Dumbest Professional Narrative?

Popular TV shows? Too many to count. I'm not even going to list the dumb MTV ones, but the History channel has a lot of dumb ones, like Ancient Aliens and The National Geographic channel's Bigfoot show

Finding Bigfoot for sure....all those trivia questions with the answers presented as facts...

Under the dome (Season 3). I loved the first season, the second one was ok, but the third one? I just kept watching it to laugh about it haha :P

Magic's Biggest Secrets Finally Revealed. I wanted to watch the show (it was on TV on daily basis about a year ago)- it looked cheap, but I am a curious person. After a couple of tricks I couldn't stand the narrator anymore and never watched it again.

PS: Other than that, everything on KanalD

Skyrim.

Apocaliptic Dragons all over the place? lets play a racist game about "independece", and off course all the aincients hided their treasures at the end of dungeons with conviently placed exits at the end.. those ancients.. not very clever

Actual representation of a skyrim dungeon

Covert Affairs should just have ended after season 4.
Long story made short :The first four seasons are a good spy series showing how a newbie evolves into a hardened veteran who's seen and done it all. They form a coherent whole with what feels like a logical conclusion to it all. And most importantly: Personal issues play into subplots, but on the whole don't overtake the spy business as the main plot.

Then comes along season 5, trying to start off a sequel story. And all of a sudden the personal issues take center stage and the spy business turns into a backdrop for a romance drama.

Continuum also deserves mention.
Even though there's plenty in-universe explanation for the complete shift in focus that starts off season 3, that doesn't excuse the fact that season 3 just turns out to be quite dull plot-wise.

I'll go with anything in "recent" times by David Cage since I don't even need to play his games to think their plots are stupid...

I don't care if a movie's logic doesn't match real-life logic. I'm down for some good entertainment, and I'm a fan of speculative fiction and fantasy, so I'm fine with a movie creating its own rules. But once those rules are created, then it's important to me that they stick to those rules.

Remember the movie Minority Report? There was a red ball/brown ball dichotomy set up so that the movie could open with a tense few minutes of wondering if the hero would be able to save the victims-to-be in time. If the murder-to-be is a crime of passion, then the system spits out a red ball and the heroes only have hours to stop the crime before it happens. If the murder-to-be is premeditated, then the system spits out a brown ball and the heroes have a couple of days to stop the crime before it happens. Our hero is then implicated in a murder with a brown ball, giving those chasing him days to try and stop the murder before it happens. When the moment of the murder occurs, however, it is not a premeditated murder, but a crime of passion! The system should have spit out a red ball, and given the investigators hours to stop the murder, not days.

Even great franchises, like the Marvel movies, aren't immune to this either. I'm a huge fan of them, and see them in the theaters when they come out. But whenever they break their own rules, it really gets under my skin. In the first Iron Man movie, we find that Stark Industries has come up with a new electrical propulsion system. The opening scenes show us that since the rockets no longer needs to carry massive amounts of chemical propellant, they can be made much smaller and still be as effective as their larger counterparts. And this electrically-powered propulsion system is what Tony uses to fly in his Iron Man suit. I can accept that, since it's internally consistent, and the arc reactor gives virtually unlimited electricity to power the suit. But in later movies (I believe I noticed it in the Avengers and every movie after that), Iron Man leaves a contrail in the sky behind him when he flies. A contrail would only form like that if his suit was flown using some chemical propellant. Why abandon the electrically-powered propulsion system when it worked so well? And where on that suit is Tony managing to store the amount of chemical propellant necessary to fly further than a few feet, much less the long-term sustained flight we see in the movies? Perhaps it was added because leaving a contrail behind you when flying looks "cool", but seeing it absolutely destroys my ability to lose myself in the story.

Something similar happens in Ant-Man. They establish in the movie that when getting bigger or smaller, the mass of an object doesn't change. Which is why the hero is able to punch "with the force of a bullet" when he is a few millimeters tall; he might be tiny, but still has all the mass he normally would. But then that means a random ant is able to carry a 180 pound (about 80 kilograms) weight on its back without trouble, and fly with that much weight on its back? I know ants can easily lift twenty to fifty times their body weight, but that ant doesn't weigh five pounds (about two kilograms)! Or there is a scene when a character shrinks rather heavy piece of equipment in order to carry it around in his pocket later in the movie. If the mass of an object doesn't change, how is the character even able to lift the equipment, much less carry it around in his pocket without being noticed?

Like I said, I don't care if the rules you set for your universe don't match the rules in our universe. It's entertainment, and I want to be entertained. The writer and creators can set whatever rules they want, but once they set up those rules for the audience, they shouldn't go and break them later in the story. It's jarring, and it ruins any sense of immersion in their universe that I might have been experiencing.

The Law and Order SVU episode "depicting" Gamergate: http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2015/02/12/law-order-svu-takes-on-gamergate-cant-press-reset-button/
All gamers are mysogynysts! That means you too shitlord.