I totally get where you're coming from Laura. I can watch charismatic villains do awful things to people in fictional shows and cheer them on, but seeing violence and horror that actually happened, as in City of God and all the Holocaust movies, just destroys me.

Dude, me too. That's why I love Alias and Lost violence but cannot stand 24 and CSI - the latter are way too "real". The BF does not understand this attitude either - I always end up arguing that showing things like bioterrorism and hijacking etc. in such elaborate detail is like encouraging people to do these things in real life - not only that but in many cases practically showing them how to do it! Like I forgot the name of it but there was one movie that was like a how-to of creative ways to smuggle weapons & bombs etc. onto a plane - or maybe it was a John Doe episode, I forget. The other argument I have is that there's too much horrible shit happening in the real world, why on earth would I want to watch fictional recreations of it? I prefer my scariness to be as far removed as possible from reality.

CSI [...] way too "real".

FWIW, I think real criminal forensic specialists laugh and laugh at that show. For one thing, the crimes always get solved. For another, they always get solved on the basis of evidence, rather than Jimmy being a dumbass and blabbing to all his friends. It is about as realistic as the fact that everybody who spends more than 20 minutes in contact with Jack, who is not his biological relative, is killed before the day ends.

I know, that's why I put real in quotes... it's not really all that realistic but compared to vampires, Sydney's SpyJinks and the InvisiMechaSaur, it is - put it this way, for people without any knowledge of real forensics or being in the FBI/Secret Services, it comes across as being way more plausible than it actually is.

But that's good! All the dumbass criminals will be properly misdirected, and you can't do much about all the criminals smart enough not to take advice from a TV show anyway.

That's why I love Alias and Lost violence but cannot stand 24 and CSI - the latter are way too "real".

This is why I prefer to read cozy mysteries. Real murders involve death and pain and loss and icky stuff like that.

Betsy is me.

Interesting conversation this morning. I am also in the camp that likes villains. Actually, I like characters with interesting motivations and good lines, who are played by pretty people. This often = villains. I wouldn't want to be anywhere near a Sawyer in real life, but on TV, he's yummy. (And, as Spike was, he's pretty bad at being bad.)

As for Charlie ... I tend to woobify him, but I missed the episode before last. Actually seeing Ethan's death might change my mind.

Charlie's always come across (to me) as weak, without enough strength of will to accomplish anything on his own, someone who desperately wants the approval and guidance of others. His pathological need to take care of someone fits right in with his pathological inability to take care of himself. Sure, he killed Ethan to protect Claire, because otherwise he'd have to have killed him because he was scared of him, and Ethan made his uselessness very obvious, which was possibly even more offensive than hanging him.

ITA, which is why I find Charlie interesting. If the writers are consistent with the character arc (a BIG if, I'll admit), Charlie can be taken in a bunch of different directions from this base point. He can become another Boone and glom onto Locke, he can identify himself as Mr. Babymama Protector (and more than likely be rejected in that role by Claire), or he can go lots of other ways. If the show sticks around for five or seven years, Charlie could possibly become the next Wesley--I see the potential badass in him, if some really bad shit happens on that island.

I want Charlie to apprentice himself to Sayid.

I'd either be trying to learn everything Locke knows, or Sayid knows, at this point.