Thirith on 6/8/2008 at 07:44
Thing is, I don't agree that all stand-alone episodes are just filler material. I'd describe both Lost and Battlestar Galactica as being focused at least as much on character as on plot - which, personally, is one of the reasons why I enjoy both series. (It's what some people sneer at as "soap opera" - cf. Deep Space Nine.)
Those episodes only become pure filler for me when they reveal nothing new or interesting about the characters. I can't remember the last Kate-centric episode that really said anything new about her character, for instance. But saying that the character-heavy episodes of Lost season 1 are just filler is missing the point, i.e. that the series is as much about its characters as it is about black smoke, Others, the Darma Initiative etc. It's fair enough not to like character-driven series, but that in itself doesn't make a series bad yet.
Stitch on 6/8/2008 at 14:28
Quote Posted by Thirith
But saying that the character-heavy episodes of
Lost season 1 are just filler is missing the point, i.e. that the series is as much about its characters as it is about black smoke, Others, the Darma Initiative etc. It's fair enough not to like character-driven series, but that in itself doesn't make a series bad yet.
Jesus, of course it doesn't. All good series are character-driven. What I take issue with is poorly paced, poorly written television, character-driven or otherwise.
Get this:
good writing can move forward both the general plot and character development at the same time. Hell, in any great work the two are intrinsically linked.
For example: Lost was sunk the moment they decided to flesh out character's backstories via drifting-off-into-space flashbacks, as opposed to revealing them in the context of the main story and in service of the plot.
Edit: hrm upon review perhaps I came off a bit disproportionately sharp here
Thirith on 6/8/2008 at 18:56
Quote Posted by Stitch
Jesus, of course it doesn't. All good series are character-driven. What I take issue with is poorly paced, poorly written television, character-driven or otherwise.
Get this:
good writing can move forward both the general plot and character development at the same time. Hell, in any great work the two are intrinsically linked.
Sure, I absolutely agree. What I don't agree with is that
Lost automatically becomes pure, unadulterated crap that can only be enjoyed by things that evolved, just barely, from eggplants because it's not a great work. It's pulp, but at it's best it can still be greatly enjoyable pulp.
Quote:
For example: Lost was sunk the moment they decided to flesh out character's backstories via drifting-off-into-space flashbacks, as opposed to revealing them in the context of the main story and in service of the plot.
Sunk? Rubbish. Yes, the device may be hackneyed, but when it works, it works fairly well, providing a counterpoint to the present-day action or making us reassess what we've just seen. Again, it's not great or original writing, but it can be very effective and quite good fun.
fett on 7/8/2008 at 06:45
Quote Posted by WAREAGLE
I really regret putting the thread topic in caps
In that case, I wish you'd take a gander at your username.
Thirith on 7/8/2008 at 07:21
(Quick question: Has anyone here seen Damages? I hear that it fared extremely well with critics and awards committees... but it struck me as much, much worse than Lost or Battlestar Galactica ever were with respect to clichéd writing, hackneyed characters, bad pacing. I'm still wondering whether there's something I missed about Damages, because so much I've read about it on the web is an unmittigated love-fest.)
Muzman on 7/8/2008 at 07:50
I saw the pilots for Damages and Conviction a while ago and I really liked the look of the latter. Quite complex and down to earth (centres on young not-so-go-getter lawyers who get work in the public defender's office), but it was too unformulaic to be a Law and Order spin off (which it is) and the world doesn't have room for two shows with legal puns for titles.
Damages made me coin the phrase CSI:Legal. Well, actually I probably heard it somewhere else first. That might be a touch premature (or I'm thinking of the wrong show)
Thirith on 7/8/2008 at 08:00
In terms of visual style and editing, I definitely see what you mean by CSI: Legal. However, I never got into CSI, so I can't say much about the comparison otherwise.
Vraptor7 on 10/8/2008 at 23:32
Damages was quite well written overall, some interesting twists and I think a pretty satisfying season as a whole. I don't know if the new season has started yet, but I'll probably get around to following it at some point.
ZymeAddict on 17/8/2008 at 10:30
Quote Posted by Stitch
For example: Lost was sunk the moment they decided to flesh out character's backstories via drifting-off-into-space flashbacks, as opposed to revealing them in the context of the main story and in service of the plot.
I've just finished the first season, and to tell you the truth, those character flashbacks are about the only thing that kept me watching.
To me, the main, Island-centered portion of
Lost feels a lot like watching just the "conspiracy" episodes of
The X-Files without having the welcome offset of the "monster of the week" ones, which kept everything from getting too bogged-down and samey on that show.
However, since it's been mentioned on this thread that things don't really start picking up until half way through season 2, I guess I'll keep going.
Yakoob on 17/8/2008 at 18:36
Quote Posted by ZymeAddict
I've just finished the first season, and to tell you the truth, those character flashbacks are about the only thing that kept me watching.
Heh, funny, it was the exact opposite for me.
and yes, the island-stuff don't pick up until just several more episodes, so keep watching.
