Narrative stinginess in binge-worthy shows.
August 25, 2016 12:43 PM Subscribe
"Delay of audience gratification has been a staple of episodic storytelling for a long time, but no show advanced the practice more than the grandfather of plotblocking, Lost. No matter how well-written the various flashbacks often were, the writers knew that what kept us hooked was the mystery of the island — and that storyline was illiberally meted out like capfuls of water to a thirsty man. Just enough to keep us alive. I’ve actually found that the shows that are the most “binge-worthy” are the most narratively stingy. You start each new episode almost out of frustration, hoping it will deliver a morsel of satisfaction, an inch of forward progress."
Writer-director Andrew Matthews on Stranger Things and his idea of "plotblocking".
I've noticed this before, but I don't think what Lost did exists in Stranger Things at all.
Stranger Things is 8 episodes, and every single piece of information that's going on comes to the viewer exactly as early as it can.
Lost is 122 episodes, and each and every revelation about the plot and characters is delayed until the last possible moment, when the writers are finally forced to make something up. The same holds for the show as a whole.
There's a big difference. In Stranger Things, we, the audience, are in on what's happening. We know the facts of the plot as soon as the characters do, and often sooner than many of the characters. The suspense lies in two major aspects: asymmetry of who knows what and when, and a giant monster trying to eat everybody. When it comes to an end, it's succinct, it's coherent, and they just barely avoid falling into the True Detective trap, where they can't possibly make any followup without rebooting completely. In Lost, *nobody* is in on the facts or the plot—not the audience, not the characters. In hindsight, the writers probably weren't either.
When you get to the end of Stranger Things, you don't feel betrayed for having got there.
posted by atbash at 12:59 PM on August 25, 2016 [66 favorites]
Stranger Things is 8 episodes, and every single piece of information that's going on comes to the viewer exactly as early as it can.
Lost is 122 episodes, and each and every revelation about the plot and characters is delayed until the last possible moment, when the writers are finally forced to make something up. The same holds for the show as a whole.
There's a big difference. In Stranger Things, we, the audience, are in on what's happening. We know the facts of the plot as soon as the characters do, and often sooner than many of the characters. The suspense lies in two major aspects: asymmetry of who knows what and when, and a giant monster trying to eat everybody. When it comes to an end, it's succinct, it's coherent, and they just barely avoid falling into the True Detective trap, where they can't possibly make any followup without rebooting completely. In Lost, *nobody* is in on the facts or the plot—not the audience, not the characters. In hindsight, the writers probably weren't either.
When you get to the end of Stranger Things, you don't feel betrayed for having got there.
posted by atbash at 12:59 PM on August 25, 2016 [66 favorites]
I felt like Stranger Things (which I enjoyed a lot) really could have devoted more time to certain plot points. Barb was criminally underused (and it's like nobody even missed her when she was gone) and Steve's apparent decision to stop being an asshole had so little on-screen justification that it really stretched plausibility for me.
More screen time for those subplots wouldn't have been a bad idea at all.
That said, I think the article is right that the series belabors some of its points. But I think it's mostly a failure to strike the perfect balance in how its screen time is portioned out rather than a deliberate attempt to string the viewer along.
posted by a mirror and an encyclopedia at 1:05 PM on August 25, 2016 [9 favorites]
More screen time for those subplots wouldn't have been a bad idea at all.
That said, I think the article is right that the series belabors some of its points. But I think it's mostly a failure to strike the perfect balance in how its screen time is portioned out rather than a deliberate attempt to string the viewer along.
posted by a mirror and an encyclopedia at 1:05 PM on August 25, 2016 [9 favorites]
One of the things I liked about Stranger Things was that in every episode, stuff happened. Never felt like the wheels were just spinning to delay something exciting for a late-season reveal. But I do agree with the writer's closing thesis, which is that movies are also good and not everything should be episodic. A bold stand to take, but I'm with him.
posted by prize bull octorok at 1:10 PM on August 25, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by prize bull octorok at 1:10 PM on August 25, 2016 [3 favorites]
I liked Stranger Things, because it was a perfect 8 episodes. However, they are going to make more. I don't want more. This is what bothers me about media now...they never make a concise story and leave it alone. So I guess I agree with him and the endless mystery trend.
posted by agregoli at 1:14 PM on August 25, 2016 [5 favorites]
posted by agregoli at 1:14 PM on August 25, 2016 [5 favorites]
Lost was good for all of one season in my opinion. Stranger Things wasn't even that.
posted by WalkerWestridge at 1:17 PM on August 25, 2016
posted by WalkerWestridge at 1:17 PM on August 25, 2016
He's got a point but I think that Stranger Things is the wrong target for it. It was only eight hours and moved pretty quickly. I'd love to see more shows run for that time rather than 13 or more episodes.
posted by octothorpe at 1:19 PM on August 25, 2016 [5 favorites]
posted by octothorpe at 1:19 PM on August 25, 2016 [5 favorites]
But I do agree with the writer's closing thesis, which is that movies are also good and not everything should be episodic. A bold stand to take, but I'm with him.
Ha!
But yeah, it seems like the whole point of this article is not so much to convince us that Stranger Things had to be more concise—It's for Andrew Matthews to tell his friends/agent/self that he doesn't want to move from movies to TV. Which is fine.
I agree that some aspects of the show could have been tightened up, and that some could have used more time. But I am not convinced that Stranger Things was deliberately stalling in an attempt to pad out the show or make people want to binge it for shreds of plot.
posted by ejs at 1:20 PM on August 25, 2016 [3 favorites]
Ha!
But yeah, it seems like the whole point of this article is not so much to convince us that Stranger Things had to be more concise—It's for Andrew Matthews to tell his friends/agent/self that he doesn't want to move from movies to TV. Which is fine.
I agree that some aspects of the show could have been tightened up, and that some could have used more time. But I am not convinced that Stranger Things was deliberately stalling in an attempt to pad out the show or make people want to binge it for shreds of plot.
posted by ejs at 1:20 PM on August 25, 2016 [3 favorites]
I think some are missing the fact that there will be untold number of new seasons of Stranger Things coming soon.
posted by agregoli at 1:22 PM on August 25, 2016
posted by agregoli at 1:22 PM on August 25, 2016
...Which will be judged in their turn.
posted by ejs at 1:23 PM on August 25, 2016 [7 favorites]
posted by ejs at 1:23 PM on August 25, 2016 [7 favorites]
I binged the first seven episodes of Stranger Things in a night and then waited almost a week to finish it off. Every episode to me felt unsatisfying, even the ending happened so quickly.
I definitely would have preferred another 2-3 episodes of material because the show just felt so shallow. Like, they show all these things that could have been potentially cool but it held all of it's cards so close to its chest and then forgot about all sorts of plot threads. The show just stops caring about Barb, the buildup of Brenner and his experiments goes nowhere really, the family life of the chief. Probably more that I've forgotten about as well.
I would have loved to have seen more character moments. Like, I would have loved to have gotten to know Will for more than ten minutes before he went missing. I would have loved to have seen the kids teach Eleven how to play D&D and see that tension between the two boys build. Some of the best Spielberg moments happened in quiet moments between characters and that would have been so great to see. The actors were so fantastic and I really wanted to see them doing more things together.
posted by Neronomius at 1:25 PM on August 25, 2016 [2 favorites]
I definitely would have preferred another 2-3 episodes of material because the show just felt so shallow. Like, they show all these things that could have been potentially cool but it held all of it's cards so close to its chest and then forgot about all sorts of plot threads. The show just stops caring about Barb, the buildup of Brenner and his experiments goes nowhere really, the family life of the chief. Probably more that I've forgotten about as well.
I would have loved to have seen more character moments. Like, I would have loved to have gotten to know Will for more than ten minutes before he went missing. I would have loved to have seen the kids teach Eleven how to play D&D and see that tension between the two boys build. Some of the best Spielberg moments happened in quiet moments between characters and that would have been so great to see. The actors were so fantastic and I really wanted to see them doing more things together.
posted by Neronomius at 1:25 PM on August 25, 2016 [2 favorites]
I'd argue that The Night Of, this summer's other bingeworthy show, is far more guilty of plotblocking than Stranger Things. The latter advanced plots pretty quickly. Sure, it didn't show the monster right away, and you were never quite sure what happened to Will until they told you, but it was only eight hours of television. The former, on the other hand, spends a lot of time on things that seem completely irrelevant - Stone's feet, forpetessake - just to stretch episodes out and delay you from getting any meaningful information.
posted by moviehawk at 1:26 PM on August 25, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by moviehawk at 1:26 PM on August 25, 2016 [3 favorites]
One of the things that bothers me about Stranger Things is the same thing that bothers me about HBO's The Night Of. In ST, there is this whole hinted-at back story of the cop's dead/missing daughter, which seems to serve no purpose but to legitimize his concern for Joyce's missing son because, what, a male police officer can't care about a missing child unless he has a personal stake in it? For a few episodes I actually thought Eleven would turn out to be his daughter. Or is it going to have more relevance in season 2? And with The Night Of, why is there so much story about the lawyer's skanky feet? There's as much screen time devoted to his trying to find a cure as there is screen time of Nasir's actual trial. I don't see how it is helping any part of the story. I'm more interested in his relationship with his son and ex wife and what that says about him as a person, which is barely explored. Unless there is something about his allergies and that damn cat and the allergy is going to lead him to connect the cat to Andrea's killer, I just don't care about his eczema.
posted by archimago at 1:26 PM on August 25, 2016
posted by archimago at 1:26 PM on August 25, 2016
I binged the first seven episodes of Stranger Things in a night and then waited almost a week to finish it off. Every episode to me felt unsatisfying, even the ending happened so quickly.
"The food here is terrible! And such small portions!"
posted by Strange Interlude at 1:28 PM on August 25, 2016 [32 favorites]
"The food here is terrible! And such small portions!"
posted by Strange Interlude at 1:28 PM on August 25, 2016 [32 favorites]
My point, ejs, is that it ain't a concise story if they are making more. And yet the 8 episode arc was lovely. I wish there were more shows that would happen and end. The public's obsession with more of everything is disturbing to me. And sure does result in a ton of shitty remakes of movies, at the least.
Mystery and everything-not-explained is way cooler to me than endless ongoing details.
posted by agregoli at 1:38 PM on August 25, 2016 [2 favorites]
Mystery and everything-not-explained is way cooler to me than endless ongoing details.
posted by agregoli at 1:38 PM on August 25, 2016 [2 favorites]
I would say that Twin Peaks was the first instance of egregious plot-blocking, rather than Lost.
I stopped watching after I got to the end of season one and still didn't know who killed Laura Palmer.
HBO's new show "The Night Of" is currently guilty of plot-blocking in the first degree, but I must admit, I am enjoying it.
posted by w0mbat at 1:44 PM on August 25, 2016 [1 favorite]
I stopped watching after I got to the end of season one and still didn't know who killed Laura Palmer.
HBO's new show "The Night Of" is currently guilty of plot-blocking in the first degree, but I must admit, I am enjoying it.
posted by w0mbat at 1:44 PM on August 25, 2016 [1 favorite]
The public's obsession with more of everything is disturbing to me
This absolutely. Fawlty Towers (for instance) is a mere 12 episodes and it's perfect.
posted by davebush at 1:48 PM on August 25, 2016 [8 favorites]
This absolutely. Fawlty Towers (for instance) is a mere 12 episodes and it's perfect.
posted by davebush at 1:48 PM on August 25, 2016 [8 favorites]
It's been a while since I saw it, so perhaps I'm misremembering, but Top of the Lake seemed to be a 6 part series that worked on the principle of deferring meaningful info for delayed gratification: I remember finding the final two episodes extraordinarily moving because the show had been relatively plodding and had held back up until that point. Admittedly, with six episodes, the show had to be relatively brisk anyway so you're never really parched for plot as a watcher. But the point that perhaps distinguishes Top of the Lake from true plotblocking, and arguably makes it a more successful example, was that the time that would otherwise have been spent advancing the story focused on aesthetics and creating a mood of isolation: you felt deprived and sated at the same time, which is an interesting and unusual aesthetic flavour.
posted by Collaterly Sisters at 1:49 PM on August 25, 2016 [5 favorites]
posted by Collaterly Sisters at 1:49 PM on August 25, 2016 [5 favorites]
I think parcelling out answers too slowly is just as bad as revealing too much too soon. I never watched Lost, but I eventually gave up on the X Files when it became abundantly clear that the writers never had any idea where they were going, and were making it up so slowly that they were assured of never getting anywhere anyway. The structure of American TV pretty much guarantees this, which is why shows that are well-thought-out from the beginning are probably British or short-season cable shows (or Netflix).
Note that this over-plotblocking can happen even when the author knows where things are going. If mysteries are overhyped and not enough answers are given, it can lead to quitting, too. I gave up halfway through His Dark Materials when it became clear that the author was simply not going to give ANY answers about Dust until the very end. That kind of tease can come off as monumentally unfair (at least to me).
posted by rikschell at 1:49 PM on August 25, 2016
Note that this over-plotblocking can happen even when the author knows where things are going. If mysteries are overhyped and not enough answers are given, it can lead to quitting, too. I gave up halfway through His Dark Materials when it became clear that the author was simply not going to give ANY answers about Dust until the very end. That kind of tease can come off as monumentally unfair (at least to me).
posted by rikschell at 1:49 PM on August 25, 2016
Nobody else seems to think so, but the first three episodes of Stranger Things struck me as kind of padded out. They were eventful as episodes, but a lot of individual scenes lacked forward movement. The decent production and performances kept me engaged until the writing really kicked in, plotwise.
posted by Flexagon at 1:57 PM on August 25, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by Flexagon at 1:57 PM on August 25, 2016 [3 favorites]
I'd like to mention 'The Man in the High Castle' as an egregious example of spinning its wheels. A viewer could almost skip from ep 3 to 10 and not miss too much. I got the impression they were just holding out for a second season. Too bad because the first 2 eps were good.
posted by Dmenet at 1:59 PM on August 25, 2016 [4 favorites]
posted by Dmenet at 1:59 PM on August 25, 2016 [4 favorites]
FWIW "deferring meaningful info for delayed gratification" works as a pretty good description of the art of "telling a story".
posted by Artw at 2:02 PM on August 25, 2016 [19 favorites]
posted by Artw at 2:02 PM on August 25, 2016 [19 favorites]
I see his point, but would like to suggest that the concept of "plot-blocking" goes back much further than episodic storytelling. It is the most pronounced in episodic storytelling, to be sure, but I think there are examples in many other places and formats. I cast my eyes to Hamlet, where the Danish Prince dithers about his course of action for three acts, feigning madness, acting as his own plot-blocker. I suspect if I spent some time noodling, I would think of some films where it is a problem too.
There is also the reverse problem, where certain elements of a plot are rushed and not allowed room and space to breathe and have meaning - and I would point at a lot of the huge "blockbuster" films of the day as suffering from that particular affliction, where momentous events happen and are swept past because we have to get to the next set piece. Repetition dilutes, but too much too fast means nothing matters.
Right now, there is a strong focus/interest in episodic storytelling, which is where TV shines. The pendulum will swing in a different direction at some point.
posted by nubs at 2:04 PM on August 25, 2016
There is also the reverse problem, where certain elements of a plot are rushed and not allowed room and space to breathe and have meaning - and I would point at a lot of the huge "blockbuster" films of the day as suffering from that particular affliction, where momentous events happen and are swept past because we have to get to the next set piece. Repetition dilutes, but too much too fast means nothing matters.
Right now, there is a strong focus/interest in episodic storytelling, which is where TV shines. The pendulum will swing in a different direction at some point.
posted by nubs at 2:04 PM on August 25, 2016
LOST was a shiv in the throat from a lover. Stranger things is a pleasant, if creepy, afternoon bike ride.
posted by blue_beetle at 2:04 PM on August 25, 2016 [12 favorites]
posted by blue_beetle at 2:04 PM on August 25, 2016 [12 favorites]
Re: Barb, @theshrillest Pretty much nails it with "the barb fandom is mostly projection and imagination. she's the boba fett of stranger things"
Oddly I don't think this means it isn't real.
posted by Artw at 2:14 PM on August 25, 2016 [22 favorites]
Oddly I don't think this means it isn't real.
posted by Artw at 2:14 PM on August 25, 2016 [22 favorites]
FWIW "deferring meaningful info for delayed gratification" works as a pretty good description of the art of "telling a story".
If by "pretty good" you mean reductive and profoundly inaccurate in a thousand different ways, sure.
Deferring info is one tool creators use when telling stories. It's not the tool.
Besides, I think what this article is trying to get at is the question of whether that tool is being well-used or poorly used in shows made for binge-watching. Pacing is a thing in story-telling, and one element of pacing is how and why things are withheld, and how and when they're revealed. Too quickly can make a story feel undeveloped; too slowly can make it feel padded; that moment when it occurs to you the creator doesn't actually have a plan can feel like a betrayal of the time and trust you've invested.
posted by not that girl at 2:14 PM on August 25, 2016 [4 favorites]
If by "pretty good" you mean reductive and profoundly inaccurate in a thousand different ways, sure.
Deferring info is one tool creators use when telling stories. It's not the tool.
Besides, I think what this article is trying to get at is the question of whether that tool is being well-used or poorly used in shows made for binge-watching. Pacing is a thing in story-telling, and one element of pacing is how and why things are withheld, and how and when they're revealed. Too quickly can make a story feel undeveloped; too slowly can make it feel padded; that moment when it occurs to you the creator doesn't actually have a plan can feel like a betrayal of the time and trust you've invested.
posted by not that girl at 2:14 PM on August 25, 2016 [4 favorites]
"I would say that Twin Peaks was the first instance of egregious plot-blocking, rather than Lost.
I stopped watching after I got to the end of season one and still didn't know who killed Laura Palmer."
I wouldn't say that it was plot-blocking. David Lynch never intended to reveal who Laura Palmer's killer was at all - it was just a hook to hang the show on, a central point around which he could stage these weird little vignettes. I don't think you can call it plot-blocking if it was never intended to be revealed in the first place.
I stopped watching after I got to the end of season one and still didn't know who killed Laura Palmer."
I wouldn't say that it was plot-blocking. David Lynch never intended to reveal who Laura Palmer's killer was at all - it was just a hook to hang the show on, a central point around which he could stage these weird little vignettes. I don't think you can call it plot-blocking if it was never intended to be revealed in the first place.
During the first and second season, the search for Laura Palmer's killer served as the engine for the plot, and captured the public's imagination, although the creators admitted this was largely a MacGuffin; each episode was really about the interactions between the townsfolk.posted by komara at 2:17 PM on August 25, 2016 [8 favorites]
Declining ratings led to ABC's insistence that the identity of Laura's murderer be revealed midway through the second season.
Lynch never wanted to solve the murder, while [Mark] Frost felt that they had an obligation to the audience to solve it. This created tension between the two men. [Wikipedia]
FWIW "deferring meaningful info for delayed gratification" works as a pretty good description of the art of "telling a story".
Maybe my description was a little broad, but I thought in context it was clear that my emphasis was on the relative slowness of plot delivery. Sure, all stories are based on the principle of deferring information, but there are degrees of slowness in arriving there.
posted by Collaterly Sisters at 2:19 PM on August 25, 2016
Maybe my description was a little broad, but I thought in context it was clear that my emphasis was on the relative slowness of plot delivery. Sure, all stories are based on the principle of deferring information, but there are degrees of slowness in arriving there.
posted by Collaterly Sisters at 2:19 PM on August 25, 2016
It's not new, it's just that the current balance is skewed towards long arching plots instead of monster-of-the-week stories. Media companies need addicts, not satisfied customers who can walk away.
posted by mattamatic at 2:19 PM on August 25, 2016
posted by mattamatic at 2:19 PM on August 25, 2016
Re: Barb, @theshrillest Pretty much nails it with "the barb fandom is mostly projection and imagination. she's the boba fett of stranger things"
I was musing on Barb the other day and thinking that what was interesting to me was that she was the inversion of the Cabin in the Woods thing/the idea of the "final girl" in horror films. Barb's the virgin, the good one, who is supposed to survive by virtue of her virtue; instead, she's the one taken. Not sure if that explains the fandom; I feel she was very underused and under-acknowledged in the story; in a small town where one kid has gone missing and turned up dead, Barb's disappearance should've made some noise, despite the "cover story".
posted by nubs at 2:25 PM on August 25, 2016 [5 favorites]
I was musing on Barb the other day and thinking that what was interesting to me was that she was the inversion of the Cabin in the Woods thing/the idea of the "final girl" in horror films. Barb's the virgin, the good one, who is supposed to survive by virtue of her virtue; instead, she's the one taken. Not sure if that explains the fandom; I feel she was very underused and under-acknowledged in the story; in a small town where one kid has gone missing and turned up dead, Barb's disappearance should've made some noise, despite the "cover story".
posted by nubs at 2:25 PM on August 25, 2016 [5 favorites]
It's not new, it's just that the current balance is skewed towards long arching plots instead of monster-of-the-week stories. Media companies need addicts, not satisfied customers who can walk away.
The huge interest in having long-arc plots on TV also hinges on the fact that we have the capability to binge-watch as never before, with DVRs/Netflix/DVDs; there is an element in the emergence of this popularity that can be tied to the technology that enables it. If TV series still depended on you having to be in front of it at a set time every week, I don't think the heavily involved episodic format would be as prevalent.
posted by nubs at 2:30 PM on August 25, 2016 [7 favorites]
The huge interest in having long-arc plots on TV also hinges on the fact that we have the capability to binge-watch as never before, with DVRs/Netflix/DVDs; there is an element in the emergence of this popularity that can be tied to the technology that enables it. If TV series still depended on you having to be in front of it at a set time every week, I don't think the heavily involved episodic format would be as prevalent.
posted by nubs at 2:30 PM on August 25, 2016 [7 favorites]
a central point around which he could stage these weird little vignettes
I think this is a fine premise for a show! The inability of network executives to realize that an unanswered question as a premise is a great framing device and not a problem is in line with viewers who think the point of a story is the ending. Not all journeys have destinations.
Lost did well in the beginning because it was based on an ensemble cast with greatly varying life experiences and the mysteries of the island were something they bonded over, not a problem to solve. In theory the problem was that they survived a plane crash and wanted to get home. In reality, some of the characters didn't want to leave, some had no homes, and some felt that their circumstance had some greater meaning -- and maybe it did for some, but not all. Eventually it became clear there was no true ending, but people enjoyed the show so more people were added, more mysteries came to light, and the writers decided that the only way to end it was to offer answers to the questions -- too many answers.
It's why a number of people, hearing that Stranger Things would continue, hoped that it would be an anthology-style series because we don't need answers. I'm scared that they'll provide answers. I don't want answers. And frankly, I'm not sure I need more questions.
posted by mikeh at 2:42 PM on August 25, 2016 [2 favorites]
I think this is a fine premise for a show! The inability of network executives to realize that an unanswered question as a premise is a great framing device and not a problem is in line with viewers who think the point of a story is the ending. Not all journeys have destinations.
Lost did well in the beginning because it was based on an ensemble cast with greatly varying life experiences and the mysteries of the island were something they bonded over, not a problem to solve. In theory the problem was that they survived a plane crash and wanted to get home. In reality, some of the characters didn't want to leave, some had no homes, and some felt that their circumstance had some greater meaning -- and maybe it did for some, but not all. Eventually it became clear there was no true ending, but people enjoyed the show so more people were added, more mysteries came to light, and the writers decided that the only way to end it was to offer answers to the questions -- too many answers.
It's why a number of people, hearing that Stranger Things would continue, hoped that it would be an anthology-style series because we don't need answers. I'm scared that they'll provide answers. I don't want answers. And frankly, I'm not sure I need more questions.
posted by mikeh at 2:42 PM on August 25, 2016 [2 favorites]
If TV series still depended on you having to be in front of it at a set time every week, I don't think the heavily involved episodic format would be as prevalent.
That was why shows always reset at the end of each episode so that you could watch them in any order. You knew that if a character got a new job or girlfriend/boyfriend at the beginning of the hour, that they'd be right back in their old situation by the end of that episode. The networks demanded that structure so that they could run them in any order and it made the shows easier to sell into syndication.
It wasn't until shows like Hill Street Blues that we started to get episodes that built on each other and then it wasn't until Wiseguy (I think) where we got a single main plot that stretched over multiple episodes.
posted by octothorpe at 2:44 PM on August 25, 2016 [3 favorites]
That was why shows always reset at the end of each episode so that you could watch them in any order. You knew that if a character got a new job or girlfriend/boyfriend at the beginning of the hour, that they'd be right back in their old situation by the end of that episode. The networks demanded that structure so that they could run them in any order and it made the shows easier to sell into syndication.
It wasn't until shows like Hill Street Blues that we started to get episodes that built on each other and then it wasn't until Wiseguy (I think) where we got a single main plot that stretched over multiple episodes.
posted by octothorpe at 2:44 PM on August 25, 2016 [3 favorites]
ANYONE can write a great beginning. That's really not the hard part.
posted by Artw at 2:46 PM on August 25, 2016 [7 favorites]
posted by Artw at 2:46 PM on August 25, 2016 [7 favorites]
I feel like Stranger Things was good enough to have earned us giving them a crack at winning us over again with a second season, and if they True Detective things up, well, so it goes
posted by prize bull octorok at 2:46 PM on August 25, 2016 [6 favorites]
posted by prize bull octorok at 2:46 PM on August 25, 2016 [6 favorites]
^F the killing
0 results.
Oh my god that show was so bad this way. Every single episode was like 5 minutes to completely resolve the cliffhanger from the last episode 40 minutes of non-plot followed by a 2 minute OH MY GOD CLIFFHANGER THEY ARE GOING TO SOLVE THE MYSTERY!. (That of course is a complete red herring that gets resolved to completion 5 minutes into the next episode.)
(That and everyone on the show was completely unable to think their way our of a wet paper bag.)
posted by aspo at 2:48 PM on August 25, 2016 [3 favorites]
0 results.
Oh my god that show was so bad this way. Every single episode was like 5 minutes to completely resolve the cliffhanger from the last episode 40 minutes of non-plot followed by a 2 minute OH MY GOD CLIFFHANGER THEY ARE GOING TO SOLVE THE MYSTERY!. (That of course is a complete red herring that gets resolved to completion 5 minutes into the next episode.)
(That and everyone on the show was completely unable to think their way our of a wet paper bag.)
posted by aspo at 2:48 PM on August 25, 2016 [3 favorites]
Maybe I'm just nostalgic for the days when a tv series might not hard reset but the ongoing premise will continue even if there's some character development. If someone's ongoing turmoil or plot arc ends, it means the character is being written off the show or they die. Or the actor portraying them quit. Or died.
posted by mikeh at 2:51 PM on August 25, 2016
posted by mikeh at 2:51 PM on August 25, 2016
It's like reading One Thousand and One Nights and being really hung up on what's going to happen to Scheherazade.
posted by mikeh at 2:53 PM on August 25, 2016 [11 favorites]
posted by mikeh at 2:53 PM on August 25, 2016 [11 favorites]
I was literally just going to say that. Plot developments aren't necessarily the most important parts of a narrative, although they may be useful in keeping people interested.
posted by Small Dollar at 2:55 PM on August 25, 2016
posted by Small Dollar at 2:55 PM on August 25, 2016
Spoilers for season 2:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
For what it's worth the Duffer Brothers have stated they have ideas for season 2, including explaining the events from season 1 and going more in depth with the mythology of the show. In interviews they've specifically talked about needing to explain Barb's disappearance in the show, since she (along with others) disappeared unexplainably, while Will came back. Season 2 jumps forward 1 year.
posted by gucci mane at 2:57 PM on August 25, 2016
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
For what it's worth the Duffer Brothers have stated they have ideas for season 2, including explaining the events from season 1 and going more in depth with the mythology of the show. In interviews they've specifically talked about needing to explain Barb's disappearance in the show, since she (along with others) disappeared unexplainably, while Will came back. Season 2 jumps forward 1 year.
posted by gucci mane at 2:57 PM on August 25, 2016
My favorite series are mini-series of 3-6 episodes. They tell a self-contained story with a beginning, middle and end. They don't string you along just to make you watch another season. BBC seems particularly adept at making these mini-series.
posted by Triplanetary at 3:02 PM on August 25, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by Triplanetary at 3:02 PM on August 25, 2016 [2 favorites]
ArtW: "ANYONE can write a great beginning. That's really not the hard part."
I couldn't agree more! In fact, I have a rating system for movies: Each movie gets a numeric score. The lower the number, the better the movie is. A really top-notch movie gets a score of zero.
This rating represents the number of minutes before the end of the movie when you should exit the movie theater, if you still want to think fondly of the movie.
It is so hard to make good endings...
posted by Triplanetary at 3:09 PM on August 25, 2016 [3 favorites]
I couldn't agree more! In fact, I have a rating system for movies: Each movie gets a numeric score. The lower the number, the better the movie is. A really top-notch movie gets a score of zero.
This rating represents the number of minutes before the end of the movie when you should exit the movie theater, if you still want to think fondly of the movie.
It is so hard to make good endings...
posted by Triplanetary at 3:09 PM on August 25, 2016 [3 favorites]
^F the killing
AMERICAN the killing. And my god it was bad for this. At times only wanting to see all the manglings of Seattle geography kept me going.
I actually thought season 2 was better on this front, though I don't think it really came to much of anything.
Would love to see the pair of them in a better written show though.
posted by Artw at 3:13 PM on August 25, 2016
AMERICAN the killing. And my god it was bad for this. At times only wanting to see all the manglings of Seattle geography kept me going.
I actually thought season 2 was better on this front, though I don't think it really came to much of anything.
Would love to see the pair of them in a better written show though.
posted by Artw at 3:13 PM on August 25, 2016
It's not all monster of the week or formless ongoing 12 hour movies. Hannibal got into a groove of 3-4 episode arcs with distinct breaks between them (so much so that season 3 is broken into three distinct parts.) you can hold and build tension for just over two hours finely.
posted by The Whelk at 3:26 PM on August 25, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by The Whelk at 3:26 PM on August 25, 2016 [1 favorite]
The elephant in the room for me was that Lost had no story - viewers were straining to figure out a solution to how the pieces fitted together, when in reality the pieces didn't fit together and there was no solution to find - writers were just throwing out random garbage with the deceit that it all tied together somehow.
Stranger Things by contrast had a story - writers had decided what was happening and what would happen before shooting starting.
You can plot-block if there is a plot to block. Lost was merely doling out a series of new distractions to hide that there was no "there" there.
posted by anonymisc at 3:47 PM on August 25, 2016 [14 favorites]
Stranger Things by contrast had a story - writers had decided what was happening and what would happen before shooting starting.
You can plot-block if there is a plot to block. Lost was merely doling out a series of new distractions to hide that there was no "there" there.
posted by anonymisc at 3:47 PM on August 25, 2016 [14 favorites]
The strangest part of that, for me, was that they waited to show the daughter's death until the last episode, jumping back and forth between her and Will.
There was some really dumb use of flashbacks in the last few episodes, including some of things characters weren't present for or aware of which seemed to be there to remind the viewer what they watched a few episodes ago.
posted by Artw at 3:49 PM on August 25, 2016 [1 favorite]
There was some really dumb use of flashbacks in the last few episodes, including some of things characters weren't present for or aware of which seemed to be there to remind the viewer what they watched a few episodes ago.
posted by Artw at 3:49 PM on August 25, 2016 [1 favorite]
Dark Shadows gave off that plot-Nyah, always wondering what Grayson Hall was going to do, or be.
posted by clavdivs at 4:02 PM on August 25, 2016
posted by clavdivs at 4:02 PM on August 25, 2016
Wasn't it a soap opera and pretty much supposed to do that?
posted by Artw at 4:12 PM on August 25, 2016
posted by Artw at 4:12 PM on August 25, 2016
There was some really dumb use of flashbacks in the last few episodes, including some of things characters weren't present for or aware of which seemed to be there to remind the viewer what they watched a few episodes ago.
With how 80s-obsessed the show was, they really missed a beat there by not opening each installment with a montage of scenes from the previous episode with a Bill Bixby sound-alike intoning: "Last week on Stranger Things..."
posted by Atom Eyes at 4:17 PM on August 25, 2016 [4 favorites]
With how 80s-obsessed the show was, they really missed a beat there by not opening each installment with a montage of scenes from the previous episode with a Bill Bixby sound-alike intoning: "Last week on Stranger Things..."
posted by Atom Eyes at 4:17 PM on August 25, 2016 [4 favorites]
It would be a budget killing nightmare, but it bugs me they used a CG monster and not some kind of period appropriate special effect.
posted by Artw at 4:18 PM on August 25, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by Artw at 4:18 PM on August 25, 2016 [2 favorites]
Every episode to me felt unsatisfying
Really? The third episode, the one that ends at the quarry, hit me so hard that I immediately watched it again. That's when I knew I'd watch the rest of the series. And I don't like episodic t.v. I didn't make it through more than five or six episodes of Lost.
I find myself shaking my head in disagreement as I read Matthews' piece.
In sum, there's no accounting for taste, but someone is sure as hell going to try and write an essay to try to insist on their taste that will spread through the internet one forum post at a time.
Andrew Matthews is an independent filmmaker based in Austin, TX.
Ah, ok, right, that's about where I'd expect this to be coming from.
posted by late afternoon dreaming hotel at 4:20 PM on August 25, 2016 [3 favorites]
Really? The third episode, the one that ends at the quarry, hit me so hard that I immediately watched it again. That's when I knew I'd watch the rest of the series. And I don't like episodic t.v. I didn't make it through more than five or six episodes of Lost.
I find myself shaking my head in disagreement as I read Matthews' piece.
In sum, there's no accounting for taste, but someone is sure as hell going to try and write an essay to try to insist on their taste that will spread through the internet one forum post at a time.
Andrew Matthews is an independent filmmaker based in Austin, TX.
Ah, ok, right, that's about where I'd expect this to be coming from.
posted by late afternoon dreaming hotel at 4:20 PM on August 25, 2016 [3 favorites]
There's a big difference. In Stranger Things, we, the audience, are in on what's happening. We know the facts of the plot as soon as the characters do, and often sooner than many of the characters. The suspense lies in two major aspects: asymmetry of who knows what and when
And wow, they do this right. They acknowledge they're doing it and yet make it a seamlessly natural part of human interaction.
The scene that brings that front and center is when Nancy and Mike are talking after everybody's in on each other's secrets and they realize that they would have been more effective together all along, just like most of us are stronger against all the weird unknown stuff out there when we're honest about our experiences and believe there's truth in the honesty others offer us (even when they speak of strange or monstrous things).
And so they go to make their little "no more secrets, OK?" pact and.... immediately they break it. Right away they shy away from admitting their feelings/interest about who they're interested. Right there we have a little microcosm of why the asymmetry of who knows what and when is built in to the human drama and we're stuck playing games about it so much of the time.
It doesn't feel like the writers are toying with us. It feels like we got to see things people might do in about the way at about the pace they might do them.
posted by wildblueyonder at 4:25 PM on August 25, 2016 [9 favorites]
And wow, they do this right. They acknowledge they're doing it and yet make it a seamlessly natural part of human interaction.
The scene that brings that front and center is when Nancy and Mike are talking after everybody's in on each other's secrets and they realize that they would have been more effective together all along, just like most of us are stronger against all the weird unknown stuff out there when we're honest about our experiences and believe there's truth in the honesty others offer us (even when they speak of strange or monstrous things).
And so they go to make their little "no more secrets, OK?" pact and.... immediately they break it. Right away they shy away from admitting their feelings/interest about who they're interested. Right there we have a little microcosm of why the asymmetry of who knows what and when is built in to the human drama and we're stuck playing games about it so much of the time.
It doesn't feel like the writers are toying with us. It feels like we got to see things people might do in about the way at about the pace they might do them.
posted by wildblueyonder at 4:25 PM on August 25, 2016 [9 favorites]
From the "What Stranger Things is missing..." article in the first comment:
Nearly everything difficult about the original works, everything weird, gross, uncomfortable, unexplained, and hidden beneath the surface (“occulted,” to use an evocative lit-studies term) has been stripped away in favor of a lowest-common-denominator pastiche that retains the surface elements but loses the power within.
Oh you mean like having the central figure, the kid who's sought after by his mom, brother, his three friends and assorted others, be constantly referred to as a queer / fairy / gay kid who's much loved by everyone except his mouthbreathing bullies who have their asses handed to them? Yeah, you're right, a real 80s movie would have made you know that sissy was dead in the first five minutes, good riddance. Much more high-powered approach.
posted by late afternoon dreaming hotel at 4:26 PM on August 25, 2016 [3 favorites]
Nearly everything difficult about the original works, everything weird, gross, uncomfortable, unexplained, and hidden beneath the surface (“occulted,” to use an evocative lit-studies term) has been stripped away in favor of a lowest-common-denominator pastiche that retains the surface elements but loses the power within.
Oh you mean like having the central figure, the kid who's sought after by his mom, brother, his three friends and assorted others, be constantly referred to as a queer / fairy / gay kid who's much loved by everyone except his mouthbreathing bullies who have their asses handed to them? Yeah, you're right, a real 80s movie would have made you know that sissy was dead in the first five minutes, good riddance. Much more high-powered approach.
posted by late afternoon dreaming hotel at 4:26 PM on August 25, 2016 [3 favorites]
LOST was a shiv in the throat from a lover.
Oh my god, then what was Under The Dome? (Awesome FF threads, though!)
posted by Room 641-A at 4:48 PM on August 25, 2016 [1 favorite]
Oh my god, then what was Under The Dome? (Awesome FF threads, though!)
posted by Room 641-A at 4:48 PM on August 25, 2016 [1 favorite]
Come on, everyone saw through that one when they failed to wrap it up in one season, surely?
Also MeFi styleguide dictates that it is referred to as "Under the Dumb".
posted by Artw at 4:51 PM on August 25, 2016 [2 favorites]
Also MeFi styleguide dictates that it is referred to as "Under the Dumb".
posted by Artw at 4:51 PM on August 25, 2016 [2 favorites]
I've noticed this before, but I don't think what Lost did exists in Stranger Things at all.
I've mentioned this before, but Lost was a frustrating experience for me. For me, there's a big difference between discovering a plot as writers of a series (as a lot of shows figure things out as they go along) versus making it up out of whole cloth. The difference is hard to explain, but Steven King always felt like he was unearthing a story, as if it already had a sort of platonic existence, rather than he was creating a story ex nehilo. Some writers have something of an observational respect for the story itself, others sees themselves as mini-gods over their creation. Lost, I think, created something that didn't feel as if were truly being discovered, and as such, had a "making it up as they are going along" sort of feel, with an ending that seemed to support this notion. The best counterexample that I can think of is Breaking Bad or Better Call Saul. The writers admit that they don't always know how the story is going to go, but it surprises them what they sometimes discover about the plot or the characters. It's as if the story is deserving of respect as an independent entity, rather than a clay to be molded towards whatever whim. Stranger Things is a discovered story, not simply a created one. Those who discover stories tend to talk as if they are caretakers of it. Some shows, like Lost, make me feel something other than that, as if there was not much there really holding up the novelties we were seeing on screen, and now I have to pay attention to the writers and their intentions, rather than the story that should have captured me into its independent reality.
posted by SpacemanStix at 4:56 PM on August 25, 2016 [6 favorites]
I've mentioned this before, but Lost was a frustrating experience for me. For me, there's a big difference between discovering a plot as writers of a series (as a lot of shows figure things out as they go along) versus making it up out of whole cloth. The difference is hard to explain, but Steven King always felt like he was unearthing a story, as if it already had a sort of platonic existence, rather than he was creating a story ex nehilo. Some writers have something of an observational respect for the story itself, others sees themselves as mini-gods over their creation. Lost, I think, created something that didn't feel as if were truly being discovered, and as such, had a "making it up as they are going along" sort of feel, with an ending that seemed to support this notion. The best counterexample that I can think of is Breaking Bad or Better Call Saul. The writers admit that they don't always know how the story is going to go, but it surprises them what they sometimes discover about the plot or the characters. It's as if the story is deserving of respect as an independent entity, rather than a clay to be molded towards whatever whim. Stranger Things is a discovered story, not simply a created one. Those who discover stories tend to talk as if they are caretakers of it. Some shows, like Lost, make me feel something other than that, as if there was not much there really holding up the novelties we were seeing on screen, and now I have to pay attention to the writers and their intentions, rather than the story that should have captured me into its independent reality.
posted by SpacemanStix at 4:56 PM on August 25, 2016 [6 favorites]
I'd like to mention 'The Man in the High Castle' as an egregious example of spinning its wheels...
In his writing P.K. Dick was a genius at coming up with provocative ideas and setting a tone, and he was actually pretty good at writing believable characters (better than many SF authors). But he often struggled with plot and narrative. When he wrote the novel for 'The Man in the High Castle' he experimented with using I Ching throws to guide the plot, but he admitted later that it didn't work out for him by the end. One of the exceptions to this is 'A Scanner Darkly' which has a plot that moves forward towards an actual ending. The greatest PKD story ever put on film was directed by Ridley Scott, and was very heavily re-written into something else.
For storytelling there are many guidelines but no final laws. My high school drama teacher taught us that Aristotle says every drama has a beginning a middle and an end, but a talented writer can twist this into any permutation of anticipation and release. What actually works should be what people like, but even that can be wrong, seeing that many old works now regarded as classics were neglected in the first run.
I think everyone can agree that what we don't like are long boring parts where nothing happens. But many of my favourite films have this. It works if the boring parts have this elusive texture to them. And it's hard to describe.
posted by ovvl at 5:17 PM on August 25, 2016 [1 favorite]
In his writing P.K. Dick was a genius at coming up with provocative ideas and setting a tone, and he was actually pretty good at writing believable characters (better than many SF authors). But he often struggled with plot and narrative. When he wrote the novel for 'The Man in the High Castle' he experimented with using I Ching throws to guide the plot, but he admitted later that it didn't work out for him by the end. One of the exceptions to this is 'A Scanner Darkly' which has a plot that moves forward towards an actual ending. The greatest PKD story ever put on film was directed by Ridley Scott, and was very heavily re-written into something else.
For storytelling there are many guidelines but no final laws. My high school drama teacher taught us that Aristotle says every drama has a beginning a middle and an end, but a talented writer can twist this into any permutation of anticipation and release. What actually works should be what people like, but even that can be wrong, seeing that many old works now regarded as classics were neglected in the first run.
I think everyone can agree that what we don't like are long boring parts where nothing happens. But many of my favourite films have this. It works if the boring parts have this elusive texture to them. And it's hard to describe.
posted by ovvl at 5:17 PM on August 25, 2016 [1 favorite]
It would be a budget killing nightmare, but it bugs me they used a CG monster and not some kind of period appropriate special effect.
Huh? There are definitely CG-composite shots of the beastie, and I'm pretty sure there are some full-CG sequences, but they totally built a monster suit - complete with animatronic petal-mouth - and put a guy in it.
posted by figurant at 5:33 PM on August 25, 2016 [3 favorites]
Huh? There are definitely CG-composite shots of the beastie, and I'm pretty sure there are some full-CG sequences, but they totally built a monster suit - complete with animatronic petal-mouth - and put a guy in it.
posted by figurant at 5:33 PM on August 25, 2016 [3 favorites]
I think everyone can agree that what we don't like are long boring parts where nothing happens
GRRM sobbing into a mattress made of HBO money somewhere.
posted by Artw at 5:34 PM on August 25, 2016 [2 favorites]
GRRM sobbing into a mattress made of HBO money somewhere.
posted by Artw at 5:34 PM on August 25, 2016 [2 favorites]
->late afternoon dreaming hotel
Yeah, taken as a whole I found each episode unsatisfying. I loved parts and pieces of each episode and I would have absolutely LOVED a movie, or a miniseries, of each of those subplots. But weaved together I just found it not more than the sum of its parts.
I just felt like each thread was really distinct in and of itself. I was watching Winona Ryder and the kids and I thought about how different the tones were between them and I kind of wish there was more of a tightness, more of a melding of everything towards the end. But it reminded me of a layer cake with a layer of frosting keeping all the different layers separate.
The show is nakedly inspired by King and Spielberg and one of the things that makes them so great is that they're able to interweave things so well. Like, they seem to perfectly capture a slice of "America" and when I was tuning in to Stranger Things I was really hoping for another slice of that. But that could also just be me.
posted by Neronomius at 7:35 PM on August 25, 2016
Yeah, taken as a whole I found each episode unsatisfying. I loved parts and pieces of each episode and I would have absolutely LOVED a movie, or a miniseries, of each of those subplots. But weaved together I just found it not more than the sum of its parts.
I just felt like each thread was really distinct in and of itself. I was watching Winona Ryder and the kids and I thought about how different the tones were between them and I kind of wish there was more of a tightness, more of a melding of everything towards the end. But it reminded me of a layer cake with a layer of frosting keeping all the different layers separate.
The show is nakedly inspired by King and Spielberg and one of the things that makes them so great is that they're able to interweave things so well. Like, they seem to perfectly capture a slice of "America" and when I was tuning in to Stranger Things I was really hoping for another slice of that. But that could also just be me.
posted by Neronomius at 7:35 PM on August 25, 2016
Chief Hopper's backstory about his daughter is important because it explains why he is willing to cross a secret government agency to rescue another kid. He can't bear to see someone else he cares about in the same pain he was in and he's willing to die, not suicidal, but if he has to risk death to rescue Will, so be it.
Most cops would be willing to risk their lives to save a kid, but few are willing to break the law and fight their own government to do so. Hopper is unique because he is willing to cross that line.
posted by clockworkjoe at 9:55 PM on August 25, 2016 [4 favorites]
Most cops would be willing to risk their lives to save a kid, but few are willing to break the law and fight their own government to do so. Hopper is unique because he is willing to cross that line.
posted by clockworkjoe at 9:55 PM on August 25, 2016 [4 favorites]
Then he gets awful random and plot-convenient towards the end.
posted by Artw at 10:07 PM on August 25, 2016
posted by Artw at 10:07 PM on August 25, 2016
FWIW "deferring meaningful info for delayed gratification" works as a pretty good description of the art of "telling a story"."Telling a story" is not a good description of what happened in Lost.
posted by Horkus at 10:07 PM on August 25, 2016 [2 favorites]
Well, neither is delayed gratification, TBH.
posted by Artw at 10:09 PM on August 25, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by Artw at 10:09 PM on August 25, 2016 [2 favorites]
I'd like to mention 'The Man in the High Castle' as an egregious example of spinning its wheels. A viewer could almost skip from ep 3 to 10 and not miss too much. I got the impression they were just holding out for a second season. Too bad because the first 2 eps were good.
TBH I don't think it's possible to do that story as a TV series. Maybe a movie, or a *very* short mini-series, but not a full series. It's a story I like, but there's just not enough meat to it to fill 10 hours, so you wind up having to either add things and risk insulting the existing fans, or dragging things along just to fill up the time slot. Which... yeah, maybe legitimately that's the kind of plot-blocking this article is talking about.
But it's still not Lost. Lost violated the Cooperative Principle right up front, and then strung viewers along for years, pretending they knew where they were going, and that they were going to pull all of it together in the end. And we all knew it as we got nearer to the final episode—asymptotically closing in past the point where it was obvious there wasn't enough time left to have the kind of plot they needed to satisfy the empty promise.
posted by atbash at 6:43 AM on August 26, 2016
TBH I don't think it's possible to do that story as a TV series. Maybe a movie, or a *very* short mini-series, but not a full series. It's a story I like, but there's just not enough meat to it to fill 10 hours, so you wind up having to either add things and risk insulting the existing fans, or dragging things along just to fill up the time slot. Which... yeah, maybe legitimately that's the kind of plot-blocking this article is talking about.
But it's still not Lost. Lost violated the Cooperative Principle right up front, and then strung viewers along for years, pretending they knew where they were going, and that they were going to pull all of it together in the end. And we all knew it as we got nearer to the final episode—asymptotically closing in past the point where it was obvious there wasn't enough time left to have the kind of plot they needed to satisfy the empty promise.
posted by atbash at 6:43 AM on August 26, 2016
But it's still not Lost. Lost violated the Cooperative Principle right up front, and then strung viewers along for years, pretending they knew where they were goingI've talked about this before on MeFi, but I think Lost (like most Abrams shows, in fact) was fatally compromised by pandering to fans' expectations. There seems to have been on Lost a tension between two different modes of writing—simple world building, with the loving elaboration of mythos, complexity, and literary and cinematic reference points—and linear, joyless, "get to the end" story-telling. For the first three seasons at least, the first mode of writing—oblique; implicit; referential; endlessly ramifying—was in the ascendant. The show's loudest and dullest internet fans demanded more of the latter. The writers ultimately caved, giving us the disastrous Season 6—the ultimate fan service—and this killed the other five seasons retrospectively. An effectively open narrative was retro-fitted into a linear one, and the results weren't pretty.
For me, it's like the competing modes of storytelling in Algernon Blackwood. In the John Silence stories, a series of bizarre, confusing, and seemingly inexplicable events is narrated. And it's great ... until the final three pages, where the all-seeing, all-knowing John Silence settles down and explains everything—which, for me, utterly ruins the effect of the stories. In "The Willows," by contrast, Blackwood seems to have sensed that the key to a lasting piece of horror fiction is not to explain what's going on at all. All we (the readers) know by the end of the story is that the forces on the island were unearthly and horrific. The central mysteries are never resolved. It remains an open narrative, with room for the reader to insert his or her own interpretations into the story. And therein lies its narrative power. I have re-read "The Willows" numerous times and will happily do so at any time because it's in some basic way on-going. But I've never felt a desire to re-read a John Silence story.
Lost should have gone the "Willows" route. Instead, it went the John Silence route (but much more ineptly than Blackwood). And for that, I blame the fans.
posted by Sonny Jim at 7:38 AM on August 26, 2016
I'm not entirely sure that half hearted flailing attempts to resolve mysteries that have been set up as important and central to the show can be described as "fan pandering" - if they weren't important they should't have been put in.
posted by Artw at 7:52 AM on August 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by Artw at 7:52 AM on August 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
Also Blackwood is a superb storyteller who knows exactly what he is doing with The Willows, and where he is going to go with it and where he is not going to go with it, whereas Damon Lindelof is an utter hack who should not be allowed near anything.
posted by Artw at 7:56 AM on August 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by Artw at 7:56 AM on August 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
I'm not entirely sure that half hearted flailing attempts to resolve mysteries that have been set up as important and central to the show can be described as "fan pandering" - if they weren't important they should't have been put in.
So you're suggesting the show was mostly composed of Checkov's Guns left lying around? I like it.
posted by atbash at 8:08 AM on August 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
So you're suggesting the show was mostly composed of Checkov's Guns left lying around? I like it.
posted by atbash at 8:08 AM on August 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
Sonny Jim, if I may quote you but add emphasis to make an argument: In "The Willows," by contrast, Blackwood seems to have sensed that the key to a lasting piece of horror fiction is not to explain what's going on at all. All we (the readers) know by the end of the story is that the forces on the island were unearthly and horrific. The central mysteries are never resolved.
The trouble Lost had was that it was adventure, not horror, and leaving questions unanswered by the barrelful doesn't work in that genre. The storytelling gave every indication that its mysteries had answers. Lost presented itself as a puzzle to be solved rather than a grand mystery to leave us in wonder. For crying out loud, they were still introducing new "mysterious" malarkey they had no intention of explaining deep into the last season, because they knew that "oooh, what does that mean" was the engine of the show. It's a fair criticism to say that when a story depends upon the explicit building of anticipation and then half-asses the payoff that the story was bungled.
I do wonder how well Lost would feel in a binge rewatch. Shorn of expectations and smashed together, it might work a lot better. When I saw the first season of True Detective, it was on DVD a year after it aired. Viewed in isolation and in rapid succession, the complaint that the show promised more than it delivered, that there were grander truths that it should have had but didn't, felt silly. It was a detective show with some flair, and never pretended to be anything else. Fans took it farther in the free time between episodes and were disappointed when it didn't match their expectations. Is Lost better when you know what to expect and aren't thinking about its mysteries in the long gaps between episodes and seasons? (Probably.)
posted by Harvey Jerkwater at 8:14 AM on August 26, 2016
The trouble Lost had was that it was adventure, not horror, and leaving questions unanswered by the barrelful doesn't work in that genre. The storytelling gave every indication that its mysteries had answers. Lost presented itself as a puzzle to be solved rather than a grand mystery to leave us in wonder. For crying out loud, they were still introducing new "mysterious" malarkey they had no intention of explaining deep into the last season, because they knew that "oooh, what does that mean" was the engine of the show. It's a fair criticism to say that when a story depends upon the explicit building of anticipation and then half-asses the payoff that the story was bungled.
I do wonder how well Lost would feel in a binge rewatch. Shorn of expectations and smashed together, it might work a lot better. When I saw the first season of True Detective, it was on DVD a year after it aired. Viewed in isolation and in rapid succession, the complaint that the show promised more than it delivered, that there were grander truths that it should have had but didn't, felt silly. It was a detective show with some flair, and never pretended to be anything else. Fans took it farther in the free time between episodes and were disappointed when it didn't match their expectations. Is Lost better when you know what to expect and aren't thinking about its mysteries in the long gaps between episodes and seasons? (Probably.)
posted by Harvey Jerkwater at 8:14 AM on August 26, 2016
I'm not entirely sure that half hearted flailing attempts to resolve mysteries that have been set up as important and central to the show can be described as "fan pandering" - if they weren't important they should't have been put in.I'm thinking of things like the whispering, which was a "mystery" that was "resolved" so clumsily in Season 6 that it was better (much better) to have not gone back and revisited it at all. Or "Adam and Eve." A lot of the details like that in the show didn't need explanation (at least to my mind); they worked much better as essentially open bits of atmospheric "spookiness" and world-building that didn't need final resolution.
Damon Lindelof is an utter hack who should not be allowed near anything.This needs to be the strap-line on the Lost DVDs.
posted by Sonny Jim at 8:16 AM on August 26, 2016
I've talked about this before on MeFi, but I think Lost (like most Abrams shows, in fact) was fatally compromised by pandering to fans' expectations
Really? So when show writers admit that they "just think of the weirdest most fucked up thing and write it and we're never going to pay it off" that's pandering to fans? Especially since they outright said for years that they had answers to all the mysteries?
I watched Lost with passion when it aired, but I think it failed. It's an interesting failure and it did some neat things, and I have no problem with writers putting themselves into corners and finding ways out of them (the crew on Breaking Bad apparently did so regularly), but Lost didn't handle it well. Lessons to be learned from Lost:
-mystery is all well and good, but character is key;
-good characters require more diverse backstories than variations on "daddy issues";
-mysteries might not need to be solved unless you are narratively promising answers; for example, horror can get away with not providing all the answers (cf. Stranger Things), but the action-adventure genre - which Lost seemed firmly placed in - really can't.
-if you are going to build the mystery into a mythology, there needs to be coherence. Coherence will never be perfect, but it should be striven for.
posted by nubs at 8:21 AM on August 26, 2016 [3 favorites]
Really? So when show writers admit that they "just think of the weirdest most fucked up thing and write it and we're never going to pay it off" that's pandering to fans? Especially since they outright said for years that they had answers to all the mysteries?
I watched Lost with passion when it aired, but I think it failed. It's an interesting failure and it did some neat things, and I have no problem with writers putting themselves into corners and finding ways out of them (the crew on Breaking Bad apparently did so regularly), but Lost didn't handle it well. Lessons to be learned from Lost:
-mystery is all well and good, but character is key;
-good characters require more diverse backstories than variations on "daddy issues";
-mysteries might not need to be solved unless you are narratively promising answers; for example, horror can get away with not providing all the answers (cf. Stranger Things), but the action-adventure genre - which Lost seemed firmly placed in - really can't.
-if you are going to build the mystery into a mythology, there needs to be coherence. Coherence will never be perfect, but it should be striven for.
posted by nubs at 8:21 AM on August 26, 2016 [3 favorites]
Really? So when show writers admit that they "just think of the weirdest most fucked up thing and write it and we're never going to pay it off" that's pandering to fans?Sorry: what I meant is that they should never have promised answers, and never attempted to deliver a final season that purported to wrap things up with a nice, neat bow. (Because, how could they?)
I do wonder how well Lost would feel in a binge rewatch.I can tell you from experience that seasons 1–3 work very well indeed on a binge rewatch, provided that there is enough beer. In fact, I'm (coincidentally) binge re-watching season 1 right now.
mysteries might not need to be solved unless you are narratively promising answers; for example, horror can get away with not providing all the answers, but the action-adventure genre - which Lost seemed firmly placed in - really can't.Yeah. I'm willing to be convinced that I simply had the wrong set of generic expectations for this show.
posted by Sonny Jim at 8:28 AM on August 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
Sorry: what I meant is that they should never have promised answers, and never attempted to deliver a final season that purported to wrap things up with a nice, neat bow. (Because, how could they?)
Ah, thanks. I can completely agree with that.
posted by nubs at 8:57 AM on August 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
Ah, thanks. I can completely agree with that.
posted by nubs at 8:57 AM on August 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
Loudly announcing "We have a plan" when you don't have a plan is never going to go well in the long term.
posted by Artw at 9:00 AM on August 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by Artw at 9:00 AM on August 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
Loudly announcing "We have a plan" when you don't have a plan is never going to go well in the long term.
Are we talking about Battlestar Galactica now too? :)
posted by nubs at 9:02 AM on August 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
Are we talking about Battlestar Galactica now too? :)
posted by nubs at 9:02 AM on August 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
"So you're suggesting the show was mostly composed of Checkov's Guns left lying around? I like it."
Right now I believe the record for Checkhov's Guns Per Episode is being set by HBO's The Night Of. I'm sure the creators know how it's going to end - it's only an 8 episode miniseries - but they're doing their damnedest to make it look like they're either going to fire all of them at once or none of them at all. Or neither of those options, somehow. It's the opposite of narrative stinginess, in a way. "Here, let us show you a dozen ways in which this story could branch out and be resolved. Oh look the last episode is coming up in just a few days. I bet you're wondering if we've even picked a path yet!"
[if you believe Naz did it, turn to page 12]
[if you believe the creepy mortician was directly involved, turn to page 34]
[if you think Stone will get over his cat allergy, turn to page 5]
posted by komara at 9:12 AM on August 26, 2016
Right now I believe the record for Checkhov's Guns Per Episode is being set by HBO's The Night Of. I'm sure the creators know how it's going to end - it's only an 8 episode miniseries - but they're doing their damnedest to make it look like they're either going to fire all of them at once or none of them at all. Or neither of those options, somehow. It's the opposite of narrative stinginess, in a way. "Here, let us show you a dozen ways in which this story could branch out and be resolved. Oh look the last episode is coming up in just a few days. I bet you're wondering if we've even picked a path yet!"
[if you believe Naz did it, turn to page 12]
[if you believe the creepy mortician was directly involved, turn to page 34]
[if you think Stone will get over his cat allergy, turn to page 5]
posted by komara at 9:12 AM on August 26, 2016
ANYONE can write a great beginning.
I disagree.
posted by Gelatin at 12:38 PM on August 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
I disagree.
posted by Gelatin at 12:38 PM on August 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
Maybe I'm just nostalgic for the days when a tv series might not hard reset but the ongoing premise will continue even if there's some character development. If someone's ongoing turmoil or plot arc ends, it means the character is being written off the show or they die. Or the actor portraying them quit. Or died.
Well, there's still a lot of this on TV, though. That's what House, MD was, and it's what shows like Criminal Minds and Bones still are. And that's not even getting into daytime shows. But the common feature here is that none of them are lumped in with the Golden Age Of Television Prestige Dramas.
posted by tobascodagama at 12:55 PM on August 26, 2016
Well, there's still a lot of this on TV, though. That's what House, MD was, and it's what shows like Criminal Minds and Bones still are. And that's not even getting into daytime shows. But the common feature here is that none of them are lumped in with the Golden Age Of Television Prestige Dramas.
posted by tobascodagama at 12:55 PM on August 26, 2016
ANYONE can write a great beginning.
I disagree.
Anyone can write a terrible beginning, too. The choice is yours.
posted by Grangousier at 12:57 PM on August 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
I disagree.
Anyone can write a terrible beginning, too. The choice is yours.
posted by Grangousier at 12:57 PM on August 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
My wife and I tried to write together for the fun of it only it was not fun. This was in the 80s. Her story-telling was greatly affected by a then severe addiction to Young and the Restless. Everything moved at a glacial pace and plot-blocking was a major component. Mine was affected by a severe addiction to cyberpunks and William Gibson. We abandoned the project.
I agree that Lost was a stellar example of "making shit up as we go along" but the winner and all-time champion is still the mythology episodes in X-Files. You know the ones, where you get to the producer vanity page at the end and when the little kid says "I made this" and you scream at the TV "and you should have been slapped!"
posted by Ber at 7:32 PM on August 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
I agree that Lost was a stellar example of "making shit up as we go along" but the winner and all-time champion is still the mythology episodes in X-Files. You know the ones, where you get to the producer vanity page at the end and when the little kid says "I made this" and you scream at the TV "and you should have been slapped!"
posted by Ber at 7:32 PM on August 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
I'll still take going-nowhere X-Files over InfoWars.com X-Files, but that's another thread.
posted by tobascodagama at 9:46 AM on August 27, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by tobascodagama at 9:46 AM on August 27, 2016 [1 favorite]
X-Files was probably the first TV shows with arcs/mythology that think I ever took in as an adult. And I just loved seasons 3-5, and I was foolish enough to think that eventually there'd be real reveals that stayed revealed whether or not there was a payoff resolution along with it.
Somewhere through season 6 that I realized that it seemed increasingly likely they did not have a plan or any coherent mythology behind the writing, and not only was it unlikely that things were ever going to make sense, they might not care, it might have been more about producing that bemused sense that the-truth-is-out-there but just out of reach than ever delivering... because every serial format has incentives to string you along.
That burnt me on TV for a long time. And when Lost was big, there was just absolutely no question I was going to invest in that. I already knew how likely it was that there was going to be no good payoff, it was too familiar.
posted by wildblueyonder at 10:35 AM on August 27, 2016
Somewhere through season 6 that I realized that it seemed increasingly likely they did not have a plan or any coherent mythology behind the writing, and not only was it unlikely that things were ever going to make sense, they might not care, it might have been more about producing that bemused sense that the-truth-is-out-there but just out of reach than ever delivering... because every serial format has incentives to string you along.
That burnt me on TV for a long time. And when Lost was big, there was just absolutely no question I was going to invest in that. I already knew how likely it was that there was going to be no good payoff, it was too familiar.
posted by wildblueyonder at 10:35 AM on August 27, 2016
Netflix Finally Renews Stranger Things, and Here's the First Teaser for Season Two
posted by Artw at 6:15 AM on August 31, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by Artw at 6:15 AM on August 31, 2016 [2 favorites]
Strange Things Fans Have a New Reason to Tune into Archie
posted by nubs at 8:48 AM on August 31, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by nubs at 8:48 AM on August 31, 2016 [2 favorites]
Stranger Things: Cool Girls, Missing Girls, and Our Girls
posted by Artw at 10:46 AM on September 3, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by Artw at 10:46 AM on September 3, 2016 [1 favorite]
I do wonder how well Lost would feel in a binge rewatch.
Did this last summer. It was still very frustrating. The main upside was that I didn't have to wait a week to see them not resolve anything. Even though I didn't watch it live and so did not have weeks or months to go over the minutiae of the show, it was still frustrating because I literally just watched the last episode, so that's still fresh for the next episode where they don't resolve anything.
posted by LizBoBiz at 7:31 PM on September 5, 2016
Did this last summer. It was still very frustrating. The main upside was that I didn't have to wait a week to see them not resolve anything. Even though I didn't watch it live and so did not have weeks or months to go over the minutiae of the show, it was still frustrating because I literally just watched the last episode, so that's still fresh for the next episode where they don't resolve anything.
posted by LizBoBiz at 7:31 PM on September 5, 2016
« Older The worst of the worst. | Una donna americana sta leggendo tutto il catalogo... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
10 Things Stranger Things Taught Me About Storytelling
Personally I enjoyed it just fine, though it definitely leant heavily on pastiche and didn't really have that much to say about anything in the end. But it was an enjoyable fun watch with a halo of cool fan art attached.
Oddly I didn't find it to have the problems the Matthews complains of - a relatively short run meant that it didn't have time to put the plot into a holding pattern or any of the other ills that often beset TV shows. Those are things that happen, of course, but Strangef Things seemed to zip along quite merrily.
posted by Artw at 12:57 PM on August 25, 2016 [15 favorites]