Overuse of character deaths on TV?

[spanky87]

It seems that like 9 times out of 10 I read about some shocking spoiler it turns out to be that...a character died.

Is that all TV series writers today can really do to shock viewers? It seems like every week there's a character death on TV. Aren't people getting numb at this point? It just seems like a gimmick and cheap way to write an actor off most of the time. When certain shows do it too frequently it loses it's impact.

Not even in early 2000's was it this excessive. I remember watching Buffy the Vampire and whenever a character died on the series it was truly shocking, and it didn't happen all the time. Upon reflection it seemed like a well planned out decision that either brought the series to another level, gave proper closure to a character/story-arc, advanced storylines, or all of the above. And even when one main cast member left the show they weren't just killed off randomly.

Nowadays it seems to just happen because there needs to be a shock in a season finale or an actor decided to leave the show.

Well you get my drift. What do you think?

[remake]

Pretty Little Liars is known for using death as a "shock" but turns out to be the exact opposite. Season 5 just started and there's already been 7 deaths (including a character who faked their death) from the beginning of the show until now.

A lot of the shows I watched had someone die in their last/current seasons as well: True Blood (although it's like 100 people die every episode but recently it was someone major), Degrassi (a suicide last season, a character dying by texting and driving this season), Arrow, Teen Wolf (one of my favorite characters but I don't blame her for leaving because of her age), and The Tomorrow People.

[JeffTheMovieGuy]

I think that adds to the difference between basic cable tv shows and premium channel tv shows like the ones that are shown on HBO.

Premium channel shows are usually given the end date ahead of time and it gives the shows creators enough time to really outline the storylines, important character arcs and development. Yes some will end in death but its after the character's run though his or her 1 to 2 season long arc.

I wish there were more character deaths that actually served a purpose in character development instead of the actor getting a big break and leaving the show.

[Show spoiler]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7vW1oEKP1k

[Show spoiler]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jzv_TxJLzRw

[BluProofie]

Major character deaths are usually only done well on HBO and Showtime shows or by Joss Whedon. It seems like since Game of Thrones and The Walking Dead made the "no one is safe" rule popular, crappy network shows now poorly try to use it.

[Todd Tomorrow]

While I appreciate that Game of Thrones is only true the books, I find that so many entertaining or interesting characters have been killed off by now that the series has become a little less compelling for me.

[Show spoiler]Joffrey may have been the most loathsome character of any TV series ever and the series is less fun without his petty sadism.

The one series that genuinely surprised and shocked me when a lead character was killed of was

[Show spoiler]Will in The Good Wife

, because that's a series who doesn't usually do that type of thing. Great season though, its best yet.

[theprestige85]

Originally Posted by spanky87

It seems that like 9 times out of 10 I read about some shocking spoiler it turns out to be that...a character died.

Is that all TV series writers today can really do to shock viewers? It seems like every week there's a character death on TV. Aren't people getting numb at this point? It just seems like a gimmick and cheap way to write an actor off most of the time. When certain shows do it too frequently it loses it's impact.

Not even in early 2000's was it this excessive. I remember watching Buffy the Vampire and whenever a character died on the series it was truly shocking, and it didn't happen all the time. Upon reflection it seemed like a well planned out decision that either brought the series to another level, gave proper closure to a character/story-arc, advanced storylines, or all of the above. And even when one main cast member left the show they weren't just killed off randomly.

Nowadays it seems to just happen because there needs to be a shock in a season finale or an actor decided to leave the show.

Well you get my drift. What do you think?

Excellent post, spanky. I had actually thought of making a similar thread last week.

It all comes down to laziness and a lack of confidence combined with creativity. I honestly believe it is as simple as that.

Game Of Thrones is the worst offender. I sort of HAVE to watch the show because my girlfriend is into Tolkien and all that bollocks, but never have I seen these major character death gimmicks used for dear life on a show. I've mentioned it on other threads (much to the dismay of many of it's fans) but such overused techniques exposes Got and other similiar shows as extremely superficial. With shows like got I hear/read about is how someone is glad somebody died or that they are sad one of their favourites got killed off in the most fetishly gruesome way possible.

Like you said, when Whedon and co used it for Buffy & Angel, it was to terrific effect. It wasn't all the time, it wasn't the only thing in their tool box and it would often make sense. The season 2 episode, Passion, for example, is a bit of a game changer in a season full of game changers.

[Show spoiler]Jenny Calender's death is not only the first time the show kills of a major character, but it also changes the outlook of all of our protagonists as well as the spectator's views on Angelus. If we thought Angelus was a nasty piece of work prior to Passion, we find out he is the definition of a monster afterwards. It very cleverly forces us to consider how far we would go to support a fan favourite. The worst thing about the death, however, is it's devasting effects of Giles. The scene where Angelus has left Jenny's lifeless body on Giles' bed all the while leaving romantic gestures like roses and candles throughout the house so that Giles would think he was in for a wonderful reunion with Jenny is far more disturbing and painful than all the deaths on got put together. And they barely used blood, too.

There are HUGE consequences and character shaping during and after that episode and the show never feels the same again (in a good way).

What happened in Game Of Thrones after, say, The Viper bloke got killed? There wasn't even any mention of it! We never see the despair that his wife (the bird from Luther) and it turns out that it does nothing for the story anyway. That scene was for that episode and that episode only. Something to give the audience something to talk about so that they will tune into the next season. It's rubbish, mate.

I agree with you 110%

[BluProofie]

Originally Posted by theprestige85

Excellent post, spanky. I had actually thought of making a similar thread last week.

It all comes down to laziness and a lack of confidence combined with creativity. I honestly believe it is as simple as that.

Game Of Thrones is the worst offender. I sort of HAVE to watch the show because my girlfriend is into Tolkien and all that bollocks, but never have I seen these major character death gimmicks used for dear life on a show. I've mentioned it on other threads (much to the dismay of many of it's fans) but such overused techniques exposes Got and other similiar shows as extremely superficial.

The show simply follows the books, so it sounds like your problem is with George R. R. Martin.

[Agent Bond]

It was annoying on True Blood, but Games Of Thrones went overboard with it.

[BluProofie]

Originally Posted by Agent Bond

It was annoying on True Blood, but Games Of Thrones went overboard with it.

Again, the showrunners of GoT are just adapting the books. If they changed character deaths, book fans would just complain(and they still do).

[Todd Tomorrow]

Originally Posted by BluProofie

Again, the showrunners of GoT are just adapting the books. If they changed character deaths, book fans would just complain(and they still do).

The characters they've killed off weren't even essential to the main story(Ned, Catelyn, Robb, The Hound, Tywin, Shae, Ygritte were all expendable).

Yes, everybody knows that, but as it's a TV show it can still be talked about a such.

What makes GoT work so well is its many interweaving stories and it's characters and how they plot against each other. It's not like I just sit there, impatiently waiting how "the main story" pans out.

From what I gather the next two books to feature in the series are far less popular among fans and I can see why. Many of the more entertaining characters are not around anymore.

[Foggy]

Originally Posted by BluProofie

Again, the showrunners of GoT are just adapting the books. If they changed character deaths, book fans would just complain(and they still do).

The characters they've killed off weren't even essential to the main story

[Show spoiler](Ned, Catelyn, Robb, The Hound, Tywin, Shae, Ygritte were all expendable).

Weren't essential?!?!?!? Their deaths have SHAPED the narrative the show.

[kpkelley]

Originally Posted by Agent Bond

It was annoying on True Blood, but Games Of Thrones went overboard with it.

Oh, the irony! One of my biggest issues with True Blood is that a popular character who is killed at the end of season one(as well as book one) is revived to start season two, because of his popularity. The show went way off track in later seasons trying to keep the character relevant, now it bears no resemblance to it's source material.

[Agent Bond]

Again, the showrunners of GoT are just adapting the books. If they changed character deaths, book fans would just complain(and they still do).

Its still ridiculous.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by BluProofie

The show simply follows the books, so it sounds like your problem is with George R. R. Martin.

I can somewhat understand why people think that Game of Thrones goes overboard with killing off major characters, but I don't even think that you can blame GRRM. He's patterned the series after real history (mostly, but not exclusively, the War of the Roses), and history is just chock full of death. GRRM is just pointing out the obvious: bad shït happens to good people, often (hell, usually) completely randomly and with no purpose.

Except that in GRRM's story, the deaths aren't without purpose. Even this:

What happened in Game Of Thrones after, say, The Viper bloke got killed? There wasn't even any mention of it! We never see the despair that his wife (the bird from Luther) and it turns out that it does nothing for the story anyway. That scene was for that episode and that episode only. Something to give the audience something to talk about so that they will tune into the next season. It's rubbish, mate.

It's not completely wrong to say that Viper's death was "for that episode..." and "something to give the audience something to talk about", but it is wrong to say that "it does nothing for the story". It had a significant impact on what happened to Tyrion. And whether Tyrion lives or dies, or stays in King's Landing or escapes off to somewhere else will have a significant impact on what happens in Westeros at large, because Tyrion is a major player.

And that's what a lot of people didn't understand about Ned Stark's death at the end of Season 1. It wasn't just that it was a shock to see the death of not just a major character, but someone that most viewers saw as the major character. It was that pretty much everything that happens after that point happened because Ned Stark was executed. And each major death after that point just compounds that. It was the sound that starts an avalanche.

Me, I disagree with the initial point of the thread. If anything, I don't think there are enough characters dying on TV. For decades in popular fiction especially series fiction (whether books, comics, movies, or TV) we've gotten used to the idea that if you're an important character, nothing truly bad will ever happen to you. I think what we're seeing now is a reaction against that. A sense of "real life doesn't care if you're a major character".

I wonder if Shakespeare ever got complaints about killing off major characters in every other play.

Oh, and

Originally Posted by theprestige85

I sort of HAVE to watch the show because my girlfriend is into Tolkien and all that bollocks

Sounds like your problem isn't so much with Game of Thrones itself, but that you don't like fantasy (which you apparently think is "bollocks") and are reacting to feeling compelled to watch it because of your girlfriend.

My suggestion: man up and tell your girlfriend you don't want to watch something you don't like. I never really understood that kind of thing. My wife and I have some things we both like and watch together, but there are other things that she likes and watches that I don't, and things that I like and watch that she doesn't. Neither of us feels compelled to watch something just because the other one likes it, and neither of us wants to compel the other to watch something they don't like just because we like it.

[sycro]

Originally Posted by theprestige85

What happened in Game Of Thrones after, say, The Viper bloke got killed? There wasn't even any mention of it! We never see the despair that his wife (the bird from Luther) and it turns out that it does nothing for the story anyway. That scene was for that episode and that episode only. Something to give the audience something to talk about so that they will tune into the next season. It's rubbish, mate.

Read the damn books before you complain about the payoff. They had 2 episodes after that, but trust me, it wasn't for nothing. I'm sorry that you can't follow more than 2 story arcs at once, but GoT has way too many to focus on

[Show spoiler]Oberyn's

death in the last 2 episodes.

[theprestige85]

Originally Posted by sycro

Read the damn books before you complain about the payoff. They had 2 episodes after that, but trust me, it wasn't for nothing. I'm sorry that you can't follow more than 2 story arcs at once, but GoT has way too many to focus on

[Show spoiler]Oberyn's

death in the last 2 episodes.

I'm not saying that they should have completely concentrated on

[Show spoiler]Oberyn's death

but, come on, they could have at least had a few scenes where Ellaria Sand (thank you kpkelley) reflects on what's happened or something.

[theprestige85]

It's not completely wrong to say that Viper's death was "for that episode..." and "something to give the audience something to talk about", but it is wrong to say that "it does nothing for the story". It had a significant impact on what happened to Tyrion. And whether Tyrion lives or dies, or stays in King's Landing or escapes off to somewhere else will have a significant impact on what happens in Westeros at large, because Tyrion is a major player.

Dunno mate, I just don't see how it did. The fact that Kingslayer just decides to release Tyrion with ease shows that the death of Oberyn was for nothing. The odds weren't exactly in Oberyn's favour prior to the fight, why wait to release him until after??

And that's what a lot of people didn't understand about Ned Stark's death at the end of Season 1. It wasn't just that it was a shock to see the death of not just a major character, but someone that most viewers saw as the major character. It was that pretty much everything that happens after that point happened because Ned Stark was executed. And each major death after that point just compounds that. It was the sound that starts an avalanche.

Yeah, see I would agree THAT was a reasonable justified killing off a major character. As you say, it has shaped the characters and the series in a way that wouldn't be possible had he been left to live. But then they got trigger happy and now it's an awful gimmick. Notice how each of the other characters death get more and more gruesome too, as if to say 'Ned Stark's death was pussies, wait till you see this, folks!' It's just dodgy business, mate.

Me, I disagree with the initial point of the thread. If anything, I don't think there are enough characters dying on TV. For decades in popular fiction especially series fiction (whether books, comics, movies, or TV) we've gotten used to the idea that if you're an important character, nothing truly bad will ever happen to you. I think what we're seeing now is a reaction against that. A sense of "real life doesn't care if you're a major character".

That's interesting, I think it's definitely the other way around for me. I've gotten used to seeing characters dying as some knee jerk reaction to get more ratings that it always surprises me when I haven't seen a death at the end of every season. It's one of the strengths of Mad Men. A show i'm not exactly in love with but do appreciate. Given it's setting and tone, you are very unlikely to see any deaths of characters. And the very few deaths that you do see or hear about are effective because it's a show that doesn't rely on it. It's just good old fashioned storytelling and character development that the show prides itself on, not characters dying at the end of the season.

The Wire was also a show that used character deaths sparingly, but then, that show was about SO much more than that.

Sounds like your problem isn't so much with Game of Thrones itself, but that you don't like fantasy (which you apparently think is "bollocks") and are reacting to feeling compelled to watch it because of your girlfriend.

Mate, look at my avatar! Of course I don't like fantasy. I LOVE fantasy. I've no problem with that genre at all. 'Fantasy is true', as Ursala K. Le Guin says. 'Not factual but true'. My problem with thrones has absolutely nothing to do with fantasy as so much as to do with a weakness storytelling

You alluded to Shakespeare telling off characters in his plays in defence of GoT. Difference is Shakespeare actually seemed to have sympathy and care for his own characters.

[thewerepuppygrr]

Originally Posted by theprestige85

That's interesting, I think it's definitely the other way around for me. I've gotten used to seeing characters dying as some knee jerk reaction to get more ratings that it always surprises me when I haven't seen a death at the end of every season. It's one of the strengths of Mad Men. A show i'm not exactly in love with but do appreciate. Given it's setting and tone, you are very unlikely to see any deaths of characters. And the very few deaths that you do see or hear about are effective because it's a show that doesn't rely on it. It's just good old fashioned storytelling and character development that the show prides itself on, not characters dying at the end of the season.

The Wire was also a show that used character deaths sparingly, but then, that show was about SO much more than that.

Mate, look at my avatar! Of course I don't like fantasy. I LOVE fantasy. I've no problem with that genre at all. 'Fantasy is true', as Ursala K. Le Guin says. 'Not factual but true'. My problem with thrones has absolutely nothing to do with fantasy as so much as to do with a weakness storytelling

You alluded to Shakespeare telling off characters in his plays in defence of GoT. Difference is Shakespeare actually seemed to have sympathy and care for his own characters.

None of the shows you mention are remotely similar to Game Of Thrones. If someone died every week in Mad Men, then it wouldn't make any sense - they don't exactly live in a dangerous environment. As I believe someone else here tried to point out to you, Thrones is set in a harsh, feudal environment where, in many circumstances, escaping death and tragedy is more difficult than being a victim of it. The entire story is a war - guess what? People die in wars. A lot.

To complain of a weakness in storytelling or to accuse Martin of having no sympathy for his characters is a narrow-minded opinion. Every death matters.

[Show spoiler]Obyryn's death has major repercussions later on. Robb and Catelyn's deaths are already affecting the lives of many characters, not least Arya and the Bolton family. The Hound may or may not be dead, but if he is, then it was to provide a further influence on Arya.

None of it is for naught. The significance of events may not be apparent to you right off the bat, but the ripples WILL resonate.

While I am happy to accept that there will be major character deaths in a show such as Thrones, in other shows it simply doesn't work. I agree major character deaths in Buffy (like JC and JS) were shocking and well done, but one that did my head in was Heroes. They kept introducing interesting people and then bumping them off before you even got a chance to see their full potential, and instead chose to kept the focus on tiresome people like the Petrellis. I think that was one of the major reasons Heroes went downhill so fast. Agents of SHIELD is in danger of succumbing to the same trend as well.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by theprestige85

Dunno mate, I just don't see how it did. The fact that Kingslayer just decides to release Tyrion with ease shows that the death of Oberyn was for nothing. The odds weren't exactly in Oberyn's favour prior to the fight, why wait to release him until after??

You're still focusing too narrowly, and I think that's the issue here. Unlike many (if not most) series, in which the each episode is largely a self-contained story, Game of Thrones needs to be looked at as a long (very long) serialization of one mega-story. The events don't happen in a vacuum. Something that happens now may not have any immediate repercussions, but may have considerable impact a ways down the road.

At any rate, the thing about the Viper/Mountain fight was that Oberyn actually did (much to a lot of people's surprise) have considerably good odds against the Mountain. It was his own obstinance that did him in. If he had just focused on killing the sonofabïtch instead of trying to make him confess, he'd've won.

As for the ease of Jamie freeing Tyrion, it was obvious that he was trying to play things by the book. He didn't want to commit treason (which is what he did) if he didn't have to. He succeeded in getting Tywin to agree to judge in Tyrion's favor, but then Tyrion's pride and obstinancy got the better of him, and that deal was screwed. Jamie freed Tyrion because it was the only card left to play. And that eventually led to Tyrion killing his father, which will have more repercussions.

Again, it's an avalanche. Something minor ends up causing major disaster, and it keeps getting worse and worse.

The Wire was also a show that used character deaths sparingly, but then, that show was about SO much more than that.

Oh, absolutely. For me, The Wire is the best TV show I've ever seen in roughly 55 years of watching TV. But that doesn't mean that every show needs to be and do the same things.

You alluded to Shakespeare telling off characters in his plays in defence of GoT. Difference is Shakespeare actually seemed to have sympathy and care for his own characters.

So does Martin. He's talked with great emotion how agonizing it was to write the Red Wedding scene, and did everything he could to put it off writing it until there was nothing else left to write for that book.

The biggest reason that readers/viewers don't like seeing characters they like getting killed off, is because in real life, you don't get to choose who lives and who dies (unless you're a ruthless dictator). The appeal of fiction is that the author does get to decide who lives and who dies, so a happily ever after ending is possible. The good people get to live, the bad people die. But an author who is honest with himself and his work knows that the story has its own ideas.

[Ajira316]

Originally Posted by theprestige85

Dunno mate, I just don't see how it did. The fact that Kingslayer just decides to release Tyrion with ease shows that the death of Oberyn was for nothing. The odds weren't exactly in Oberyn's favour prior to the fight, why wait to release him until after??.

I wouldn't say Oberyn died for nothing just yet. Dorne (where Oberyn is from) is going to be a major location for Season 5 and *Season 5 Casting Info Ahead (Some small spoilers)*

[Show spoiler]Prince Doran Martell (Oberyn's brother), Prince Trystane Martell (fiancé of Princess Marcella) are going to be major characters this season. They are also casting for the "Sand Snakes" (Oberyn's bastard daughters.)