Miscellaneous Movie Musings - Page 40

Alex · 06-09-2006, 11:23 AM

I think there are many, many plots. Probably an infinite amount. What there is in limited quantity is motivation that we find interesting. But even if there are only 36 plots there is still a lot of leeway in presenting those plots in interesting ways.

What I think gets me is if you are going to cover very well-trod territory with a story, you should provide some reason for it to be worth revisiting since the last time someone did. I don't really have a problem with a remake of Psycho (it could be good and if it isn't oh well) but I do have a problem with a shot-for-shot remake as it seems to have no point except to say that a modern audience can't properly appreciate it unless you replace Janet Leigh with Anne Heche and Anthony Perkins with Vince Vaughn (remember when he did dramatic work too?).

Essentially I'm looking for some originality in a movie. If it isn't in plot, hopefully it is in character, or in mood, or in some interesting interpretation of the standard plot, or in the style of filmmaking. Plot is huge, so if you go with a very worn chestnut then you are at a bit of a disadvantage in finding room for creative expansion but it isn't impossible. As I said in the review, Cars is almost exactly, plot point for plot point, the same story as Doc Hollywood. And yet it is much better because it creates more interesting characters. But if it hadn't done that or found some other area for growth then simply being a knock-off of a B movie would have been a problem.

Alex · 06-09-2006, 11:25 AM

The problem with those 36 plots is that they are abstracted to such a high level that it doesn't really reveal much. To me it is kind of like saying there are only 26 letters in the alphabet so you can't easily write something original.

Cadaverous Pallor · 06-09-2006, 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

To me it is kind of like saying there are only 26 letters in the alphabet so you can't easily write something original.

Exactly. Most movies have multiple plots tied together. It's not like there's only 36 kinds of movies - there are near-infinite combinations of the 36 building blocks.

We're seeing Cars tonight. I'm excited.

Not Afraid · 06-09-2006, 11:13 AM

It's not about the story so much as it is about the telling. There are a great many "classic" stories that have been told and retold many times over with varying results. I have always loved a good retelling of a story, but nothing can be worse than a bad retelling of a good story.

scaeagles · 06-09-2006, 11:37 AM

But how many different ways can you tell a story about, say, abduction? There can be hundreds of different reasons why someone was abducted, and the same number of ways to try to rescue someone who was abducted, and those can make the story more interesting, but the key is development of characters that you care about within that story of abduction.

I think this is why Hollywood is focusing more and more on special effect movies. The plots are pretty much the same, so they try to cover for that with bigger special effects to make it more visually interesting.

Gemini Cricket · 06-09-2006, 11:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scaeagles

The plots are pretty much the same, so they try to cover for that with bigger special effects to make it more visually interesting.

What's that saying? "You can put lipstick on a pig..."

innerSpaceman · 06-09-2006, 06:53 PM

Abduction was one of the 36 was was least astract. I have to agree with Alex; most on the list are too abstract to provide any meaning whatsoever to the thesis that the number of possible plots is maddeningly finite.

Alex · 06-09-2006, 07:33 PM

Also I don't think you'd find many critics complaining simply because a movie was made that centered around "abduction."

If a movie was made in which a child is abducted for ransom and a parent decides that the only hope is to defy the abductors by screwing with their plans, since they probably plan to kill the child no matter what, then the movie better have something unique to offer that wasn't provided by Ransom.

I think for most critics it is ok to cover the same ground but the filmmaker has to provide a reason why, given the choice between A and the new B, you should choose B. Simply being more recent is not enough reason.

Alex · 06-09-2006, 07:34 PM

scaeagles, do you try to find creative movies or do you generally end up at whatever the top three movies at the box office are? Tentpole movies aren't trying to be creative. Creativity is risky and people don't like to spend $120 million on risk.

I see creative original movies all the time but they're not so often playing at the 10-screen multiplex.

tracilicious · 06-09-2006, 07:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

I see creative original movies all the time but they're not so often playing at the 10-screen multiplex.

This reminds me of You, Me, and Everyone We Know. Very creative and original. Nothing much happens plot wise, but it's a great film.
.

06-09-2006, 11:23 AM	#1
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	I think there are many, many plots. Probably an infinite amount. What there is in limited quantity is motivation that we find interesting. But even if there are only 36 plots there is still a lot of leeway in presenting those plots in interesting ways. What I think gets me is if you are going to cover very well-trod territory with a story, you should provide some reason for it to be worth revisiting since the last time someone did. I don't really have a problem with a remake of Psycho (it could be good and if it isn't oh well) but I do have a problem with a shot-for-shot remake as it seems to have no point except to say that a modern audience can't properly appreciate it unless you replace Janet Leigh with Anne Heche and Anthony Perkins with Vince Vaughn (remember when he did dramatic work too?). Essentially I'm looking for some originality in a movie. If it isn't in plot, hopefully it is in character, or in mood, or in some interesting interpretation of the standard plot, or in the style of filmmaking. Plot is huge, so if you go with a very worn chestnut then you are at a bit of a disadvantage in finding room for creative expansion but it isn't impossible. As I said in the review, Cars is almost exactly, plot point for plot point, the same story as Doc Hollywood. And yet it is much better because it creates more interesting characters. But if it hadn't done that or found some other area for growth then simply being a knock-off of a B movie would have been a problem.
	Submit to Quotes

06-09-2006, 11:25 AM	#2
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	The problem with those 36 plots is that they are abstracted to such a high level that it doesn't really reveal much. To me it is kind of like saying there are only 26 letters in the alphabet so you can't easily write something original.
	Submit to Quotes

06-09-2006, 11:13 AM	#4
Not Afraid HI! Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 17,108	It's not about the story so much as it is about the telling. There are a great many "classic" stories that have been told and retold many times over with varying results. I have always loved a good retelling of a story, but nothing can be worse than a bad retelling of a good story.
	Submit to Quotes

06-09-2006, 11:37 AM	#5
scaeagles I LIKE! Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,819	But how many different ways can you tell a story about, say, abduction? There can be hundreds of different reasons why someone was abducted, and the same number of ways to try to rescue someone who was abducted, and those can make the story more interesting, but the key is development of characters that you care about within that story of abduction. I think this is why Hollywood is focusing more and more on special effect movies. The plots are pretty much the same, so they try to cover for that with bigger special effects to make it more visually interesting.
	Submit to Quotes

06-09-2006, 06:53 PM	#7
innerSpaceman Kink of Swank Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Inner Space Posts: 13,075	Abduction was one of the 36 was was least astract. I have to agree with Alex; most on the list are too abstract to provide any meaning whatsoever to the thesis that the number of possible plots is maddeningly finite.
	Submit to Quotes

06-09-2006, 07:33 PM	#8
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	Also I don't think you'd find many critics complaining simply because a movie was made that centered around "abduction." If a movie was made in which a child is abducted for ransom and a parent decides that the only hope is to defy the abductors by screwing with their plans, since they probably plan to kill the child no matter what, then the movie better have something unique to offer that wasn't provided by Ransom. I think for most critics it is ok to cover the same ground but the filmmaker has to provide a reason why, given the choice between A and the new B, you should choose B. Simply being more recent is not enough reason.
	Submit to Quotes

06-09-2006, 07:34 PM	#9
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	scaeagles, do you try to find creative movies or do you generally end up at whatever the top three movies at the box office are? Tentpole movies aren't trying to be creative. Creativity is risky and people don't like to spend $120 million on risk. I see creative original movies all the time but they're not so often playing at the 10-screen multiplex.
	Submit to Quotes

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode