| Posted: 21 November 2014 at 7:03pm | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
Here's one I'm not fond of: People going on dangerous missions (sometimes for years) and not knowing on why they are there after they get there.
They did this on Gravity (Clooney asking Bullock why she was there--which was the point of the mission) and Prometheus (whole crew, scientists included). It's a fairly obvious way of to impart info to the audience, but it just makes the characters look severely under-prepared.
There are a whole slew of clumsy methods of explaining stuff to the audience which are often unnecessary. I'd say trust the audience more. A human mind can't help but try and fill in blank areas, and it doing so can help immersion much more than an explanation that's clearly aimed at the audience by characters who reasonably should already know stuff.
I note that stories (movies/comics/whatever) targeted at a younger audience often skate right by explaining much of anything past character motivations and the stories make perfect sense.
|
Topic Closed)
