Sharing Cinematic Values #4: McParadigm

[epilogue]

Furthermore, if we are calling these movies nostalgic soap opera stuff (the soap opera part I definitely agree with) how do you reconcile wanting to see some of them, being excited by them, calling at least one of them one of the 100 greatest films of all time, with your otherwise total disdain for the genre?

[epilogue]

But seriously folks, is it fair to call this current outpouring of genre (SUPERHERO MOVIES!!! BWWWWWWWWWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM) nostalgic?

Absolutely. Nostalgic. Infantilizing. Coddling. 100%.

Also, what's nostalgic about it?

[bada]

I've watched General Hospital every day for 35 years.

[LoathedVermin72]

Furthermore, if we are calling these movies nostalgic soap opera stuff (the soap opera part I definitely agree with) how do you reconcile wanting to see some of them, being excited by them, calling at least one of them one of the 100 greatest films of all time, with your otherwise total disdain for the genre?

Because the problem isn't necessarily inherent in the material - the problem is in the execution, and in what people want out of these movies, as proved over and over through box office and reception.

[LoathedVermin72]

But seriously folks, is it fair to call this current outpouring of genre (SUPERHERO MOVIES!!! BWWWWWWWWWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM) nostalgic?

Absolutely. Nostalgic. Infantilizing. Coddling. 100%.

Also, what's nostalgic about it?

Because it uses (exploits) characters and settings people grew up with as children as a way to garner interest and dominate pop culture. People want to see the comic book heroes (or space heroes or ninja turtles or robot cars) they loved as kids turned into "adult" movies for some reason.

[E.H. Ruddock]

But seriously folks, is it fair to call this current outpouring of genre (SUPERHERO MOVIES!!! BWWWWWWWWWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM) nostalgic?

Absolutely. Nostalgic. Infantilizing. Coddling. 100%.

Also, what's nostalgic about it?

Because it uses (exploits) characters and settings people grew up with as children as a way to garner interest and dominate pop culture. People want to see the comic book heroes (or space heroes or ninja turtles or robot cars) they loved as kids turned into "adult" movies for some reason.

Fingers crossed for a Gobots or Snorks movie.

[epilogue]

But then he goes and starts using narrative and story interchangeably and I have to wonder if he hasn't been tricking me this entire time.

I don't think you ever explained how you delineate these two? One of the dictionary definitions of "narrative" is literally "a story."

I was out and about yesterday and didn't really have the time to devote to a real answer. In all honesty, my post above was tongue-in-cheek. Just flashback humor, if you will. But now that we're here...

The thing with differentiating these ideas (narrative, story and plot) is that when I'm talking about them, I'm using literary definitions/delineations. These definitions don't automatically or even easily transfer to the cinematic conversation, obviously, because cinema and literature are different mediums. So it gets sticky.

These are my definitions based on my years studying theater and literature. They are writer's definitions and my own preference. Others don't/won't use these words the same way but this, at the very least, gives you have an understanding of what I'm talking about when I'm talking about this stuff.

Okay, so, story is the entire series of events in chronological order. In film, the story is the film. Regardless of plot or narrative or structure. The images you're seeing in the order presented are "the story."

Plot is more about specific points or patterns within the story. Plot breaks the story down into it's components: exposition, rising action, climax, falling action, and resolution.

Narrative deals more with how the events are told. I'm going to quote from a blog entry that dives further into this stuff (he puts it way more succinctly than I could right now). Really, what I've posted here is discussed in that same blog post, so I'll link his post below as well.

If you don’t mind using the previous words in this one’s definition, narrative is the method and means by which you construct the events of a story into a plot. It concerns itself with the sequence of the events, the medium on which they are told and the way these events are put together into one coherent unit.

Narratives may involve a reordering of the events of a story. The story’s events can be set out of chronological order; be combined with elements from outside of the story to better tell the consumer what is going on; or to build dramatic effect. Sometimes a narrative may draw attention to things or events the story lacks, because the contrast is interesting.

The narrative comes from the events of the story in order to create a dramatic effect through the structure of the plot.

read more here: http://hacktext.com/2011/09/story-vs-na ... plot-1205/

TL;DR:
- Story is the entire sequence of events.

- Plot deals with how the events relate to each other and breaks the story down into structural components.

- Narrative is how the story is told; it comes from the events of the story in order to create a dramatic effect through structure and plot.

- These are literary definitions that deal more with prose than film (though they are still usable in discussing that medium) and are how I use these words in discussions. I understand others do not differentiate these terms in the same way.

[epilogue]

Furthermore, if we are calling these movies nostalgic soap opera stuff (the soap opera part I definitely agree with) how do you reconcile wanting to see some of them, being excited by them, calling at least one of them one of the 100 greatest films of all time, with your otherwise total disdain for the genre?

Because the problem isn't necessarily inherent in the material - the problem is in the execution, and in what people want out of these movies, as proved over and over through box office and reception.

Interesting. Is it fair to say then that your problem isn't with modern cinema but with modern audiences? Obviously, audience demand affects the supply.

[epilogue]

But seriously folks, is it fair to call this current outpouring of genre (SUPERHERO MOVIES!!! BWWWWWWWWWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM) nostalgic?

Absolutely. Nostalgic. Infantilizing. Coddling. 100%.

Also, what's nostalgic about it?

Because it uses (exploits) characters and settings people grew up with as children as a way to garner interest and dominate pop culture. People want to see the comic book heroes (or space heroes or ninja turtles or robot cars) they loved as kids turned into "adult" movies for some reason.

Ah. Yes. Now I'm with you.

[Strat]

I want to date McP.

[LoathedVermin72]

But then he goes and starts using narrative and story interchangeably and I have to wonder if he hasn't been tricking me this entire time.

I don't think you ever explained how you delineate these two? One of the dictionary definitions of "narrative" is literally "a story."

I was out and about yesterday and didn't really have the time to devote to a real answer. In all honesty, my post above was tongue-in-cheek. Just flashback humor, if you will. But now that we're here...

The thing with differentiating these ideas (narrative, story and plot) is that when I'm talking about them, I'm using literary definitions/delineations. These definitions don't automatically or even easily transfer to the cinematic conversation, obviously, because cinema and literature are different mediums. So it gets sticky.

These are my definitions based on my years studying theater and literature. They are writer's definitions and my own preference. Others don't/won't use these words the same way but this, at the very least, gives you have an understanding of what I'm talking about when I'm talking about this stuff.

Okay, so, story is the entire series of events in chronological order. In film, the story is the film. Regardless of plot or narrative or structure. The images you're seeing in the order presented are "the story."

Plot is more about specific points or patterns within the story. Plot breaks the story down into it's components: exposition, rising action, climax, falling action, and resolution.

Narrative deals more with how the events are told. I'm going to quote from a blog entry that dives further into this stuff (he puts it way more succinctly than I could right now). Really, what I've posted here is discussed in that same blog post, so I'll link his post below as well.

If you don’t mind using the previous words in this one’s definition, narrative is the method and means by which you construct the events of a story into a plot. It concerns itself with the sequence of the events, the medium on which they are told and the way these events are put together into one coherent unit.

Narratives may involve a reordering of the events of a story. The story’s events can be set out of chronological order; be combined with elements from outside of the story to better tell the consumer what is going on; or to build dramatic effect. Sometimes a narrative may draw attention to things or events the story lacks, because the contrast is interesting.

The narrative comes from the events of the story in order to create a dramatic effect through the structure of the plot.

read more here: http://hacktext.com/2011/09/story-vs-na ... plot-1205/

TL;DR:
- Story is the entire sequence of events.

- Plot deals with how the events relate to each other and breaks the story down into structural components.

- Narrative is how the story is told; it comes from the events of the story in order to create a dramatic effect through structure and plot.

- These are literary definitions that deal more with prose than film (though they are still usable in discussing that medium) and are how I use these words in discussions. I understand others do not differentiate these terms in the same way.

I like this. This makes sense. I always separated "story" and "plot," but I like your points about separating "narrative." I'm going to use the terminology this way from now on.

[LoathedVermin72]

Furthermore, if we are calling these movies nostalgic soap opera stuff (the soap opera part I definitely agree with) how do you reconcile wanting to see some of them, being excited by them, calling at least one of them one of the 100 greatest films of all time, with your otherwise total disdain for the genre?

Because the problem isn't necessarily inherent in the material - the problem is in the execution, and in what people want out of these movies, as proved over and over through box office and reception.

Interesting. Is it fair to say then that your problem isn't with modern cinema but with modern audiences? Obviously, audience demand affects the supply.

I think it's a combination of both. Obviously, studios are going to try give audiences what they want. But I don't think they're blameless in this, either. It's hard for me not to loathe Disney for the inescapable onslaught of soulless, meaningless art-product they continually hoist on global pop culture. I think it's foolish to discount the very real impact this can have on public consciousness and the artistic well-being of society, even if there's an element of "giving them what they want" at play. Their influence is so absolute that I don't even know what we can do to combat at this point. They practically have a monopoly on imagination.

[epilogue]

I want to date McP.

I'd def s his d and hope I got a little on me, yeah.

[epilogue]

I like this. This makes sense. I always separated "story" and "plot," but I like your points about separating "narrative." I'm going to use the terminology this way from now on.

I always thought it made sense. I'm so happy we found a common language here. What a great day!

[epilogue]

Furthermore, if we are calling these movies nostalgic soap opera stuff (the soap opera part I definitely agree with) how do you reconcile wanting to see some of them, being excited by them, calling at least one of them one of the 100 greatest films of all time, with your otherwise total disdain for the genre?

Because the problem isn't necessarily inherent in the material - the problem is in the execution, and in what people want out of these movies, as proved over and over through box office and reception.

Interesting. Is it fair to say then that your problem isn't with modern cinema but with modern audiences? Obviously, audience demand affects the supply.

I think it's a combination of both. Obviously, studios are going to try give audiences what they want. But I don't think they're blameless in this, either. It's hard for me not to loathe Disney for the inescapable onslaught of soulless, meaningless art-product they continually hoist on global pop culture. I think it's foolish to discount the very real impact this can have on public consciousness and the artistic well-being of society, even if there's an element of "giving them what they want" at play. Their influence is so absolute that I don't even know what we can do to combat at this point. They practically have a monopoly on imagination.

Damn. Well said.

[bada]

The Disney evil empire thing is pretty lame. The Gummi Bears never hurt anyone.

[epilogue]

They jumped on a lot of heads, bada. I'm sure there was some cranial trauma here and there. Had to be.

[LoathedVermin72]

The Disney evil empire thing is pretty lame. The Gummi Bears never hurt anyone.

They are responsible for Marvel and The Force Awakens, so they're pretty much Satan incarnate in my eyes.

[epilogue]

The Disney evil empire thing is pretty lame. The Gummi Bears never hurt anyone.

They are responsible for Marvel and The Force Awakens, so they're pretty much Satan incarnate in my eyes.

Well, Marvel was gonna Marvel with or without Disney.

Disney was smart enough to buy Marvel but I don't think they're responsible for Marvel. They were shrewd enough to recognize an investment opportunity.

[LoathedVermin72]

The Disney evil empire thing is pretty lame. The Gummi Bears never hurt anyone.

They are responsible for Marvel and The Force Awakens, so they're pretty much Satan incarnate in my eyes.

Well, Marvel was gonna Marvel with or without Disney.

Disney was smart enough to buy Marvel but I don't think they're responsible for Marvel. They were shrewd enough to recognize an investment opportunity.

movies are basically stocks