![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
invitanJust having some contemplation on how characters and plots of a story affect myself, as either a reader or an audience.
To summarise, I'd say that plots are what make me decide to read/watch something, while characters will leave the ultimate impression in me. In other word, before reading/watching anything, I'd have to read the preview first at least. Usually I'd also read the review to consult the majority's opinions. On the other hand, I may choose to reread/rewatch the piece, depending on how intriguing the characters are only. (Of course this applies more to books. Other types of portrayal have another critical factor: visual effects. It is one of the reasons why I resist One Piece so much - the art is not exactly to my liking. And it's also my only motivation to download Prince of Tennis movies despite its horrendous rating and terrible reviews - to watch Aibacchi play with a real tennis ball. However, books are different. "A picture tells a thousand words" also means that pictures restrict the fantasy of readers/audience. Verses, in contrast, can never convey the vivid images no matter how beautiful and masterful words are used, which leaves us infinite spaces to unleash our imagination.) This tendency of mine also results in more often than not contradictory opinions pre-read/watch and post-read/watch.
Take an example, '2012' is the latest movie I'd watch. Before deciding to spend 40k for a ticket in the national movie theater, I've asked for all sorts of remarks from my friends who have seen it, and received mixed/distinctly different perspectives. They either love it or hate it, and in my experience, such reactions are totally not safe. I also read the summary: the survival of humanity on the edge of apocalypse. The plot is a big cliche - too many movies have used the concept before: "War of the Worlds", "Independence Day", "The Day after Tomorrow", etc. And to be blunt, I am not exactly a fan of magnificent visual effects or thrilling actions. I tend to prefer small-scale heartfelt or comedic stories, or those with very original plots at least. That's why I never intend to see it at first.
Perhaps I would never get a hold on the movie tickets if not for my elder brother's insistence and the fact that my family have never gone to a movie together properly before. And to tell the truth, 2012 has gone so far beyond my expectation.
Watching it, I get to understand why it might not suit some people's taste. The plot is not exactly the best out there, and loopholes are not so difficult to pick up. Just as my brother comment, if the plan is to build seven "Noah Arks", then why don't they just construct more underwater vessels or something, rather than let humanity die in vain. And is it really that so many leaders would be so cowardly as to escape alone and leave their people behind? Won't there be a wave of opposition when the information is known globalwide? And not to mention outraging exaggerated scenes - an amateur pilot can fly a jet through the midst of fireballs and be able to land on a tiny plot of land safe and sound, or how the protagonist drive the limo through the 10.5 Richter earthquake. The outcome is obvious even from the start - it's a Hollywood movie after all.
Well, perhaps you probably can tell now that I'm not really the most demanding type of audience after reading everything above. More precisely, I don't really give a damn about special effects and minor loopholes of the situations. The characters, in my opinion, make up the most value here. So maybe the situation they're in is a bit unbelievable (and stupid anyway), so what? The characters are alive, and real, and believable. Above all, the sense of connection, the link, the tie that binds people together in time of need has been depicted wonderfully here. Every single character has a back story that is told not with stupid flashback, but with all the actions they take in reaction to the disasters. A phone call, a hand given for help, a book saved - all these trivial little things make individuals a community. And in face with catastrophe, these delicate ties that we often ignore everyday may become invaluable.
Another thought of mine is that things can never stay a simple past tense. Every little action will always lead to something else. That's why we can never cease to ask the question "what if". What if the protagonist had never divorced his wife and thus she had never had a boyfriend who was also an amateur pilot? What if he had never published and his book had never fallen into the hand of this other guy who was the commander? So many coincidences, but they are not at all deus ex machina.
I also like the bit when the ragged driver and the millionaire sit down and talk like casual people in temporary shelter. No more bosses and employees. When we know that we are all gonna die together, that's when equality might actually exist. Death, ironically, is the only thing fair.
I've read several reviews from the internet, and it seems that no professionals agree with me on these points (laugh). Well, I guess I'd never be qualified to become a movie reviewer anyway, so who cares?
P/s: Suddenly feel relieved that I can still write more than 100 words Y__Y
To summarise, I'd say that plots are what make me decide to read/watch something, while characters will leave the ultimate impression in me. In other word, before reading/watching anything, I'd have to read the preview first at least. Usually I'd also read the review to consult the majority's opinions. On the other hand, I may choose to reread/rewatch the piece, depending on how intriguing the characters are only. (Of course this applies more to books. Other types of portrayal have another critical factor: visual effects. It is one of the reasons why I resist One Piece so much - the art is not exactly to my liking. And it's also my only motivation to download Prince of Tennis movies despite its horrendous rating and terrible reviews - to watch Aibacchi play with a real tennis ball. However, books are different. "A picture tells a thousand words" also means that pictures restrict the fantasy of readers/audience. Verses, in contrast, can never convey the vivid images no matter how beautiful and masterful words are used, which leaves us infinite spaces to unleash our imagination.) This tendency of mine also results in more often than not contradictory opinions pre-read/watch and post-read/watch.
Take an example, '2012' is the latest movie I'd watch. Before deciding to spend 40k for a ticket in the national movie theater, I've asked for all sorts of remarks from my friends who have seen it, and received mixed/distinctly different perspectives. They either love it or hate it, and in my experience, such reactions are totally not safe. I also read the summary: the survival of humanity on the edge of apocalypse. The plot is a big cliche - too many movies have used the concept before: "War of the Worlds", "Independence Day", "The Day after Tomorrow", etc. And to be blunt, I am not exactly a fan of magnificent visual effects or thrilling actions. I tend to prefer small-scale heartfelt or comedic stories, or those with very original plots at least. That's why I never intend to see it at first.
Perhaps I would never get a hold on the movie tickets if not for my elder brother's insistence and the fact that my family have never gone to a movie together properly before. And to tell the truth, 2012 has gone so far beyond my expectation.
Watching it, I get to understand why it might not suit some people's taste. The plot is not exactly the best out there, and loopholes are not so difficult to pick up. Just as my brother comment, if the plan is to build seven "Noah Arks", then why don't they just construct more underwater vessels or something, rather than let humanity die in vain. And is it really that so many leaders would be so cowardly as to escape alone and leave their people behind? Won't there be a wave of opposition when the information is known globalwide? And not to mention outraging exaggerated scenes - an amateur pilot can fly a jet through the midst of fireballs and be able to land on a tiny plot of land safe and sound, or how the protagonist drive the limo through the 10.5 Richter earthquake. The outcome is obvious even from the start - it's a Hollywood movie after all.
Well, perhaps you probably can tell now that I'm not really the most demanding type of audience after reading everything above. More precisely, I don't really give a damn about special effects and minor loopholes of the situations. The characters, in my opinion, make up the most value here. So maybe the situation they're in is a bit unbelievable (and stupid anyway), so what? The characters are alive, and real, and believable. Above all, the sense of connection, the link, the tie that binds people together in time of need has been depicted wonderfully here. Every single character has a back story that is told not with stupid flashback, but with all the actions they take in reaction to the disasters. A phone call, a hand given for help, a book saved - all these trivial little things make individuals a community. And in face with catastrophe, these delicate ties that we often ignore everyday may become invaluable.
Another thought of mine is that things can never stay a simple past tense. Every little action will always lead to something else. That's why we can never cease to ask the question "what if". What if the protagonist had never divorced his wife and thus she had never had a boyfriend who was also an amateur pilot? What if he had never published and his book had never fallen into the hand of this other guy who was the commander? So many coincidences, but they are not at all deus ex machina.
I also like the bit when the ragged driver and the millionaire sit down and talk like casual people in temporary shelter. No more bosses and employees. When we know that we are all gonna die together, that's when equality might actually exist. Death, ironically, is the only thing fair.
I've read several reviews from the internet, and it seems that no professionals agree with me on these points (laugh). Well, I guess I'd never be qualified to become a movie reviewer anyway, so who cares?
P/s: Suddenly feel relieved that I can still write more than 100 words Y__Y
Tags: