A blog about writing, reading, and watching stories

Tag: screenwriting

HBO does DC: The Titans

I want to enjoy The Titans, I really do. There is definitely tortured-superhero character development to enjoy—especially in the first season, which when defined as it should have been by Rachel’s deliciously creepy arc, includes the first episode of the second season. Yet the writers keep making one particularly questionable decision over and over. Usually, when a TV story follows characters in different settings, or in different time frames (past and present), these dual story threads are interwoven within episodes. And have you heard the cliché, You have to understand the rule before you can break it? The writers are certainly making a conscious choice not to flip back-and-forth, but instead to devote entire episodes to the secondary storyline. This structure can work…but only if the writers were still addressing the purpose of the usual rule: Leave them wanting more.

Knowing when to leave

A good time to leave a storyline is when the characters are on the brink of something exciting—victory, disaster, anything the viewers are dying to see. This makes the viewers (or readers, because the same principle works for chapter breaks) anxious to get back to the other storyline. The Titans continually leaves the secondary storyline after a moment of resolution, an ending point so neatly tied in a bow I kept thinking the secondary arc was finished when there were actually more episodes to come! So, of course, I wasn’t in suspense, anxiously awaiting the next installment.

What’s next on my watchlist

Suddenly, there’s so much spec fic to watch: new (to me) seasons of The Handmaid’s Tale, The Witcher, Star Trek: Discovery, The Wheel of Time, possibly Locke and Key. What’s on your list?

The OA: Part 2

While The OA did, as I suspected, leave the liminal space of the fantastic and dive headfirst into actual supernatural narrative in Part 2, the show improved so much that the particular tension from an unreliable narrator wasn’t needed. We could still argue about whether the show is original enough to be worth watching for most SF/F buffs–and about exactly where that line falls, now that the plot is complicated enough that I’ve never seen all those particular tropes combined in just this way–but I’d rather point out some of the writing techniques the show used well this time.

An actually mysterious beginning

Part 2 opens with characters we don’t know, in a dimension we don’t know: specifically, with a private eye, a desperate client, and a missing girl who is a female version of Buck, one of the OA’s listeners in Part 1. This beginning wouldn’t work half so well without Kingsley Ben-Adir as the private eye protagonist, inhabiting the character so completely and (it seems) effortlessly. He has some help from the writing, though. In this new season, we start again with a mystery, but a mystery seen through the eyes of a character who doesn’t know the answers. Remember, the mystery in Part 1 is the story of Prairie’s captivity, but Prairie knows her own history already, and it’s hard to over-emphasize how that drains a narrative of urgency. Even when Prairie arrives in Part 2, she doesn’t have the memories of her alternate self, so she doesn’t have the answers, either. Without answers, our main characters can ricochet from stressed to desperate and back again. Thank God.

So why start with Karim, our private eye, and not the characters we know? This allows the writers to employ a technique that science-fiction and fantasy novels use all the time: the gradual widening of the world. Personally, this is one of my favorite things about speculative fiction, because it’s often tied to a sense of wonder that comes with each step farther into the unknown. The idea is to start very simply, with a situation that is small and somewhat ordinary (in this case, a bare three characters in a well-known fictional plot: private eye, client, missing) and to gradually let the story open up into something bigger and weirder. It’s as if the audience is climbing a mountain through layers of cloud and each new break in the fog allows them to glimpse a wider world that is not only stunning, but also redefines each previous view. They could only do this with a new character, because our returning friends are already deeply steeped in weirdness.

An end to static situations

Exactly how many static (read: unchanging) situations were featured in Part 1? Let’s see: there’s Prairie’s captivity in the past; the boys listening to her story in the present, and the gradual revelation of how horrible their home lives really are without any real change to them; and Prairie’s adoptive parents’ doubts about her sanity (and who can blame them, when she literally goes blank in every scene with them in it?). In fact, looking back, Part 1 seems to completely confuse “bit by bit revelation” with “plot.” Sorry, but no. Learning new information is exposition; goals, conflicts, decisions, and disasters that change the situations the characters are in (leading to new goals, etc.) is plot. In a book it would be much harder to disguise exposition as forward motion, but since actors were acting it out–wow! It kind of looked like plot. But when you compare it to the ever-changing situations in Part 2, the steady progress towards ultimate goals and confrontations, it’s easy to see the difference.

Of course, the devil’s advocate in my head is telling me that Part 2 could move so quickly only because of all the set-up and character development in Part 1. To which I say, yes, but it’s better to do them at the same time. Go watch Battlestar Galactica, Killjoys, Dark Matter, Stranger Things, etc. to see how.

© 2022 Stories Welcome

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑