Audience-Alienating Premise cleanup

I suspect conservatism. FWIW I watched that movie and I loved it (and I'm not at all conservative, I'm a socialist,) but I think a better indicator for the film's entry would be if it failed or not. Was the movie unsuccessful as a result of its premise?

Edited by themayorofsimpleton on Feb 13th 2021 at 9:51:12 AM

Not sure putting this under Unfortunate Implications is a good idea if the whole thing is meant to be a dig at generalizing an entire political movement (I'm socialist as well but I'd also have issues if something Sinclair was used to bash my political field in its entirety like that).

I wasn't saying it should go under Unfortunate Implications. I was just saying it wouldn't fit Audience-Alienating Premise if the work was successful, which is what we need to find out.

EDIT: According to Wikipedia, Bombshell had a budget of $32 million, and a worldwide box office total of $61.4 million. Not a failure, so it doesn't count.

Edited by themayorofsimpleton on Feb 13th 2021 at 11:29:06 AM

I think the Bombshell thing could work as a UI entry if it focused more specifically on the people depicted in the film, though I’m not sure if that would still be ROCEJ-violating or not.

Reposting from the previous page:

Bringing up the following example from Malcolm & Marie:

• Audience-Alienating Premise: The entire movie is basically one long argument scene. For many, this is a major turnoff.

I don't know, that seems like a ZCE, but I'm not 100% sure. Any other thoughts?

I'm not sure if I buy that it's a ZCE, as that sounds like it could be an accurate description. An argument as an entire movie doesn't sound especially thrilling tbh.

Ah, OK. Just wanted to double check.

Doesn't AAP require the work to fail? The movie got a lukewarm reception from critics, but as Netflix doesn't release viewing numbers in most cases, one cannot tell if Malcolm & Marie actually alienated audiences.

Fair point, though one that is impossible to validate due to what you mentioned about Netflix statistics. In their absence, I’d say lukewarm reception does point toward AAP in this case due to it still being a premise most would probably not have interest int. I’m not invested in keeping it AAP though so if others disagree that’s fine.

Bringing up the following example from The Playboy Club:

• Audience-Alienating Premise: Much of the show's undoing came from its premise that portrayed being a Playboy Bunny as somehow being a liberating experience during the women's rights movement and change in gender attitudes in The '60s, which was seen as an epic case of Completely Missing The Point. As one reviewer for The AV Club stated in a review comparing the show with Pan Am:^note The quote is in the comments section in the linked article
  Meredith Blake: [...] [D]o I have to point out how dressing up in a skimpy rabbit costume is slightly more degrading than wearing a powder blue suit? […] [Y]es, The Playboy Club is about 10 times worse because it's actually pretending that being a bunny was somehow a liberating experience.

Even if the example is legit, it is way too complain-y as written. Might need a rewrite if it is legit at all.

There shouldn’t be a pothole to Completely Missing The Point either. Seems plausible as an example though.

Bringing up the following example from YMMV.Yu Gi Oh The Movie Pyramid Of Light:

• Audience-Alienating Premise: Though fans liked it, the main problem with the movie was that it couldn't appeal to anyone else. To those who never saw the series, this movie is really hard to get into.

That applies to a good deal of anime movies (and series movies in general). Just move it to Continuity Lock-Out.

This Values Dissonance entry for Ride with the Devil sounds like it would better fit Audience-Alienating Premise but I would some consensus before I go ahead and add it.

Sounds like a rare accurate example of AAP.

I’ll take that as a green light.

The only entry on YMMV.Yeezus is an Audience-Alienating Premise example. The album went double platinum in the USA, and performed well in Denmark, Australia, and the UK. On top of that, it's written more like a Broken Base example. I'd fix it up myslf, but I'm not familiar enough with Kanye West to do so.

Edited by GoldenCityBird on Mar 27th 2021 at 9:14:08 AM

Bringing up the following example from The Zero Theorem:

• Audience-Alienating Premise: The film proved difficult to market and unless you're a fan of Terry Gilliam or dystopian stories, this was probably not your cup of tea.

Broken Base definitely fits better. I listen to Kanye a lot and I'm involved in the music world a bit, and I can definitely say that Yeezus is divisive. For just one example, Anthony Fantano did a review in which he gave the album a 5 out of 10, and got 19,000 likes and 10,000 dislikes in the process, and I'm sure you could find more if you looked around the internet. Definitely not Audience-Alienating Premise, I'll say that.

Without proof of it failing to attract an audience, it's not an example. Delete or add context to it.

I did my best to re-tool it.

Bringing up an example from YMMV.Date A Live:

• Audience-Alienating Premise: The concept of dating powerful supernatural girls to seal their powers was seen as a turn off by most people in the west, who pegged the series as being just another silly Widget Series. However, this is slowly starting to change as the introduction of Kurumi and Westcott took the series in a much darker and serious turn.

Far as I know it's quite a popular series here in the west, and if it was just in the west, wouldn't that be Americans Hate Tingle or similar?

I don't even see how the concept is inherently alienating, as some people like silly anime like that. Plus the entry says "starting to change" which violates Examples Are Not Recent. Maybe it better fits something like And You Thought It Would Fail if people expected it to be another run of the mill anime that was better than they thought?

Found this example under Live-Action TV:

• This is the reason Roundhouse isn't as popular as other 90's Nickelodeon shows. It's one part teen sitcom and one part Sketch Comedy, on a mainly barebones set with an ensemble cast of 12-15 actors telling a story using cardboard props (ironically, it was the most expensive of Nick's shows at the time as a lot of said cardboard props were mostly for one scene/joke). Add to that all the radar-dodging, parental bonuses and surprisingly awesome music, and few people knew what to make of it. It somehow managed to last four seasons. While many other Nickelodeon shows from the 1990s (including fellow SNICK stablemates Clarissa Explains It All, The Ren & Stimpy Show and Are You Afraid of the Dark?) remain hugely popular in The New '10s, Roundhouse has to settle for Cult Classic status.

The way it is written, it sounds like simply "it didn't do as well as Nickelodeon's greatest hits" rather than alienating — and it lasted four seasons. Should I cut this?