How much pandering to fans should writers do?

[sisterofmercy]

I've noticed both on this forum and on Tumblr when people talk about shows like Buffy and Glee that people often say that the writers pandered too much to what the fans want, rather than going with the original plan.

Do you think this is the case?

Obviously writers have a vision for their work but they also want to make it succeed, particularly as it's such a competitive field.

So do you think it's right for them to give the fans what they want?

 

[Skytteflickan88]

Obviously writers can't run their own race without considering that they have to get enough viewers to keep on air. But I think I'd prefer a show that goes it's own way to a bland generic pleasing-as-many-people-as-possible show, even if that means I don't like all the decisions being made.

I think Joss once said something about how he rather have a hundred people addicted to the show than a thousand that just liked watching. I think it was in a context that meant that he told the story he wanted to tell, even if it wasn't to everyone's taste.

Of course, sometimes it's hard to tell if the writer took a risk and followed the original idea or if they did it for the fans.

Joss kept James on, even though he was suppose to be die in season 2, after a few episodes. I think I recall that was said to be because he was popular. But maybe it was because Joss thought he fit into the show. I also heard that Joss brough Spike back for good because he became more interested in the character in Lovers walk, because he saw possibilities for him. But maybe it was because he'd be a fan-pleaser?

It's hard to tell sometimes. It's also hard to tell if some out of character moments were made because the writers wanted it to work for the overall story, or because the fans wanted it. For example, the scoobies not killing spike in season 4, even after the Primeval when it was proven that Spike was able to cause damage; was that done for the fans or the writers?

I would actually say that over all, neither ats or btvs pander that much to their fans. Maybe they wanted to do more heartbreaking stuff, but held back, I don't know. I think they had a good balance and seemed to have the story as a first priority, and the ratings as second.

---------- Post added at 05:02 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:02 PM ----------

Exactly how did the writers pander to fans in buffy?

 

[Taake]

Exactly how did the writers pander to fans in buffy?

The first thing I can think off is the Bangel+Spuffy ending to season 7. Both sides got their shipping preference supported.

 

[BuffyElevated]

The first thing I can think off is the Bangel+Spuffy ending to season 7. Both sides got their shipping preference supported.

Yep, yep. Even though, to me, the Bangel scene didn't quite fit with what Angel was going through in his own show (and we talked about that in a separate thread here on the boards), it was nice that they included that final scene in the show for both groups of fans.

I think that it's fun when the writers throw in little wink-wink-nudge-nudge moments to the fans, such as on "Glee" when they started making the ship names that the fans came up with canon.

However, there comes a point where they need to say "No, this character would not really do this. This is not true to the character". I think Sarah fought a lot for Buffy and what she thought was realistic to her nature, and I love that she did that. It didn't help much, from what we've heard in interviews, but whatever. We got what we got and now we have to live with the story because now that is what's canon, no matter what we might have wanted.

 

[Skytteflickan88]

The first thing I can think off is the Bangel+Spuffy ending to season 7. Both sides got their shipping preference supported.

That's true. Kind of annoying how we got the "Maybe one day we'll work it out Angel" and the "Spike I'm in love with you" ending, with buffy not choosing. But I wonder if that wasn't the best option, storywise as well.

I think Spuffy was hard to avoid, I mean the ending of a series should have lots of lose strings tied up, because the story needs closure, so Spuffy needed some sort of recognition. And it makes sense that Angel comes back in the last episodes, since he was such a big part of the first seasons and was also referenced and shown throughout all seasons. Now if Riley had been brought back for closure, that would have been over the top. And unnessacary, since they already got some sort of closure.

I hate that Angel came back with the amulet and basically saved the day. That felt like lazy writing, considering that the other seasons had smart finales where the heroes figure things out for themselves and then save the day, not have characters from other shows coming in. Couldn't they have brought him back some other way? Maybe angel simply got wiff of the big fight without the senior partners, came and offered his help, like he did on the show, and that's that?

 

[PrincessBuffy16]

Well, I think it's like that with all the shows.

Writers do write what fans want, sometimes. But I don't believe they go all the way against their belief and wishes.

 

[BuffyElevated]

That's true. Kind of annoying how we got the "Maybe one day we'll work it out Angel" and the "Spike I'm in love with you" ending, with buffy not choosing. But I wonder if that wasn't the best option, storywise as well.

Well, they knew they were going to continue the story into the comics, so I think it was smart of them to leave it kinda open-ended. It was a little bit annoying to the fans who weren't intending to read any of the comics, though.

 

[Skytteflickan88]

Joss planned for the comics back then? I had no idea. I assumed he came up with that years later.

 

[zobothehobo]

I think as a writer on a TV show you have to pay attention to what the fans are saying and what they want because if they're not happy, your viewership goes down. But I, personally, don't believe in "pandering" to the fans. Glee is a show that I loved... and then the writers stopped doing their job and let the fans do it, and now the show's a wreck. The writers of Glee listen to the fans entirely too much. I think it was HisMrs who said up there (sorry, I don't feel like scrolling to check...) that there comes a point where the writers have to go "No, this character would never do that." Because if they don't, no one knows who the characters are. The biggest problem I have with Glee right now is I don't know who the characters are. They keep changing. And not changing direction, or growing, the writers just change their minds constantly of WHO they want this character to BE. That is listening to the fans entirely too much.

 

[Skytteflickan88]

Agree, you have to stay true to the characters.

I think that the writers can be more lose about the story "Wouldn't it be cool if we used this plot, the fans would really like it even if it's a bit odd"(like OMWF) but it's a lot more risky with characters, and you ahve to keep focus on them, keep them "true". To go with the OMWF example, that plot worked, even though it was a bit odd, but when they used Xander and mad him out of character in that episode, seemingly for a easy explanation for summoning Sweet and for a gay joke, it was not cool.

 

[Zeppo]

It bugs me when people complain about Angel's cameo in the last episode of the show he was a part of just because it throws a monkey wrench in Spuffy. BtVS was ending, Angel was a part of the show, he needed to come back to help address the triangle - which he'd never been around to do until then - as well as closing his character/relationship on that show; it wasn't just pandering to shippers, it was paying respect to the characters, verse, and fans (paying respect to fans is not the same as pandering). Angel's influence on the show and its characters was momentous and his part in Buffy's future needed to be addressed. AtS was still going, so who knew what was going to happen for sure with him and her and Spike, if anything?

They didn't know they'd do comics. The comics weren't being planned on happening til well after Angel was cancelled as it was cancelled at the end of season 5 so as far as they knew they could've had another season or two of the verse.

Glee panders too much for it's own good, I think. If fans get too much of what they want they have no reason to watch. Besides, TV about the journey not the destination. I don't feel like the Buffy-Angel writers did much of that. I know there was a strong online community for a good half of the series run but nothing like what goes on now with all the Brittana's and Finnchel loudmouths with Twitter and such. Listening to fans compromises vision and fans are louder than ever now with vocal platforms galore at our fingertips. No one can handle the suspence of TV anymore; they want what they want and read the spoilers until they get it. It sucks.

 

[Taake]

It bugs me when people complain about Angel's cameo in the last episode of the show he was a part of just because it throws a monkey wrench in Spuffy. BtVS was ending, Angel was a part of the show, he needed to come back to help address the triangle - which he'd never been around to do until then - as well as closing his character/relationship on that show; it wasn't just pandering to shippers, it was paying respect to the characters, verse, and fans (paying respect to fans is not the same as pandering). Angel's influence on the show and its characters was momentous and his part in Buffy's future needed to be addressed. AtS was still going, so who knew what was going to happen for sure with him and her and Spike, if anything?

Well I really like that Angel comes back and I agree with all of what you said about paying respect to the character and verse etc... so I'm not really complaining about the cameo. But the nature of his apperance, the strict non-stance taken in shipping conflict, feels like pandering to Bangels as well as Spuffies. I still like it and I think it's only right that he did appear, but obviously Joss could've picked a side there...

 

[Zeppo]

Well I really like that Angel comes back and I agree with all of what you said about paying respect to the character and verse etc... so I'm not really complaining about the cameo. But the nature of his apperance, the strict non-stance taken in shipping conflict, feels like pandering to Bangels as well as Spuffies. I still like it and I think it's only right that he did appear, but obviously Joss could've picked a side there...

Oh ok, you wanted definate, unquestionable closure on one or the other. They definately avoided that to not anger anyone ... I'm trying to think of how they could close this off in Chosen with Spike still going over to AtS. Are you a Dawson's Creek fan? They did a pretty good job with the conclusion to their triangle, however there was no spinoff going simultaneously.

 

[Icarium]

Pandering is a terrible idea in so many ways. First, it's basically just a way of selling out. Second, internet fandoms give a skewed perception of the overall fandom even in this day and age and I suppose this was even more the case back when BtVS was airing. The writers end up pandering to the vocal minorities, so often they sell out and only end up pissing off more viewers than they please. Third, when a writer writes something he doesn't really like but thinks fans would like the quality of their work tends to be rather abysmal. The greatest show on television, "The Wire" has practically no pandering, no infodumping, no favours for the viewers at all and that's a part of what makes it so amazing.

It bugs me when people complain about Angel's cameo in the last episode of the show he was a part of just because it throws a monkey wrench in Spuffy. BtVS was ending, Angel was a part of the show, he needed to come back to help address the triangle - which he'd never been around to do until then - as well as closing his character/relationship on that show; it wasn't just pandering to shippers, it was paying respect to the characters, verse, and fans (paying respect to fans is not the same as pandering). Angel's influence on the show and its characters was momentous and his part in Buffy's future needed to be addressed.

But they didn't really bother to give proper closure to Buffy and anyone of the scoobies except for the love interests, so it seems like blatant pandering to me.

 

[Kean]

There are certain things that I feel were pandering but you can't ever be sure.

I do hate pandering though. Whether I like it or not, I want stories to stick to their truth, not what the fans determine. There is a reason why we watch and someone else makes it. I often feel like there is too much inclusion of fan wants. I wish shows could exist in the vaccum of their own creativity, instead needing to please viewers or keep the story on air, long after it needed to be.

I must say though, the absolute worst show for pandering is Supernatural. There has been countless deliberate nods to the fandom, specifically Wincest. For me, this is just...ugh. As much as I enjoy the show I will never take it with anything more than a pinch of salt because the fans have the writers in their pockets.

 

[Zeppo]

But they didn't really bother to give proper closure to Buffy and anyone of the scoobies except for the love interests, so it seems like blatant pandering to me.

Is it the way that Angel was presented in the finale or the fact that he was in the finale at all that you consider pandering? I never expected closure on Buffy choosing and am suprised that others did, the feeling I get is that by leaving it open-ended (on BtVS) it was considered a cop-out by many yet the story was still ready to continue in any capacity on AtS. Any closure done in Chosen would've been undone on AtS and thus cheapened like Spike's amulet death was by being brought back to Angel.

Angel needed to come back for a moment for the reasons I said above and the only relevent reason for him to be there was to help her fight. I just don't see the pander, pander to me means closure or decision which there wasn't. If anything it was anti-pandering as no one was given what they wanted; a choice from Buffy.

 

[Skytteflickan88]

Well I really like that Angel comes back and I agree with all of what you said about paying respect to the character and verse etc... so I'm not really complaining about the cameo. But the nature of his apperance, the strict non-stance taken in shipping conflict, feels like pandering to Bangels as well as Spuffies. I still like it and I think it's only right that he did appear, but obviously Joss could've picked a side there...

I as going to simply rep agree, but then I thought of something. Maybe it needed to end that way, with Buffy not choosing, because she really can't choose. I think she loves/wants Angel more (atleast in season 7, later is questionable) but she can't really turn her back on Spike either.

Anyne who hasn't read "After dark" or whatever it's called, it's a short Season 8 online comic that shows that Buffy really is a bit unsure of who she wants.

So maybe it had to end without giving answers, because Buffy had none. So in a way, it wasn't pandering at all(specialy since Angel coming back was necassary for the story), it was to show where Buffy was.

---------- Post added at 10:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:27 PM ----------

I must say though, the absolute worst show for pandering is Supernatural. There has been countless deliberate nods to the fandom, specifically Wincest. For me, this is just...ugh. As much as I enjoy the show I will never take it with anything more than a pinch of salt because the fans have the writers in their pockets.

I think that might simply have been the writers having fun, making fun of the fans, good naturely.

But the Wincest thing I never saw as a nod to the fandom, more of a "Ewww, you people are gross" to parts of it.

 

[Zeppo]

xfivebyfive agrees: I dont dislike his appearance because of spuffy but because hes written completely out of character

How so? I'm gonna jump in cause I think I know what you meant by OOC: I know there's anger that he didn't mention anything about Cordelia or Connor but that story was wrapped on his own series - with another season following - and both cases had nothing to do with Buffy the character or BtVS. Cordelia had been irrelevent on BtVS for four years by that time and what is there to say? It's not like Angel is a big ol' chatterbox about things that bug him even to Buffy so had he spilled I would've found that OOC. (Also, I'm sure if Buffy had known about Connor her memory would've been wiped of anything Connor.) Again, I'm assuming that's what you mean by OOC.

Remember, not all Buffy fans watched AtS so him bringing it up wouldn't make sense (Chosen was rushed enough let alone having all this irrelevent-to-her-sitch exposition of what happened in LA to Buffy squeezed in). Had Buffy crossed onto Angel in season 5 then that stuff would obviously be addressed as it happened in that series and is relevent. However, if these were HBO shows, I'm sure it would've been brought up and everything leading up to it handled differently. 😉

 

[Icarium]

How so? I'm gonna jump in cause I think I know what you meant by OOC: I know there's anger that he didn't mention anything about Cordelia or Connor but that story was wrapped on his own series - with another season following - and both cases had nothing to do with Buffy the character or BtVS. Cordelia had been irrelevent on BtVS for four years by that time and what is there to say?

Angel had been almost as irrelevant on BtVS for four years, why was he there then? 🙂

Is it the way that Angel was presented in the finale or the fact that he was in the finale at all that you consider pandering?

Joss being too scared to pick one ship, yet trying desperately to give crumbs to both camps is what I think was clear pandering. Stringing along both major shipping groups is IMO worse than deciding to pander to the more vocal one, it's trying to satisfy everyone and usually ends up satisfying no one. Angel bringing a random amulet that saved the day was bad writing, pure and simple, not sure if we can call it pandering, though.

 

[Zeppo]

Angel had been almost as irrelevant on BtVS for four years, why was he there then? 🙂

No, he wasn't. He was back a few times in season 4 not to mention Buffy's visits to LA and came to Buffy's side in season 5 followed by her running away from her new life and meeting him after her ressurection. His influence was a lot heavier on the title character than Cordelia's. The non-closure of their relationship didn't make him irrelevent, his name even popping up numerous times since he left and not just from Buffy. I couldn't imagine the show ending without a cameo from Angel, something's gotta bookend the series a little.

Joss being too scared to pick one ship, yet trying desperately to give crumbs to both camps is what I think was clear pandering.

Maybe. I guess it depends if you want closure on it.

If anyone cares, personally I only want closure if it goes my way otherwise leave it open so I can close it myself which I think was the intention (I don't mind that so much, it's like a Archie-Betty-Veronica thing but it clearly alienates many.). Sure, you could say Joss was scared to pick and maybe he was but he's made controversial decisions before, especially concerning Willow. I can't blame him for trying to make everyone happy but remember, the verse was not over, just that one incarnation of it so there was more room to keep going with it. They knew whatever viewship from Buffy that wasn't watching AtS would tune in and they did.

Stringing along both major shipping groups is IMO worse than deciding to pander to the more vocal one, it's trying to satisfy everyone and usually ends up satisfying no one.

Ok, sure. Another way of looking at it is if you look at Buffy's speech about cookies then watch at the end when Spike dies and you aren't an AtS viewer (or are, without knowing Spikey-wikey returns), it's pretty clear of what choice she'll probably make, lol.

Angel bringing a random amulet that saved the day was bad writing, pure and simple, not sure if we can call it pandering, though.

I'm not defending that the amulet stuff is good writing, but no one knew it would save the day and no one said it had to be used. I still don't think it's OOC for him to bring a possible antidote to the problem, though, regardless of the outcome. I would find it OOC for him to not come to her side to help, with or without a dues ex machina.