2 ms·

> If you're using devices to make a story more difficult to follow, just for the sake of making it more difficult to follow for the "challenge", then that's stu

> If you're using devices to make a story more difficult to follow, just for the sake of making it more difficult to follow for the "challenge", then that's stupid. I don't know you, and even I know you disagree with your own statement. If not, the only thing you'd enjoy are media targeted at pre-schoolers and young children. Anything targeting and age beyond that is made more difficult to follow, by design to make it more challenging than what a young child can grasp. That allowed the creator to explore deeper subjects. Maybe you don't like things more challenging than your comfort zone, maybe you don't like more less linear depictions but do like them somewhat. Unless you can tell me you only consume media targeted at young children. Even you average Marvel film leaves plenty unsaid that needs to be infered, plenty unspoken to be felt. Non-linear narrative's to evoke a response in the viewe, false imagery, deception, feints and direct intuitional/emotional appeals. Now those might be targeted at just where you like them, but thats admiring you like them and you agree with the approach and that it's not stupid. It's just when thing slave your preferred zone you begin to dislike them.

yupper32 5y ago
> If not, the only thing you'd enjoy are media targeted at pre-schoolers and young children. Oh come on, you know I wasn't talking about that kind of challenge. There are two things: 1. Pieces that are more challenging to read/watch because the story is deeper and the challenging read is required to tell that story. 2. A piece that purposely makes it the story harder to follow, or is otherwise really difficult to follow, without adding much depth. I was clearly talking about #2. "In fact, the plot isn't impossible to follow – it's just extraordinarily difficult without a pen, a notepad and a pause button to hand." - The article That's just stupid, and absolutely falls into #2. It's a crime drama.
- ubermonkey 5y ago
  ...and we all know that a genre film cannot also be challenging!
- Firadeoclus 5y ago
  The article makes the argument that the plot being hard to follow is in fact to the film's benefit. So unless you require "depth" to be plot depth, that doesn't match #2. There are qualities other than "plot depth" that can be enhanced by ambiguity. Most people don't watch a film solely for the plot. > It's a crime drama. Is that prescriptive or descriptive?

yupper32 5y ago

> If not, the only thing you'd enjoy are media targeted at pre-schoolers and young children. Oh come on, you know I wasn't talking about that kind of challenge. There are two things: 1. Pieces that are more challenging to read/watch because the story is deeper and the challenging read is required to tell that story. 2. A piece that purposely makes it the story harder to follow, or is otherwise really difficult to follow, without adding much depth. I was clearly talking about #2. "In fact, the plot isn't impossible to follow – it's just extraordinarily difficult without a pen, a notepad and a pause button to hand." - The article That's just stupid, and absolutely falls into #2. It's a crime drama.

ubermonkey 5y ago
...and we all know that a genre film cannot also be challenging!
Firadeoclus 5y ago
The article makes the argument that the plot being hard to follow is in fact to the film's benefit. So unless you require "depth" to be plot depth, that doesn't match #2. There are qualities other than "plot depth" that can be enhanced by ambiguity. Most people don't watch a film solely for the plot. > It's a crime drama. Is that prescriptive or descriptive?