Plot vs. Character in Geek Culture

[Mr Trick]

@Priceless How dare you! Peter Falk is a flippy legend! 😛 I would class Columbo as a whodoneit. Its a different case each week and he has to figure out who done it😉

 

[Oromous]

Apologies for my prior rudeness, but I was kinda distracted earlier, so I didn't really get to address the rest of your post. Which I'll do now. 🙂

Now I think I understand the myth arc but ... I'm not sure it was worth understanding. But all the motw episodes of the show (thankfully the bulk of them) are great. I love the funny ones the best. X files is very tonally dissonant from one episode to the next, and I don't mind that at all, because I enjoy Mulder and Scully's relationship throughout and I enjoy the monsters. That's what I'm watching for. For all I hate the myth arc, I love the smoking man and Krycek and am always pleased to see them. So I definitely watch this show for character not overarching plot - though I do enjoy the monsters and the mysteries.

I can't stand any form of star trek - but the one I can tolerate the most easily is DS9, and when you compare its format to the others of the franchise - it's essentially a soap opera set in space. It places much more emphasis on character and relationships than the shows where they're just plodding from planet to planet setting phasers to stun.

I agree.

The X-Files and its myth arc is an interesting examination of genre television and its effect on geek culture zeitgeist because, convoluted and nonsensical as it is, whenever I looked up what the series meant to the people back then as an icon of '90s pop culture, Mulder and Scully's relationship would often be secondary to the kind of government conspiracy paranoia that was bred from its myth arc and the overall series' atmosphere. And I just want to say that I'm not making fun or criticizing those people, but it's just that I know people like that in real life, my peers and classmates who care less about the character relationships or even the grander underlying philosophies and would focus more on the superficial details of canonical consistencies and what greater conflict the heroes will face next. The X-Files and its fandom back then represent that kind of attitude in how people consumed science fiction and geek culture medium like Star Trek and Star Wars, where the "myth arc" or the main plotline was of more importance (before people realized it's going nowhere) than whatever distracting shipping Chris Carter was trying to force onto its audience.

And it's true, people did indeed find it distracting, especially the "noromo" crowd (an X-Files term that describes fans who preferred Mulder and Scully's relationship to be platonic, not romantic like some soap opera). They don't want some sappy romance taking the series' focus away from what's far more important: the plot. "What shocking revelation is X-Files/Lost/Heroes going to bless upon us next? What amazing twists and turns will we learn next week?" There was this attitude going into the show where you're hoping to find some mystical truth in what's essentially escapist fiction for teenagers of the period The X-Files/Star Trek belonged to, and to be frank, I once belonged to that crowd too. It's understandable too, associating your identity with some fantastical plot of the show - whether it's space aliens, the government, or just plain ol' bodysnatchers - and escaping from whatever angst you're facing in real life.

Star Trek offered this kind of escapism for people too, and I could imagine why since it was released during the tumultuous times of '60s America.

Charmed I can tolerate more easily than star trek, because I prefer fantasy and magic to space, but I'm not a fan because I just don't really care about the characters. I certainly wouldn't choose to watch them. Unless it was the episode with Cordelia in, but then I'm watching for Cordelia ... so still a character thing.

Woo, didn't know Charisma is in this. She looks fabulous.

But for all that I appreciate character first and foremost - I still expect the plot to be consistent. I don't like retcons or things that don't make sense. I don't like breaking the plot for character any more than I like breaking character for plot. I expect consistency in both plot and character in good story telling - compelling characters driving a consistent plot. Half my problem with the myth arc of the X files is that just when I think I've got my head around it, they introduce something else and I can't for the life of me work out how they link up - even though Mulder is acting like they do, and I'm not even convinced Chris Carter really knows how they link up, he just wanted to throw in another bit of conspiracy. I'm not convinced it's a consistent plot, what's there is confusing - and Mulder and Scully tend to work separately in those episodes so - Krycek aside - I'm left with nothing to enjoy.

I think the series started to lose its consistency around season 3 or 4, but to prevent this thread from turning into an X-Files discussion thread, I'll just say that I've read the interviews and stuff, and I think there's a lot of pressure from Fox, and there were a number of unfortunate circumstances that dictated how the myth arc would go, whether it's Gillian Anderson's pregnancy, David Duchovny's demands for the show to move to LA (and closer to his wife back then, Téa Leoni), or just Fox's continuous requests for Chris to extend the series. There's just a lot of complications that forced Chris' hands to shape the myth arc into what it was.

I like genre television because I prefer fantastical stories to realistic ones but I have to care about the characters to keep following the plot. If a plot is interesting but I don't care about the people involved - I'm not sticking around. But all inconsistencies are as bad as each other. Anyone can write a story where the characters have no internal consistency and do and say completely opposite things to what they did and said before and where the plot breaks down or rewrites itself - but if writing stories is your job, then I expect you to be able to tell a consistent story where characters follow along a coherent plot making decisions that are in line with who you have written them to be. It's not supposed to be easy - but anything less is not good writing and I don't give either a pass.

Yeah, I could certainly respect that demand for good writing. I think I was also more stringent back then with my choice of show and movie to watch, but over the years, having seen most of the pop cultural classics, I got kinda lax and just started to watch whatever, being more lenient with the quality.

I think, having worked in film production myself, I could also sympathized with how tough the job can be, especially in television where the deadlines are killer. So sometimes, I just close one eye and let it slide. lol

 

[WillowFromBuffy]

Plot and world building are two very different things. I most often think of them as opposites. Like, certain sci fi and fantasy books have a strong focus on world building, which may get in the way of the plot. The Lord of the Rings is a good example of a series of books that are heavy on world building and relatively light on plot.

Characters and plots should be suited to each other. Characters in modern TV shows have so called arcs. An arc is just another word for plot.

BtVS often have really well structured plots on the episode level. Newer shows often have better season arcs, but they can't match the brilliant plotting of BtVS's best episodes.

 

[DeadlyDuo]

@Oromous I didn't think we were derailing the thread talking about Once Upon A Time because it was all relative to the question of plot vs character and was an example of what happens when plot is prioritised over character development and when character development is lazily written.

 

[Ethan Reigns]

What do we all make of a show like Dollhouse? If character consistency is what turns your key, the main character (and a number of others) have different personalities and skills every week! And the characters get thrust into unrelated different situations every week.

Aside from the series name that, like many Whedon productions is something of a negative factor against the show's success, this is a story about complete lack of consistency and assignments (called engagements in the series) that are downloaded into the personality each week and erased after being used. The long arc of the story is that not every aspect of the personality gets erased when it is supposed to be. Echo's skills seem to be accumulating. And Sierra and Victor seem to have an unbreakable bond regardless of how many times they try to erase it. If you didn't see the entire series, you may have missed that, but if you were not interested in malleable characters, you wouldn't make it to the end of the series so it depends on how much you wanted to put up with it all. One of the admirable things about Echo is that regardless of the difficulty of the engagement and the skills required, she always seemed to be up to the task.

There are a number of surprises about who is a doll and who is not and the underlying effects of the Rossum Corporation that, like Wolfram & Hart, is never seen clearly or completely from the character's point of view but are eventually opposed to some unknown level of effectiveness. We presume Wolfram & Hart is only momentarily inconvenienced. We assume Rossum is destroyed. But we never see anything that confirms our suspicions.

During the show, we expect the FBI agent to be closing in on the dollhouse so the plot appears to move forward in an arc in this direction but we get a few surprises along the way.

I think it is possible to write a successful show based on any arrangement of variables, whether it be plot, circumstances, character, personality or any other such thing. What makes the difference is whether the writing is any good and the theme of the show (as opposed to the situation) remains consistent.

 

[thrasherpix]

I'd say tonal consistency is important, however, that doesn't mean each season can't have it's own theme. I generally see the "tonal differences" between Buffy seasons as "themes" in which the characters and world building happen within (and first seasons typically get a break). (I could also go into that sometimes a show just bogs down after awhile, but I'm not in an essay mood today.)

I agree with Deadly Duo on Once Upon a Time.

I'm not a fan of Spiderman so I can't say on that.

However, I'm a Star Wars fan. I still love Expanded Universe/Legends. But I've given up on Disney Star Wars for the most part, certainly the last batch of movies. (I can still handle Clone Wars--all but the last season pre-Disney--because enough time passes, and enough other factors, make it easy to reconcile much of it to EU, but again, don't want to go into essay mode, especially on something a bit off topic.)

I know some people who try to simplify things too much say "you just don't like Rey because powerful women threaten you" or some similar BS (though I'm sure that's true of some), despite that my favorite characters are Tenel Ka Djo, Mara Jade [ETA: link works now], and also Ahsoka and then Ventress (though she didn't become a favorite until after I read her gritty redemption arc Dark Disciple, but the novel wouldn't have worked for me had I not gotten to know her first in The Clone Wars, and see her begin her journey that she finally gets through in the book). EU/Legends isn't perfect, but I like many more than the original movies, whereas now when I hear of a new Star Wars movie or series by Disney I have zero interest in seeing it (I haven't seen a single Mandalorian ep and doubt I ever will despite all the good things I hear of it)...and that's after I gave them a fair chance, and I was one of the few people excited when Disney purchased the rights to it, but now wish they never had. (Also, I love EU Skywalker, absolutely loathe Disney's Skywalker).

 

[AlphaFoxtrot]

OUAT is "Once Upon A Time." The first season was something of a mystery soap set in a fairy tale land. The Second season onward suffers heavily from corporate meddling. Like, think if Season 2 of the X-Files was ordered by Fox to be about Independence Day, and that Mulder must now dress like a sexy pirate.

As for the abbreviation, It's like "Always Sunny In Philadelphia," or "Don't Trust the B in Apartment 23." There's really no good way to abbreviate them.

But as for the topic, civilization is a contest between the Apollonian and the Bacchian.

 

[HowiMetdaSlayer]

Not to go too far off topic, and with a short response relying on monosyllabic words, is that worth watching? I think I stopped after the second season, there was just something missing that prevented me from really getting into it. Were subsequent seasons more of the same or was it leading to something more?

Gawd I ♥ season 1. Actually the best episode of the series was the 2nd episode of the 2nd season. If it had stayed closer to that it would've been on my all time list. Unfortunately the series kept meandering during the middle of both seasons 2 & 3, and kinda fell apart altogether after season 3. 😏