Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

SGU, by far the most underrated series.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #76
    Originally posted by jeri View Post
    But still, isn't it a matter of individual perception and interpretation? My argument is that all these opinions, pro and con, are subjective.
    Content, what a viewer may or may not like, Characterization, story arcs, all things like this do indeed come down to personal perception.
    What does not however is *Structure*, it's far easier to critique and such in writing (such as essays etc) because you can see the grammatical structures etc, but it can be done with pretty much anything.

    "I don't like X character because I did not relate to them" = Subjective opinion.
    "I don't like X character because their personality changes from week to week displaying a lack of continuity in writing for X character". This is more a structural fault.
    See what I am saying?
    sigpic
    ALL THANKS TO THE WONDERFUL CREATOR OF THIS SIG GO TO R.I.G.
    A lie is just a truth that hasn't gone through conversion therapy yet
    The truth isn't the truth

    Comment


      #77
      Originally posted by Gatefan1976 View Post
      Content, what a viewer may or may not like, Characterization, story arcs, all things like this do indeed come down to personal perception.
      What does not however is *Structure*, it's far easier to critique and such in writing (such as essays etc) because you can see the grammatical structures etc, but it can be done with pretty much anything.

      "I don't like X character because I did not relate to them" = Subjective opinion.
      "I don't like X character because their personality changes from week to week displaying a lack of continuity in writing for X character". This is more a structural fault.
      See what I am saying?
      Unless that change in character is part of the character. Me I'm forced to tollerate critics and find their contribution only occationally helpful. Could probably do without them or alteast wish they keep there input down to a sentence or two. No one can ever claim to know why an artist does one thing or another. Often not even the artist themselves.
      SGU. Best Sci-fi show to come along in decades.

      Comment


        #78
        Originally posted by psl1 View Post
        Unless that change in character is part of the character. Me I'm forced to tollerate critics and find their contribution only occationally helpful. Could probably do without them or alteast wish they keep there input down to a sentence or two. No one can ever claim to know why an artist does one thing or another. Often not even the artist themselves.
        But film is structured. There are rules, because film*is* a language. It has a grammar, syntax, punctuation. When these are circumvented, without knowledge or reason it's noticed. When characters are cliche it's noticed, just like stereotypes are. Cliche CAN be good in writing and film, if the cliche is understood and used with purpose. Boardwalk Empire plays on cliches very well as does Game of Thrones. SGU doesn't.

        This isn't about being an art critic or knowing exactly what an artist is thinking. It's simply about understand film language and writing and commenting on that. It's not anything personal, or even an attack, it's observation.
        Disclaimer: All opinions stated within this post are relevant to the author herself, and do not in any way represent the opinions of God, Country, The Powers That Be or Greater Fandom.

        Any resemblance to aforementioned opinions are purely coincidental.

        Comment


          #79
          Sorry there are no rules in art. Whatever works, works. It’s that simple and that complicated.

          Everything else you are referring to is related to the rules of the business of film or TV. Nothing to do with art. It may be of importance to those who perpetuate the industry, but of no concern to us.
          SGU. Best Sci-fi show to come along in decades.

          Comment


            #80
            Originally posted by psl1 View Post
            Sorry there are no rules in art. Whatever works, works. It’s that simple and that complicated.

            Everything else you are referring to is related to the rules of the business of film or TV. Nothing to do with art. It may be of importance to those who perpetuate the industry, but of no concern to us.
            Umm, Have you ever attended an English class?
            Both Dee and I are talking about *scriptwriting*, nothing else.
            sigpic
            ALL THANKS TO THE WONDERFUL CREATOR OF THIS SIG GO TO R.I.G.
            A lie is just a truth that hasn't gone through conversion therapy yet
            The truth isn't the truth

            Comment


              #81
              Originally posted by psl1 View Post
              Sorry there are no rules in art. Whatever works, works. It’s that simple and that complicated.

              Everything else you are referring to is related to the rules of the business of film or TV. Nothing to do with art. It may be of importance to those who perpetuate the industry, but of no concern to us.

              Sorry, you are greatly mistaken. If the structure of film isn't adhered too we wouldn't understand what was happening on screen. You may not see the structure, but you do know it. For example, ignoring characters and story (kinda), do you know what the rule of the line is? Why it shouldn't be crossed (unless for very specific purposes)? Any idea about eye lines and their importance? Any idea how those 2 very specifc rules impact the story told? How they are used for character?

              They are just 2, very important examples of film structure. It exists, it's important. I will even say that bad scripting effects the use of this.

              As for scriptwriting, I could go on forever about the importance of a good script in building a product. It's the bridge to the otherwise, build it badly and no one is crossing it. The characters will fall and die, they'll never get to their end conclusion and neither will many of the audience. We, as an audience, understand things in a specific way. As do actors in reading and interpreting a script.
              Last edited by Deevil; 16 June 2012, 11:29 PM.
              Disclaimer: All opinions stated within this post are relevant to the author herself, and do not in any way represent the opinions of God, Country, The Powers That Be or Greater Fandom.

              Any resemblance to aforementioned opinions are purely coincidental.

              Comment


                #82
                Originally posted by Gatefan1976 View Post
                Umm, Have you ever attended an English class?
                Both Dee and I are talking about *scriptwriting*, nothing else.
                There's a general ignorance in art about structure. Many people seem to think its all free love and you can do what you want and people will understand you. The world really doesn't work that way. We have a capability of gleaning meaning from things, but only within a framework of referred and referenced knowledge. What writers need to do is play on that knowledge while also being somewhat fresh. It's not easy, it's freaking hard work, but to withhold criticism because of that would be wrong.

                And as I said, scripts are the building blocks and when they aren't right the filming isn't either.
                Disclaimer: All opinions stated within this post are relevant to the author herself, and do not in any way represent the opinions of God, Country, The Powers That Be or Greater Fandom.

                Any resemblance to aforementioned opinions are purely coincidental.

                Comment


                  #83
                  Originally posted by Gatefan1976 View Post
                  Umm, Have you ever attended an English class?
                  Both Dee and I are talking about *scriptwriting*, nothing else.
                  Are you though? All I see are vague references to structure and cliché without any real analysis or reasoning. Art is freeform, the problem is that the medium is only art in part.

                  Comment


                    #84
                    Originally posted by KEK View Post
                    Are you though? All I see are vague references to structure and cliché without any real analysis or reasoning. Art is freeform, the problem is that the medium is only art in part.
                    Because you have offered so much reasoning?

                    The truth is, you and others are huge fans so it doesn't really matter what critique against the show is offered - you are still fans. You don't want to hear anything against it, and really you are perfectly within your right to love and defend that in which you enjoy... Equally, folks are within their right to notice faults.

                    It really comes down to one question, does any of this really matter *to you*. If it doesn't, that's fine. Hell, I wouldn't have offered any critique but for what this thread was saying... But it appears we may be hitting the 'live and let live' conclusion of the Convo.
                    Disclaimer: All opinions stated within this post are relevant to the author herself, and do not in any way represent the opinions of God, Country, The Powers That Be or Greater Fandom.

                    Any resemblance to aforementioned opinions are purely coincidental.

                    Comment


                      #85
                      Gatefan, Deevil,

                      So, Ulysses is by your defintion, poorly written because it does not use accepted tropes to tell the story in that novel?
                      All plot and no character makes for a dull story... All plot and no character makes for a dull story... All plot and no character makes for a dull story... All plot and no character makes for a dull story...

                      "Scott isn't out. Actually, he'll probably soon get back in, then out, then in, then out, then in, with rhythm and stamina." reddevil 4/22/2010

                      Comment


                        #86
                        Originally posted by Ser Scot A Ellison View Post
                        Gatefan, Deevil,

                        So, Ulysses is by your defintion, poorly written because it does not use accepted tropes to tell the story in that novel?
                        By who? There are a number of novels named Ulysses, so unless I know which one you are talking about I cannot comment on it, assuming I've read it. Of I have I'll happily discuss novels with you in another thread.

                        This is about SGU and screenwriting/filming. A very different medium.
                        Last edited by Deevil; 17 June 2012, 09:36 AM.
                        Disclaimer: All opinions stated within this post are relevant to the author herself, and do not in any way represent the opinions of God, Country, The Powers That Be or Greater Fandom.

                        Any resemblance to aforementioned opinions are purely coincidental.

                        Comment


                          #87
                          Deevil,

                          Ulysses by James Joyce. The stream of consiousness novel.
                          All plot and no character makes for a dull story... All plot and no character makes for a dull story... All plot and no character makes for a dull story... All plot and no character makes for a dull story...

                          "Scott isn't out. Actually, he'll probably soon get back in, then out, then in, then out, then in, with rhythm and stamina." reddevil 4/22/2010

                          Comment


                            #88
                            Originally posted by Ser Scot A Ellison View Post
                            Deevil,

                            Ulysses by James Joyce. The stream of consiousness novel.
                            I haven't read it, cant say I'm likely too either. While I get what you're trying to say (or think i do), it doesn't apply here. SGU didn't do anything differently in writing or filmatically. It just didn't do what it set out to do all that well. But if ya loved what you got The.End! It doesn't much matter, does it? Kind of like if you enjoyed the Transformers movie, you won't care that narratively it just doesn't work... Incidently, I like those movies so I don't much care .
                            Disclaimer: All opinions stated within this post are relevant to the author herself, and do not in any way represent the opinions of God, Country, The Powers That Be or Greater Fandom.

                            Any resemblance to aforementioned opinions are purely coincidental.

                            Comment


                              #89
                              Originally posted by psl1 View Post
                              No worries , the point is they are clearly not cliche. They represent people you meet all the time.
                              I see today why I didn't understand you're reply, I mistakenly typed argue when I meant agree! Please excuse my mistake, I have been working too much lately.
                              sigpic

                              Comment


                                #90
                                Originally posted by psl1 View Post
                                Unless that change in character is part of the character. Me I'm forced to tollerate critics and find their contribution only occationally helpful. Could probably do without them or alteast wish they keep there input down to a sentence or two. No one can ever claim to know why an artist does one thing or another. Often not even the artist themselves.
                                I rarely agree with critics about film, TV, literature, art, whatever. I often feel critics are jaded; seen way too much to the point of souring everything.
                                sigpic

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X