PDA

View Full Version : Let's get into character: FILMS vs. TV SHOWS


Asokan
09-10-2005, 06:52 AM
Uhm, I dunno if this shoulda been posted in the TV Forum, but since it also concerns movies I post it here.

Okay, here's my earth-shattering, convention-defying, balls-busting, nobody-really-cares point: :eek:
A good film (as always, subjectively speaking, i.e. to me), especially one I may want to watch again, is one that doesn't necessarily contain a great story, but has compelling, strong, compulsively watchable characters. If the characters don't work, the film doesn't work for me.

That's also, I think, why TV Shows have been increasingly hip among film fans over the last couple of years. With characters like Jack Bauer (24), Jack and Sidney Bristow and Arvin Sloane (ALIAS), and pretty much everyone on LOST, THE SOPRANOS and THE SHIELD, you never get tired of these shows, even if their plots start to derail. As long as the characters are fresh and exciting, I don't mind about the plots.

Film Example: TRAINING DAY. Not an original plot, an otherwise uninspired director and a rather disappointing resolution, but still I rewatch this one over and over, cause I love these (at times larger-than-life) characters, even the minor ones, and how they interact in some amazing and some hilarious conversations. That's also why most Tarantino flicks are enjoyable to rewatch, to observe these characters (but it can go wrong, case in point: KILL BILL, VOL.1 and TRUE ROMANCE, where the novelty factor is soon diminished and you see that there is no substance beneath them; KILL BILL, VOL. 2 though delivered the goods: didn't you just love melancholic Michael Madsen?).

Another Film Example: STUCK ON YOU. Most people hated this, dismissing it as yet another gross-out Farrelly flick, bit I for one consider it a masterpiece, because these two brothers (obviously modelled after the two directors) were so finely drawn and well-played.

TV Show Example: ALIAS. Everybody hit on the third season for not delivering story-wise, but I didn't give a f****, since the characters continued being highly intriguing and surprising. The fourth season failed miserably not because of the increasingly stupid stories, but mostly because these characters stopped evolving in interesting and challenging ways (especially Sidney was extremely boring).

Another TV Show Example: LOST. Without spoiling anything, I guess most people know by now that this is one show that gives you a constant erection without hardly ever jerking you off (what an analogy :rolleyes: ), i.e. you get lot of great character stuff, but the plot seems to be feeding you mysteries without resolving them for you. That's also why the finale was a disappointment to most people. But I, yeah, I loved it for all those small moments of human interaction.

So, who's with me on this and who says to my face that I'm just being reductive and not counting other pleasures a film may offer. And to spark the controversy: SIN CITY sucked precisely because none of the characters were compelling enough to sustain my interest in their stories, whereas the best compliment you could give the character-driven CRASH is that it may be the best TV pilot for a great series that never got picked up. Amen to that.:D

Cronos
09-10-2005, 08:18 AM
i agree but also disagree

when there are great characters in either a film or TV show it makes it so much more watchable, especially with Alias, Lost and The Shield, even on the lesser episodes it was still great to watch the characters develop. the same goes for films.

but i also find great enjoyment in film that is just plain fun, even if the characters and story suck, as long as it keeps me entertained and watching i consider it great

Asokan
09-10-2005, 11:33 AM
Originally posted by Cronos
as long as it keeps me entertained and watching i consider it great

Well, talk about low expectations, eh?:D

Nah, I mean any movie that is watchable deserves some credit, but that doesn't make 'em good, does it? SHOWGIRLS may be the most compulsively watchable bad film ever made, but that doesn't make it automatically good, does it? Though Gina Gershon's character was great. ;)

cerealkiller182
09-10-2005, 02:38 PM
I agree with you Asokan that TV Shows are controlled by their characters. Look at The Mummy serial. I liked the first one, but the second was terrible and I though Rick O'Connell(Brendan Fraser) was a great character. A waster character at that.

btw i enjoy Training Day, the Kill Bills, and True Romance for more reasons then just their characters.

bluesbrother965
09-10-2005, 02:44 PM
Characters are the most important part for me, but plot is pretty important as well. A movie or series can be great with a stupid plot (or with no plot at all) as long as it's got interesting characters, but it has to be done right, the characters have to be used in the right way.

The Postmaster General
09-10-2005, 04:27 PM
Film is like driving toward a destination, TV Shows are like sailing in the ocean.

That's about the best way I can explain how I see the difference.

Asokan
09-10-2005, 05:38 PM
Originally posted by BubbaStrangelove
Film is like driving toward a destination, TV Shows are like sailing in the ocean.

Yeah, but then the question is: why do you watch a movie/tv show? Just to get to a satisfying conclusion after a couple of hours, like in a movie, or actually enjoying every minute of the ride, regardless of a satisfying wrap-up, like in most TV shows?

The Postmaster General
09-10-2005, 08:36 PM
The same reason I like road trips and like being an the ocean.

I don't know, man.

When I watch movies I'm seeing how things come together, I'm seeing where we're going, and am anticipating the destination, making what I will of the trip - seeeing cool stuff along the way that's leading up to where I'm going. Hey, we are driving into the mountains now - Whoa! Where are we going?

With TV, it's like you are just floating adrift, and these characters are your captain. If you have an idiot character, you might get into idiot situation - I just sort of hang out and lounge with these people as a coast along in the boat. I don't really think about where we are headed, or if it's anywhere. We go along and take things as they come. Hey rough waters! Whew made it past that. We are still on the ocean and still wandering along, and everyone is the same as they ever were.

There are exceptions, but generally that's the feeling I get from the two.

Is that what you were asking?

Asokan
09-11-2005, 04:05 AM
Yeah, nice descriptions of both art forms, Bubba!:)

Brick
09-11-2005, 03:20 PM
I think you are way off base with True Romance. I think that movie is a classic , with classic characters, and classic performances by the actors portraying them.