Pet Peeves In Kidcoms

[Sailor V]

I've heard negative comments on kidcoms, why are they so bad? :confused: Well, I think the people who work on Nickelodeon, Nickelodeon's Clone (Also known as the Disney Channel), and other children's network think that children are easily impressed by each kidcom that some network put little to no effort in their own shows by writing lazily, overairing them, and even overexposing them up unto the point where adults go crazy in a bad way. Most of us do have pet peeves on kidcoms and I'll share mine with yours!

Some of my pet peeves in kidcoms are, for example, set up painful (and mostly unfunny) jokes that don't work and pointless plotlines that are lazily written and sometimes don't even have an ending at all! :mad: I also dislike networks overairing limited episodes of kidcoms, most of them I'm sick of watching in the first place, let alone seeing on my first viewing.

Here are some pet peeves, what are yours on kidcoms?

[Shawn Hopkins]

I think Dan Schneider's are actually rather well-written, especially Keenan and Kel and to some extent iCarly. It's just that he knows his audience and isn't shy about the dumb or gross jokes. If they don't appeal to the older viewer I'm sure he doesn't lose much sleep over it, on his bed of money, because they aren't -for- the older viewer. I can't look down on any kids that like them, I used to watch Hey Dude! every day.

Disney's, on the other hand, are definitely lowest common denominator cheese and, for Hannah Montana, cornpone. Still, they're inoffensive enough, it's something my grandmother and my little cousins can both watch and laugh at.

I really haven't watched them enough in recent years to develop a big list of likes or dislikes, though. They aren't something you should really expect greatness out of, they're just zitcoms and, in some cases, another word that rhymes with zitcoms.

[Master Toon]

kidcoms themselves

Writing - I wouldn't say that the writing is lazy but it doesn't get enough attention. Sometimes I anticipate an exciting conclusion only for something simple and dumbed-down to happen. As if the writing don't care or lost interest halfway through. Just because it's a show for kids does not mean it can't have good writing and given the right amount of attention.

The "dumb" character - This is very common in kidcoms and cartoons and there's nothing wrong with that but take a show like Lizzie McGuire or Even Stevens. Both are great shows and they never had that constant dumb character. Sure Tudgeman was kinda slow at moments (despite being a smart kid) and Twitty had his moments too but he was almost always on the ball. The dumb character is not always needed.

Two friends disgusted over someone calling them boyfriend and girlfriend - I hate it when two characters are accused of being together and they just blow it out of proportion. Why can't they just calmly say "We're not together, we're friends" instead of "EEW! No way am I this person's anything!". If my friend who happened to be a girl did that to me, it would probably hurt my feelings.

The bratty younger sibling - Megan from Drake and Josh is a perfect example. However Pim from Phil of the Future is a perfect example of how they can antagonize their older siblings but you still like their characters at the end of the day.


kidcom critics

I hate how critics name a bunch of stuff about new kidcoms that was present in older kidcoms. They never mention writing or jokes but instead talk about how the characters always have relationships or get into trouble. Last time I checked kidcoms have always had those things.