Metaplot, Time, & Space
Jul. 12th, 2008 01:42 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
omorkaSo in a random fan community on LJ, someone mentioned that (paraphrasing) short-form storytelling, movies and 'purely' episodic TV shows (i.e., ones with no overall season plot arc) in particular, just weren't holding her interest anymore. This got me thinking, because this is largely true for me, too (with some obvious exceptions) for those two media, but not for written fiction, in which I am very much still a fan of the short story and have an odd fondness for flashfiction.
For movies, I think I can make a pretty good case for why I feel this way. I like characterization and worldbuilding more than I like plot, in general. A really, really good plot can make up for mediocre characterization, but it has to truly sparkle to make up for a lack of characterization. And in general, a movie can bang out a plot in 90 minutes, but for it to do so and have decent characterization and a reasonable sense of world is very, very hard. Thus, I tend to like (a) longer movies, (b) talky movies (more opportunity for characterization at the expense of plot) or ones with small casts (such that only two or three characters really need to be developed), and (c) movies drawn from a pre-existing canon, such that they can shortcut the characterization while leaving enough hooks for the pre-existing fans for them to hang their knowledge of the characters on. The problem with (c), of course, is that some movies decide to wildly change those characters. If they do this well, developing the new character in the film, then I don't mind so much, but if they just randomly decide to make a change and don't explain or at least foreshadow it, It annoys me.
Good acting helps, too, since things like body language and line delivery can really help flesh out a character. Attention to detail in costumes and props makes for good worldbuilding and can also help frame and explain a character. And tight dialogue writing is a must, or I'm outta there. I would hold up Ghostbusters as an example of excellent use of all three of these elements, just to point out one place where I feel it was done right. The problem with all of this is that the longer a movie is, the more it's likely to do a good job of the things I think are important, but the harder it is physically for me to watch - my visual processing issues again.
Television is a sort of in-between medium, where (at least in episodic TV) character development and worldbuilding can happen over a longer time, a season or more, but plot typically has to be resolved in 30 minutes minus commercial breaks. Sometimes this works for me, and sometimes it doesn't, and this time the make or break element tends to be the dialogue and the writing generally - a fascinating plot poorly explained will turn me off, while good dialogue and interesting character interactions can make up for a really crappy episode plot. Still, I prefer television that has overall arcs, season arcs, and smaller plot arcs within a season. Eureka has had some terrible individual show plots, but I still have enjoyed both season arcs so far and enjoy speculating about the overall arc.
So why am I more tolerant of the short form in text? Partly because flashfiction rarely tries to do all three of plot, character, and worldbuilding - generally speaking, it chooses one and tries to do it well. Some of my favorite flashfics are purely character meditations, or attempts to set a scene and a mood. And partly because most of the flashfic I read is part of a larger canon. Some of it - probably the majority in my particular case - is fanfic, but I also enjoy short-short stories by published authors set in their own fictional universes. Niven and Asimov both did this quite a bit (Niven may still - I haven't read much of his new stuff since the turn of the century), usually to develop a particular aspect of their world.
When a flashfic isn't set in a large continuity, I often find it irritatingly vague. Harlan Ellison used to do that often, and it's part of what irritates me about him (albeit a very small part). So it really is largely about jewels in a larger web, for me; it's that larger context that makes short forms pleasurable for me.
tl;dr: The Lord of the Rings movies basically have everything I want in a movie, and only manage that by being ten hours long in aggregate. And the version I like isn't even the one they could get away with showing in the theaters.
For movies, I think I can make a pretty good case for why I feel this way. I like characterization and worldbuilding more than I like plot, in general. A really, really good plot can make up for mediocre characterization, but it has to truly sparkle to make up for a lack of characterization. And in general, a movie can bang out a plot in 90 minutes, but for it to do so and have decent characterization and a reasonable sense of world is very, very hard. Thus, I tend to like (a) longer movies, (b) talky movies (more opportunity for characterization at the expense of plot) or ones with small casts (such that only two or three characters really need to be developed), and (c) movies drawn from a pre-existing canon, such that they can shortcut the characterization while leaving enough hooks for the pre-existing fans for them to hang their knowledge of the characters on. The problem with (c), of course, is that some movies decide to wildly change those characters. If they do this well, developing the new character in the film, then I don't mind so much, but if they just randomly decide to make a change and don't explain or at least foreshadow it, It annoys me.
Good acting helps, too, since things like body language and line delivery can really help flesh out a character. Attention to detail in costumes and props makes for good worldbuilding and can also help frame and explain a character. And tight dialogue writing is a must, or I'm outta there. I would hold up Ghostbusters as an example of excellent use of all three of these elements, just to point out one place where I feel it was done right. The problem with all of this is that the longer a movie is, the more it's likely to do a good job of the things I think are important, but the harder it is physically for me to watch - my visual processing issues again.
Television is a sort of in-between medium, where (at least in episodic TV) character development and worldbuilding can happen over a longer time, a season or more, but plot typically has to be resolved in 30 minutes minus commercial breaks. Sometimes this works for me, and sometimes it doesn't, and this time the make or break element tends to be the dialogue and the writing generally - a fascinating plot poorly explained will turn me off, while good dialogue and interesting character interactions can make up for a really crappy episode plot. Still, I prefer television that has overall arcs, season arcs, and smaller plot arcs within a season. Eureka has had some terrible individual show plots, but I still have enjoyed both season arcs so far and enjoy speculating about the overall arc.
So why am I more tolerant of the short form in text? Partly because flashfiction rarely tries to do all three of plot, character, and worldbuilding - generally speaking, it chooses one and tries to do it well. Some of my favorite flashfics are purely character meditations, or attempts to set a scene and a mood. And partly because most of the flashfic I read is part of a larger canon. Some of it - probably the majority in my particular case - is fanfic, but I also enjoy short-short stories by published authors set in their own fictional universes. Niven and Asimov both did this quite a bit (Niven may still - I haven't read much of his new stuff since the turn of the century), usually to develop a particular aspect of their world.
When a flashfic isn't set in a large continuity, I often find it irritatingly vague. Harlan Ellison used to do that often, and it's part of what irritates me about him (albeit a very small part). So it really is largely about jewels in a larger web, for me; it's that larger context that makes short forms pleasurable for me.
tl;dr: The Lord of the Rings movies basically have everything I want in a movie, and only manage that by being ten hours long in aggregate. And the version I like isn't even the one they could get away with showing in the theaters.
