io9: "The night before we were scheduled to shoot that scene, John Wirth and I went down to the set to see how it looked. It's late and I know the crew wants to get on their work. But here's the conversation we have:
ME: There's something…not right.
JOHN: I agree. It's just…what is it?
ME: It's not…I dunno…right.
PRODUCTION DESIGNER: Could you be a little more specific? We'll fix it. But, you know, maybe a direction to go in? Font size? Pen color? Anything?
ME: It's just…I can't think of any other way to say it…but it doesn't look like a Terminator wrote it.
JOHN: Exactly.
PRODUCTION DESIGNER: Huh."
6 comments:
This article raises some hysterical questions, that as far as I can tell, are the kinds of things that cultures like Treckies are built on. Most people understand the idea that in stories, you just can't cover everything you want to detail wise, and sometimes you have to leave things up to people's imagination. But, when you shift into something like TV where you're forced to define a very distinct world, you have to make some truly ridiculous decisions about sometimes details that may seem minute and ridiculous. The article used The Sarah Connor Chronicles from Fox, which I'm not familiar with at all, but from my experience with shows like Fire Fly, understand that while I've never seen something, when the description of this thing doesn't like up time and time again, it begins to really bug me.
I thought the part about trying to decide what a Terminator's handwriting should be like was really interesting. It would be challenging, but also fun, to figure out a problem like that. I remember when I was designing a set for the play A Doll's House, I was trying to have a really strong conceptual reason for everything I put into the design, but there were some things that I made a certain way that didn't necessarily have reasons behind them. Usually I just liked the way something looked, even if I didn't have a reason relating to the play for putting it there.
I loved this article! It is so fascinating to hear about the writer's process and interaction with the crew. I can completely see the situation he layed out with the terminator font. I also really like how he distinguishes from "organic, ambiguous and a little messy" from flat out lazy. I can't stand lazy authors who only conceptualize the specific area where their characters live, (and poorly, at that) and don't pay any attention to the rest of the world, but at the same time, there should be some ambiguity--fiction shouldn't read like a history textbook. I think the same can sometimes apply to art and design--as one of my favorite teachers used to say "don't say, show," meaning, don't explicitly put in a line for every contour, but show it with shadow or color or tone or something. Leave a little open for interpretation, and the work is a lot more relevant.
GO I09!
Fangirling over.
This is incredibly interesting because the entire assumption of the article is that the writer is writing for an audience. That people will see this in one form or another and be intrigued and think about the world. Often times we get caught up in masturbatory projects, where everything is defined and tightly controlled and based around US and OUR ideas as creator. As soon as a project is performed, or filmed, or read, it is out of the hands of the creative team. It becomes the property of those consuming it.
This is somewhat different, I've found, in novels. Often the writer knows volumes more than what makes it into the book (example: J.K. Rowling and the Harry Potter universe). However, these worlds often feel artificially small because they focus so profoundly on minute details that leave no room for creativity on the part of the viewer.
We talked about Jaws in Foundations of Drama (a commenter on the article also mentions the same thing). The suspense is far greater when forced to come up with something for yourself - the image of the shark, part of the world, whatever. All together, it just creates a much more involving experience for the viewer because it creates ROOM for the viewer to fit in the world.
I found this article fascinating and very relevant to what we study here in the School of Drama. Over the summer in Los Angeles I worked as a set dresser and encountered a similar problem. I had to figure out what a military government oversight office looked like and also what a government agents handwriting would look like. It is at these points when imagination, storytelling and common sense come into play.
I like the fact that this take the reader through the artistic process behind a show. watching a show what you see is what you get. you dont get to see what actually happend to get things where they are when you watch it. i find it interesting how the writter has so much more to do with the artistic process than just writing.
Post a Comment