Been doing some thinking (yes I know it hard to believe) but this thinking brings up a question. Does fantasy series need the lack of detail in the story? If we read a book very little is left to us to figure out. If we watch say NCIS again A leads to B and we get to C.
All along I thought Grimm left a lot of loose ends that I would like to know why, but should fantasy writing have those loose ends for the viewer to fill? On the forum we each view the series with different insights and ideas on the story so we have many things to debate, because of the loose ends, those incomplete plots.
A good show, fantasy or otherwise, does not go into too much detail. There is only so much time for each episode, if all details were explained they would have to speed up the show so much you couldn't understand what the actors were saying. You want details on whale processing? Read the middle chapters of Moby Dick, the ones kept out of most editions because they are so long and boring. On most crime shows the action occurs in one day or two, from the murder to the arrest, with all the interviewing being done by the CSI team, who carry guns. Not in the real world. If all details were covered on Grimm, there would be only 1 or 2 WOW's per month. I have never been to Portland, but Nick and Hank sure seem to get from one part of town to another at Indy car speed. You want details, wait for the movies or the books.
@JS and eric. I'm with eric on this one. There just isn't enough time in a TV episode to cover every detail. Now, books are a different matter. For example, J. K. Rowling covered how "magic" worked in almost painful detail in her "Harry Potter" books!
However, I think of other TV shows I've liked over the years where they did extend story lines and plots beyond a single episode. "NYPD Blue" comes to mind. On that show it was sometimes two or even three episodes before a case was solved, and they did it well.
(08-09-2016, 01:47 PM)jsgrimm45 Wrote: [ -> ]All along I thought Grimm left a lot of loose ends that I would like to know why, but should fantasy writing have those loose ends for the viewer to fill?
No, it should not. Fantasy should be no different than any other story medium. In fact, because it's fantasy, it may require a little more detail. In my opinion, of course.
(08-11-2016, 09:54 AM)irukandji Wrote: [ -> ] (08-09-2016, 01:47 PM)jsgrimm45 Wrote: [ -> ]All along I thought Grimm left a lot of loose ends that I would like to know why, but should fantasy writing have those loose ends for the viewer to fill?
No, it should not. Fantasy should be no different than any other story medium. In fact, because it's fantasy, it may require a little more detail. In my opinion, of course.
Could be the want the viewer to use their own Imagination on somethings. Take NCIS what does the viewer have to imagine, fantasy is all about imagination. So could that account for the loophole we see?
There is a big difference between a crime solving show like CSI. And a show like Grimm which is a show about fantasy character. On CSI the focus is in the crime. On Grimm the focus is on the wesen. They just happened to use crimes as an excuse for the violence. There is not thought in terms crime.
(08-12-2016, 01:00 AM)syscrash Wrote: [ -> ]There is a big difference between a crime solving show like CSI. And a show like Grimm which is a show about fantasy character. On CSI the focus is in the crime. On Grimm the focus is on the wesen. They just happened to use crimes as an excuse for the violence. There is not thought in terms crime.
I agree this is why I asked the question do shows like CSI need to have no loopholes and Grimm has because the loophole is for the viewer to add?
I don't she the loopholes as loopholes. On Grimm they are creating a situation to get a response. Their only concern is to create the situation not how they create it. On CSI they are creating a puzzle which is done in the detail. In CSI there are no exciting scenes to rewatch. Once you see the puzzle, the second time you don't get the same excitement. On Grimm since it is contrived situations. You can create outtakes that can be watched over and over. The situation does not need the detail. Take the Adalind and Juliette fight. Having a basic knowledge of who they are that scene will always be exciting. You don't even need to know why they are fighting, or what happens next.
(08-13-2016, 10:15 PM)syscrash Wrote: [ -> ]I don't she the loopholes as loopholes. On Grimm they are creating a situation to get a response. Their only concern is to create the situation not how they create it. On CSI they are creating a puzzle which is done in the detail. In CSI there are no exciting scenes to rewatch. Once you see the puzzle, the second time you don't get the same excitement. On Grimm since it is contrived situations. You can create outtakes that can be watched over and over. The situation does not need the detail. Take the Adalind and Juliette fight. Having a basic knowledge of who they are that scene will always be exciting. You don't even need to know why they are fighting, or what happens next.
You made my point better than I did. The loophole or plotline without a how does cause the viewer to fill in the why. Thanks.
(08-11-2016, 10:53 AM)jsgrimm45 Wrote: [ -> ]Could be the want the viewer to use their own Imagination on somethings.
All shows, (even your example of NCIS), require the viewer to use their imagination. For example, it's a given that Nick and Jethro have to use the bathroom from time to time. We don't have to see it to know it's true.
However, in order for the viewer to follow along, both shows must have clear cut stories. NCIS generally uses the same format.
Grimm, being a fantasy show, has the luxury of using a variety of different formats.
Grimm has been steadily losing viewership and that is important. Not all viewers want a show that all of the sudden throws everything to the wind after following a consistent storyline like the royals and the keys. I think that is a big reason why Grimm is down to 13 episodes instead of the usual 22.