interconnecting storylines

[Orson-Cockart]

You know the ones: babel, crash, amores perros. I hate them, Babel especially. Third rate writers unable to create a feature length idea, so they join together three short stories.

[Cop No. 633]

I really have to disagree with you on this one. Sure, Crash was a piece of shit. It was an over the top film about racism that sadly got attention because many people thought it was "real" when it's more like a terrible cliched fairy tale about racism. But you can't judge a film solely because of its structure. Almost any structure in film could work, it just needs the proper story. And I for one am a huge of Amores Perros. I liked that it didn't repeat itself with the stories and it was telling a broader story about the class relationships in Mexico. It's a great film that really brought the attention of America to Mexico's filmmakers.

But back on topic, I don't think the structure is lazy in any way. It's actually a lot harder to do than you think. You have more characters to balance out and you have more themes to consider unless each story is a take on the same theme. Not to mention how you choose to have these stories connect is crucial. It can make or break the structure of the story.

I think you should give different structures a try. I don't think film has a one-structure-fits-all formula. I mean, Pulp Fiction used this technique and did it brilliantly. I think you should reconsider the fact that you didn't like the movies and not that the structure was flawed.

[Tweek]

Sure, Crash was a piece of shit. It was an over the top film about racism that sadly got attention because many people thought it was "real" when it's more like a terrible cliched fairy tale about racism.

Ugh! Agreed. I was so pissed watching that movie. I left the room and got some crap for it. They thought the subject matter was too much for me... I simply thought it sucked. -shrug--


There are movies that can do the interconnecting plots well though. I don't understand how it indicates an inability to create a feature-length idea. Perhaps enlighten me/us, Orson-Cockart?

[vesaker]

I don't understand how it indicates an inability to create a feature-length idea. Perhaps enlighten me/us, Orson-Cockart?

He means that say 3 writers can only come up with 30 minutes worth of story and instead of trying to write more to make their own movies they simply combine their three 30 minute stories to make a movie.
-----------
Now this is possible but then what CosmicPuppet said comes into play about balancing the characters and how the stories interconect being a crutial part. Like any other aspect of cinema it can be good if done well. Pulp Fiction, as mentioned, does a great job of this.

I think if anything what Orson was discribing would be something like Sin City, but then you can argue that the structure of the subject matter dictated how the movie would be played out. But to have a couple good stories interwoven together and it done well is great.

I'm really hoping that Trick or Treat (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0862856/) does a good job of this as it looks great from the trailers atleast

[therealjohng]

Third rate writers unable to create a feature length idea, so they join together three short stories.


This:


http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/PYR/NECA0002~Pulp-Fiction-Posters.jpg

proves that wrong.

[JJFlamingo]

Haha anyone that shits on Crash is just pissed it beat Brokeback for Best Picture...:D


---------

Oh mi god!!! It's James Bond vs. Jason Bourne and only ONE will survive!!! Happening NOW in the ULTIMATE ULTIMATE MOVIE CHARACTER TOURNAMENT!!!!

http://www.joblo.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2698580&posted=1#post2698580

[Orson-Cockart]

Ugh! Agreed. I was so pissed watching that movie. I left the room and got some crap for it. They thought the subject matter was too much for me... I simply thought it sucked. -shrug--


There are movies that can do the interconnecting plots well though. I don't understand how it indicates an inability to create a feature-length idea. Perhaps enlighten me/us, Orson-Cockart?

I didn't say it indicated an inability to create a feature-length idea. The point I made was that interconnecting three separate stories is a lazy method of writing, though i'm now reconsidering that view.

A poster above mentioned Pulp Fiction, which i'm not a fan of either, but the structure suited the film's cartoonish style. Films which use interconnecting storylines usually suffer from underdeveloped characters, as the time is allocated to so many different perspectives none are give the time they require. This lack of character development limits the audience's sympathy for the characters, which may not be detrimental to films of a cartoonish nature (Pulp Fiction), but certainly provides an uphill challenged for filmmakers aiming for a more serious tone (Crash) with developed characters being essential. Though it must be said that a lack of character development wasn't Crash's only failing.

Perhaps branding the style as lazy is unwarranted. On the contrary it would take an extremely talented writer to create a good screenplay -- of a serious tone -- in this style.

[Orson-Cockart]

Haha anyone that shits on Crash is just pissed it beat Brokeback for Best Picture...:D


---------

Oh mi god!!! It's James Bond vs. Jason Bourne and only ONE will survive!!! Happening NOW in the ULTIMATE ULTIMATE MOVIE CHARACTER TOURNAMENT!!!!

http://www.joblo.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2698580&posted=1#post2698580


I didn't like BBM either. Though i was pissed that Capote (by far the best film of the year) didn't win.

[adamjohnson]

This:


http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/PYR/NECA0002~Pulp-Fiction-Posters.jpg

proves that wrong.

HA! Does it now?

[cuddleworthy]

I disagree. Interconnecting stories, if properly done, are a great way to tell a story. Watch Traffic and prove me wrong. To me, the standard way of telling a story is so overdone that introducing a variety of characters that can serve as a protagonist keeps the audience riveted. I also disagree how characters are underdeveloped. Characters are made through action. Throwing a variety of characters in the mix makes each one different, more so than if we were focusing on a single character alone.

[APzombie]

good call,

Traffic
Pulp Fiction
Magnolia

all fucking wonderful films. Probably the best films of the last twenty years.

[LordSimen]

This:


http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/PYR/NECA0002~Pulp-Fiction-Posters.jpg

proves that wrong.


If there ever was a movie to /end thread, it'd be that movie. :D

[Tweek]

Haha anyone that shits on Crash is just pissed it beat Brokeback for Best Picture...:D




I liked Brokeback Mountain but I wasn't holding out for it to become Best Picture.

[echo_bravo]

Crash was just plain AWFUL. Any film with Tony Danza and Ludacris should NOT win Best Picture.

I actually felt that Munich should of won Best Picture but there were too many politics behind that I dont even want to get into.

So back on topic, I actually like the "interconnecting storylines"..when its done right. I thought Babel was really well done esp the asian girl's story part.

[Pirate Mike]

I'm just here to give Go some love

[Tweek]

He means that say 3 writers can only come up with 30 minutes worth of story and instead of trying to write more to make their own movies they simply combine their three 30 minute stories to make a movie.
-----------
Now this is possible but then what CosmicPuppet said comes into play about balancing the characters and how the stories interconect being a crutial part. Like any other aspect of cinema it can be good if done well. Pulp Fiction, as mentioned, does a great job of this.

I think if anything what Orson was discribing would be something like Sin City, but then you can argue that the structure of the subject matter dictated how the movie would be played out. But to have a couple good stories interwoven together and it done well is great.

Whoa. Sorry. I must've skimmed, I didn't see this post yesterday.:(

Yep, I agree the balancing the characters and how the stories connect bit. Sometimes that crap does seem... Arbitrary? But it can be done well.

Sin City had Marv and Hartigan. So yeah, two characters I freakin' love that had quite a bit of room to shine but it seemed like everyone else didn't get as much. I mean Clive Owen did but I've grown unimpressed the more I watch it. He had some good moments though. Maybe if they do A Dame to Kill For if the sequel ever comes out. -shrug-

[Gordon]

Just because you don't like the style, doesn't mean you should be ignorant enough to assume that the writers are third rate and can't come up with anything better. They just enjoy the style.

http://www.jdmfilmreviews.com/images/paul-thomas-anderson-mirror.jpg

[bigred760]

I like movies with multiple storylines; gives a chance to see how different stories with the same theme or themes can be compared and contrasted. Several movies that have done that brilliantly have already been mentioned.

[eljefe15]

Short Cuts is another film that comes to mind that is successful in interconnecting story lines. So I have to strongly disagree with this rant. Oh and I liked Crash but I have to agree that it was a "fairytale" version of racism. The real world is much harsher.

[bonoferox]

Love Actually works pretty well.

[Scorpio24]

Babel especially. Third rate writers unable to create a feature length idea, so they join together three short stories.


This may be one of the most mental things i've ever read on a.......no scratch that. Read anywhere in the world.

Ok i've only seen about 3% of it but still I don't see that puppy being beaten.

[Orson-Cockart]

This may be one of the most mental things i've ever read on a.......no scratch that. Read anywhere in the world.

Ok i've only seen about 3% of it but still I don't see that puppy being beaten.

Well your post is the new champ ;) wow! just, wow!

[Scorpio24]

Why thank you. It was pretty wow wasn't it?

Seriously man your staement is crazy. Do you really beleieve the line I highlighted? That the people writing these films are 3rd rate hacks?

Come on now. Ok you might not like the films they become but the writing is stunningly good in some of these films. Babel was a masterpiece.

Could you explain why it's thrid rate?

[Darknyss]

Short Cuts is another film that comes to mind that is successful in interconnecting story lines.

Unfortunately, I hated both Short Cuts and Traffic. Neither movie could engage me at all and I couldn't care less about any of the characters.
Didn't see Babel, I only have a friend's review to go on and she hated it, so it's unlikely I'll sit down and watch it.

[eljefe15]

Unfortunately, I hated both Short Cuts and Traffic. Neither movie could engage me at all and I couldn't care less about any of the characters.
Didn't see Babel, I only have a friend's review to go on and she hated it, so it's unlikely I'll sit down and watch it.

Well, I loved Amorres Perros, I thought Crash was ok and I haven't seen Babel. I understand your point of view but the movies I've disliked has been because of other reasons besides the "interacting storyline" structure. Are you saying that you cannot be engaged by a film with that structure? If that's true so be it but I don't think that has to do with anything other than personal taste. However, I will argue that writers that write in this structure are NOT "third rate writers unable to create a feature length idea" as was suggested early in this thread. Guillermo Arriaga wrote Amores Perros along with 21 Grams and The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada. He's hardly a third rate writer.

[Monotreme]

I love intercutting storylines. A lot of interesting characters are better than one. Also, if you'll notice, most of these multiple storyline movies wouldn't work at ALL if only one storyline was expanded. For instance, if Babel was about a middle-aged American couple who go on a trip to Morocco and try to reconcile the differences between them while one of them gets shot accidentally... that would amount to a pretty boring film without much more meat on it other than perhaps being a well-acted character study. But put all the stories together - different languages, different cultures, so far apart but still connected - and you get the ultimate point of the film and the reason it exists and is called "Babel" in the first place.

In short, I think your arguement is a harsh generalization, and is ultimately crude and quite ignorant. Sorry...!

[Orson-Cockart]

In short, I think your arguement is a harsh generalization, and is ultimately crude and quite ignorant. Sorry...!

Analysing film can only be done subjectively. I wasn't providing an arguement, nor was I aiming to entice others to share my view; I was merely giving a brief reason as to why -- in my preference -- I dislike those types of films. Feel free to give your view on those films, but to label my view as ignorant was foolish of you.

[X-Nightcrawler]

I don't get it.

Just to try and understand, do you see any major difference between "Babel", "Amores Perros" or "Crash" with stuff like "Four Rooms" or "Creepshow"?

[damien22]

Considering that Magnolia, Short Cuts, Pulp Fiction, Nashville, and Traffic are all some of my favorite movies, I can hardly agree with you. I honestly think that being able to effectively connect 15 different stories (as done in Nashville to near perfection) is quite a fucking difficult thing to do, and to be entertaining at the same time wiht a run time of almost 3 hours, you have to surely give some respect and reconsider calling Robert Altman and the following mosaic directors third rate. While you may not have been entertained by these films, the countless other people that were glued the screen by these intriguing and emotional films can't just be creating the intrigue for themselves.

[Monotreme]

Feel free to give your view on those films, but to label my view as ignorant was foolish of you.

I disagree, though. To say that you dislike those films is one thing, and feel free to say that all you like because I can't argue with personal preference and opinion. But to claim that all interconnecting storyline films derive from laziness and lack of talent on the writers' part is an extremely ignorant comment, in my opinion, and a rash generalization that in most cases doesn't even apply.

[Orson-Cockart]

I disagree, though. To say that you dislike those films is one thing, and feel free to say that all you like because I can't argue with personal preference and opinion. But to claim that all interconnecting storyline films derive from laziness and lack of talent on the writers' part is an extremely ignorant comment, in my opinion, and a rash generalization that in most cases doesn't even apply.

I guess there's no way of knowing the difficulty experienced by others, so I stand corrected with regards to branding other writers lazy. But I do regard Arriaga and Haggis as third rate writers. For me it's far easier to write a screenplay structured in that style, than it is to write a film which expresses the subjectivity of a single protagonist.