Today in class my seniors asked me about MTV reality programming.
And that was the prompt needed to introduce them to Next & Room Raiders, which they immediately loved based off of the verbal description I gave for each show.
Education is important.
show them real world and then show them terrace house
My gf and I started rewatching the first season of top chef and I didn't know they gave the contestants the Real World style intro while arriving to the city.
My pilot is currently in active danger of going away before even shooting a frame, because exactly one human being doesn't think exactly one other human is the right kind of attractive, so I am in an especially sympathetic place i/r/t people who don't meticulously plan an entire TV show in advance
The risk of all that effort meaning fucking bupkis is so goddamned high that I can't fault anybody who takes off and builds the rest of the plane in the air
I know this isn't the subject the discussion and it's just kind of how all visual media work, but boy, that fuckin' sucks!
I ain't gonna name names on the internet, because I would like to continue to work, but exactly one human being might blow up this whole fucking thing because they think all Natives should look like Disney's Pocahontas*, and it has been one of the most enervating things I've experienced in this or any other job
*They of course did not SAY this say this, because it's 2021, but it is exceedingly easy to read between lines
Game's not over, we've got options and schemes, but fuckin' a. The whole process has been a dream up until now, there have been scores of supportive and insightful and compassionate executives we've dealt with. There are a lot of good people in the system, trying their hardest. But the right shithead in the right place can stymie the work of a lot of fucking people.
Today in class my seniors asked me about MTV reality programming.
And that was the prompt needed to introduce them to Next & Room Raiders, which they immediately loved based off of the verbal description I gave for each show.
Education is important.
show them real world and then show them terrace house
Terrace House was so good....up until you learn that the showrunners were creeps and a lady from the show got bullied so much that she killed herself
0
Options
3cl1ps3I will build a labyrinth to house the cheeseRegistered Userregular
My pilot is currently in active danger of going away before even shooting a frame, because exactly one human being doesn't think exactly one other human is the right kind of attractive, so I am in an especially sympathetic place i/r/t people who don't meticulously plan an entire TV show in advance
The risk of all that effort meaning fucking bupkis is so goddamned high that I can't fault anybody who takes off and builds the rest of the plane in the air
I know this isn't the subject the discussion and it's just kind of how all visual media work, but boy, that fuckin' sucks!
I ain't gonna name names on the internet, because I would like to continue to work, but exactly one human being might blow up this whole fucking thing because they think all Natives should look like Disney's Pocahontas*, and it has been one of the most enervating things I've experienced in this or any other job
*They of course did not SAY this say this, because it's 2021, but it is exceedingly easy to read between lines
Game's not over, we've got options and schemes, but fuckin' a. The whole process has been a dream up until now, there have been scores of supportive and insightful and compassionate executives we've dealt with. There are a lot of good people in the system, trying their hardest. But the right shithead in the right place can stymie the work of a lot of fucking people.
That fucking sucks dude! I hope they don't get their pigheaded way!
also, I agree that meticulously planning a show from the start rarely works
but I think it's better when the show at least knows where it's going eventually
like, theres a lot to respect about a show having a story to tell and then telling it and then being done
I think Babylon 5 is a pretty good example of striking that balance. Had a solid idea where everything was going, enough that pieces and hints could be dropped very early on. But not so strict in the details that they weren't prepared to roll with lots of happenstance.
My hot take: TV with too firm a plan is actively bad and undercuts all the strengths of the medium for the sake of appeasing the worst people on the internet
I'll agree that you're missing out on reacting to the audience, changing the plot based on the performance, etc. However, if your show is a mystery, you gotta know what the answers to the questions are, at least on a basic level. "What is in this mysterious basement?" You need to know that already when you put it in the story. I'm so worn out from stories that have their fans write years of speculation when the answer was "Lol, we'll figure it out later, probably."
Ya know, the longer I write my d&d game the more im finding out that this is not at all the case. Do you know how many times I've created a mysterious basement that's basically empty till my players walk in and start telling me what they are looking to find in this basement?
This is how my game has been going, but D&D(VtM in my case) is actively interactive storytelling, TV is much less so.
Edit: that was supposed to be an edit, not a new post. Whoops
Fencingsax on
+1
Options
Zonugal(He/Him) The Holiday ArmadilloI'm Santa's representative for all the southern states. And Mexico!Registered Userregular
I think most of the time when these shows introduce a mystery, they have some idea of an answer, but also: getting an answer to a mystery is rarely going to be as fun as seeing a mystery and trying to solve it yourself. There are exceptions, like, Knives Out was built in such a way that watching the explanation would be just as fun as everything else, but that's...a different format. And I think that with Lost, for instance, they figured out at some point that the mysteries were less effective when the characters of the show weren't invested. The best mysteries on Lost worked because someone like Locke was working to figure them out, and watching his reaction to the questions and the answers were what really made the show stick in people's minds the way that so many of Lost's imitators failed to do.
+7
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
My argument is less that things have to be planned out, and more "if you introduce a mystery, you need to know an answer to said mystery"
Why?
Because otherwise you aren't actually saying much.
To be clear, you never have to tell the audience what the answer is, and if you come along a better answer, use that. It doesn't even need to be particularly specific. But as a writer, you should have a grasp of your world.
Obviously, I am talking about something that is relevant to the story. If it doesn't matter to the story, then it doesn't matter.
+5
Options
Zonugal(He/Him) The Holiday ArmadilloI'm Santa's representative for all the southern states. And Mexico!Registered Userregular
edited April 2021
Related to Gravity Falls, good god do they really put in their work in making their series antagonist a really terrifying force (within the boundaries of a children's cartoon).
Related to Gravity Falls, good god do they really put in their work in making their series antagonist a really terrifying force (within the boundaries of a children's cartoon).
Damn. You know what sells that is Preston's really terrified muffled screaming. It takes it from a goofy cartoon thing to happen to someone to really effective body horror.
there isn't any inherent value, as a story-teller, to knowing the answer to any mystery ahead of time -- especially when its ending is so nebulous/in flux that you can't really prepare for any fallout.
bluntly: the answers, despite any ratifications to the characters/thrust of the narrative, are far more for the audience than not. and audiences can be fickle; even flat out wrong about where a story should go.
the only thing that matters when introducing a mystery into a story is having a firm grasp on why your characters want to solve it. or don't want it solved. especially in long-form storytelling. we are gonna be dealing with shifting motivation far longer than we are any single answer, and that's where the drama is.
there isn't any inherent value, as a story-teller, to knowing the answer to any mystery ahead of time -- especially when its ending is so nebulous/in flux that you can't really prepare for any fallout.
bluntly: the answers, despite any ratifications to the characters/thrust of the narrative, are far more for the audience than not. and audiences can be fickle; even flat out wrong about where a story should go.
the only thing that matters when introducing a mystery into a story is having a firm grasp on why your characters want to solve it. or don't want it solved. especially in long-form storytelling. we are gonna be dealing with shifting motivation far longer than we are any single answer, and that's where the drama is.
I feel like there are several counterarguments to be made where the mystery was made up as it went and it clearly showed. X-Files and the collective works of JJ Abrams being to clear examples, and that's coming from someone with WAY more generous feelings about Abrams than a lot on this forum.
You know what? Nanowrimo's cancelled on account of the world is stupid.
there isn't any inherent value, as a story-teller, to knowing the answer to any mystery ahead of time -- especially when its ending is so nebulous/in flux that you can't really prepare for any fallout.
bluntly: the answers, despite any ratifications to the characters/thrust of the narrative, are far more for the audience than not. and audiences can be fickle; even flat out wrong about where a story should go.
the only thing that matters when introducing a mystery into a story is having a firm grasp on why your characters want to solve it. or don't want it solved. especially in long-form storytelling. we are gonna be dealing with shifting motivation far longer than we are any single answer, and that's where the drama is.
I feel like there are several counterarguments to be made where the mystery was made up as it went and it clearly showed. X-Files and the collective works of JJ Abrams being to clear examples, and that's coming from someone with WAY more generous feelings about Abrams than a lot on this forum.
There are "Counterarguments" to any approach to storytelling
I feel like there is a problem in media criticism where identifying a problem leads to the assumption that if this is the problem then doing exactly the opposite must be the solution but that's rarely the case. JJ Abrams clearly brought this argument on and I do think he has abused and gone to far with his mystery box concept but he's not wrong about the way people interact with mysteries.
I feel like there is a problem in media criticism where identifying a problem leads to the assumption that if this is the problem then doing exactly the opposite must be the solution but that's rarely the case. JJ Abrams clearly brought this argument on and I do think he has abused and gone to far with his mystery box concept but he's not wrong about the way people interact with mysteries.
That's a fair point. That said, are there any good examples of this idea working? Any shows that had a central mystery introduced very early in the show, ended in a satisfying way, and which the creators later revealed was made up as it went?
You know what? Nanowrimo's cancelled on account of the world is stupid.
0
Options
StraightziHere we may reign secure, and in my choice,To reign is worth ambition though in HellRegistered Userregular
I mean there are a lot of folks here who like Lost, that's where this conversation started
For me, a mystery is a form of conflict in a story and like all forms of conflict, the more it's presented as a critical part of the story then the more it needs to be resolved in some way. Answering it may be a form of resolution - as in Knives Out as was mentioned above - but there's a lot of ways it could go. The issue really only shows up when it just gets shunted off into "fuckin' whatever", which is true of any central conflict that just gets fucked off into the ether by the showrunners.
BSG spoilers:
For example, whatever the FUCK was going on with Starbuck. Figuring out what had happened to her after she died was her entire arc in the last season. Every episode had something about her struggling with who she was and what it meant that she was whoever she was both in terms of what she thought of herself and what everyone else thought of her, and the whole metaplot of who could have brought her back and what does that mean, and then the last episode just Zoidberg-walked away and it was fuckin' stupid and fuckin' hell. God what a waste of an ending that was.
If a mystery isn't ever presented as an actual conflict for a show then it doesn't need to be resolved for me to be happy with things.
Haunting of Hill House spoilers:
What actually happened to the mom the night she died was framed as a central source of conflict throughout, and it was important that it did end up getting resolved, so the show held up in that regard. What it was in the history of the house that led it to be a place where souls get eaten, slowly, was never raised as a key plot element, so that we never found out was never any sort of issue - something the sequel series should have taken note of.
The GeekOh-Two Crew, OmeganautRegistered User, ClubPAregular
If you enjoyed Gravity Falls, I definitely recommend The Owl House. It's a very different setting, but it has a pretty similar weirdness feel and sense of humor. Most likely because the creator, Dana Terrace, is Alex Hirsch's partner. And he does a voice of a great character on the show.
I feel like there is a problem in media criticism where identifying a problem leads to the assumption that if this is the problem then doing exactly the opposite must be the solution but that's rarely the case. JJ Abrams clearly brought this argument on and I do think he has abused and gone to far with his mystery box concept but he's not wrong about the way people interact with mysteries.
That's a fair point. That said, are there any good examples of this idea working? Any shows that had a central mystery introduced very early in the show, ended in a satisfying way, and which the creators later revealed was made up as it went?
Veronica Mars season one pivoted several times on who the guilty party was, and it's the best long-form mystery the medium's ever presented (in my opinion).
I'm actually deeply curious about the opposite, for the plan-lover crowd. What's a mystery show that you feel ended satisfactorily?
I mean there are a lot of folks here who like Lost, that's where this conversation started
Supposedly the Lost writer room did have a rule that if you introduced a mystery you also had to introduce the answer -- but that answer was subject to change if someone came up with something better along the way. The Black Rock was just a rock that was black and served as a landmark until someone said it should be a crashed slave ship instead.
Also they didn't plan out enough to be able to fit all the answers into the show (ie. who was in the other boat that shot at Sawyer's group during the time jumps?).
I feel like there is a problem in media criticism where identifying a problem leads to the assumption that if this is the problem then doing exactly the opposite must be the solution but that's rarely the case. JJ Abrams clearly brought this argument on and I do think he has abused and gone to far with his mystery box concept but he's not wrong about the way people interact with mysteries.
That's a fair point. That said, are there any good examples of this idea working? Any shows that had a central mystery introduced very early in the show, ended in a satisfying way, and which the creators later revealed was made up as it went?
Veronica Mars season one pivoted several times on who the guilty party was, and it's the best long-form mystery the medium's ever presented (in my opinion).
I'm actually deeply curious about the opposite, for the plan-lover crowd. What's a mystery show that you feel ended satisfactorily?
I don't think I have a preference for either approach here but The Flight Attendant had a fun mystery that was wrapped up in what I found to be a satisfying way.
0
Options
DepressperadoI just wanted to see you laughingin the pizza rainRegistered Userregular
Today in class my seniors asked me about MTV reality programming.
And that was the prompt needed to introduce them to Next & Room Raiders, which they immediately loved based off of the verbal description I gave for each show.
Education is important.
show them real world and then show them terrace house
Terrace House was so good....up until you learn that the showrunners were creeps and a lady from the show got bullied so much that she killed herself
My gf and I started rewatching the first season of top chef and I didn't know they gave the contestants the Real World style intro while arriving to the city.
The first few seasons of Top Chef are wild to go back to, especially if you've only ever seen the most recent ones. It was a very, very different show.
There's a difference between knowing all your answers ahead of time and having a very low care for if your eventual answers fit and make sense once you do have them.
BSG spoilers
I used to think tv shows like that were more planned out in advance. But when they did the whole these 5 long term main cast members are ALSO cylons pull outta no where, but didn't know it, you could tell it was a total ass pull for a cliffhanger. The followup stories of them also being the super special original cylons that the rest would come to be based on was also just not satisfying.
I think if you're writing a mystery show you don't need to have all the answers, but when you're done, a measure of how successful you were is could someone believe you had a plan.
akajaybay on
+1
Options
JedocIn the scupperswith the staggers and jagsRegistered Userregular
edited April 2021
I thought Murder She Wrote did a good job with the final reveal that spoiler]Angela Lansbury and all the "victims" were highlanders, and she systematically framed most of the population of a small town for murder to prevent the mortal world from discovering her secret.[/spoiler]
A well-planned mystery might not have a huge advantage over a seat-of-your-pants improvisation the first time around, but I feel it makes them more likely to hold up on rewatches.
I feel like there is a problem in media criticism where identifying a problem leads to the assumption that if this is the problem then doing exactly the opposite must be the solution but that's rarely the case. JJ Abrams clearly brought this argument on and I do think he has abused and gone to far with his mystery box concept but he's not wrong about the way people interact with mysteries.
That's a fair point. That said, are there any good examples of this idea working? Any shows that had a central mystery introduced very early in the show, ended in a satisfying way, and which the creators later revealed was made up as it went?
The creators of Life on Mars and Ashes to Ashes said that
they hadn't decided how the latter would end ahead of time, which is why Sam Tyler is in every scene of Life on Mars in case they decided it was all in his head
I mean there are a lot of folks here who like Lost, that's where this conversation started
Supposedly the Lost writer room did have a rule that if you introduced a mystery you also had to introduce the answer -- but that answer was subject to change if someone came up with something better along the way. The Black Rock was just a rock that was black and served as a landmark until someone said it should be a crashed slave ship instead.
Also they didn't plan out enough to be able to fit all the answers into the show (ie. who was in the other boat that shot at Sawyer's group during the time jumps?).
I have my own theories on that (and have also read others) but I can also appreciate sometimes leaving a mystery open for folks to enjoy analyzing past the formal conclusion of a show.
Posts
show them real world and then show them terrace house
{Twitter, Everybody's doing it. }{Writing and Story Blog}
Watch the people who couldn't get in The Real World hear a story and then scare themselves in the dark. What's not to enjoy?
Steam ID XBL: JohnnyChopsocky PSN:Stud_Beefpile WiiU:JohnnyChopsocky
*They of course did not SAY this say this, because it's 2021, but it is exceedingly easy to read between lines
Game's not over, we've got options and schemes, but fuckin' a. The whole process has been a dream up until now, there have been scores of supportive and insightful and compassionate executives we've dealt with. There are a lot of good people in the system, trying their hardest. But the right shithead in the right place can stymie the work of a lot of fucking people.
Terrace House was so good....up until you learn that the showrunners were creeps and a lady from the show got bullied so much that she killed herself
That fucking sucks dude! I hope they don't get their pigheaded way!
I think Babylon 5 is a pretty good example of striking that balance. Had a solid idea where everything was going, enough that pieces and hints could be dropped very early on. But not so strict in the details that they weren't prepared to roll with lots of happenstance.
And I am very happy that it absolutely stuck the landing for its ending.
This is how my game has been going, but D&D(VtM in my case) is actively interactive storytelling, TV is much less so.
Edit: that was supposed to be an edit, not a new post. Whoops
Why?
Because otherwise you aren't actually saying much.
To be clear, you never have to tell the audience what the answer is, and if you come along a better answer, use that. It doesn't even need to be particularly specific. But as a writer, you should have a grasp of your world.
Obviously, I am talking about something that is relevant to the story. If it doesn't matter to the story, then it doesn't matter.
I screamed when this happened in the finale.
Damn. You know what sells that is Preston's really terrified muffled screaming. It takes it from a goofy cartoon thing to happen to someone to really effective body horror.
bluntly: the answers, despite any ratifications to the characters/thrust of the narrative, are far more for the audience than not. and audiences can be fickle; even flat out wrong about where a story should go.
the only thing that matters when introducing a mystery into a story is having a firm grasp on why your characters want to solve it. or don't want it solved. especially in long-form storytelling. we are gonna be dealing with shifting motivation far longer than we are any single answer, and that's where the drama is.
I feel like there are several counterarguments to be made where the mystery was made up as it went and it clearly showed. X-Files and the collective works of JJ Abrams being to clear examples, and that's coming from someone with WAY more generous feelings about Abrams than a lot on this forum.
There are "Counterarguments" to any approach to storytelling
That's a fair point. That said, are there any good examples of this idea working? Any shows that had a central mystery introduced very early in the show, ended in a satisfying way, and which the creators later revealed was made up as it went?
BSG spoilers:
If a mystery isn't ever presented as an actual conflict for a show then it doesn't need to be resolved for me to be happy with things.
Haunting of Hill House spoilers:
Veronica Mars season one pivoted several times on who the guilty party was, and it's the best long-form mystery the medium's ever presented (in my opinion).
I'm actually deeply curious about the opposite, for the plan-lover crowd. What's a mystery show that you feel ended satisfactorily?
Supposedly the Lost writer room did have a rule that if you introduced a mystery you also had to introduce the answer -- but that answer was subject to change if someone came up with something better along the way. The Black Rock was just a rock that was black and served as a landmark until someone said it should be a crashed slave ship instead.
Also they didn't plan out enough to be able to fit all the answers into the show (ie. who was in the other boat that shot at Sawyer's group during the time jumps?).
I don't think I have a preference for either approach here but The Flight Attendant had a fun mystery that was wrapped up in what I found to be a satisfying way.
son of a dangit
every day I discover some new horror
The first few seasons of Top Chef are wild to go back to, especially if you've only ever seen the most recent ones. It was a very, very different show.
BSG spoilers
A well-planned mystery might not have a huge advantage over a seat-of-your-pants improvisation the first time around, but I feel it makes them more likely to hold up on rewatches.
The creators of Life on Mars and Ashes to Ashes said that
Steam
No Diggle? No dice.
Coran Attack!
I have my own theories on that (and have also read others) but I can also appreciate sometimes leaving a mystery open for folks to enjoy analyzing past the formal conclusion of a show.