Recent Trends in Media That You're Tired of Seeing

[vanguard333]

Tropes are tools; ultimately, it's about how they are used. However, often when one is used well, it inevitably spawns imitators who use it poorly, leading to storytelling trends that boom and then bust. I recently made a thread about storytelling tropes that you don't see often and would like to see appear more; this thread is the opposite: this is about storytelling tropes that you feel you see too often, even if they're used well, and that you think should appear less often.

Here's an example:

 

1. Timeline/Multiverse Stories:

For the past few years, there have been a ton of branching-timeline/multiverse stories: Into the Spider-verse, Across the Spider-verse, No Way Home, Everything Everywhere All at Once, Loki, Multiverse of Madness, Quantumania, The Flash, Hyrule Warriors: Age of Calamity, the Final Fantasy 7R project (Remake, Rebirth, and the untitled part 3), and even Fire Emblem Engage to some extent, for just a few of the many examples I could list. And I'm tired of them.

To be clear, I am not saying that all these examples are bad or that timeline/multiverse stories are inherently bad: Into the Spider-verse and Everything Everywhere All at Once were great movies that did a good job handling their multiverse stories, and I have yet to see Across the Spider-verse, but I've heard that it's really good. What I'm trying to say is that there has been a ton of them recently, and, for a lot of them, the timeline/multiverse aspect hurts more than it helps, and the timeline/multiverse aspect is sometimes stapled on to a story that would've been better without it.

[Etrurian emperor]

I've been pretty tired of multiverse stories for a while now with Bayonetta 3 being the point I got most annoyed with it. FF7 gets kind of a pass since it doesn't really adhere to the multiverse style. Its just the same story told a bit different rather than ''Wutai Sephirot and Shinra executive Barret'' 

[Imuabicus der Fertige]

Not an inherent trend to media in itself, but the great majority of fans and the degree to which headcanons and the actually presented media itself are being intermixed. I made a very angry comment about something similar in the General Unpopular Opinions thread.

I am so fucking thankful, that SF only goes through hyper-activity when a new game comes out, or someone throws shade towards their favorite boy Dmitri or their gal Edelgardand and that the shittier less interesting discussions can be steerad clear from thanks to individual topics... as bad as it might be to say, as a member of this board, I so very much appreciate it´s... low tempo, is how I´d put it.

[Jotari]

9 hours ago, vanguard333 said:

Tropes are tools; ultimately, it's about how they are used. However, often when one is used well, it inevitably spawns imitators who use it poorly, leading to storytelling trends that boom and then bust. I recently made a thread about storytelling tropes that you don't see often and would like to see appear more; this thread is the opposite: this is about storytelling tropes that you feel you see too often, even if they're used well, and that you think should appear less often.

Here's an example:

 

1. Timeline/Multiverse Stories:

For the past few years, there have been a ton of branching-timeline/multiverse stories: Into the Spider-verse, Across the Spider-verse, No Way Home, Everything Everywhere All at Once, Loki, Multiverse of Madness, Quantumania, The Flash, Hyrule Warriors: Age of Calamity, the Final Fantasy 7R project (Remake, Rebirth, and the untitled part 3), and even Fire Emblem Engage to some extent, for just a few of the many examples I could list. And I'm tired of them.

To be clear, I am not saying that all these examples are bad or that timeline/multiverse stories are inherently bad: Into the Spider-verse and Everything Everywhere All at Once were great movies that did a good job handling their multiverse stories, and I have yet to see Across the Spider-verse, but I've heard that it's really good. What I'm trying to say is that there has been a ton of them recently, and, for a lot of them, the timeline/multiverse aspect hurts more than it helps, and the timeline/multiverse aspect is sometimes stapled on to a story that would've been better without it.

I wouldn't say there's any individual tropes I'm sick of seeing in of themselves. And multiverse is a really good example of this. I'm sick of seeing it done poorly or for no real reason. But Everything, Everywhere, All At Once is a genuinely great movie that properly engages with it's multiverse premise to tell a genuinely heartwarming and philosophical story (fight scenes could drag on a little long though). I wouldn't want to see something like that not made just because the market is saturated.

[vanguard333]

19 minutes ago, Jotari said:

I wouldn't say there's any individual tropes I'm sick of seeing in of themselves. And multiverse is a really good example of this. I'm sick of seeing it done poorly or for no real reason. But Everything, Everywhere, All At Once is a genuinely great movie that properly engages with it's multiverse premise to tell a genuinely heartwarming and philosophical story (fight scenes could drag on a little long though). I wouldn't want to see something like that not made just because the market is saturated.

This is the reason I said, "appear less often" rather than the more specific, "not appear at all anymore" and titled this "Trends in Media That You're Tired of Seeing" and not "Tropes in Media That You're Tired of Seeing". I agree that Everything, Everywhere All At Once was great, and I don't want to see multiverse stories end; I want to see the huge surge in multiverse stories end.

 

9 hours ago, Etrurian emperor said:

I've been pretty tired of multiverse stories for a while now with Bayonetta 3 being the point I got most annoyed with it. FF7 gets kind of a pass since it doesn't really adhere to the multiverse style. Its just the same story told a bit different rather than ''Wutai Sephirot and Shinra executive Barret'' 

For me, the annoying thing about FF7R is that, as a complete newcomer, I just wanted a remake of FF7, and that's what FF7Remake was marketed as being. Instead, all the multiverse stuff meant that the game may as well have thrown up a big neon sign saying, "Come back after you've played FF7!"

[Jotari]

32 minutes ago, vanguard333 said:

This is the reason I said, "appear less often" rather than the more specific, "not appear at all anymore" and titled this "Trends in Media That You're Tired of Seeing" and not "Tropes in Media That You're Tired of Seeing". I agree that Everything, Everywhere All At Once was great, and I don't want to see multiverse stories end; I want to see the huge surge in multiverse stories end.

I guess to more clearly put what I wanted to say, would be that I wouldn't mind a huge surge in multiverse stories of they consistently engaged with and utilized the idea well.

[AnonymousSpeed]

Posting.

Oh wait, this is "Media" not "Social Media" please do not make that thread-

5 hours ago, Imuabicus der Fertige said:

as bad as it might be to say, as a member of this board, I so very much appreciate it´s... low tempo, is how I´d put it.

Dying forum cope. There was a joke about this on Excelblem FE9 chapter 17 video already.

Dang, does @Shadow Mir even post anymore? Axe fighters are good. I am tired of them being ignored in media, and this trend must stop.

[indigoasis]

4 hours ago, Imuabicus der Fertige said:

Not an inherent trend to media in itself, but the great majority of fans and the degree to which headcanons and the actually presented media itself are being intermixed. I made a very angry comment about something similar in the General Unpopular Opinions thread.

my headcanon is that you're wrong

I think I kinda feel this, too, especially when headcanons I read about actively go against established canon or rules. I don't mind the stuff that's actually plausible, or the stuff I can easily dismiss, but the incorrect stuff that's so widespread to the point that it's treated as fact is what bothers me (basically popular headcanon that's actually just misinformation). If I understand what you're saying correctly, I do believe I'm in the same boat.

1 hour ago, vanguard333 said:

For me, the annoying thing about FF7R is that, as a complete newcomer, I just wanted a remake of FF7, and that's what FF7Remake was marketed as being. Instead, all the multiverse stuff meant that the game may as well have thrown up a big neon sign saying, "Come back after you've played FF7!"

I saw a post on Twitter the other day explaining how a common theme among Final Fantasy games is defying fate (the exception being XV if you don't count alternate endings). Remake does exactly this, but in regards to defying the story of the original game (in a very obvious manner).

5 minutes ago, AnonymousSpeed said:

Dying forum cope.

we'll still be here from the grave

[Jotari]

1 hour ago, indigoasis said:

my headcanon is that you're wrong

I think I kinda feel this, too, especially when headcanons I read about actively go against established canon or rules. I don't mind the stuff that's actually plausible, or the stuff I can easily dismiss, but the incorrect stuff that's so widespread to the point that it's treated as fact is what bothers me (basically popular headcanon that's actually just misinformation). If I understand what you're saying correctly, I do believe I'm in the same boat.

I see this a lot in the A Song of Ice and Fire community. Theories built upon a foundation that's only true if a multitude of other theories are correct. It's an inevitable consequence of the writer releasing only one installment of the series in almost 20 years. Fans have over analyzed stuff so thoroughly that evolving their own fanfiction into their view of the series in lieu of any actual forward progression is the only avenue of new conversation, if nothing else.

But, what I really wanted to ask is examples from the Fire Emblem series. Who, or what, or when is fan ideas being treated as fact (well aside from the very wrong headcanon that Edelgard is a good person).

Edited April 17 by Jotari

[lenticular]

Grimdark. Definitely grimdark. We have passed peak grimdark at this point and it's on the wane now, but there's still too much of it for my tastes. I don't mind fiction that has a dark edge to it, but I need for there to be some sort of light in the darkness if I'm going to stay interested. Unending doom and gloom just doesn't do it for me. And there's also the related phenomenon of "edgy for the sake of edgy" which is extremely tiresome.

I'm also not really a fan of "enemies to lovers" style romance stories. Of course, last time that romance novels came up on this forum, I think I was the only one who had any interest in the genre, so probably nobody else here cares about the trends in tropes and subgenres there.

10 hours ago, Jotari said:

But, what I really wanted to ask is examples from the Fire Emblem series. Who, or what, or when is fan ideas being treated as fact (well aside from the very wrong headcanon that Edelgard is a good person).

Ike is/isn't a commoner, maybe? I've seen that being argued from both sides by people who are convinced that their take is Objective Reality and not just their interpretation.

[vanguard333]

13 hours ago, Jotari said:

I guess to more clearly put what I wanted to say, would be that I wouldn't mind a huge surge in multiverse stories of they consistently engaged with and utilized the idea well.

I see.

 

12 hours ago, indigoasis said:

I saw a post on Twitter the other day explaining how a common theme among Final Fantasy games is defying fate (the exception being XV if you don't count alternate endings). Remake does exactly this, but in regards to defying the story of the original game (in a very obvious manner).

Okay; that doesn't really change how, in execution, the multiverse aspect was extremely stapled-on and made the game alienating to me as a newcomer who had never played FF7. Rather hard to appreciate a multiverse metanarrative about defying the events of FF7 when I haven't played FF7.

[Nauriam]

A trend I have seen a lot recently that really bothers me is making female protagonists seem strong by making them more masculine. In America there has been a lot of whining from people usually leaning right politically about a ton of media making a bunch of Mary Sues, and really pushing a female power theme. I don't have any issue with female protagonists, and in fact wish that there were more. On a Fire Emblem note, I think that the newer games should have had forced female protagonists rather than a choice for story reasons. I do have an issue with how every time we get a strong female character, they just make the character traditionally masculine to make them seem powerful. The two examples that come to mind are that one strong girl from season 1 of the Mandalorian (I only watched season 1 but I assume she comes back), and Rey from the new Star Wars movies. There isn't an issue with women being portrayed as powerful by having masculine qualities, but it is an issue when that's the predominant way used to make females seem strong or powerful. It just further pushes the cultural narrative that masculine qualities are the only way to be strong or successful or protect people etc. And the converse is true too. Male protagonists that are strong/powerful through what is usually considered female qualities is a great thing and I wish I saw it more often. Things like a single father who's goal is to be the best caretaker or something like that. All I want is more diversity and storytelling, and traditional protagonist roles looking less masculine, whether women are playing the protagonist or not. And if you're going to make a physically strong and brash character you need to put women in those roles sparingly (not necessarily never), because in real life there are much more men that fit that description than women.

As an example of a strong female protagonist who doesn't display traditionally masculine qualities, I would point towards Yuna from FFX. Spoilers for FFX below (I know it's an old game but if you haven't played it you should).

Spoiler

Yuna goes on a journey knowing that she will die at the end, and is willing to do it just for the happiness of everyone for a short amount of time (alluded to be around 3 years or so). And along her really morbid journey are constant reminders of her eventual demise, as well as her role as savior and hope of everyone. She is really devoted to the happiness of even the least significant citizens, and makes sure to spend her time and energy to care for the people that she's sacrificing herself for. This journey is obviously extremely physically hard, but even more draining on Yuna's soul because of everything mentioned above. She reflects Jesus in these ways, but all throughout she does not show her strength by being physically stronger, or wittier, or more ambitious. She is caring, kind, and extremely self-less and her strength as a character comes from that. IMO we need more characters in media that portray strength through those qualities rather than a more masculine display of strength through bravado and wit.

 

[JimmyBeans]

13 hours ago, AnonymousSpeed said:

Axe fighters are good.

This is true, and we must all do our part to spread this propaganda truth.

My super cold take of trends I dislike is retainer characters dominating the rosters. Blah, blah, blah muh world building and such things.

[Jotari]

1 hour ago, lenticular said:

Ike is/isn't a commoner, maybe? I've seen that being argued from both sides by people who are convinced that their take is Objective Reality and not just their interpretation.

I think that's something that definitely can be argued though. Because Greil no doubt was a noble being a general in the pre-Ashnard regime, with it specifically being noted that Ashnard made it possible for commoners to achieve such ranks ergo someone from before had to have been a noble. It's more deductive than fanfiction. But then maybe I'm exactly the kind of person who was being called out, lol.

[Acacia Sgt]

28 minutes ago, Jotari said:

I think that's something that definitely can be argued though. Because Greil no doubt was a noble being a general in the pre-Ashnard regime, with it specifically being noted that Ashnard made it possible for commoners to achieve such ranks ergo someone from before had to have been a noble. It's more deductive than fanfiction. But then maybe I'm exactly the kind of person who was being called out, lol.

Even if you don't count the Gawain bit, there's still the fact Ike is still effectively a "Mercenary Prince". So not exactly "common" either, even if he wasn't of noble origins.

[Jotari]

7 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Even if you don't count the Gawain bit, there's still the fact Ike is still effectively a "Mercenary Prince". So not exactly "common" either, even if he wasn't of noble origins.

Well he objectively does get a noble title, and then throws it away. Better question is why should anyone really care? None of us are believers in the divine right of kings and the rightful place of feudalism. Nobility literally doesn't exist (though super genes do exist in some Fire Embelm settings, not Tellius though...unless you're Micaiah). People like Ike in this regard not because he's a commoner, but because he's different from other Fire Emblem lords. But it is a bit of a misconception that he's unique or unprecedented in that regard, as he hits a lot of the same plot beats as Alm. And later Byleth too as commoner raised mercenary protagonists. It's the less common of Fire Embelm's stock character tropes, but "Seemingly ordinary guy raised by a gruff old dude of renowned martial skill with a secret origin" is one of the two Fire Emblem protagonist along with "Lordling with responsibilities". Kris even follows that archetype, minus any significant secret backstory (and we never get to see Mac Lir, sounds like a cool guy though).

[Acacia Sgt]

2 minutes ago, Jotari said:

(though super genes do exist in some Fire Embelm settings, not Tellius though...unless you're Micaiah).

More like every Branded. But then they're more like in an in-between state. To the Beorc they might seem extraordinary, but not to the Laguz.

2 minutes ago, Jotari said:

People like Ike in this regard not because he's a commoner, but because he's different from other Fire Emblem lords. But it is a bit of a misconception that he's unique or unprecedented in that regard, as he hits a lot of the same plot beats as Alm. And later Byleth too as commoner raised mercenary protagonists. It's the less common of Fire Embelm's stock character tropes, but "Seemingly ordinary guy raised by a gruff old dude of renowned martial skill with a secret origin" is one of the two Fire Emblem protagonist along with "Lordling with responsibilities". Kris even follows that archetype, minus any significant secret backstory (and we never get to see Mac Lir, sounds like a cool guy though).

Now I wonder how perceptions would be if FE had been localized since the start. Since yes, Ike would no longer seem like much of a novelty if we already got used to Alm.

[vanguard333]

2 hours ago, lenticular said:

Grimdark. Definitely grimdark. We have passed peak grimdark at this point and it's on the wane now, but there's still too much of it for my tastes. I don't mind fiction that has a dark edge to it, but I need for there to be some sort of light in the darkness if I'm going to stay interested. Unending doom and gloom just doesn't do it for me. And there's also the related phenomenon of "edgy for the sake of edgy" which is extremely tiresome.

Ike is/isn't a commoner, maybe? I've seen that being argued from both sides by people who are convinced that their take is Objective Reality and not just their interpretation.

Yeah, grimdark was a really annoying trend for a while; I'm really glad that it's waning. Unending doom and gloom just doesn't hold interesting, and I'm sorry, but trying to make a story seem "more mature" by making it all doom and gloom just makes it come across as immature.

 

I've been trying to avoid the "Ike is/isn't a commoner" argument, since it's not what this topic is about, but with it continuing to come up, I will respond just once, then ask that this topic not get derailed:

Ike was a commoner: he was born a commoner, raised a commoner, and, perhaps most importantly given the statement someone made about headcanons: the story frames him as a commoner and treats him as a commoner, so it doesn't matter what I say: the story says he's a commoner.

56 minutes ago, Jotari said:

I think that's something that definitely can be argued though. Because Greil no doubt was a noble being a general in the pre-Ashnard regime, with it specifically being noted that Ashnard made it possible for commoners to achieve such ranks ergo someone from before had to have been a noble. It's more deductive than fanfiction. But then maybe I'm exactly the kind of person who was being called out, lol.

There is no doubt that Greil was a noble; emphasis on "was"; before Ike was born, he had fled Daein and been made an outlaw, and an outlaw was even lower than a peasant: they had zero rights and it was not a crime to kill them. Ike was born the son of an outlaw and a priestess; not exactly high-status.

22 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Even if you don't count the Gawain bit, there's still the fact Ike is still effectively a "Mercenary Prince". So not exactly "common" either, even if he wasn't of noble origins.

Everyone inherited from their parents in the middle ages: the farmer's son inherited the farm, the smith's son, unless he got an apprenticeship elsewhere, would inherit the forge. Calling him a prince just because he inherits something is misleading.

10 minutes ago, Jotari said:

But it is a bit of a misconception that he's unique or unprecedented in that regard, as he hits a lot of the same plot beats as Alm. And later Byleth too as commoner raised mercenary protagonists. It's the less common of Fire Emblem's stock character tropes, but "Seemingly ordinary guy raised by a gruff old dude of renowned martial skill with a secret origin" is one of the two Fire Emblem protagonist along with "Lordling with responsibilities".

There are two major differences though: first, Alm is treated throughout the game as someone special with everyone fawning over him and saying he was born special and better than them, with the explanation for it given by the second difference: Alm is secret royalty, and him being secret royalty plays into the plot as he inherits the empire. Alm's plot is a King Arthur and the Sword in the Stone plot. Also, Alm wasn't raised by a mercenary, but by a renowned knight and he was told that he was that knight's grandson, which gave him political perks.

 

Anyway, I have said all that I wanted to say. I will say no more so as not to derail the topic.

[Jotari]

6 hours ago, vanguard333 said:

There are two major differences though: first, Alm is treated throughout the game as someone special with everyone fawning over him and saying he was born special and better than them, with the explanation for it given by the second difference: Alm is secret royalty, and him being secret royalty plays into the plot as he inherits the empire. Alm's plot is a King Arthur and the Sword in the Stone plot. Also, Alm wasn't raised by a mercenary, but by a renowned knight and he was told that he was that knight's grandson, which gave him political perks.

But Alm very much was raised as a commoner in the same way Ike was. He grew up in a tiny village without servants or feudal responsibilities. And Ike likewise is treated specially because of his connection to Greil. That's what Shinon was so pissed about.

[Fire Emblem Fan]

Multiverse stories and alternate versions of characters. No, I'm not interested in the 8467735th identity of Spider-Man, thanks.

[Shanty Pete's 1st Mate]

32 minutes ago, Fire Emblem Fan said:

Multiverse stories and alternate versions of characters. No, I'm not interested in the 8467735th identity of Spider-Man, thanks.

 

On 4/16/2024 at 9:57 AM, vanguard333 said:

. Timeline/Multiverse Stories:

This makes me think of a phenomenon analyzed by one of my favorite YouTubers, Eddy Burback, in his video "Multiverse Fatigue". Might be worth checking out and reflecting upon, even if it's mostly about the MCU.

For my part, I broadly agree on "multiverse" as a narrative device being overused nowadays. It's possible to be tired of it, while still recognizing that individual works utilizing such a device can be great regardless. "Into the Spider-Verse" is one of my favorite animated films ever - in big part, I think, because of how character-centered it is. It's not a "crossover for crossover's sake" - instead, each other Spider-person impresses on Miles, and helps him grow into the role that was thrust upon him. The revolutionary animation style didn't hurt, either.

As for the answer to the question... uh, nothing I can really think of? Maybe I'm not an overly critical viewer. There's just so much media out there - free and paid, cable and streaming, in theaters or your local library, in print or on the web. So many stories, that if you're not seeing what you want - or seeing too much of what you don't - you can look somewhere else. Heck, in an age of fanfiction.net and AO3, you can write and share your own.

Sorry if this comes across as a kind of "toxic positivity", as that's in no way my goal. You're allowed to have whichever issues you have! I just don't think I feel the same way.

On 4/16/2024 at 9:16 PM, AnonymousSpeed said:

Dying forum cope. There was a joke about this on Excelblem FE9 chapter 17 video already.

Dang, does @Shadow Mir even post anymore? Axe fighters are good. I am tired of them being ignored in media, and this trend must stop.

Ooh, are we doing a summoning ritual? Ahem... "Magic Axe Wyvern builds are sorely underrated and underutilized!" If that don't do the trick, then nothing will.

[Jotari]

1 hour ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

Sorry if this comes across as a kind of "toxic positivity", as that's in no way my goal. You're allowed to have whichever issues you have! I just don't think I feel the same way.

Don't worry, I'll balance out your (actually not at all) toxic positivity with some toxic cynicism. You are absolutely right. Not only do we have access to various genres easy, we have access to world wide media, almost of all of it translated as we have the good fortune to speak the lingia franca (and probably have the knowledge to be a pirate of Netflix and the like is falling short). Not only do we have that, but we also have a hundred years worth of visual media from the past century, and several thousand years of written works from before that. If there was a complete and total ban on new content tomorrow there would still be enough high quality stuff out there to take up more than a life time's worth of consumption.

And here's where the cynasicism comes in. Because all that is true. And it's also irrelevant. Because you are absolutely not going to watch the latest Iranian drama no matter how good it is. Unless you have a friend who's really into it and recommends it. And while you might read the best book sold in England in 1878, you're not going to read the second best book because only scholars with a specific interest in the period are even going to know about the second most famous stuff. We are, as we've always been, at the absolutely mercy of the capitalist system and what they want to show us. All of it is there, but you're only going to watch what's put in front of you and pushed by the algorithm and marketing titans. Which means a bit of your local stuff, a bit of Britain, and lot of America, and any noteworthy foreign language work these days will almost certainly be Japanese or Korean. I think we have all seen far too many movies that are well known to be bad, well reported to be bad and then watched and found subjectively bad, but watched anyway just because they were the trend everyone's talking about.

[Etrurian emperor]

On 4/17/2024 at 4:07 PM, Nauriam said:

The two examples that come to mind are that one strong girl from season 1 of the Mandalorian (I only watched season 1 but I assume she comes back)

Oh...hehe...oh nooo no no. She did a social media ''oopsie'' and got fired. 

I'm on two minds on the matter. On one hand I think gigantic or otherwise very rough woman like Vaida or Unicorn's Amalia to be hilarious and I do love seeing them. On the other hand I do agree with the sentiment that a woman being ''strong'' meaning she has to have masculine traits is lazy and not entirely sending the right message.

I think Titania has the right idea. Very capable and still clearly a woman without having much masculine traits. 

 

[Zapp Branniglenn]

The two shows I'm watching right now are X-Men 97 and Fallout. And wow. Two incredible adaptations of a thing from 1997. I guess the only thing I'm tired of is the one difference between the two. One has a new episode every week while the other had its whole season dropped on day one. I don't understand the logic in that. Sure 'binge-watching' is its own marketing buzzword, but it's not the default state in which we consume media. When there's a new episode in a few days, it's something to look forward to. When eight hours of TV get dropped on you it becomes an immediate backlog that you have to make time for at a direct opportunity cost of whatever your current media thing is. Like you were just assigned your term paper in school.

Having multiple episodes up on Day One for the binge watcher demographic is going to seriously ramp up your internal stats on that show opening, but it doesn't have to be the whole damned show. These Streaming companies surely want people to return in order to avoid those major lulls inbetween high profile releases, so I'd say the sweetspot is around 20-30% of the show's episodes up on Day 1. However much runtime it needs to introduce the world, establish characters, and hook them with a good mystery.

[lenticular]

On 4/17/2024 at 4:44 PM, vanguard333 said:

Yeah, grimdark was a really annoying trend for a while; I'm really glad that it's waning. Unending doom and gloom just doesn't hold interesting, and I'm sorry, but trying to make a story seem "more mature" by making it all doom and gloom just makes it come across as immature.

That's something that I tend to see more from fans than from writers. Writers usually (not always!) manage to have a bit of a more nuanced take on things, but I've definitely seen who will scoff at anything with a lighter tone and call it immature or unrealistic, which, yeah, definitely comes across as immature. It has the same sort of energy as a teenager who is desperate to avoid anything that can be seen as childish.

15 hours ago, Shanty Pete's 1st Mate said:

As for the answer to the question... uh, nothing I can really think of? Maybe I'm not an overly critical viewer. There's just so much media out there - free and paid, cable and streaming, in theaters or your local library, in print or on the web. So many stories, that if you're not seeing what you want - or seeing too much of what you don't - you can look somewhere else. Heck, in an age of fanfiction.net and AO3, you can write and share your own.

I broadly agree with this. While there are definitely tropes and trends that I roll my eyes at, I do usually find it pretty simple to avoid them in favour of other media that are much more to my tastes. The only caveat that I would add, though, is that it can be somewhat tricky to do so when there's a work that is mostly to my tastes, but then has one trend-chasing section that's been shoehorned in (often but not always by a meddling studio or similar). That sort of thing can be harder to avoid and does get frustrating.

14 hours ago, Jotari said:

And here's where the cynasicism comes in. Because all that is true. And it's also irrelevant. Because you are absolutely not going to watch the latest Iranian drama no matter how good it is. Unless you have a friend who's really into it and recommends it. And while you might read the best book sold in England in 1878, you're not going to read the second best book because only scholars with a specific interest in the period are even going to know about the second most famous stuff. We are, as we've always been, at the absolutely mercy of the capitalist system and what they want to show us. All of it is there, but you're only going to watch what's put in front of you and pushed by the algorithm and marketing titans. Which means a bit of your local stuff, a bit of Britain, and lot of America, and any noteworthy foreign language work these days will almost certainly be Japanese or Korean. I think we have all seen far too many movies that are well known to be bad, well reported to be bad and then watched and found subjectively bad, but watched anyway just because they were the trend everyone's talking about.

Speak for yourself. My main media consumptions are games and books. For games, I mostly (maybe about 90%?) play indie stuff. For books, I do tend to skew towards more recent and towards British and American, but far from exclusively. I probably have a couple dozen or so different nationalities of authors that I've read over the last year or two, at a guess. And while I haven't read anything from 1878 recently, but I did read At The Back of the North Wind last year, which was published in 1871, and is at best the fourth most famous book sold in England from that year (behind Through The Looking Glass, Middlemarch, and The Descent of Man).

Which isn't to say that this is the right way or the best way to consume media. If all you want to do is watch the latest movies from Disney and play the latest games from Nintendo, then that's great. But if you're going to watch movies that you know are going to be bad, then that's your fault, not capitalism's. It really only requires the tiniest amount of effort to ignore the stuff that corporate marketing puts in front of you, and acting as if they're impossible to exist is crediting them with far more power than they actually have.

1 hour ago, Zapp Branniglenn said:

Sure 'binge-watching' is its own marketing buzzword, but it's not the default state in which we consume media.

I don't think there really is a default state for media consumption. By and large, what tends to be "default" changes a lot over time, as well as being different from one medium to the next. A steady release of new content over time is pretty common for TV or for comics, but is much rarer (though not unheard of) for books or games, for instance. So the problem isn't really with how we consume media overall but with how people are accustomed to watching TV in particular.

If I buy a new game -- let's say that it's a pretty chunky RPG like Fire Emblem, for instance -- then the default assumption is that I'll go through it at my own pace. Depending on how fast I play and how much time I have to devote to it, maybe I'll get through it in a week or maybe it will take me months. And that's just expected and normal. Nobody is suggesting that Fire Emblem would be better if it had a staggered release with only two chapters coming out every week. And personally, I feel the same way about TV. Like, I know that season 5 of Star Trek: Discovery has started to be released, but I'm not going to start watching it until the whole thing has come out, because then I'll be able to watch it all at my own pace, whatever pace that ends up being.

Which isn't to try to discount the psychological pressure that "must catch up on this!" can exert. If you do fall into that mindset then it absolutely can stop you from enjoying something as much as you would otherwise. But I do think that there isn't any inherent problem with the release schedule, more just that people are needing to adjust their mindsets, which inevitably takes time.