2. The Inability To Come Up With Good Stories
Quick, tell me what movie this is from: a bad guy has gotten their hands on a magical item that, if brought to the right place and right time, will awaken an army/open a portal/ start a doomsday device. A reluctant hero comes forward to try and stop the bad guy that takes them to several different locations/set pieces before resolving in a big fight/CGI set piece. Go ahead, think it over: see how long it takes before you need three or four hands to list em all. The big defence of this sort of narrative style is that Hollywood has ALWAYS told stories that fit that broad outline, that in fact, ALL stories fit that sort of broad outline, going back to early folklore and mythology. And thats accurate. The bare bones version of various myths and classic films follow those beats to a T. Except that those are the BARE bones. What sets the classic stories apart is HOW they tell the story, in terms of the authors voice, or the characters that are developed, the themes that are brought to bear, the drama that arises from the conflicts between characters. Joss Whedon proved that pretty conclusively this summer with The Avengers, which followed the blockbuster formula beat-for-beat, but he fleshed his narrative out with his unique voice as a writer, with his masterful understanding of the characters, and his willingness to give the characters breathing space to play out their arcs. The problem is, most films? They dont do the fleshing out part, otherwise known as THE ONLY IMPORTANT PART. They just follow the basic beats of what a blockbuster action-adventure is *supposed* to do, only extending effort to change up character names around. Its so indicative of a process that values Properties over Narratives, that places hitting a release date over getting it right. Scripts are rewritten (if not straight-up written) on-set, during production, so of course the narratives are going to be insultingly simplistic, the characters nothing but broad archetypes fleshed out only by whatever thespians have turned up for a paycheck. The obvious excuse, and one that gets busted out pretty often, is that the writers arent being lazy hacks, theyre just following Joseph Campbells Hero Mythology. Without getting too into it, Campbells Hero Mythology was an academic theory that showed how all stories, when stripped down to their elements, follow a basic, rudimentary arc. Which, again, is true enough, but STARTING with that intent is completely backwards. Instead of telling a story and then letting other people find out how your characters and drama compare to others, you start out with all the analysis and deconstruction. Its like filling in all the blank spaces on a crossword puzzle, THEN looking at the clues: its a totally backwards approach to creating compelling drama and interesting narrative. So, next time you watch a movie where characters make baffling, wrong-headed decisions that make no sense except to lengthen out the run time and eat up space, you know why.
Hey guys, isnt it stupid that Green Lantern quits being Green Lantern after five minutes of training and spends a half hour moping in his apartment? No no no no, you have to understand, thats what youre SUPPOSED to do!
It may very well be what youre *supposed* to do. The movie still sucked.