3 ms·

Aristotle himself lists spectacle as one of the essential components of drama, alongside other indispensables such as a plot. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poet

by alexqgb 14y ago

Aristotle himself lists spectacle as one of the essential components of drama, alongside other indispensables such as a plot. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poetics_(Aristotle) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poetics_(Aristotle) That's not to say that writers with poor plots don't resort to amplified spectacle when trying to conceal their failings. But it's a mistake to think that spectacle, in and of itself, has no place in well constructed drama. In many ways, good drama is what justifies a major spectacle, which is the show in show business.

WalterBright 14y ago
I won't say that movies with huge fiery explosions are always boring, but there's a pretty strong correlation. Sometimes, spectacle is worthwhile, such as in Ben Hur, but BH didn't omit the plot. But I look for movies like Memento, Primer and The Man From Earth, which are entirely plot driven. I just have no interest anymore in jump scares and explosions.
moultano 14y ago
Big explosions aren't a spectacle anymore. They haven't been for years. Great art design is what makes for spectacle in a modern movie.
coldtea 14y ago
>Aristotle himself lists spectacle as one of the six essential components of drama, alongside other indispensables such as a plot. Ever read the drama Aristotle referred to though? "Spectacle" there had nothing do with boring pre-calculated show-some-tits, car chases and explosions.
- alexqgb 14y ago
  While it's true that there were no round-the-world chases in exploding robots piloted by naked sea nymphs in the earlier works of Sophocles, they did figure more prominently in his later plays. Scholars remain divided as to whether this was a direct or an indirect cause of the neon helicopter gunships that became a popular and recurring device in the oeuvre of Euripides. Of course, very few of these "innovations" stand up to any real scrutiny. Close readings of the Odyssey and the Iliad will reveal that, more often than not, Homer did it first.

by alexqgb 14y ago

WalterBright 14y ago

I won't say that movies with huge fiery explosions are always boring, but there's a pretty strong correlation. Sometimes, spectacle is worthwhile, such as in Ben Hur, but BH didn't omit the plot. But I look for movies like Memento, Primer and The Man From Earth, which are entirely plot driven. I just have no interest anymore in jump scares and explosions.

moultano 14y ago

Big explosions aren't a spectacle anymore. They haven't been for years. Great art design is what makes for spectacle in a modern movie.

coldtea 14y ago

>Aristotle himself lists spectacle as one of the six essential components of drama, alongside other indispensables such as a plot. Ever read the drama Aristotle referred to though? "Spectacle" there had nothing do with boring pre-calculated show-some-tits, car chases and explosions.

alexqgb 14y ago
While it's true that there were no round-the-world chases in exploding robots piloted by naked sea nymphs in the earlier works of Sophocles, they did figure more prominently in his later plays. Scholars remain divided as to whether this was a direct or an indirect cause of the neon helicopter gunships that became a popular and recurring device in the oeuvre of Euripides. Of course, very few of these "innovations" stand up to any real scrutiny. Close readings of the Odyssey and the Iliad will reveal that, more often than not, Homer did it first.