SparkyCola, on 29 September 2013 - 04:00 AM, said:
Am I the only one who thought that line was funny? I love dry, deadpan humour though... I thought there were loads of funny moments in the show..
Yeah, I thought that was pretty funny, especially considering how many things SHIELD has stood for over the years.
Christopher, on 29 September 2013 - 07:16 AM, said:
^It's unwise to say that anything in fiction "just isn't necessary." It depends on what a particular story needs. There have been instances in stories I wrote where I saw no other choice but to kill a character off, even though it broke my heart to do so.
Of course. Me, too. But in most cases it's just a symptom of the laziness and low standards that are prevalent out there.
Omega, on 29 September 2013 - 12:39 PM, said:
The emotional response I got from Wash's death wasn't so much shock as it was fear. Trip's, on the other hand, gave me no response at all.
The emotional response I got in both cases was disappointment that the writer copped out.
I, on the other hand, killed R. Daneel Olivaw because it served the thematic needs of the story. Provoking emotion was secondary. So I'm probably not that good an artist.
Er... you killed Daneel?
SparkyCola, on 29 September 2013 - 01:24 PM, said:
To me it's on a par with making you jump in a horror film.
That's a perfect comparison.
NeuralClone, on 29 September 2013 - 03:40 PM, said:
Wow. I get what you're saying but I don't agree with your rationale for why it's a childish storytelling technique or that it's intended to appeal to the "adolescent audience." The subjects you brought up in a previous post about rape, death, etc. are all valid adult subjects for a show or movie to deal with. I don't at all agree that their inclusion in a story somehow makes the storytelling less refined or geared for a younger audience. That's exact opposite conclusion I would have come to. The way it's handled, on the other hand, may be rather poor.
Well, yes, specifically the way it's handled. There was a time when these subjects were tackled on television and movies in a mature fashion, but pop culture is in a rather grindhouse phase right now. You mention Breaking Bad
, which is a show that stars a drug dealer; then there's Dexter
, which stars a serial killer; and The Shield
, which was lurid, Cops
-style trash. Then there's genre stuff like nuBSG and SGU and on and on; to say nothing of countless movies. The point of my list in the original post was to point out the current requirement that characters be thoroughly corrupt, and how that contrasts with what we've seen in SHIELD
. Any show that features characters that aren't
thoroughly corrupt-- e.g. Warehouse 13
-- are dismissed as "fluff" or "cheesy," while the adolescent stuff is praised as "dark" and "edgy."
Lost abused it from "time to time?" More like Lost was one of the biggest offenders.
Well, okay, I was being generous. They were pretty bad.
Although the show itself was really good, up until the end.
I don't agree that Serenity's deaths were cheap and gimmicky. I thought they were very effective story-wise and dramatically. It raised the stakes.
Others have made that argument and it may be true. Perhaps it's just in the context of the times that it looked like a cop out. We'll see how it stands up over time.