Too few people (Hollywood producers, triple-A video game studios, and women themselves) realize that men like looking at the token nude girls, yeah, but like @Bryan Romer said, that's the extent of their interest, whereas when they see e.g. some girl who's badass, can handle herself, has dignity, intelligence, and wit, has actual interests (be they writing, singing, dancing, boxing, drumming, whatever) etc, they go "wow, she's awesome. I wish I could find a girlfriend like that." Most of them, anyway. Sure, being pretty is an asset in the dating game (when the more important stuff is there), but hardly a necessity; it's all about having character, depth, being more than your looks etc. Women like that have an easier time gaining men's respect and camaraderie in addition to attraction. Unless the guy is a total choud, of course. @Mckk, oh yeah, I can't stand needless, stupid relationship drama. I mean, what's so wrong with portraying an actually functional relationship (warts and all, of course, to be realistic)? Those can be just as interesting or even more so than the perennially on again, off again bs relationships that are so prevalent in fiction.
Is it NOT awesome to have twins? Does it matter if they're identical? Does the degree of awesomeness change as they get older? If it's not awesome to have twins, you could just, you know, kill one and nobody would know the difference (story idea!). They could share shirts and shoes and diapers. They'll invent their own language which you could sell to the military as an unbreakable code. If they're cute, hey, you've already got half a boy band under your roof that will make you a billion dollars. Or a girl band, though you give up something with the lack of alliteration in that case. You could take them to Hollywood and put them in one of those shows that needs one kid but really needs twins because the law says kids can't work those brutal hours. They could serve as each other's voodoo dolls. You could let one commit a terrible crime and have the other take the blame for it and solve two birds with one stone. You could save a lot of money on mirrors just by having them look at each other. They might even be telepathic with each other, able to communicate faster than light, and you could put one on a starship and leave the other at home and still know what's going on (Robert A. Heinlein, Time for the Stars). They could blame each other for their own farts, thus bamboozling you and the FBI. You could leave one out in the forest to be raised by wolves, collect him in twenty years, and publish a Nobel Prize winning study of intelligence and personality similarities and differences and sell the rights to Hollywood. It would be economical too, because even if you're rich, you'd only have to buy one Lamborghini and tell them to share it. Yes, there are many advantages to having twins. At least, I suppose there are - I don't have twins myself, so it's just slightly possible that I might be wrong. Not likely, but I'm just putting that out there.
We have a book called " How to survive a horror movie" It basically makes fun of all the classic Clique characters/plots/settings in horror movies or books.
I would imagine the deleted scenes all involved the team taking the pieces off when the coach wasn't looking and then sticking them back. Sometimes putting the wrong pieces back.
Embarrassing confession. Growing up I loved reading Sweet Valley Twins and thought it would be sooo cool and sooo awesome to have them. And... then it happened. Mine are 10 year old boy/girl. I had my third 18 months after they were born. I literally don't remember much from the first 4 years. @minstrel it's exhausting, challenging, non-stop fighting, night-time feedings can take twice as long which means when you're done with the second the first is about to wake up. As they get older you trade new problems for the old. Comparing grades, starting to like each others friends, and oh the fighting. Mine aren't identical or the same sex so maybe I'm missing out . Fun fact, true twin language only exists in cases of extreme isolation, so if people claim their twins had a legitimate twin language give them the side-eye and back away they probably had their kids locked in the basement for the first couple of years.
Perfect example of be careful for what you wish for. A friend came over with their new born a few months back. I asked to hold the baby and swear I had a mild case of PTSD.
So . . . I imagine some of you would dislike as a character the mother of twins who's never flustered, flurried, dog-tired, or punch drunk, whose hair is always in order and whose fingernail polish is never cracked. Heck, who always has time to put on fingernail polish! Me, I can't stand the Jealous Lover who takes everything he sees his beloved do in the worst way possible as fast as possible. (It usually is a guy, but can be a woman). But you're supposed to think he is sooooo attractive and the love interest isn't a punching bag who needs to get help ASAP. Then there's the detective/law enforcement type (usually a woman) who's supposed to be so intelligent, clever, well-trained, etc., but in the big standoff with the antagonist she gets between him and the hero and ends up having him snatch her as a shield. Not that our characters can't make stupid mistakes. But fundamental errors in their own profession?
I watched The Help; and most the white women in it were Stepford Wives; utterly two dimensional characters devoid of any personality outside of their interactions with their black staff. It really grated with me to the point that it ruined the film. I dislike any character that exists only to provoke a response in another character.
And if they're over two, you get this? Envious Colleague: Wow, look how toned your muscles are! Your hearing is so acute! And how did you learn to see out of the back of your head? It must be magic! Mother-of-twins: No magic, the twins are old enough to run now.
Another character I dislike is the one who sees something that looks suspicious (usually his/her lover with someone else) but for which there's a perfectly innocent explanation. They overreact. Their lover says, "Just listen! I have a perfectly innocent explanation!" But the character says, "No! I won't listen! It's over, Maximilian! The wedding is OFF!" (Or whatever.) This sets the whole plot in motion and the rest of the story is basically the characters trying to overcome the initial deliberate misunderstanding. I hate this. If the character would just stand still for thirty seconds and listen, there would be no misunderstanding and everything would be fine. BUT NOOOOOO!!!!!
Haha yes. If I was getting married to someone and there instant response to an innocent situation was "you cheating bastard, the weddings off", I would probably consider it a lucky escape.
In Romance land they call this The Big Misunderstanding. It's generally considered a plot flaw, but it's amazing how many books sell well despite having this as the lynchpin of the conflict.
God, I hate this trope with a seething passion of a thousand suns. It's just forced drama for the sake of a plot all because one of them refused to keep their ass still for three seconds and let the person whom they supposedly love enough to marry explain themselves. Honestly, if the person is not willing to hear your side of the story, then yes, thank the gods the wedding is off. Can you imagine raising kids with that partner? Me: "Sorry I'm late in picking up Jill, I got stuck in tra-" Spouse: "Clearly this means you hate me and our child! I WILL FILE FOR DIVORCE!!!" This kind of stuff, if it happens in real life, is just asking for a miserable life. It's normal to not really understand a given situation, but a relationship works when both sides are willing to hear each other out and not blow things up to the extreme. More Character Tropes I Dislike: + In police procedurals, there's almost always this wacky co-worker who spends his time goofing off and hitting on the ladies rather than, I dunno, help to solve the case. And he (or she) almost never gets called out for his/her behavior by the chief. In the event that he/she does get chewed out, it's almost always forgiven at the end.
This one is a bit of stretch, but I believe these people play characters quite far removed from their real personalities: - Angelina Jolie Boneo from U2 Bob Geldoff George Clooney They all need to extract their heads from their arses.
The Big Misunderstanding, repeated numerous times in various situations, underpins much of the plot in Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time books.
Most often, I hate the other character in that scenario. The one that finds himself in suspicious situations and LETS people get the wrong idea. That moment when, if you put yourself in his shoes, you know exactly what you'd say to diffuse the situation, it kills me. He could just fecking say two bloody words in most of those scenarios that would stop the other character from flying off the handle, but NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!! It's all 'No, it wasn't me, I swear,' and 'just give me a chance!' when it could be a swift 'Leopold did it to ruin our wedding!' I mean, give your innocent explanation when the other character's calmed down but in the meantime, summarise that bitch. Everyone hates Leopold, Daphne would understand.
I'm sure I'll repeat a lot of what others have already mentioned, but... Just read a book with a protagonist I couldn't stand. She's completely static. She sees the negative in everything, but is good at everything she does. Everyone wants to sleep with her. She cries a lot. She walks around with no purpose. She willingly sleeps with a man and then says he used her. And all this presented in the first person--pointlessly, because we're never allowed into her head. Worst part is that this book gets rave reviews.
Hmm. A book that everyone loves but the writing is awful. Is this book Fifty Shades of Grey by any chance?
Or Twilight? Here are a few more characters I dislike: • The token asshole coach/priest/politician/corporate executive leader/teacher/admiral/any other figure of authority. Now yes, there are people in positions of power who do abuse their powers, and yes I do have a few of them spread all over my many stories (my sci-fi has an asshole admiral, for example), but I still don't like it. Why? Like the token bully thing I mentioned, there's usually no rhyme or reason as to why these people are dicks. I'm not asking for a tragic backstory or anything, just a simple explanation why they like using the main character as their personal punching bag. Even if its something simple as, "pride and ego mixed in with duty" or "I've advanced far more than any of these nimrods, I've got it all so I deserve the special treatment." or "I'm secretly afraid of this person's talents, but I won't admit it..." Anything beyond, "Um, the script here says I'm supposed to hate you so...uh...you suck!" It's perfectly fine to have an asshole in your story, just give him/her/them a reason why to explain their actions. • The token 'psycho with a mental illness'. Very offensive with horrific consequences. How many people with mental illnesses refuse help because they're scared society will shun them? Considering what Hollywood wants us to believe about them, I can understand why they'd be afraid. Would you want to reach out for help if you think everyone else will see you as 'just another crazy loon'?
50 Shades of Grey has pretty bad writing, from what I've seen of it. The writing in Twilight isn't half as bad as most people make out, though it doesn't rise beyond the level of competency.