogers used up the one wish he gave them as compensation to ask him not to. While played for laughs, there is nothing to suggest he wasn't completely serious in his intentions (her response to him even turning up is more or less to cower in terror). Having not been freed like Jeannie, she was forced to obey their every command, whenever they could find her. Her malicious streak seems to be a genie trait, not completely a personal one. Jeannie herself did many of the same things on occasion to get what she wanted.
The surprisingly large LazyTown fandom is known for its interpretations of character backstories. Fanfiction writers often give Robbie Rotten a tragic past. A few diehards have created interpretations of the mythical "Number Nine", mentioned only in one episode. A lot of fan theories revolve around Nine being Sportacus' father.
Another story interpretation is in this thread; Robbie Rotten is a Tragic Hero, and the series actually takes place After the End so his goal to keep the kids inside is actually to protect them from radiation.
In Lois & Clark, there is a serial killer under Superman's nose and he never even notices. Jimmy Olsen may seem innocent at first glance, but by the end of the series he has a substantial body count going on. In pretty much every episode, Jimmy is professing his love for a girl and by the end of the episode he'll have won her over only for her to vanish without a trace in the next episode. Even plot armored characters aren't safe from him, Lois's sister goes from a central storyline to never heard from again.
The cast of Lost fall under this. To some, Locke is truly special, with a divine reason for doing what he does. To others, he's just overzealous; and he has risked far too much in his attempts to find himself and protect the island, making him a Jerkass. The show loved zig-zagging on this point.
And is Ben Linus a power hungry sociopath, or just a man who's life has has slowly destroyed by a Jerkass God with nothing but a promise of destiny, forcing him into killing people due to being obedient to His orders? Notice he never kills anyone who is an innocent, only targeting those who threaten the Island in some way (excluding Keamy and Widmore, but they were the ones who had his daughter killed, and admit it, Keamy had it coming...)
There was a common debate in the first three series of The L Word between those who saw Jenny as a faithless, narcissist and those thought of her as a nice girl who made a few mistakes. However after series 4 she was almost universally loathed. Similarly, Bette Porter is viewed by some as a bitch and others as a decent but flawed person.
Kamen Rider manages to gather a few of these every other year or so.
Kamen Rider Ex-Aid has roughly the same amount of solid characterization as it does have space for ambiguity.
The revelations about the past of Taiga have caused viewers to interpret him as either a Jerkass Woobie or a self centered Sociopath who's entire reason for what he does * including endangering innocent lives, trying to outright murder Ex-Aid and generally being a pain in the butt amounts to either his ego being bruised or flat out jealousy that other people got the job that "should" have been his. His dialog and actions provide evidence for both.
When talking about Emu, more specifically the Bugster virus he has, one has to ask what the Bugster portion is. Is it Emu or M? Moments in the show provide proof for both of these theories being the case.
Considering Kiriya's habit of lying, one has to wonder if him acting goofy and casual with everything he does is an act to mask how he feels about causing his friend's death. At times it almost feels forced when he laughs at other people.
Is Nico just a womanchild, who hangs around solely to annoy people or is she hidden social expert? She may had pretended to be infected with the Game disease just to bother Taiga. Either that or she was testing him to see who he really is. Her claim about him 'being a softie' after witnessing his reaction would imply that. Also, Nico is a genius gamer, who makes 100 million yen a year, yet she spends her time by following Taiga for unknown reasons. Her actions would imply her to be somewhere in between.
While it's hard to argue that Kuroto isn't a Jerkass and a monster, it's possible to wonder if he's a murderous narcissist because that was his original personality, or if he was somehow driven mad, possibly by the virus. If it was the second one, the state he's deteriorated to and his graphic death leave a little bit of Sympathy for the Devil.
The boys themselves: Are they virtually irredeemable jerkasses and brats who bring Lois' wrath on themselves; or are they actually pretty good kids who act out in good part because that's the only way they can get a consistent reaction from their mom, and additionally were so emotionally abused/neglected/manipulated by her that they're lucky they're only as screwed up as they are?
The episode where Reese gets his own apartment really points to the latter. When he lives on his own, he completely turns around and does mature considerably, other than mishandling his money (which had nothing to do with his good school performance) and given his nonchalant attitude about the subject with his parents, it seems to be their fault that they neglected to teach him anything about responsible money management in the first place.
A flashback episode revealed that Hal used to be much stricter, and Lois was a passive enabler who became the hard-nosed matriarch she is in the series' present day after her passive parenting of Francis led to him almost setting himself on fire and her proclaiming that she was going to be tough with him and any future children, "for their own good" as far as protecting them from themselves.
Also, several episodes have painted Hal have as having a serious selfish streak (like his skipping work on Fridays for over a decade to go do fun things without the family ruining his good time).
It could just be fans over-thinking things, but the LiveJournal consensus on Hawkeye from Mash is that he's either bisexual (flirting with anyone that moves), bipolar (four breakdowns at least and incredibly quick to go from depressed to manic and back again) or both. In the words of Sidney the psychiatrist: "Anger turned inwards is depression. Anger turned sideways is Hawkeye Pierce." This theory is so popular, Futurama has a field day with it in War is the H-Word; Hawkeye as the robot "iHawk", operating and drinking a martini at the same time while hitting on the nurse. Also, he has a switch on his side which changes his mood from irreverent ("Zoidberg has twice as much experience as you do" - "Right, He's a doctor AND a butcher") and maudlin ("When will the killing end?")
"This isn't a war, it's a murder." * flips switch* "Dis ain't a war, it's a moider!"
For a POV switch, the early seasons of M*A*S*H are actually the story of Frank Burns, an already unhappy man to begin with, being driven insane by his off kilter tent mates (Hawkeye Pierce & Trapper John MacIntyre, and later B.J. Hunnicutt) while trying to survive during his tour of duty in the Korean War, only to be terrorized and bullied by them at every turn, thus acting out against them as a coping mechanism.
Patrick Jane in The Mentalist: is he a good guy with a tragic past, or is his charming persona another act as he plots the murder of Red John? Could he be Red John himself?
The second is confirmed in the episode "His Red Right Hand" when a dying Bosco asks Jane to promise to kill Red John and not simply arrest him; Jane tells him that was always the plan.
Jane was always fairly forthright about his plans for Red John. The question is whether his personality in the meantime is genuine or an act in service of that goal. As the series delves deeper into Jane's character, it increasingly points to the former.
The third is finally disproven by Season Six's "Red John", but given how dedicated some fans were to this theory even facing a mountain of conflicting evidence throughout the sixth season, it's likely there are still a few out there who believe it.
The Season Two finale probably confirms the third as false, as Red John and Jane appeared in a scene together. Granted, we didn't actually SEE Red John, but the actions he took confirm his identity.
Morgana': She could easily be seen as a) an innocent girl who was raised by a sociopath, was taught her to hate herself for who she is from an early age, was betrayed by one of her closest friends and denied the readily available help she needed to get better by everyone around her or b) an evil, manipulative bitch whose inevitable spiral happened the first chance she had to show her true colors.
Arthur. Just how does he manage to constantly miss, oh, I don't know, his best friend's a warlock? Does he already know, or does he suspect and is in denial? Maybe he's brain-damaged or enchanted on some level. Or maybe Merlin is constantly drugging him not to notice. The explanation the creators seem to be going with is that Arthur is very unobservant, which is certainly well supported.
There are quite a few people who think that the the guards of Camelot are magic sympathizers who are so incompetent purely because they want to help Merlin.
Zordon, a wise sage or using teenagers to fight his battles for his own possibly shady means, likely breaking intergalactic law. As for the Rangers themselves, goody-good role models for the youth of the nineties, or Jerkasses to two people (possibly with learning troubles) perceived to be bullies but only needed friends/find out the rangers' identities.
Tommy, Zordon's paladin, or someone who just wants revenge, and doesn't mind throwing his friends under the bus to do it? Does he divorce himself from the Green Ranger?
Are Bulk and Skull the typical bumbling "bad guys" you see in kiddie shows and the result of Dawson Casting... or high school students who had to repeat every year multiple times and behave like that because they were harassed by everyone including the Power Rangers?
It has been suggested (with varying degrees of seriousness) that Jessica Fletcher, the Amateur Sleuth from Murder, She Wrote, is a clever serial killer who kills people to further her writing career, hides behind the persona of a harmless elderly lady, and manages to cover up her crimes by somehow manipulating other people into confessing to them. Murder She Did? (The German dub is titled "Mord ist ihr Hobby", which would translate back to "her hobby is murder".)
NCIS: Is Gibbs a man who's had no luck in relationships since the deaths of his wife and daughter or who's ruined them due to his inability to move on?
He ruins them because he never commits to the relationship. This is backed by the fact whenever he is asked about something in his past, he refuses to talk about it.
In regards to above, is Gibb's team the family he never got to have (his subordinates as his "kids" and Ducky as a surrogate father-figure) or a crutch he uses to keep from moving on with his life? In his free-time he keeps making those damn boats and that's it. Sure, they're Nakama but they can't be around Gibbs all the time.
Dwight in The Office. On the one hand, he's a hopelessly deluded man whose pretensions of Nietzschian grandeur clearly make him a loser. On the other hand, he does what he loves and is very good at it, he had the best love life out of any of the characters for several seasons, and he's always making reference to having regular friends outside of work who he does stuff like play laser tag with. Out of all the characters, Dwight's life is arguably the least sad and depressing. This might not be a case of Alternate Character Interpretation, though — he started as a Butt-Monkey, but the writers upgraded Dwight to a more formidable character when they realized that the fans liked him. On the other, other hand, he could be antisocial or dyssocial. He shares no empathy over killing his cousin Mose's pet dog (he thought it had rabies, but it turned out ate some whipped-cream pie. Dwight says he killed it because it was a thief), his ex-girlfriend Angela's cat (it looked like it had died, so he froze it — but it died from freezing to death) and shot a neighbor's dog thinking it was a werewolf. He constantly deceives people (like when he attempted a coup against his boss Michael). He stores weapons like poison darts, nunchucks, knives, cross-bows, etc. all around the office. He is shown fighting and or threatening co-workers. He is a narcissist. He cares for no one else's safety when he LIT THE OFFICE ON FIRE to prove they don't care for fire drills and caused property damage, and gave co-worker Stanley a heart attack during that fiasco.
From Dwight's POV, the fire was his idea of proving how much he cared for everyone else's safety, as he hoped it would prove that a more thorough evacuation plan was needed. The same goes for the weapons: he believes that his Crazy Preparedness ultimately makes the office a much safer place to be (he did save Jim from getting his ass beat by Roy). As for his lack of empathy towards animals, if memory serves, Jim tricked him into thinking there was a werewolf, and ended up buying Angela a new cat.
Jim tricked Dwight into think Jim was a vampire which, considering the "werewolf" incident, was probably pretty dangerous. Dwight killed the "werewolf" long before that episode.
Dwight bought Angela a new cat - and then couldn't understand why she was still upset. He had no comprehension of Angela's emotional connection to her cat. Then there was the time he tricked Angela in marrying him, and couldn't understand why she was upset.
Didn't he grow up on a farm? It's only reasonable that he'd think of animals in terms of utility first (she lost her pet, get her a new pet) and sentimentality after. As for the con wedding, he and Michael both live as if they're inside a movie, so to Dwight it would have seemed like the kind of crazy romantic stunt that always works out in movies.
A common theory about Michael Scott is that he's a genius in disguise, and all his bumbling and whatnot is a part of the plan. See the episode in which Michael and Jan go to Chili's to meet with a client, where Michael just tells jokes and stories the whole time, which ends up being the perfect strategy for getting the client on-board with them. This leads Jan to develop a crush on Michael. Other characters have also theorized aloud that Michael may be a secret genius.
Michael definitely steps up his game when he deals with clients. He has a rolodex of all of his clients, which includes lots of personal information, and topics to avoid and to emphasize. And he tells a good story. But when he's in the office, he's insulting, inconsiderate, and can't tell a joke to save his life.
Confirmed by the Michael Scott Paper Company arc. At the end of it, Michael single-handedly negotiates his old job back, as well as getting sales positions for Pam and Ryan, all while knowing full well that if he gets called on his bluff he doesn't have a leg to stand on. It's probably the first time in the series that we actually get to see why Michael made manager in the first place. He's actually really good at his job.
Michael's branch is the best preforming branch of the entire company, despite being staffed by a bunch of idiots, so he has to be doing something right.
The pilot script for NBC's vs. of The Office was the pilot script for The BBC's vs. of The Office with all the names changed. Once the script-lines diverged, some characters diverged dramatically. David Brent was very different from Michael Scott, for instance.
One ACI for both of them is that they were not Bad Bosses until the cameras came and triggered their increasing Small Name, Big Ego moments.
Ryan the Temp seems to be "The Only Sane One" but he is actually the most incompetent salesman in the entire company having never made a single sale
Also, even though he brags constantly about having women throwing themselves at him, but really the only one who he can really be with is Kelly
Is Ryan actually an intelligent guy who knows more about business than Micheal or is he someone who is book smart but has little to no practical knowledge. Having never made a single sale doesn't necessarily make him incompetent since it is Truth in Television that there are some people who can't be salesmen to save their lives but seem otherwise intelligent in Real Life, but his other plans, such as the website, don't work out in the real world the way they did on paper either.
Sophie. The actress Olivia Coleman has mentioned in interviews that while other cast members like Sophie she sees her as a detestable character who uses and abuses Mark.
We only see Jeff from Peep Show from the point of view of his worst enemy Mark. From Mark's point of view, he appears to be an absolute pillock. But we have seen him in tears over Sophie breaking up with him in series 2, and he is happy to date Sophie and help care for her baby in series 7, so maybe he's a lot nicer when Mark's not around.
A large contingent of fans of The Prisoner (1967) who believe that when Number Six asks, "Who is Number One", the New Number Two gives a straight and honest answer when he responds, "You are, Number Six." If true, this would make it the Mind Screw to end all Mind Screws.
Another is that they know exactly why he resigned, but they want him to tell them. Which would mean that the only person really keeping Number Six in the Village was himself.
Red Dwarf has a few. One presented in the show itself is whether Rimmer was acting as he did to genuinely fulfill Holly's brief (that is, keep Lister sane); in that case, when he was offered the chance to become Ace, he let his true personality show. Another, outside the show, is whether the Alternate Universe presented in the episode "Back to Reality" is the "true" one, and they really were playing a total immersion video game.
The novelization suggests an alternative reason for Lister being three million years out in deep space: in the show, he was put into stasis for quarantine violation after he was dumb enough to send a photograph of himself with a cat that he'd smuggled onboard to the ship's photo lab, suggesting that his lazy thinking put him in his situation. In the novel, he was sentenced to stasis for the same crime, but he'd committed it and gotten himself caught (and in a way that he calculated would avoid having the cat — whom he had fully vaccinated to avoid endangering the crew — captured and dissected by the science lab) after thoroughly studying the ship's penal code so that he could get himself sentenced to three years in stasis to avoid having to actually wait that time for the ship to reach Earth, when his commission would have been complete. In the novel, Lister's meticulous planning (albeit in the service of laziness) put him in his situation.
This trope has been invoked on Reno 911!. Characters on the show have claimed that the show's producers purposely edit footage to make the Sheriff's Department look more incompetent and idiotic than they really are.
Is Sebastian Monroe from Revolution an evil despot or a strong leader dedicated to returning order and civilization to the world?
Likewise in the second season, has the tragedy of loosing everything and letting so many people die snapped him back to sanity and he's a genuinely remorseful man trying to make up for his past wrongs, who just has difficulty shaking his acquired dark habits or is he still an evil murderer who is just helping the protagonists because it gives him a better chance of survival against this new great threat? Or alternatively, is he just using all of this as an excuse to allow him to spend time with his best friend once again? He certainly does seem quite a bit happier now that he and Miles are working together once again.
In Royal Pains, is the brother Evan an annoying load, or a competent accountant and the only thing keeping his passive doctor brother from starving to death?
"I think it's possible that he doesn't hate J.D.. Maybe J.D. is as close to a friend as he has. For all we know, he just has poor social skills. I think that the Janitor constantly misreads J.D.'s motives and assumes he's a young punk."
Acknowledged in-show when the Janitor, having reached a temporary truce with JD, sarcastically suggests, or so it appears, that they "go to a baseball game and share a big tub of popcorn". As JD turns away in disgust, thinking he's making fun of him, the Janitor begins to proffer two tickets before muttering, "That's the last time I reach out to someone."
The Janitor even once actually said that he's tormenting JD for no real reason, and implies that JD isn't even the first person he's done that to.
The personality changes of Jordan's sister, Danni, happened after the death of her brother Ben. It's possible that she's just acting out to deal with her grief.
One episode is actually built on alternate character interpretation. JD is trying to write a speech honoring Dr. Kelso, but throughout the episode sees no evidence that he's anything other than an amoralJerkass who shirks responsibility whenever possible. JD never reads the speech, but suggests that Kelso's responsibility as Chief of Medicine requires him to detach himself emotionally to benefit the greatest number of people, accompanied by a shot of Kelso leaving the hospital and exhaling in relief, rather than cheering the end of his duty for the day. Other episodes follow up on this - one is told from Kelso's perspective as he tries to end a harsh streak of infighting between his employees by becoming their common enemy. And after he retires and just stops by to sit in the coffee shop, there's no antagonism left to be seen.
When Cox takes over Kelso's job as Chief of Medicine, we learn that Kelso himself recommended Cox to the hospital board. This suggests that as far back as the first season, and probably before, that Kelso had been grooming Cox to take his place for years, which explains why Kelso let Cox get away with so many things and nearly always explained his decisions to Cox.
In one episode, after Kelso received complaints about Cox's rude bedside manner, so he decides to try acting as a resident to prove he can pull it off without acting the way Cox does. But when trying to give advice to an overweight woman in her mid twenties, he suggests, dealing with her weight problems through a healthy diet and excessive, and actually expresses shock at her opting for the more dangerous option of surgery (which would make more money for the hospital). He states he was actually trying to help her, but was his attempt motivated by actual compassion, or a desire to prove that he do better bedside manner than Cox? And was his later attempt, where he took up Cox's attitude and became more forceful, motivated out of a desire to help or because he was trying to recover from his wounded pride?
Some of this took place behind the scenes of Seinfeld:
Frank Costanza was originally written as sort of an older version of George: high-strung and dominated by George's mother Estelle. Jerry Stiller thought one of his first scenes was falling flat, and (trying to avoid being written out like John Randolph) he did a take shouting his lines at an equal volume to Estelle Harris. The cast and crew were so cracked up that it redefined how all three characters were written and acted: instead of George taking after his meek dad, he grew up in a house where anything could blow up into an argument. It arguably also influenced Stiller's later role on The King of Queens, where his character Arthur was also a Large Ham who frequently exclaimed his bizarre thoughts to the other characters.
Dave Chappelle's sketch onSesame Street points out some particularly hilarious ACIs on its various characters that you probably realize when you grow up. For example, Cookie Monster has drug-laced cookies, apparently.
Is Sherlock really, as he himself claims, a sociopath who finds solving crimes a pleasant diversion from boredom, or does he have some other kind of personality disorder with similar symptoms? In universe, John does bring up the possibility that Sherlock has Asperger's and he simply acts like a jerk out of force of habit. It's also worth pointing out that sociopathy is a congenital psychological condition that results in an inability to understand or empathize with other people's feelings, and contrary to what the fandom believes, it's not something you can really be "cured" of. Sherlock's genuine admiration for Irene, fondness for Mrs. Hudson, his friendship with John, and his remorse over his callous speech to Molly at Christmas make it clear that he does care about other people.
Is John really the meekBadass Normal he presents himself as, or is he a man Born in the Wrong Century who hangs around Sherlock out of a psychological need to fight for something or someone? As Mycroft correctly pointed out, he's only truly calm when facing dangerous situations, and didn't hesitate to kill an old man (who was a serial killer) to protect Sherlock.
Sherlock's sexuality is forever up for debate; not just in context of this show, but also historically. Benedict Cumberbatch, who plays the role of Sherlock, claims that his version of the consulting detective is asexual (and by that he most likely means aromantic as well); creator Steven Moffat insists that he is "heterosexual but devoted to celibacy;" Sherlock/Irene fans label him as heteroromantic sapiosexual; Sherlock/Molly fans see him as either heteroromantic heterosexual or heteroromantic asexual; and Sherlock/John fans go with homoromantic asexual or outright homosexual. Since Word of God is gospel, as of now the canon interpretation is heterosexual, though A Scandal in Belgravia, the only episode in which Sherlock shows even the slightest romantic interest in/physical attraction towards anyone, heavily hints at his sapiosexuality — or, alternatively, If It's You, It's Okay where Irene is concerned.
Likewise, John in canon is clearly heteroromantic heterosexual, though Sherlock/John fans insist on his being bisexual or biromantic heterosexual; or, again, If It's You, It's Okay for Sherlock.
Mary Watson: Sweet, kind hearted former assassin who wants to leave her past behind in favor of a new life with John, or cold, callous liar who wouldn't mind returning to her former life?
Due to what she said and all, most likely she's most likely a sweet kind-hearted lady who wants to forget her assassin life, but is as fiercely protective of him as Sherlock is.
Smallville: Jonathan Kent's ghostly appearances in Series 10. Did he really return from the grave to impart advice? Or was he merely an avatar of Jor-El, who recognized that his own tense relationship with his son might prevent him from adhering to his advice, so chose A Form You Are Comfortable With as "Jonathan" is the only person he knows Clark will listen to?
The Luthors: are they cultured badasses and misunderstood woobies, or are they utter bastards whose cultured exteriors are just a thin veneer hiding the complete seediness underneath?
Lex: Misunderstood woobie or selfish prick who's way too eager to blame others for his problems?
Is Oliver the best or second-best character on the show, or is he just a jerk? You decide!
Is Chloe's transformation into a Big Brother-like figure to "protect" Metropolis in Season 9 the result of Post-Traumatic Stress in reaction to Jimmy's death?
On the show Special Unit 2, it's specifically said that the Links are the predecessors to mankind — in other words, human. Considering how badly they're treated by the human government — they're murdered, put down, beaten, insulted, and tortured — it's easy to imagine that SU2 is less a story about human cops fighting monsters than about humanoid lifeforms trying to lash out at an unjust system while racist humans kill them for having the nerve to be born anything other than Homo sapiens sapiens. Oh sure, some Links are genuinely dangerous...but even then, some could be merely striking back against an oppressive system. Considering how the humans treat the gnome (calling him scum, insulting him constantly, threatening him if he doesn't help), a part of the audience doesn't blame them!
The gnome was doing community service for liquor store robberies.
Anubis isn't evil. He ascended and was genuinely good. Then he saw that the Ancients were Neglectful Precursors. He got just as mad as the main cast at how the Ancients behaved but, unlike the main cast, tried to do something about it. He's just trying to shake the Ancients out of their complacency and get them to do something, anything, to save all that they've created. Of course, this is the same Anubis who the Goa'uld exiled for his unspeakable crimes.
The Ori might have started out similarly, only wanting to use their powers to heal the plague that had befallen their unascended cousins and perhaps teaching others to do the same (creating the first priors in the process). When the Alterans said "no", the Ori replied "screw you" and took a collective FaceHeel Turn from there. This one is closer to canon than it seems. When we finally meet Merlin/Moros, he compares the Ori to Oma Desala, one of the most benevolent Ascended Ancients in the series. It is good to keep in mind, however, that the Ancients and Ori split before the plague, which came around the same time as ascension, and it was the Ancients who left the Alteran homeworld.
Is Jack O'Neill a goofy, barely-competent but honorable Idiot Hero, with a bit of a dark side, who needs to be shepherded through every adventure by the Smart Guys on his team, but who mysteriously found himself put into a leadership position in the organization charged with protecting Earth from evil parasitical aliens with big space guns? Or is he a Manipulative Bastard who plays dumb to make people underestimate him and cracks jokes to distract friend and foe alike, while he's actually the one holding the reins all along? Or maybe somewhere in between? Well, they did say he was involved in Black Ops. And then there was that odd thing about being on a team with two CIA agents, and those four months in an Iraqi prison, the circumstances of his son's death and the means he chose to attempt suicide, and the habit of almost never volunteering any information... yeah, sure the guy's a ditz.
The Entire Federation in Star Trek: Utopian, Democratic Post-ScarcityUtopia? Or Incompetent, Lawful Good to Lawful Neutral, conformist, military state? Starfleet has a lot of power, access to all the cool toys, and control of interstellar communications. They try civilians in military courts. Other than the Maquis, most Federation citizens are accepting of this level of control by the military and the few that do not see Starfleet as a pack of holy angels are explicitly pointed to as misfits. On the other hand, their citizens do enjoy a number of freedoms due to the advancements of 24th century technology that we can't possibly dream of, and despite the number of insane admirals promoted by the military meritocracy, is a mostly benevolent organization. There is an argument that Starfleet in general and Picard in particular are lawful evil, because of the consistency with which arbitrary rules are used to justify allowing people, or even entire planetary populations, to die. In "Homeward", people are threatened with utter extinction through natural disaster, and Picard just quotes the Prime Directive. In the real world, when a tsunami hit Asia, nobody suggested we just let the people die to that natural disaster, even considering the thought would be viewed as thoroughly and irredeemably evil. Asia knows we exist. It's possible that Picard was playing Devil's Advocate, knowing what the people above him would say, and wanting to protect his crew, which he can't if he gets cashiered. My personal belief is that the high-ups are afflicted with the same sort of moral decay that results in allowingthingslikethisto happen, mutating a good law (The "don't land on a primitive planet and get set up as a god"/"Don't go around Giving Radio to the Romans" Prime Directive) to an excuse for immoral inaction. It's easily hit with "yet another collectivist utopia, viable only thanks to Deus ex Machina". Quentyn Quinn, Space Ranger administered beatings to the dead horse ("a real classic, that one") on and on until the author tired and moved on.
The 'verse in general. Beneath its veneer of utopian optimism, is terrifying in a vaguely WH40K way. The Alpha Quadrant powers are 'merely' a few hundred or thousand year old interstellar civilizations carefully built over the ruins of countless other bygone sapient races from the past few billion years, occasionally stumbling across a functional doomsday weapon that typically kills billions before it can be stopped. Meanwhile, for the sake of their mutual continued non-extinction, all the nation-states are maintaining the polite fiction that they only need phasers or photon torpedoes to fight wars while stockpiling said ancient weapons and hoarding the Phlebotinum it intentionally 'forgets' [read: suppresses] to avoid a Singularity. Plus everyone's just a single scientific discovery away from accidentally elevating themselves into immature godlings who, typically, are enfant terribles one temper tantrum away from murdering a whole starship/planet so they can have their way with the hot yeoman they're crushing on. And the only people standing between galactic civilization and its own (self-)destruction? Starfleet. Starfleet, from its coup-prone admiralty down to its ignoble redshirts, is fighting to preserve the ultra-pure humanist ideal against any and all forces that would tear it down, doing whatever it takes to prevent a situation arising where the gloves will come off. Because, when everyone else has fallen to their knees, who else is going to ask 'God' why He needs a starship?
Although it was put forward by the character in a later appearance, but... Scotty's miraculously fast solutions are due as much to blatantly padded estimates as to his personal genius. In the NextGen episode "Relics" Geordi tells Picard in Scotty's hearing how long a certain engineering miracle will take. After that call is hung up, Scotty asks Geordi how long it'll really take. Geordi repeats the same figure and is scolded by Scotty for not exaggerating the time it would take. ("Relics" is a post-Roddenberry episode.) Star Trek III also had Kirk ask him about his tendency to exaggerate things.
Kirk: Mr. Scott, have you always multiplied your repair estimates by a factor of four?
Scotty: Certainly sir; how else can I keep my reputation as a miracle worker?
Scotty's reasoning may be a little iffy, but the underlying concept actually makes sense to some degree. Under ordinary, non-emergency circumstances, it's preferable for an engineer to estimate the longest amount of time the repair could reasonably take and then to end up finishing ahead of schedule than to estimate the fastest they think they can do it and end up leaving people waiting or worse because it wasn't ready when it was supposed to be.
Perhaps the most famous TOS Alternate Character Interpretation of all: the nature ofKirk and Spock'srelation By which we mean, they were the love of each others' lives. It's worth noting that Gene Roddenberry all but admitted that was the case. The Ship's Closet is dedicated entirely to proving that this interpretation is the intended interpretation. Britanny even builds a timeline of the relationship - during the events of the show, Kirk and Spock are merely expressing interest in and flirting with one another. They get together as a couple during the first film. McCoy finds the whole thing amusing.
Alternate Character Interpretation of James T. Kirk. Lovable, charismatic, all-American good guy? Male chauvinist Mighty Whitey imperialist egomaniac? Or both? Interestingly, Kirk's character has gotten increasingly egotistical over the years. In the original '60s series, he was written as an ultra-serious leader type concerned mainly for the safety of his ship and crew. He tended to come off as somewhat arrogant due to William Shatner's hammy performance and the fact that he ended up breaking Starfleet rules in every other episode, but this appears to be unintentional. Then Star Trek II came along and Deconstructed Kirk's clever Take a Third Option solutions, effectively canonizing hubris as part of his character. By Star Trek VI, a villainous character denounces Kirk as "an insubordinate, unprincipled, career-minded opportunist". Finally, the film completed the transformation, portraying Academy-era Kirk as an arrogant young hot-shot (implicitly due to growing up without a father). So Kirk is an example of an Alternative Character Interpretation gradually becoming canon.
Star Trek Into Darkness has Kirk's arrogant young hot-shot reputation dragged on to the carpet and stomped on, and by the end of the film he's become significantly more humble once he realizes he's been played by someone using his ego and the only thing that prevented disaster was him pausing to listen to people counseling him to question what he was doing. Star Trek Beyond returns Kirk to a more TOS characterization: he's more thoughtful and cautious in his actions, reckless only when he has to be, and not guided by his libido as he doesn't fall for the Hot Alien Chick in Distress routine.
One take on the series holds that the Federation is actually rather amoral, governed by ethically dubious realpolitik rather than the principles it publicly espouses. In this view, the highly principled Picard is not a luminary of Starfleet but something of a naif whose own optimism blinds him to the increasingly horrific actions of his compatriots. This would explain why most admirals on the show are total scumbags.
Most of Trek fandom believes that the Traveller's interest in Wesley makes him come off as a paedophile. Even Wil Wheaton has lampshaded how creepy this was in retrospect, in the review he did of "Where No One Has Gone Before".
Captain Jellico inspires a lot of this. Some see him as a micro-managing jerk who forces through his will just because he can and thereby alienates all who serve him, others see him as a responsible officer who had every right to run the Enterprise as he saw fit, and saved the day through his genuine competence. The funny thing is that neither interpretation is exclusive of the other.
Data does have emotions. He's always had them, but they're deliberately bypassed by his programming. This could explain his more human moments, when his programs are working so hard to figure out the situation — such as, say, in a moment involving the death of a comrade — that the program performing the rerouting process gets distracted and doesn't do its job properly, resulting in Data's almost-but-not-quite emotional moments. Data has a computer program in his brain telling him what to do (influenced by Soong's ideas of what should and shouldn't be done) that ignores whatever emotions he has. The addition of his emotion chip doesn't add anything new to Data's programming; it just removes the influence of the program telling him how to behave. This explains several things, including why Lore could manipulate Data into feeling individual (mainly negative) emotions in Descent. Alternatively? Data is in the biggest, most convincing case of Denial ever encountered in an artificial being. Makes sense. How could an emotionless being want to have emotions? Perhaps the emotion chip is just a Magic Feather. If so, then it's one powerful placebo. Lore got something from that chip himself, though neither he nor we know what — and he already had emotions! Perhaps the most likely explanation is that Data only has some simple emotions, like curiosity, the desire for companionship, and the desire to be better. Full on love or rage is beyond him, but it's inaccurate to say he's without feeling. Alternatively yet again, his 'desires' could simply be pre-programmed goals. Data may not feel any actual attachment to his friends, but when an opportunity to make and keep friends comes up, his programming dictates that he chooses that option over others. Or alternatively yet again, he does feel emotions, but he doesn't know that a feeling he has is love, anger, sadness, etc., because he doesn't have any physical or psychological reaction when he feels them. He feels "pure" emotions, rather than emotions plus all the reactions and behavior that accompanies it. And he can't realize this, because he always acts in a calm, logical manner, even if the true motivations for his actions are not logical. Kind of like Spock trying to rationalize caring for Kirk as solely logical interest in the captain's safety (which is perfectly valid), even though it's obvious that the real reason is that he likes/feels affection for Kirk. Except Spock is actively trying to scrounge up a logical excuse for his actions because he doesn't want to admit that he feels emotions, whereas Data can't find any illogical excuse for his actions, because emotions don't make him act illogically. So the emotion chip just allowed Data's body/sensory system to react to his emotions, it didn't actually give them to him. The ST:TNG ep The Most Toys supports this one, particularly at the end. There's no reason for Data to lie about wanting to kill the bad guy, as it would be a way to prevent a man who just committed murder from committing more, which he has promised to do if Dara doesn't submit himself to a life of virtual slavery. Even moreso, when he tells the bad guy at the end 'I feel no emotions at all - I am only an android', it comes off as self-delusion and repression (in terms of his emotions) on a Vulcan level.
Is Geordi LaForge merely an unlucky-in-love Gadgeteer Genius, or is there something more to it? Over the course of the series, all of his closest personal relationships have been formed in one way or another with machines. He's chief engineer of a starship, his best friend is an Android, he later befriends a Borg drone, and he once fell in love with the ship's computer in the guise of a computer-generated simulation of the woman who designed the Enterprise. When he finally meets the real her, he finds her lacking; they eventually end up friends, but it's made clear it won't go further... Clearly, his own biomechanical augmentation has isolated him socially from his fellow Human beings, and he tends to relate better to machines. Since most humans in the Star Trek'verse have severe prejudices against machines and computers, Geordi has to hide his preference behind the facade of doomed brief relationships. Geordi is married by the end of the series in one possible future timeline, and Picard clearly says that her name is Leah—the aforementioned starship designer. Clearly Geordi's luck could turn around at some point. Also, in the episode "Hide and Q," Riker is offered the powers of a Q and he grants Geordi sight. The first thing Geordie does is look at Tasha Yar and exclaim that she's just as beautiful as he'd always imagined her... He was blind from birth. What could his imagination have granted him that the VISOR didn't? Or is Tasha that beautiful? This could be one of those intentionally doomed relationships that he built up in his mind. Perhaps he was so completely in the closet about his robosexual feelings that he had to hide them even from himself. It would even explain why he asked Riker to take back his gift. "Leah Brahms LaForge" is not a complete joss, not once Voyager's EMH gets hold of that tech that lets him leave the true holodecks. That came too late to allow Geordi to intend to go for hologram!Leah canonically, but the topic's open for Epileptic Trees. The main reason Leah and Geordi didn't hit it of when they met in real life is because she was already married at the time. In the novel "Genesis Wave", Leah's husband was killed, and in "Indistinguishable From Magic" Geordi and Leah finally get a Relationship Upgrade.
Q. Character development aside, it's easy to look at his seemingly immature meddling and misuse of godlike powers as a Mary Poppins act. There are hundreds of possible interpretations for Q out there; is he a maladjusted Psychotic Manchild who uses mortals as toys for his amusement, Faux Affably Evil, a harmless childish prankster, a Chaotic Good rebel struggling against his people's repressive society, a supremely alien being following some Blueand Orange Morality only he understands, humanity's self-appointed Trickster Mentor, is he all? None? Is it even possible to give him labels? The appearances he's made throughout the franchise strongly imply that Q is acting as a Trickster Mentor, as he shows up with a purpose of making those he encounters more aware of the world around them and better for it. Rarely does a Q episode not result in this ending.
Josh Marsfelder interprets the crew of the Enterprise as an entire ship of The Last DJs: the people who actually embody the values the Federation merely keeps saying it does, and who thus spend most of their time engaged in undermining the Federation-that-exists in the name of the Federation-that-could-be. Summarised in this post on Eruditorum Press (which also reinterprets one-episode wonder Rassmussen, incidentally):
They're Starfleet's flagship but interact with their superiors with what can best be described as malicious compliance: They embody the ideals the Federation claims to stand for, but in doing so they reveal that the Federation in truth doesn't stand for them at all.
Weyoun: ingratiating, deceptive snake? Or loyal, selfless Founder dog? One alternative interpretation isn't so much as who he is or what he does, but how he's seen. When you take into consideration that he (along with all the Vorta) is a family-less clone who was never born and had no childhood, but instead was callously created by the Founders with the express purpose of serving them, it's actually kind of heartbreaking. In universe, absolutely nobody likes Weyoun. And he doesn't even seem to be all that aware of this. He's also commented about his lack of aesthetics, stating that no Vorta has any sense of art because the Founders didn't think it was important for them to have it. Still, he has said wistfully, it would be nice to carry a tune... the Vorta (with Weyoun being the most extreme example) would do anything for the Founders, and the Founders are quite apathetic most of the time. Looking at it from this point of view, Weyoun isn't so much the bastard you can't help but hate, but the underdog victim that you can't help but root for.
Further point of contention: Was Weyoun 6 truly "defective?" Or did all of the Weyouns have the same potential for good if they had chosen to follow Odo or their own morality instead of the cruel Founders?
The Founder who was running the Alpha Quadrant theater said that Weyoun was the only solid she truly trusted when they were about to be captured on Cardassia Prime. Her demeanor and the circumstances lead one to believe she was being sincere.
Strongly hinted in the show: that the series exists only in the mind of '50s sci-fi writer Benny Russell. Or perhaps Benny Russell is in one universe and seeing visions of another, which he interpets to be sci-fi stories?
SFDebris spends half his videos taking the piss out of Trek's values, particularly those of its Captains. Janeway is a none-too-bright but nevertheless despotic would-be conqueror; almost an Adam West Batman villain in space. Archer is a delusional madman who considers his dog an equal member of the crew and insists on being called "Duchess." Picard is a spineless Quisling who resists saving lives until someone prods him into it. Conversely, Kirk and Sisko are Herculean ubermenschen who constantly have to pull the Federation up by a rope (with their teeth) to get it to do anything.
A running theme throughout his Opinionated Guides is the utter incompetence and bureaucratic tedium of the Federation. Starfleet is more likely to let an entire planet die than file the paperwork necessary to save it, and The Dilbert Principle ensures that no ship is staffed by anyone remotely qualified.
He applies it on a grand scale to Star Trek V, saying the film works beautifully if you take it as a satire of Roddenberry's idea of a socialist utopia, with things like the military having a number of competent people you can count on one hand and a decades-old failed publicity stunt considered important enough to send all of them on. The only problem with that is that Gene Roddenberry was a populist, not a socialist.
It's easy to see a level of crush-like attraction in Dean's militaristic, obsessive devotion to his father. Especially since he can't even comprehend disobeying him and almost always loses all backbone when his dad is nearby. That's not the only crush-like behavior on the show. There's brotherly love, and then there are the Winchesters. Y'all can say things like that because you never saw your grandfather rule your father and uncles like John Winchester led his boys. When granddad said do something, it got done. Not a crush—unswerving, dysfunctional loyalty.
Dean and Sam's relationship with their father is a direct parallel of the classical Christian relationship with God, with Dean as the dutiful son and Sam as the heretic vying for independence. Not too far off from the Paradise Lost's depictions of Micheal and Lucifer, though that poem is also rife with alternate interpretations. Holy foreshadowing, Batman! That technically is the point of that plot arc though. They were chosen as the vessels for Michael and Lucifer because the relationship they shared with each other and their father was parallel to that shared between Michael, Lucifer, and God.
The Amulet-Giving in "A Very Supernatural Christmas": A heartwarming moment where Sam realizes just how awesome Dean is and how crappy his father is in comparison, or a disheartening moment where Dean gets something just because John wasn't there? Depending on how much depression you can take, both options are believable.
Dean's devil deal: A heroic sacrifice born out of love for his brother, or the selfish act of a codependent depressive who knows firsthand the emotional devastation it will cause but does it anyway? Characters on the show say it's the latter.
Ruby: Before she died along with Dean in the third season finale and came back in the fourth, was she really planning all that stuff in the fourth season with Lilith since the beginning? Or when she died her personality took a 360 in the middle of seasons 3 & 4? And her relationship with Sam; Was she really in love with him or just using him? Or maybe she really did die at the end of season 3 and it was a new demon just pretending to be Ruby.
Is Dean the straightest most boob-lovingest man ever to be heterosexual? Or is he overcompensating and in denial about his sexuality? He's straight and overcompensating, canonically. Remember, he has a somewhat inaccurate view of "manliness", and when he does sleep with women, he's a gentle lover, somewhat at odds with his macho-macho act, which would stereotypically hit'em and quit 'em.
John Winchester: A good man who, under difficult circumstances, did the best he could for his kids? Or a pitiful, borderline abusive parent who made too many mistakes and messed up Sam and Dean for life? From what Bobby said about the John/Sam rift in the fourth season finale, maybe he doesn't have that high of an opinion of John's parenting either.
Archangel Michael: As big a dick as Lucifer and Raphael, or a Well-Intentioned Extremist who can't see eye-to-eye with the protagonists due to Blue and Orange Morality? Unlike many of the other angels, he never expresses any disdain for humanity — only Dean in particular after he refuses to cooperate with Heaven's plan — and his reason for wanting the apocalypse to happen is mostly Because God Says So. Also, from his point of view humanity has nothing to lose, since he's sure he will beat Lucifer, and once he's won the survivors will all live in Paradise Earth while anyone who dies in the battle can go to Heaven.
Was the Death who appeared in "I Think I'm Gonna Like It Here" the real deal, or just another figment of Sam's imagination? His actor, Julian Richings, supports the latter interpretation.
Cameron from Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles. We know that she is capable of feeling emotions — she becomes very emotional whenever she becomes Allison Young — but she generally suppresses them whenever she's in her main persona. To make things even more confusing, she is apparently capable of realistically faking any human emotion. Even that can't explain all of her behavior; she sometimes behaves emotionally even when no one is watching. It makes sense to think that she does have emotions, but they are secondary to her primary function: protect John Connor at any cost. Even more complicated yet—a lack of emotional behavior on her part might indicate emotions. In one episode, Cameron displayed flat, monotonous, sincere concern for John's mental health and happiness, contrasted with another Terminator perfectly faking normal, human affection. It is actually up in the air as to whether Cameron truly does care for John's emotional well-being, or if she is simply a cold machine that knowingly manipulates his emotions and feelings in order to keep him safe. Both concepts have their support in canon, as Cameron does seem to care about John, but at the same time there are several scenes which show her using both his feelings for her and his feelings for others to manipulate him.
The gang of Eric, Donna, Hyde, Jackie, Michael and Fez of That '70s Show ; Morons who make bad decisions or just people who grew up in crappy families and neglectful/abusive parents and did their best to do the right thing?
In Eric's case though, Red sure isn't the greatest father, how would you take being called dumbass, overbearing and coddling mother and have a whore of a sister that's favored by your father everyday of your life?
One interpretation of Red is that he really cares about Eric, but he's unhappy with his own mediocre life and doesn't want Eric to turn out the way he did. When Eric wanted to marry Donna, Red kept interfering and making his life miserable. When Eric stood up to him, Red told him that it was a test, to see if Eric had the guts to stand on his own.
Rachel from This Life: a sneaky manipulator who intentionally winds up Millie? Or a sweet girl who is the object of Millie's paranoia and jealousy?
It has Ianto Jones. Meek tea-boy, or a secretive Badass Normal who conned the con man? Ianto was originally intended as a much darker character, how much of this lingers on?
Captain Jack can also be seen from an Anti-hero to a borderline monster.
The entire team. A group of highly skilled specialists defending the Earth from aliens or a bunch of selfish twits who are the very cause of the dangers they're supposed to be protecting humanity from.
True Blood: For a supposedly reformed Friendly Neighbourhood Vampire, Bill sure does kill a lot of people he doesn't necessarily have to, but he's pretty easy to interpret in comparison with Sookie. For one, why does somebody that can fight off two hardened criminals with a metal chain need to be rescued so much? Why does she throw herself into so many situations where she needs to be rescued? Most of the time, when Bill (or Sam, in the first series) comes to her aid, does she need it, or is she obfuscating vulnerability? Why did she tell Bill about her paedophile uncle after she knew he'd already killed two people that had threatened her (the Rattraes)? Did she tell him because she secretly wanted revenge, because she genuinely believed he wouldn't act and it would build trust between them, or because she wasn't sure and wanted to see his reaction? Why did she tell the Vampires that visited Bill's house that the man they were drinking was carrying a vampire disease. She must have known exactly what they would do to him when they found out. She carelessly outed telepathic barhop at the vampire hotel even though she must have known at that point that doing this to an unprotected human with an ability that was useful to the vampires, would most likely be enslaved, manipulated into doing unethical things and risk death. She's not the innocent Southern Belle she imagines herself to be, and that the writers try to present her as.
Even in her personal relationships, there's a real question about how innocent and sweet she really is. For example, her treatment of Sam is frequently manipulative and mean. Whether you choose to view Sam as a Dogged Nice Guy (pun unintended), or just as a boss with a tendency to sexually harass his female employees, he genuinely cares about Sookie and tries to act in her best interests. In turn, she continually manipulates his romantic feelings in order to achieve a variety of ends: to make Bill jealous,to have a sounding board for her own problems (without reciprocating by being interested in him), to get time off work for her vampire-based escapades and as a free body guard. When he confesses his deepest and most painful secret to her — which he had never told anybody before as its discovery had resulted in familial abandonment — she loses it, because he didn't tell her sooner. It wasn't that she needed to know for any reason, just that she was curious and bored, and felt like she was entitled to the information.
Chelsea: Creator's Pet of the show because she's kind of a bitch but everyone loves her or a well meaning person who's trying to improve Charlie's attitude towards Alan but really doesn't have a clue about how damaged they are?
Veronica is schizophrenic. Think about it: in "Kanes and Abel's," she, while fully awake and aware, sees and has an extended conversation with the long-dead Lilly Kane. Seeing things and hearing voices is practically the definition of schizophrenia. And she has at least some of the symptoms of paranoia. Plus, she is in her late teens; that is generally the earliest schizophrenia manifests. Also, consider that schizophrenia can often be an inherited condition, and that her mother was an alcoholic. Maybe Lianne Mars was self-medicating for her own symptoms. Lastly, consider what Aaron Echolls says in the season one finale when he has Veronica trapped in the fridge: he goes on this whole rant about Joan of Arc and how the voices she heard were really symptoms of schizophrenia. Why would that occur to him? What if Veronica is a highly organized, high-functioning schizophrenic?
Alternatively, Veronica a full-on Alpha Bitch who's fall from grace only served to give her an excuse to hone her bitchery to new heights of life ruining and that once she won back the few people who's opinion of her actually mattered (IE Logan and Duncan), she was willing to return to her life as one of the popular crowd. Only her morality pet Wallace being framed for drug abuse caused her to return to fighting evil and then, once she got into college, Veronica still wormed her way into all of the right social circles and crusading against the little guy.
Sheriff Don Lamb: Is he an insufferable Small Name, Big Ego with delusions of grandeur or simply a good cop who has been made cynical and uncaring? It's quite clear that Neptune lets many of its richer residents get away with crimes up to and including Murder and the Sheriff's department is unable to do anything about it. (When he tried, Keith was ousted from his job). In the first episode, he is coldly dismissive of Veronica's rape claim, but at that time Veronica was still kind part of the popular scene, and we see later that Lamb had good reason to think she was crying wolf. Which is to say nothing of Lamb's backstory: abusive parents and seeing his boss and friend fired for trying to do his job. He does do the right thing when he can (letting Veronica and Duncan go when he saw the abuse in the Manning household) and given Veronica's jerkass tendencies and deliberate flouting of the law, it's easy to see his dislike of her. Under further examination, he comes across more as the Knight In Sour Armor rather than the monster we are clearly supposed to see him as.
Is Tori sweet, innocent and just trying to be normal without conflict? Or is she a bitchy and unsympathetic Jerk Sue who rivals the likes of Megan Parker, and needs to be taught a lesson? No episode asks this question better than "Prom Wrecker", where Tori's prom renders Jade unable to perform her art project, and when confronted, Tori shows no signs of caring or remorse, while at the end Jade (who tries to destroy the prom as revenge for such) is the only character to receive punishment. This caused an outrage among Tori haters and a few Tori fans themselves. There are some fans who seem to interpret Tori's actions and try to find any possible negative in them:
"The Birthweek Song": Was Trina really a shallow, Ungrateful Bitch for stating that Tori's performance of an original song (written exclusively for her) didn't qualify as a present, or was Tori's performance making herself the center of attention despite supposing to be about Trina?
"Rex Dies": Was Tori's "revival" of Rex a Heartwarming Moment towards Robbie, or was Jade in the right believing Rex's "death" would improve Robbie's mental health while Tori's actions prevented that?
Jade. Is she the cruel AlphaBitch she acts like, and is simply cruel, harsh and undeserving of the relationships and friendships she has, or is it all just a cover-up to hide her insecurities?
Andre dating Hope just to get her father to listen to her music: Was Andre stepping into the Ryder Daniels horizon just to get recognized, or was it justified for having to put up with Hope's bitchiness?
Part of the latter might be true. In Slap Fight, Robbie says he hates himself for the way he acted, only for Cat to point out that he's hated himself for years.
Or is Robbie really not in control of Rex's words and actions, i.e. Rex is an alternate personality?
Much like Alan Harper, is Robbie a Jerkass that deserves to be a Butt-Monkey, or does the universe constantly screwing him over justify his behavior?
Tori and Trina's parents being apathetic towards Tori and borderline abusive towards Trina. They leave town so they don't have to deal with Trina after after surgery, tell her to her face that they are ignoring her, and clearly favor Tori. Mrs. Vega, at least, is not too much better to Tori; flaunting that she made breakfast and telling Tori she has to make it herself, then bragging about how she used up all the ingredients herself so Tori cannot make breakfast after all. She also tells Tori she'll be there for her when Tori is having a crisis, then tells her to close her eyes and leaves.
Indeed, given that it's by nature a political show, any action that President Bartlet takes will inevitably be viewed through the individual political lens of each viewer. Fans who are inclined to disagree with Bartlet's policies are free to speculate that the actual results of Bartlet's actions would be far less rosy than he and his staff believe...and since the actual on-the-ground results of his policies are usually only alluded to through the filter of Bartlet's in-universe political staffers and not actually seen most of the time, it's entirely possible that this technically could be true in-universe.
Many fans view Josh as an insufferable jerkass who isn't nearly as smart as he believes himself to be, and he's often the one who causes trouble for the Bartlet Administration through his own blundering. Others think of him as The Ace.
The Wire is full of these, in no small part due to the complexity of its characters. In particular:
Is Detective Jimmy McNulty the Only Sane Man in a city full of police officers who have lost their way, or is he a dangerously unhinged Knight Templar with no regard for the law? For that matter, does he truly care about trying to help the people of Baltimore, or is police work just an ego trip for him?
Is Stringer Bell a soulless, Machiavellian criminal mastermind who only cares about profit, or is he a Noble Demon who tries to bring some much-needed dignity and integrity into the criminal underworld that he was born into? In the end, did he meet a Karmic Death after telling one lie too many, or did he meet a tragic death after futilely trying to improve his station in life?
Is Omar Little a bona fide modern-day Robin Hood (and the closest thing Baltimore has to a genuine hero) or is he just another crook who profits off of the drug trade and causes chaos for the simple thrill of it?
Is Tommy Carcetti a sellout, or is he a well-meaning politician who is forced to make compromises due to events beyond his control?
An unofficial fanguide to The X-Files argues that Mulder and Scully don't actually represent faith versus logic, they represent subjective reality versus objective reality. Scully is the one who really believes that "the truth is out there", and that the logical explanation remains true even if everyone casts it aside for fantasy. (She's just unfortunate enough to be in a setting where there may not be an objective reality.) Mulder, meanwhile, believes that whatever he thinks is the truth must necessarily be the truth. He gets an idea regarding aliens or monsters, and he holds onto it no matter what, baffled that nobody else agrees with him when he's "obviously" right. This one goes a long way towards explaining Mulder and Scully's tendency to switch believer-skeptic roles when confronted with cases that have a religious basis (unless we just assume that Mulder's skepticism towards Christianity is a combination of being Ambiguously Jewish and having a trauma from having a little sister abducted). One omniscient creator god actually fits much better into Scully's objective reality than it does to Mulder's subjective, anything-weird-goes reality.
Is Jack Bauer a Tragic Hero who always fights on for the greater good and still has a clear conscience in spite of the questionable tactics he employs, or a borderline Ax-Crazy loose cannon Sociopathic Hero who is just as bad as the terrorists he fights against?
Renee Walker in the last two seasons. Did she finally wake up to reality and do what really needed to be done, or did she lose her sanity and went Jumping Off the Slippery Slope at the end of the penultimate season?
Game of Thrones: In a blink-and-you'll-miss-it scene in "The Lion And The Rose", when Joffrey starts to choke, Tywin Lannister moves across the table and embraces his grandson Tommen. Was this a rare Pet the Dog moment that shows Tywin truly does care for his family as people and not just a name, or merely him being so pragmatic that his response to seeing the King die is to immediately move to protect the next heir?
Renly in the series is changed very much from the book Renly, who is basically just a sleazy vain usurper with good publicity. In the TV series him attempting to take the throne is more due to persuasion from his lover Ser Loras Tyrell. He comes across as one of the nicest characters and really seems devoted to being a good and kind King. Also him knowing of the illegitimacy of Cersei's children takes away his Evil Uncle aspect. Yet despite this the fact remains that Renly, like in the books, was willing to usurp his brother in an act that blatantly went against the succession laws of the realm and was willing to kill his brother to do so. This, despite being offered very reasonable terms by Stannis that would have allowed Renly to help make the realm better and would have probably made him King anyway eventually.
Power Rangers in Space: Is Astronema really another Rita and Zedd type villain, or really a Distaff Counterpart to Auric the Conqueror? Both were tricked into doing evil deeds by the series' Big Bad and wanted to make amends afterwards, even becoming one of the team. Although in Auric's case, he didn't have the Machine Empire spending a decade feeding him lies about the Power Rangers and Zordon. Astronema midway through In Space voluntarily did a HeelFace Turn until she was forcibly brainwashed by the Bigbad Dark Specter. Imagine if the Machine Empire had thought to use cybernetic implants to brainwash Auric. One key to this is how despite the season having undergone Cerebus Syndrome, she never pushes the show into Vile Villain, Saccharine Show territory, even after becoming Brainwashed and Crazy.
And after becoming borg-i-fied, did she really become The Starscream due to being so evil that it was a Gone Horribly Right moment for Dark Spector, or was she actually only brainwashed back into being an Anti-VillainNoble Top Enforcer but retained enough humanity that she knew Dark Spector was too evil for her to support and must be stopped? Notice the first thing she did was get rid of Darkonda. Could she have been the one behind Darkonda and Dark Spector killing each other? Granted, cyborg Astronema was hardly a saint but still showed way more humanity than either of those two.