Mel TM:

Sometimes it seems to me that people/writers are unwilling to buy into the idea that there can be an entertaining long-term relationship on TV. I like UST as much as the next person, but I don't think RST is necessarily inferior. Just different, and essential if you want to avoid creative stagnation.

Souris:

That inability to accept long-term relationships is EXACTLY the mindset that is omnipresent among critics (::cough::MattRoush::cough::) and viewers, and I HATE IT. It's my all-time TV pet peeve. It's such a juvenile, stunted, narrow belief that couples can't be interesting together. That's utter bollocks. J.J. has given voice to that crap, too. It conveys the belief that the "chase" is all that matters, and anything afterward is pointless and boring, which it's NOT. UST is great, true, but it has a definite life span, and once it's dragged out too long, where it becomes ridiculous that it's not RST, it dies. I have every bit as much interest in seeing what happens with a couple after consummation as before. If the couple is good, if the writing is good, if they pay attention to their story, then they should be every bit as interesting. Chemistry between actors doesn't vanish once they do a love scene, and the way producers act, you'd think it did. Not only does it not give the fans any credit, it doesn't give their writing ability any credit.

Mel TM:

You'd think critics would *want* to see something new for a change. It baffles me that they're so stuck on this one particular cliche. It's like they have total blinders on to the concept that "Hey! Here's an opportunity for something new!" Would Matt Roush and his hooray-ing prefer that characters jumped in the sack with a new love interest every week while always pining for that one special person? Or should characters only be in long-term relationships with people with whom they have no chemistry? That way, no precious drop of UST is destroyed!

I just hate it when producers say RST will kill a show. Broken record much? Shows that have enough stories to tell will not need to forever be propped up by UST.

Lugia:

I don't watch a show for people stagnating or not growing up (like Buffy). I want to see the evolution, and entering serious relationships and dealing with all the wonderful and frustrating experiences that brings with it, is tons more enjoyable than watching comic book characters looking silly trying to avoid getting together.

If you're creative, "producing" issues (cast changes, timing, money, fan reaction) don't concern you. You just have to keep it honest, because you can't hide *anything* on screen. As long as there's chemistry and tension, there will both be UST *AND* RST. They coexist and you can't have one without the other, just like you can't have one part of your "dynamic duo" without the other.

Kate:

I guess my problem is that it isn't a question of UST or RST with Syd and Vaughn because they're already had both. Now we're going back in a circle. It's annoying and a waste of time because we all know they're going to end up back together. I keep asking myself, "What's the point?" There is no good point. It's just to drag it out as long as absoutely tolerable for the audience. There has yet to be one producer or network that just lets the characters be together. They're so against doing what the audience wants and I fucking hate it!

Just once I'd like to see a network with balls enough to actually follow-through on their "promise" of a relationship. Just once I'd like to see writers not skew away from the challenge of writing a relationship without there having to be a breakup a month later. Why is it so hard to write a relationship between people, a good one, yet it's so easy for them to write about Rambaldi and the dozens of intricate plotlines they pull out of their asses every week? Why do they assume this is what we want?

  Back to the New VSR