Despicable Characters from Classic TV

Based on a podcast he recently heard, a friend challenged some of us to point out TV characters who were actually pretty dark despite being painted much differently by the writers. Among those we cited were:

Darren Stevens. His wife can work miracles with a twitch of her nose, but he demands she wash dishes by hand. He also gets by at work by taking credit for her ideas. Incipient alcoholic.

Hawkeye Pierce. Upset by being drafted, he resorts to childish insults, unimaginative pranks and joyless womanizing. Always ready to lecture others on morality while pretending to be an iconoclast. We get it. War is unpleasant.

Lorelei Gilmore. Obsessed with her creepily clingy relationship with her daughter, she demands everyone around her does the same. Outside that, has no clue what she wants.

Michael Stivic. Professional student sponging off his wife and working class in-laws, who he regards with smug condescension. Leaves his wife when he no longer requires her income.

I’m sure there are many others.

All of the characters in Seinfeld.

I enjoyed Jake Tapper’s rendition of Michael Stivic’s (Rob Reiner) reaction during a 2024 watch party of the Presidential debate between President Joe Biden and DJ Trump. Reiner shouted “we are f…ked!” when Biden showed his incoherence.

Stivic and Reiner are one of a kind.

Ricky Arnaz was a controlling freak of a husband on the “I Love Lucy “show according to Lucy anyway since he wouldn’t let her be in show business or do much besides stay in their little apartment and be a housewife.


There’s plenty of evidence to show that Captain James Kirk on Star Trek was Kind of an idiot as a leader. He made boldly stupid decisions more than once. narcissust i think.


I remember as a kid disliking the Jackie Gleason character in his TV show. He kept threatening to send his wife “over the moon “or some such thing which I thought meant he was going to beat her. I disliked that show intensely. But maybe he was a character we weren’t really supposed to like anyway, hard to know.

What about Major Nelson and Major Healey hiding an innocent sexy babe in a bottle and she could only come out of the bottle to save their hides when they were in trouble. Who knows what was going on when the cameras were off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by catherine

What about Captain Nelson and Captain Healey hiding an innocent sexy babe in a bottle and she could only come out of the bottle to save their hides when they were in trouble. Who knows what was going on when the cameras were off.

---

Oh yeah, that was…a problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by catherine

Who knows what was going on when the cameras were off.

---

Well, she did call him “master”, which caused bells to jangle in my pubescent brain.

I always thought Mr. Burger had a homicidal look about him. Like he'd like to meet Perry Mason in a dark alley.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KayLR

I always thought Mr. Burger had a homicidal look about him. Like he'd like to meet Perry Mason in a dark alley.

---

Best theme music in the history of TV.

This description of despicable characters reeks of Gen Z, dripping with scorn for anything "Boomer".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tiam

This description of despicable characters reeks of Gen Z, dripping with scorn for anything "Boomer".

---

But we Boomers deserve it. Those shows were pretty stupid compared to television shows of today. Anyway, Kids these days don’t understand the limitations of television Productions of the 50s, 60s, and 70s.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iris lilies

But we Boomers deserve it. Those shows were pretty stupid compared to television shows of today. Anyway, Kids these days don’t understand the limitations of television Productions of the 50s, 60s, and 70s.

---

There is some truth in this. But today's characters are often much worse. Sometimes, in well written shows, the bad characters are part of a character arc and that's fascinating thing to watch. Kudos to evolved writing and broader opportunities. But some things in today's television is absolutely cringeworthy. Especially the sexual stereotyping of both men and women.

My Favorite Martian, "Uncle Martin", pretty much sponged off of Bill Bixby by living in his apartment with no visible means of support and no job.

Matt Dillon spent much of his on duty time downing beer in the Long Branch with Kitty and Doc. And then there's Boris Badenov.

I am reading The Boys by Ron and Clint Howard about their childhood days as TV stars. Lots of behind the scene descriptions of some of these characters from the 60s-70s TV shows. I always disliked Don Knotts Barney character but apparently his real personality was totally opposite.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pinkytoe

I am reading The Boys by Ron and Clint Howard about their childhood days as TV stars. Lots of behind the scene descriptions of some of these characters from the 60s-70s TV shows. I always disliked Don Knotts Barney character but apparently his real personality was totally opposite.

---

that was a super book--listened to it on a long drive in the fall and really liked it. Fascinating to hear the stories, as I was a big fan of Andy of Mayberry show, still am.

how about movies?

There was one about an orphan boy who becomes radicalized after a military strike kills his family. He gets indoctrinated into an ancient religion, joins a band of rebel insurgents and carries out a terrorist attack that kills 300,000 people.

The past is often cringe-worthy, don't you think? TV just puts it back in our faces, because it's preserved in a way we can revisit, without benefit of fuzzily "remembering". Sure, some of our screen heroes were despicable in retrospect. Some of our REAL LIFE heroes were pretty awful people in retrospect. I don't see it as generational other than time changes what is and isn't acceptable, and hopefully for the better (present moment excepted!!).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by early morning

The past is often cringe-worthy, don't you think? TV just puts it back in our faces, because it's preserved in a way we can revisit, without benefit of fuzzily "remembering". Sure, some of our screen heroes were despicable in retrospect. Some of our REAL LIFE heroes were pretty awful people in retrospect. I don't see it as generational other than time changes what is and isn't acceptable, and hopefully for the better (present moment excepted!!).

---

Respective of that, and of what Rogar was saying about The Boys, Ron Howard said that Andy Griffith was already depicting the Mayberry (Mt Airy) of his boyhood growing up, and that he was deliberately painting it the way it was in the 1920's, and not in the 1950's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by early morning

The past is often cringe-worthy, don't you think? TV just puts it back in our faces, because it's preserved in a way we can revisit, without benefit of fuzzily "remembering". Sure, some of our screen heroes were despicable in retrospect. Some of our REAL LIFE heroes were pretty awful people in retrospect. I don't see it as generational other than time changes what is and isn't acceptable, and hopefully for the better (present moment excepted!!).

---

I agree with this. About Andy: I remember feeling empathy for Opie when he did something punishable because he was told to go upstairs and wait for "his whoopin'. As one who received the occasional whoopin' it made me very dreadful for Opie.

That would never fly on today's TV.

This thread reminds me a little of another thread I saw on another platform and the book Gone with Wind was being discussed. I realize that GWTW romanticizes the Old South, but it's still a compelling story and good literature. But I didn't realize the vituperative hatred for it from an entire population who have never even read it (admittedly). Most of whom, based on their profiles were also Gen Z. Yes, GWTW has its problems, but it hadn't occurred to me that people couldn't balance the two elements and read it for what it was. I didn't realize how villainized the book was. I gained a great deal from reading GWTW. I read at a time in my life when I was living in campgrounds with two young children and working at a fast food restaurant. It's one of those books I've never forgotten and I've reread it several times.

Quote:

---

it hadn't occurred to me that people couldn't balance the two elements and read it for what it was

---

Sadly, I think people are losing the ability to think deeply about issues and and parse out good from the bad. We don't teach kids HOW to learn or how to think on their own. (And this is not to be confused with teaching them WHAT to think lol)

I never liked Scarlet, though. :|(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by early morning

Sadly, I think people are losing the ability to think deeply about issues and and parse out good from the bad. We don't teach kids HOW to learn or how to think on their own. (And this is not to be confused with teaching them WHAT to think lol)

I never liked Scarlet, though. :|(

---

We are supposed to like Scarlett for her grit, and her unshakable love for Tara. I actually *do* like Scarlet for those traits.

Some years ago my garden club was searching around for a theme for our upcoming flower show and someone suggested GWTW. So, we used that theme and I loved it. My table display had a cigar for Rhett. But even at that time I knew we were acting in a politically incorrect way.

Quote:

---

Some years ago my garden club was searching around for a theme for our upcoming flower show and someone suggested GWTW. So, we used that theme and I loved it. My table display had a cigar for Rhett. But even at that time I knew we were acting in a politically incorrect way

---

Good theme for flowers, lol! Don't care why we're supposed to like Scarlet, I do not - she is /was scheming, money-grubbing, selfish, and manipulative. I agree she was tenacious, which could have been a redeeming feature - but no. STILL don't like her.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iris lilies

We are supposed to like Scarlett for her grit, and her unshakable love for Tara. I actually *do* like Scarlet for those traits.

Some years ago my garden club was searching around for a theme for our upcoming flower show and someone suggested GWTW. So, we used that theme and I loved it. My table display had a cigar for Rhett. But even at that time I knew we were acting in a politically incorrect way.

---

I am Aries, and I read once that the prototypical Aries female is Scarlett O'Hara. Well, that's not me. I identified more with Melanie Wilkes, while wishing I was more like Scarlett. Scarlett was the Donald Trump of that story. She got things done and would sell her soul to do it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by catherine

I am Aries, and I read once that the prototypical Aries female is Scarlett O'Hara. Well, that's not me. I identified more with Melanie Wilkes, while wishing I was more like Scarlett. Scarlett was the Donald Trump of that story. She got things done and would sell her soul to do it.

---

Scarlett’s Achilles heel was the weak and namby pamby Ashley Wilkes. I did not admire her for that when she had sexy baddie Rhett Butler at her finger tips.

GWTW is not great literature, it is not highbrow, but it is an engaging story.

One of the few assignments I remember from college was when I wrote a paper comparing Scarlett O’Hara and Becky Sharp, a main character in Vanity Fair. Becky also had her goody two shoes nemesis in Amelia, just like Scarlett had in Melanie.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iris lilies

Scarlett’s Achilles heel was the weak and namby pamby Ashley Wilkes. I did not admire her for that when she had sexy baddie Rhett Butler at her finger tips.

---

Yeah, she definitely didn't know herself very well. Ashley was not right for her. It's a great lesson--that we can spend a lifetime chasing the wrong thing--what Stephen Covey called the ladder against the wrong wall. Scary, actually.

I’m laughing here because simultaneously over on a sub Reddit there’s a thread going about the most hated characters in the TV show “Succession” which is hilarious because every character in that show is drawn to be disliked. It probably is my favorite TV show ever

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iris lilies

Scarlett’s Achilles heel was the weak and namby pamby Ashley Wilkes. I did not admire her for that when she had sexy baddie Rhett Butler at her finger tips.

GWTW is not great literature, it is not highbrow, but it is an engaging story.

One of the few assignments I remember from college was when I wrote a paper comparing Scarlett O’Hara and Becky Sharp, a main character in Vanity Fair. Becky also had her goody two shoes nemesis in Amelia, just like Scarlett had in Melanie.

---

I mean it's probably not GREAT, but it's good. Scarlett does NOT know herself. The romance was the least important part of Scarlett's character. There's a great scene where she returns home to Tara and visits the neighboring plantation, where she has a conversation with the destitute matriarch. And the woman tells Scarlett that it is her ability to endure, to persevere, to bend with the winds of change that makes her strong, that makes her successful, that makes her a survivor, while about her, the gentry class is dying, "gone with the wind." THAT is a great scene. if you get bogged down with Scarlett's love interests, it's missing the point of the story. And Scarlett doesn't even get it. She thinks the matriarch is stupid and boring. That's the point. People overlook the power of Scarlett's character. Is she nice? No. Is she good...not really, but not really bad. But Scarlett is a survivor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by early morning

Sadly, I think people are losing the ability to think deeply about issues and and parse out good from the bad. We don't teach kids HOW to learn or how to think on their own. (And this is not to be confused with teaching them WHAT to think lol)

I never liked Scarlet, though. :|(

---

I don't think Scarlett is supposed to be likeable. That's part of the intrinsic power of the story. She is an antihero. And the ultimate survivor. She isn't really a good person. But she is loyal, strong, and powerful. She has no idea what's the best thing for herself or others. She doesn't recognize love till it's too late. These are the themes that make it a good story, not the silly trappings of Ashley or Rhett.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by catherine

Yeah, she definitely didn't know herself very well. Ashley was not right for her. It's a great lesson--that we can spend a lifetime chasing the wrong thing--what Stephen Covey called the ladder against the wrong wall. Scary, actually.

---

No, she doesn't know herself. She doesn't even know what love is or what goodness is. Scarlett isn't even good herself. She's a very interesting character though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tiam

I mean it's probably not GREAT, but it's good. Scarlett does NOT know herself. The romance was the least important part of Scarlett's character. There's a great scene where she returns home to Tara and visits the neighboring plantation, where she has a conversation with the destitute matriarch. And the woman tells Scarlett that it is her ability to endure, to persevere, to bend with the winds of change that makes her strong, that makes her successful, that makes her a survivor, while about her, the gentry class is dying, "gone with the wind." THAT is a great scene. if you get bogged down with Scarlett's love interests, it's missing the point of the story. And Scarlett doesn't even get it. She thinks the matriarch is stupid and boring. That's the point. People overlook the power of Scarlett's character. Is she nice? No. Is she good...not really, but not really bad. But Scarlett is a survivor.

---

This is all true, I like everything you’re saying about Scarlet.

Yes Tiam, I think you describe her very well. I would say that she certainly isn't likeable in the sense that one would want her for a friend, and she really wasn't a very nice person. On the other hand, she is extremely likeable in the sense of being one of the great characters of fiction.

By the way (since we've drifted from TV to movies and literature), did anyone else read the lame sequel to GWTW, Scarlett by Alexandra Ripley? It's been quite awhile since I read it, but I recall that the author kind of whitewashed Scarlett, like she was a really nice person deep down inside, she was just misunderstood, i.e. Scarlett was not Scarlett.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rosarugosa

By the way (since we've drifted from TV to movies and literature), did anyone else read the lame sequel to GWTW, Scarlett by Alexandra Ripley? It's been quite awhile since I read it, but I recall that the author kind of whitewashed Scarlett, like she was a really nice person deep down inside, she was just misunderstood, i.e. Scarlett was not Scarlett.

---

Nope

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iris lilies

Nope

---

Good for you! I should have known better, but I guess I didn't.

I was about 18 when I read GWTW. I realized that it was a very well-written book because of the intense dislike I had for Scarlet. I felt she was a self-centered, whiny, spoiled brat who only stepped up when it would directly effect her, and even then, if what she did HAPPENED to benefit anyone else, okay, but her focus was ALWAYS on herself first.

See! I told you it was an intense dislike!!! >8)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by happystuff

I was about 18 when I read GWTW. I realized that it was a very well-written book because of the intense dislike I had for Scarlet. I felt she was a self-centered, whiny, spoiled brat who only stepped up when it would directly effect her, and even then, if what she did HAPPENED to benefit anyone else, okay, but her focus was ALWAYS on herself first.

See! I told you it was an intense dislike!!! >8)

---

Well, it's true. I don't think you're unique in that. I don't think people are supposed to like Scarlett. It's part of the theme of the story.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iris lilies

Nope

---

I did. I didn't really love it. Barely remember it, actually, where as GWTW is seared into my consciousness.