• java.lame.Chris (unregistered) in reply to java.lang.Chris;
    java.lang.Chris;:
    Gay:
    Jay:
    It's like in half the murder mysteries ever written, where the dying man always says, "I have to deliver a vital message! The secret is ... uggh" and he's dead.

    Which reminds me: Why is it that in movies when someone has just sufferred a fatal wound, and he is trying to gasp out the vital information before he dies, that he never says, "I was killed by Fred Mullins who lives at 307 Dover Ave." Instead he always says something like, "Beware the man with the steely eyes". Then somehow the brilliant detective has to figure out who this is.

    I'm so glad you pointed that out.

    Yes, I much prefer movies where there's no plot. The guy just gives the name in the first ten minutes and then the cops show up at the perp's house (to arrest him - end of the show).

    Oh, you haven't watched Columbo then?

    No, but apparently, the episodes lasted over an hour.

    So they didn't end in the first ten minutes as I described.

  • (cs) in reply to Matt Westwood
    Matt Westwood:
    You may be missing the point. What I understand Jay to mean is that in too many dramatic presentations the author has not properly thought up a believable plot, and in order to generate "drama", he/she has to resort to artificial means of generating dramatic tension. In the worst cases it causes a story to degenerate into pantomime of the "He's behind you!" variety.
    I'm not missing the point, I'm just failing to see the difference between what you're saying and what I'm saying. May I suggest instead that whether the plot is believable or not has nothing to do with it?

    Saying that a character's actions aren't believable is fine, but if you're questioning the believability of their actions, chances are it's been pretty crappy storytelling up to that point anyway. I believe a movie/show's ability to draw you into the setting is far more important than the believability of the plot or the characters' actions.

  • boog (unregistered) in reply to boog
    boog:
    Matt Westwood:
    You may be missing the point. What I understand Jay to mean is that in too many dramatic presentations the author has not properly thought up a believable plot, and in order to generate "drama", he/she has to resort to artificial means of generating dramatic tension. In the worst cases it causes a story to degenerate into pantomime of the "He's behind you!" variety.
    I'm not missing the point, I'm just failing to see the difference between what you're saying and what I'm saying. May I suggest instead that whether the plot is believable or not has nothing to do with it?

    Saying that a character's actions aren't believable is fine, but if you're questioning the believability of their actions, chances are it's been pretty crappy storytelling up to that point anyway. I believe a movie/show's ability to draw you into the setting is far more important than the believability of the plot or the characters' actions.

    I'm sure the two are totally unrelated.

    I, for one, find I movie/show much more engaging when I'm constantly wondering what the fuck the characters are doing.

  • Jay (unregistered) in reply to Chaos215bar2
    Chaos215bar2:
    Matt Westwood:
    You may be missing the point. What I understand Jay to mean is that in too many dramatic presentations the author has not properly thought up a believable plot, and in order to generate "drama", he/she has to resort to artificial means of generating dramatic tension. In the worst cases it causes a story to degenerate into pantomime of the "He's behind you!" variety.

    Yes! I don't think we're talking characters people doing unusual things. That's perfectly fine. We're talking about characters either doing things that don't make any sense, yet are necessary to support the rest of the plot, or ignoring some glaringly obvious easy solution to a problem for no apparent reason. Nothing makes we want to stop watching a show or walk out of a movie more.

    Thank you!

    Yes, when I say that I want a fictional story to be "realistic", I don't mean that I want to watch a movie about a guy who goes to his job as a software developer every day, discusses systems requirements with the accountants, drives home, makes himself dinner in the microwave, mows the lawn, fixing the leak in his sink, and goes to bed. That would be boring.

    I expect fiction to be more dramatic than real life. I'm quite happy to watch a movie or read a book that is totally unrealistic in the sense that the people do amazing things: the detective solves a crime based solely on the evidence he gained by examining the victim's shoes, people travel to other planets in faster-than-light starships, heros battle dragons to free the princess from the evil sorceror, etc.

    What annoys me is when the problem the hero faces is lame. When the only reason the hero doesn't quickly solve the problem is because someone didn't do some simple and obvious thing -- like call the police, or tell his friend simply and clearly where the secret documents are hidden instead of giving a mysteriously-worded clue, or ask the girl out on a date rather than silently pining away waiting for something to magically bring them together, or whatever.

    Yes, I realize that in many stories this would mean that the movie would be over in 5 minutes. So if you're a fiction writer, either don't write a story where the problem would be easily solved, or give some reason why the obvious solution doesn't work. Instead Hollywood writes often seem to say to themselves, "Well, if he called the police the movie would be over in five minutes, so instead I'll have the hero decide to chase down the villain himself for no apparent reason, even though he knows the villain has a gun and he doesn't, and that by running out of the building where the crime was committed without calling the police he will make himself a suspect. But hmm, in real life the villain would probably just turn around and shoot him -- he just killed ten people, why would he hesitate to make it eleven? -- and the movie would again be over in 5 minutes. So let's have the villain decide for no apparent reason that rather than shooting the hero when he's ten feet away and unarmed, he will instead kidnap his girlfriend so the hero has to track him down to save her, and then ..." etc.

    How did we get from software issues to movies?

  • (cs) in reply to Jay
    Jay:
    What annoys me is when the problem the hero faces is lame. When the only reason the hero doesn't quickly solve the problem is because someone didn't do some simple and obvious thing -- like call the police, or tell his friend simply and clearly where the secret documents are hidden instead of giving a mysteriously-worded clue, or ask the girl out on a date rather than silently pining away waiting for something to magically bring them together, or whatever.
    But this gets back to the point I was making: not all characters think like you do. What you think is simple and obvious might be less realistic - your idea of the obvious solution might be inconsistent with the character's personality.

    For example, some characters are cowards, which could easily explain why one might not call the police, or ask the girl out on a date. Maybe he's afraid if he calls the police then his life will be in danger, or if he asks the girl out then he'll get rejected again. Maybe the story's central theme is developing bravery - I'd hope the character takes the cowardly route early on, in order to contrast the bravery at the end.

    Still, I will note that you specifically said "no apparent reason" a few times in your comment; does this mean we are already in agreement; are you okay with a character making dumb decisions if that behavior is expected from that character? I will admit that it is the author/writer's duty to convince you that the character's actions (or inactions) make sense for that character (if a character is acting cowardly, it should be clear that fear is the reason).

    Jay:
    How did we get from software issues to movies?
    Does anyone talk about software on this site anymore?
  • High Five (unregistered) in reply to boog
    boog:
    Jay:
    What annoys me is when the problem the hero faces is lame. When the only reason the hero doesn't quickly solve the problem is because someone didn't do some simple and obvious thing -- like call the police, or tell his friend simply and clearly where the secret documents are hidden instead of giving a mysteriously-worded clue, or ask the girl out on a date rather than silently pining away waiting for something to magically bring them together, or whatever.
    But this gets back to the point I was making: not all characters think like you do. What you think is simple and obvious might be less realistic - your idea of the obvious solution might be inconsistent with the character's personality.

    For example, some characters are cowards, which could easily explain why one might not call the police, or ask the girl out on a date. Maybe he's afraid if he calls the police then his life will be in danger, or if he asks the girl out then he'll get rejected again. Maybe the story's central theme is developing bravery - I'd hope the character takes the cowardly route early on, in order to contrast the bravery at the end.

    Still, I will note that you specifically said "no apparent reason" a few times in your comment; does this mean we are already in agreement; are you okay with a character making dumb decisions if that behavior is expected from that character? I will admit that it is the author/writer's duty to convince you that the character's actions (or inactions) make sense for that character (if a character is acting cowardly, it should be clear that fear is the reason).

    Jay:
    How did we get from software issues to movies?
    Does anyone talk about software on this site anymore?

    Ok, sure. It is conceivable that in some situations statements you made earlier could make some sense.

    There, now that you've been validated and feel smart, can you shut up and go away?

  • (cs) in reply to High Five
    High Five:
    There, now that you've been validated and feel smart, can you shut up and go away?
    With people such as yourself being so friendly and welcoming, why would I ever want to leave?
  • (cs)

    Why would anyone delete Portal 2?

  • eVil (unregistered)

    Oh, just one more thing...

    Columbo isn't a "whodunnit?" but a "howcatchem?", and as such the show plays out very differently to most detective shows (mainly because Columbo blatantly knows who the bad guy is the moment he views their face).

  • (cs) in reply to Eternal Density
    Eternal Density:
    Why would anyone delete Portal 2?
    Seriously, who hasn't done this?
  • Design Pattern (unregistered)

    The Aeroplan miles discount option is a lie!

  • (cs) in reply to Mr.'; Drop Database --
    Mr.'; Drop Database --:
    14636926425432121 in hexadecimal is 0x34003500310039, which appears to be a UTF-16 representation of the string "4519". That's certainly a creative way to print a string.

    Wow, that is interesting (I'm serious). So maybe there was a 4519 there which got printed in a roundabout way (missing only the wooden table). Hmm...

  • ali McKee (unregistered)

    What kind of job was it? Were you applying to be a TreeMeister who counts on them? Or maybe as Captain Tying Knots? 5, 6, 4 ,3....

  • Sir Digby Chicken Caesar (unregistered)

    476371?

    Perhaps they're playing Numberwang...

Leave a comment on “476371?”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article