This week I want to do a short, quick discussion of something I've been thinking about. I watch a lot of children's TV (though I only watch the good shows), and TV in general, usually as I eat meals or cool down from a run.
Which is why I recently watched Star Wars Rebels, a Disney Channel animated show. And was blown away, mostly because while I knew Clone Wars was considered a very good show, I had never heard the same about Rebels. Also, it was a kids' Disney Channel show - how good could it really be?
Really, really good.
Rebels dealt with heavy issues of loss, such as loss of home, people, family, purpose, identity, faith...you name it. It's a story of people way out of their depth fighting against a huge, oppressive power with little hope they'll do more than win a couple of small battles here and there. Yes, it's a kids' show, but it's a kids' show that allows major consequences to come to the characters based on their choices, without resetting for the next episode. When injuries happen, they leave scars. When people die, they're gone. And, all in all, at least by the end, the show is about as mature and heavy as the movie Rogue One.
This left me thinking about the other kids' shows I've been watching lately, all from Disney: Rapunzel's Tangled Adventure, DuckTales, and Big Hero 6. All of these shows are very engaging, and I say this as a writer and an adult. There's a spread of depth and maturity to them, sure, but they all deal with heavy concepts in different ways. They develop character and push these characters to the limits, and the characters really come to life in different, unique ways.
And, they, too, aren't afraid to hit the characters hard, where it hurts, and let them hurt.
For example, in early episodes of the Tangled show, we see Rapunzel's abduction from her father's perspective as he remembers. It's emotional and poignant, and it helps the audience understand his current overprotectiveness toward her. Meanwhile, we follow Rapunzel as she tries to explore this new world she's been barred from while in her tower, and we see the parallels between what Gothel did to her and what her father is doing out of love. It's complex and interesting, and this was season 1. You have NO idea what comes in season 2!
No, I won't tell you. Watch the show if you want spoilers.
Why bring all this up? Look at the movies Disney has put out. Look at the new Star Wars movies and the backlash. Heck, look at my previous posts about how Disney's latest movies have only one plot between them, and how characters like Moana fail to grab my attention because they don't have much of a character arc.
I'm not saying those movies are bad. I am saying, however, that with big theater-length productions like these, Disney and other movie companies are getting more and more hamstrung by social media and general response from fans.
Movies are made to be pleasing to wide audiences. That's just the way they are. True, they're not all for all audiences, but in order to make as much money as possible, they need to cater to as many people as possible. For companies like Disney, that means listening in to as many voices as possible and responding to them.
Sometimes, this works great. Sometimes, though, I think it can hurt storytelling. If everyone is demanding a "strong female character" and no one can really pin down what that means, we end up with female characters who aren't allowed to have flaws and are therefore boring. If everyone is demanding certain fan service, it will go in the movie, even if it detracts from the story. There's a sense of what "perfection" is in a movie, and if the film doesn't fulfill it even in a small way, the internet will go crazy panning the film, or boycotting it, or generally smearing it.
Feel free to supply your own examples here. I, for one, am worried that the new Frozen movie is going to give us bland protagonists for this very reason. (Please prove me wrong, Disney!)
And, naturally, I'm not referring to criticism against movies that is very valid, such as sexism, racism, bigotry, bad writing/research, etc. What I'm referring to here is when pressure becomes so great for a film to "get it right" that the writers panic and avoid any semblance of problem to the point that the plot turns to tapioca and the characters aren't allowed to behave in any way that is flawed and human. Not socially problematic, mind you, but human.
With TV, though, the stakes aren't as high. No one is really watching and pushing for a TV show to include certain things, and if they are, TV has lots more time to make it happen in a more natural way.
TV can also show more character development, perhaps because the stakes are relaxed and because of the longer format. Using Rapunzel again as an example, in the TV show we see how her bubbly, optimistic personality, while not exactly a flaw in the traditional sense, doesn't work in all situations and can irritate people around her. We also have the time to see that personality pushed to the breaking point when she can no longer be as cheerful. (It's a well-written show, seriously.)
I wonder if Stranger Things would be as good if it were a movie and not a longer form that can take the time to build that slow burn, while also being a TV show with those lower stakes. As popular as it is, TV isn't given the same demands as films are.
So what? My take on this is that creators need to consider the pros and cons of film and TV when telling stories, and that we either need to stop pressuring movies to be so gosh-darn perfect in every way we want them to be, to the point that they're pulled in so many directions they lose any sense of story, or we need to acknowledge that's the way it is now and let TV have a bigger share of the storytelling pie. I'm not surprised that Netflix and Amazon shows are doing so well; TV is really growing. Maybe we should let it.
That's my take. Let me know yours, try some of these shows if you're interested (they really are good) and see you in a few!
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.