Read on Twitter
I watched Red Letter Media’s review of Star Trek: Picard. I know Mike and Co. are biased, and I’d really need to see the show myself to judge, but man does it seem putrid.
It offers some GREAT writing lessons though...
It offers some GREAT writing lessons though...
Star Trek: Picard is written by Michael Chabon, Akiva Goldsman, Kristen Beyer, and Alex Kurtzman.
Not a very diverse writing room, Hollywood, but I guess some forms of diversity are more important than others.
Moving on...
Not a very diverse writing room, Hollywood, but I guess some forms of diversity are more important than others.
Moving on...
The RLM guys make an excellent point that “MYSTERY BOXES” aren’t the be-all, end-all storytelling mechanism.
Why?
Because every mystery needs a satisfying payoff, or it won’t work. And...
Why?
Because every mystery needs a satisfying payoff, or it won’t work. And...
...too many mysteries can complicate an already complex plot.
Mysteries can create plot holes if you’re not careful. They also tend to muddy up otherwise straight ahead plots in an illogical way.
Mysteries can create plot holes if you’re not careful. They also tend to muddy up otherwise straight ahead plots in an illogical way.
Think about it: is a convoluted plan or conspiracy worth it when two seconds of thought make the audience go, “Why didn’t they just do X?” or “How come nobody thought of Y?”
Writers need to be AHEAD of the audience; it can’t be vice versa.
It CAN, but the mysteries fizzle.
Writers need to be AHEAD of the audience; it can’t be vice versa.
It CAN, but the mysteries fizzle.
Plots can be simple. Maybe they SHOULD be, with clear objectives for all parties. You then throw obstacles in the protagonists’ way.
This beats screwing around with layers upon layers of mysteries that make no sense, even after the reveal.
This beats screwing around with layers upon layers of mysteries that make no sense, even after the reveal.
You can chalk a lot of this up to the nature of TV writing—gotta keep people tuning in for the next episode!
But I think it’s also due to writers wanting to appear SMART and SUBVERSIVE. Everything’s gotta be novel and shocking, right?
But I think it’s also due to writers wanting to appear SMART and SUBVERSIVE. Everything’s gotta be novel and shocking, right?
There’s also the situation where writers have a REALLY COOL scene or bit of dialogue the want to get to, and work towards making that happen, even though it doesn’t make sense with what came before.
Sometimes you’ve gotta kill ideas YOU’RE in love with if they don’t work with what you’re writing.
It all comes down to personal taste, of course, but plot holes and moronic characters generally bug me.
I prefer the logical over the dramatic (but you CAN have both!) and a straightforward plot told well over endless mysteries with the ultimate impact of a wet fart.
I prefer the logical over the dramatic (but you CAN have both!) and a straightforward plot told well over endless mysteries with the ultimate impact of a wet fart.
