Re: The Great Man Formula
Duggy
> Duggy <Paul.Dug...@jcu.edu.au> wrote:
> >On May 14, 4:25 pm, "Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
> >>The Great Man Formula. Never trust your audience to figure out that the
> >>lead character is the hero, even if the character's name is in your show's
> >>title. Make sure you surround him with regular characters who are there to
> >>have plot points explained and who cannot even tie their own shoes
> >>without his help.
> >>You don't create a hero just be creating an intriguing and selfless
> >>character. He must be contrasted with the low intelligence of his
> >>companions.
> >Sounds like lazy writing.
>
> Ghod damn right it is. And the formula never goes away, endlessly used
> in movies and especially tv cop shows.
I hated in the early seasons of The West Wing that it was usually
Mandy, Donna or CJ that filled that role. The main female
characters... Donna made sense, the others did sometimes, but it was
still annoying.
Worse, I guess is when there are no characters that fill that role and
they explain everything to each other anyway... Star Trek & cop shows
are bad for it. - sure (s)he's the new detective but they still did
basic training, right?
===
= DUG.
===
pbo...@aol.com
Well, in things like Star Trek where they have to give the viewer bits
of made-up backstory it's necessary, and sometimes they inserted it
quite well. In DS9, for example, Quark or Kira could act as the foil
because they were outside the military (Quark) or Starfleet (Kira,
sometimes also Odo) structure and have relevant plot points explained.
I particularly remember one case when Sisko and Bashir went back in
time, and they got round the lack of an idiot lackey by establishing
that Bashir had never studied 21st Century history (and he filled the
same role in Trials and Tribbleations, apparently not having studied
23rd Century history either).
Doctor Who was more or less founded on the same premise - Susan's
character served little purpose other than to scream and have things
explained to her by her kindly granddad, and a character like that was
essential for the show's original (loose) aim of using its scenarios,
at least the historical ones, to educate the target audience.
Phil
The Doctor
pbo...@aol.com <pbo...@aol.com> wrote:
>On May 14, 5:10=A0am, Duggy <p.allan.dug...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On May 14, 6:21=A0pm, "Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Duggy <Paul.Dug...@jcu.edu.au> wrote:
>> > >On May 14, 4:25 pm, "Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>he
>> > >>lead character is the hero, even if the character's name is in your s=
>how's
>> > >>title. Make sure you surround him with regular characters who are the=
>re to
>> > >>have plot points explained and who cannot even tie their own shoes
>> > >>without his help.
>> > >>You don't create a hero just be creating an intriguing and selfless
>> > >>character. He must be contrasted with the low intelligence of his
>> > >>companions.
>> > >Sounds like lazy writing.
>>
>> > Ghod damn right it is. And the formula never goes away, endlessly used
>> > in movies and especially tv cop shows.
>>
>> I hated in the early seasons of The West Wing that it was usually
>> characters... Donna made sense, the others did sometimes, but it was
>> still annoying.
>>
>> Worse, I guess is when there are no characters that fill that role and
>> they explain everything to each other anyway... Star Trek & cop shows
>> are bad for it. - sure (s)he's the new detective but they still did
>> basic training, right?
>
>Well, in things like Star Trek where they have to give the viewer bits
>of made-up backstory it's necessary, and sometimes they inserted it
>quite well. In DS9, for example, Quark or Kira could act as the foil
>because they were outside the military (Quark) or Starfleet (Kira,
>sometimes also Odo) structure and have relevant plot points explained.
>I particularly remember one case when Sisko and Bashir went back in
>time, and they got round the lack of an idiot lackey by establishing
>that Bashir had never studied 21st Century history (and he filled the
>same role in Trials and Tribbleations, apparently not having studied
>23rd Century history either).
>
>Doctor Who was more or less founded on the same premise - Susan's
>character served little purpose other than to scream and have things
>explained to her by her kindly granddad, and a character like that was
>essential for the show's original (loose) aim of using its scenarios,
>at least the historical ones, to educate the target audience.
>
>Phil
susan is part of the family moreso than the TARDIS.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doc...@nl2k.ab.ca Ici doc...@nl2k.ab.ca
God, Queen and country! Never Satan President Republic! Beware AntiChrist rising!
http://twitter.com/rootnl2k http://www.facebook.com/dyadallee
Stop Stephen Harper ! on 2 May 2011 vote !