|
| Thread: TV versus Cinema |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 · NEXT» |
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
posted February 07, 2010 11:22 AM |
|
|
TV versus Cinema
Watching the law show "Shark" on DvD (pretty good, actually), after an especially good episode I actually did watch the extra, extensive comments of main actor and producer, and they made a side statement that made me think a bit:
The gist of it was, that nowadays TV shows get more and more morally complex with very detailed and grey painted characters, while cinema movies are the exact opposite painting with simple strokes in black and white.
I agree with that. Earlier shows like, well, Kojak or Streets of San Francsico or even things like Miami Vice in the 80s, have no RUNNING story. Characters are always the same, there is no personal development, episodes are different only in terms of cases. Thst's even true for shows with a general theme that would SEEM to offer an ongoing story, classics like The Fugitive, The Invaders, The Prisoner and so on STILL offered not much in terms of development - you can send at least most of the episodes in any order you like.
That has changed a lot. I think that it was the British shows that made the difference here, and I could name a HOST of British TV shows who really tell an ongoing story, characters developing and changing with each show, and nowadays those things are pretty common in TV shows.
Movies produced for Cinema, however, seem to focus on the VISUAL experience nowadays and not the story. Story seems to be something of an afterthought in today's movies, a vehicle to stun the viewer with tricks, visuals and effects more than anything else.
What do you think about that?
|
|
phoenixreborn
Promising
Legendary Hero
Unicorn
|
|
posted February 07, 2010 01:43 PM |
|
|
I think that is too simplistic. For example 'Avatar' may fit your description of an effects movie with the story as an afterthought while '4 months, 3 wees, and 2 days' is the opposite. In that movie there aren't any special effects though there is some interesting camera work but it's purpose is to bring the story to the front. Isn't this true in any era?
The first part of your post concerns development in TV shows. Some shows fit the old type you describe while many are more complex as you indicated.
____________
Bask in the light of my glorious shining unicorn.
|
|
Shares
Supreme Hero
I am. Thusly I am.
|
|
posted February 07, 2010 02:01 PM |
|
|
Quote:
The gist of it was, that nowadays TV shows get more and more morally complex with very detailed and grey painted characters, while cinema movies are the exact opposite painting with simple strokes in black and white.
That's not entirely true, even if it often seems like that, I think that even in movies most characters have well built up grey areas. You just have to find them, and it's a lot harder than in a series, since you have a lot less time. But then, I might be a bit optimistic about this, I just hope that I can't do a better job than experienced professionals. Who am I kidding, I am better than most of them!
Quote:
Movies produced for Cinema, however, seem to focus on the VISUAL experience nowadays and not the story. Story seems to be something of an afterthought in today's movies, a vehicle to stun the viewer with tricks, visuals and effects more than anything else.
So you're saying it's superficial and mostly about cosmetic features? What a surprise!
____________
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted February 07, 2010 09:56 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Movies produced for Cinema, however, seem to focus on the VISUAL experience nowadays and not the story. Story seems to be something of an afterthought in today's movies, a vehicle to stun the viewer with tricks, visuals and effects more than anything else.
Basically you're saying that there are more action movies made today than yesterday... so? 
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
Celfious
Promising
Legendary Hero
From earth
|
|
posted February 07, 2010 11:28 PM |
|
|
movies are all about the same thing these days
a bad guy with some kind of followers and a few good guys (buy guys I mean men and womens also) and the main star is generally one of the good guys.
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted February 07, 2010 11:31 PM |
|
|
By that logic almost all games are poor too seeing as they are all based around similar genres unlike in the past when such genres were 'made'... but I'd say you're missing the point of the movie/game. You heard me right, originality is NOT the point of a good movie/game.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
william
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
LummoxLewis
|
|
posted February 07, 2010 11:47 PM |
|
|
I like movies which can combine action with a damn good story. Two movies that I like pop to mind: The Matrix and The Terminator. Wish there were more of those types of films around. Action mixed with a good story makes for some very good movies.
____________
~Ticking away the moments that
make up a dull day, Fritter and
waste the hours in an off-hand
way~
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted February 07, 2010 11:50 PM |
|
|
I don't think the point here is a "good" story, but a "complex" or original story... and I said that it's not necessary and missing the point. There's not much grey areas in Matrix or Terminator although I agree they are excellent movies. (of course, I'm not interested in a "complex" story being a must for any movie... just a select few, usually dramas, but can apply in some fantasy too).
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
william
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
LummoxLewis
|
|
posted February 07, 2010 11:53 PM |
|
|
Perhaps. Sometimes, though, if the story is too complex then that might put the viewer off because it might be too hard to understand. What do you think? Have you ever experienced this before when watching films?
____________
~Ticking away the moments that
make up a dull day, Fritter and
waste the hours in an off-hand
way~
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted February 07, 2010 11:59 PM |
|
Edited by TheDeath at 00:00, 08 Feb 2010.
|
Yeah happened to me several times. Especially if you skip a small part but, due to the nature of complexity, it makes it very hard to 'catch on' later.
Don't get me wrong, I like movies that make you think, but that doesn't mean the story has to be complex or anything... it's more about either a "message" in the movie or character development (where you 'think' about and care about the character, you know, fanboys/fangirls ).
And Character Development is not always at the same pace or not designed for every movie... although a good bunch of them do. Visuals and sound and music have their place a lot, after all, it's a movie, not a book.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
william
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
LummoxLewis
|
|
posted February 08, 2010 12:03 AM |
|
|
Yeah, I agree.
Have you ever seen the movie 'Eraserhead'? That's sort of confusing in parts but a damn good movie.
____________
~Ticking away the moments that
make up a dull day, Fritter and
waste the hours in an off-hand
way~
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted February 08, 2010 12:08 AM |
|
|
Not even heard of it. I don't watch many classics at all (in fact very few), and also quite few movies as well -- I mean I do watch the more popular ones... and the more obscure ones when browsing channels, but which I don't remember sometimes. So I'll take your word for it.
"Infernal Affairs" was pretty confusing for me -- missing some parts in it (watched it on TV... ) didn't help that at all.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
william
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
LummoxLewis
|
|
posted February 08, 2010 12:26 AM |
|
|
Oh, Eraserhead was made in 1977, so I wouldn't exactly call it a 'classic' but I do get why you might say that (because it's in black and white, right?). 
And usually, skipping shows can make it so that the show makes no sense. 
____________
~Ticking away the moments that
make up a dull day, Fritter and
waste the hours in an off-hand
way~
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted February 08, 2010 12:35 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Oh, Eraserhead was made in 1977, so I wouldn't exactly call it a 'classic' but I do get why you might say that (because it's in black and white, right?).
Not really since I didn't even hear about it, I only noticed the date. Stuff before the 1980s I call classics
also I kinda don't like the sound on movies pre 1990s, unless they are remastered (which usually are, if the movie is famous, on DVD, like Terminator 1).
Quote:
And usually, skipping shows can make it so that the show makes no sense.
Yeah but that was a movie, which is much shorter, making it even more confusing.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
SpaceBunny
Adventuring Hero
Goddess (its true!)
|
|
posted February 08, 2010 12:41 AM |
|
|
@William
If you liked Eraserhead, try Un Chien Andalou - short film by Luis Bunuel. Its something different anyway.
____________
Just do as I say and you'll live - its that easy.
|
|
phoenixreborn
Promising
Legendary Hero
Unicorn
|
|
posted February 08, 2010 03:44 AM |
|
|
Quote:
try Un Chien Andalou
I didn't get the fuss to be honest. I understood more the movie 'Angel exterminador'.
____________
Bask in the light of my glorious shining unicorn.
|
|
SpaceBunny
Adventuring Hero
Goddess (its true!)
|
|
posted February 08, 2010 05:22 AM |
|
|
Un Chien Andalou is totally overrated by today's standards, but then it was made over 30 years before En Angel Exterminador. To be honest, the only one I can bear to watch is Belle de Jour. I was interested in Luis Bunuel a few years ago and watched a lot then.
____________
Just do as I say and you'll live - its that easy.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 08, 2010 07:13 AM |
|
|
STORY wasn't exactly the point.
The point was "characters". (And just for the record: it wasn't "my" point, I just happen to agree with it).
So, to repeat this. The point was that in many or at least a sizable part of today's TV shows we have morally complex characters who are painted with many facettes; they develop from episode to episode; they tend to have good and bad side, they make mistakes (with grave consequences), they may bend the law, they have mistakes - they look pretty real, their LIFE looks pretty real (which is all far away from how it was).
With movies it's the other way round. In earlier times a movie was a story with a beginning and an end - and with pretty developed characters. Think of the black series movies of the 4os. Big sleep 2 or Maltese Falcon 2? Stories and characters seemed to have s lot more facettes, and they certainly had more than the TV shows that started to air later on.
That becomes even more obvious when TV shows started to kick off with pilot movies - the pilot movie was double length and introduced the acting CHARACTERS - for example, for Kojak I remember that the pilot was the Marcus Nelson Case, a pretty complex piece, that defined the character of Kojak; then, in the series, while it was pretty good, that character didn't develop anymore - if Kojak HAD emotions in a case, it was because of something happening in the past and so on.
But I digress. Trend in the movies has gone from "time for development of plot/characters" to making plot and characters a vehicle for showing off effects, tricks, action, opticals. TV shows, on the other hand, is just the other way round: from serving the same blueprint of episode over and over again with different "guest stars" and plot variations it's more like filling characters with traits and depth, thereby making viewers accustomed and familiar with them.
So, while story is a point as well, the main focus here is on characters.
|
|
Mytical
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Chaos seeking Harmony
|
|
posted February 08, 2010 09:01 AM |
|
|
Also, a movie (unless it has sequels) only has so much time. Making a convincing 'character development' has to happen quickly and often times is just MISSED in all the action. So movies are of course at a disadvantage with character development when compaired to television series. People also tend to have a shorter attention span, so the movie people have to make sure to keep peoples attention .. and often skimp on the 'meat'..and focus on the garnish instead.
What gets me, however, is televison series. Often they will have a character undergo some 'life altering events' one episode..and then never mention it or gloss over it after. While it makes for a compelling episode..you often have to ask yourself "What was the point?" if you are NEVER going to bring it up again..or have it affect anything in any way...then why the heck did you do it in the first place?
____________
Message received.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 08, 2010 09:27 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Also, a movie (unless it has sequels) only has so much time. Making a convincing 'character development' has to happen quickly and often times is just MISSED in all the action. So movies are of course at a disadvantage with character development when compaired to television series.
But you seem to miss that this USED TO BE the point of a movie: tell a story, sketch characters. While TV shows did just retell the same story with a couple variations over and over again, not EVER altering the character.
Today it's different: suddenly the movies retell the same story over and over again, changing actors, of course, but not caring about character development anymore - or if so, then they do it with a steamhammer -, while meanwhile more and more TV series use this as a means to create more like one portioned movie, instead of unconnected episodes.
Quote:
People also tend to have a shorter attention span,
You mean, people are born wwith a genetic defect nowadays? Or what do you think would be the reason for this?
|
|
|
|
