No problem with different writers but the producers need to keep all the dots connected. Look at series like Stargate SG 1 10 years and the 2 movies to close out the open threads of the series. Stargate Universe went out in two seasons poor writing IMO.
01-13-2016, 01:07 PM
I don't think people understand what it takes to write these shows. Do they really think a show like say star trek or SG 1 that really get into the technical details of their verse. Is the same as a show like Grimm that is more into creating drama. You also have to consider that size of the staff and what the production schedule is. No show can be all of every thing. Take Star Trek for example, the writers have put so much into thinking about the technical aspect, making sure they dot all their "I's" and cross all the "T's". The drama, and interpersonal conflicts are at a minimum.
On Grimm you have posters complaining about how bad the writing is. But these same poster are spitting venom about the characters. FYI, the writer push your buttons to generate that level of passion. It is not for you to like or hate a character. It is the writers job to make you like or hate a character. Why they do it, they feel that is what the story calls for. If the writers did not make you hate the girl next door called Juliette. You would never buy into Eve. If you never bought in to Adalind as evil there would be no impact with her redemption. Why can't people just enjoy the scenario that is the actions of the characters, and see where the road take you. If you spend all your time judging the driver, you will miss the trip.
Embrace your inner Biest..... We all have one
01-13-2016, 02:59 PM
I believe all stories will have their inconsistencies for a couple of reasons.
- It is impossible to think about all possible plot holes that can be created. - The story will need to be changed. - In the series case, there are several different writers for different episodes. - When the writers start to write a story they don’t know where they are going with the story. This is just to list a few number of examples. The quality of the story and the interest of the viewer will be the variables to define if the amount and the size of the inconsistences are acceptable or not. If I really like a show I will close my eyes to the plot holes and pay attention on those parts of the story that calls my attention. Isn’t it what we call “Suspension of disbelief”? I think good writers are those who can close as much plot holes as possible, give as viable answer as possible for the questions the story raises and create a interesting story that I would by free will close my eyes for those plot holes they couldn’t close. I am writing as a viewer, as a fan… not as a writer specialist. Actually I am not a writer specialist, so I couldn’t write as one. Now, my personal experience with grimm is that I used to like the wesen of the week structure. This way, I never worried why Nick never asked how the wesen knew he was a grimm, for example. Or I never worried why Sean tried to kill Marie if she was going to die anyway. I never worried about any other inconsistence that was there in the show while I was having fun with the wesen of week. But grimm writers took the show to a direction where they created so many inconsistences that it became hard not to see. And the story structure now is not as fun as it used to be… It is not fun enough for me to close my eyes for the plot holes the writers are creating every week. But I am conscious that in the end of each episode, it is my choice to have fun or to see the inconsistences. And it is the writer’s job to convince the audience (including me) that closing the eyes for the inconsistences are worth the price to pay for the fun the rest of the story can give us. Each one should do your own choice.
01-13-2016, 03:08 PM
(This post was last modified: 01-13-2016, 03:09 PM by Hexenadler.)
(01-13-2016, 01:07 PM)syscrash Wrote: If you spend all your time judging the driver, you will miss the trip. Even if that driver is drunk out of his mind and steering the car towards a cliff? Someone once said a very similar thing about George Lucas's STAR WARS prequel trilogy. "Stop complaining, enjoy the ride!" Look where that got us. As an audience member sitting at home and watching the show on my television, I have every right to judge an episode on its own merits. Saying I'm forbidden to criticize any of the stories until the entire SERIES has wrapped is thoroughly ridiculous. (01-13-2016, 03:08 PM)Hexenadler Wrote:You have every right to judge the show. If you think it is going over the cliff then by all means get out of the car. But like mister toads will ride every turn seems like the car is going off the rails. but at the end, the fear becomes enjoyable. Until the end you don't really know you are safe.(01-13-2016, 01:07 PM)syscrash Wrote: If you spend all your time judging the driver, you will miss the trip. (01-13-2016, 02:59 PM)Adriano Neres Rodrigues Wrote: I believe all stories will have their inconsistencies for a couple of reasons.What I see is in the beginning Grimm was a fun show. A show that if you missed an episode no big deal. Then it started to get serious, the show required use to become invested in the characters. Problem they forgot to let us get to know the characters. We know a lot about Monroe and Rosalee. we know their family their up bringing. We know their likes and dislike. No other character on the show can we say that about. Even Nick we only know enough about his past to support the current story. What does Nick do for fun? We can answer that for both Rosalee and Monroe. Something as simple as when and why did aunt Mari become an active Grimm. Why would she wait till she was dying to tell Nick, she raised him. Because it doesn't help the story we are not told. But it does help us understand the characters. We have a better picture of who Trubel is then we do about Nick. You take Adalind and Catherine, the only thing we know is her mother seems abusive. But the lack of knowledge of her up bringing, we have not clue about what her relation with Kelly will be.
Embrace your inner Biest..... We all have one
01-13-2016, 03:52 PM
(01-13-2016, 03:19 PM)syscrash Wrote:(01-13-2016, 03:08 PM)Hexenadler Wrote:You have every right to judge the show. If you think it is going over the cliff then by all means get out of the car. But like mister toads will ride every turn seems like the car is going off the rails. but at the end, the fear becomes enjoyable. Until the end you don't really know you are safe.(01-13-2016, 01:07 PM)syscrash Wrote: If you spend all your time judging the driver, you will miss the trip. Syscrash, you hit the target. While we were in wesen of the week structure, knowing Nick wasn't important... But now that we have Juliette /Eve, little Kelly, Nick/Adelaind... It is important to know Nick to know how he is going to react to those things and how those things are going to affect him. Well, actually that is important for me.... I really liked your driving metaphor... So let me use it to express myself... I am feeling like if all windows in the bus are painted black... I really want to enjoy the road... But the writers aren't giving enough information for me.... Just to be clear... This is My feeling.
01-13-2016, 05:39 PM
(This post was last modified: 01-13-2016, 05:39 PM by Hexenadler.)
(01-13-2016, 03:19 PM)syscrash Wrote: You have every right to judge the show. According to you, I don't. Quote:If you think it is going over the cliff then by all means get out of the car. You're still not getting it. You basically said I'm not permitted to be in the car in the first place. That's what I find offensive. Anyway, the car's got a flat tire, and it isn't going to be replaced until January 29. Quote:But like mister toads will ride every turn seems like the car is going off the rails. but at the end, the fear becomes enjoyable. Again, look at the "Star Wars" prequels. Sometimes a leopard just can't change its spots. I continue to watch the show for the same reason most of the fans do; they want to see where the characters will end up. But it gets tough when the writers keep treating the characters like battered housewives. (01-13-2016, 01:07 PM)syscrash Wrote: I don't think people understand what it takes to write these shows. Do they really think a show like say star trek or SG 1 that really get into the technical details of their verse. Is the same as a show like Grimm that is more into creating drama. You also have to consider that size of the staff and what the production schedule is. No show can be all of every thing. Take Star Trek for example, the writers have put so much into thinking about the technical aspect, making sure they dot all their "I's" and cross all the "T's". The drama, and interpersonal conflicts are at a minimum. Well.....not quite. The original series of Star Trek did put some emphasis on technical. But what made the series so great is the chemistry between the characters as well some downright great episodes. Star Trek dealt with racial bigotry, troubled teenagers, drugs, hippies, split personalities, and much more. The problem with Star Trek developed later into the second season. The characters died and came back to life, Captain Kirk would talk about how important the Prime Directive was, but then ignored it. Spock became the more beloved character, the preferred flavor, so more stories were pumped out about him. There was also an issue with all kinds of alien women being attracted to both Kirk and Spock. I never cared about that as a kid, but it seems really bizarre to me now. The show began to lose itself in mediocrity and goofy storylines. (01-13-2016, 01:07 PM)syscrash Wrote: On Grimm you have posters complaining about how bad the writing is. But these same poster are spitting venom about the characters. FYI, the writer push your buttons to generate that level of passion. It is not for you to like or hate a character. It is the writers job to make you like or hate a character. Why they do it, they feel that is what the story calls for. I would say the writers' jobs are to write the characters. In my opinion, they could give a rats' patoot whether we like or hate them. They're more worried about whether people are watching the show, period. If the viewers aren't there, the advertisers are going to pull, and the show gets cancelled. If the posts on the forum are spitting venom at the writing or the characters, I say good, go for it. If the show gets under a person's skin, great. That tells me there's something about the show that appeals to them. If we all hated it, we wouldn't be watching and this forum would be a dead zone. Plus, and I know this sounds corny, but sometimes that one statement comes along that gets me looking at the show from a completely different perspective. I like that. (01-13-2016, 01:07 PM)syscrash Wrote: If the writers did not make you hate the girl next door called Juliette. You would never buy into Eve. If you never bought in to Adalind as evil there would be no impact with her redemption. Why can't people just enjoy the scenario that is the actions of the characters, and see where the road take you. If you spend all your time judging the driver, you will miss the trip. I don't hate Juliette, I never did. What I am suspecting is that Juliette has become the focal point of the show. I believe this was entirely unintentional. However the writers would be morons if they kept her dead. She's a controversial character. Even Nick shacking up with Adalind and Adalind having his baby can't come up against Juliette. For a character who's main purpose was just to 'be there' for Nick, she has managed to be the rails that the roller coaster called Grimm zips along on, in my opinion.
The best way to frustrate a cyberbully is to ignore him.
01-13-2016, 10:41 PM
From the beginning Sean played it all wrong. Sean knew who Nick was. Why kill his aunt who was about to die anyway. Even in hind sight what could Mari have possibly told Nick to turn him against Sean. In Beeware Adalind is a victim, Sean knows Nick is new to the Grimm game. Adalind would have been Sean's openning to work with Nick. Adalind as a victim, Nick would have had a positive impression of her and Hexenbiest. Like he did with the big bad wolf Monroe. It is Sean that made Hexebiest and the Royals the bad guys. Then got Nick to help fight the monsters Sean created. Looking back all of Nick problems with the Royals have been created by Sean.
Since the writers referenced Nick and Adalind's first time. Making Sean the heavy might be how the writers resolve Nick and Adalind's conflict.
Embrace your inner Biest..... We all have one
01-14-2016, 12:35 AM
(01-13-2016, 02:59 PM)Adriano Neres Rodrigues Wrote: Now, my personal experience with grimm is that I used to like the wesen of the week structure. This way, I never worried why Nick never asked how the wesen knew he was a grimm, for example. Or I never worried why Sean tried to kill Marie if she was going to die anyway. I never worried about any other inconsistence that was there in the show while I was having fun with the wesen of week. Exactly, by going for drama ad long running subplots they opened themselves up to larger auspice of criticism and comparison to other shows. One that leaps out to me, is the Highlander series, very similar, but one that manged to develop characters ad carry several subplots without dropping elements all over the place and relying on the bad memory or goodwill of the viewers as structural elements to compensate for poor writing and planning. I am in total agreement that the wesen of the week format was superior, given the apparent quality of the writers. |
|