This has got me thinking about this "huge story arc" approach to making a TV show:
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Mr. Robot
!!!deleted!!! (12526472) — 9 years ago(September 30, 2016 06:10 PM)
This has got me thinking about this "huge story arc" approach to making a TV show:
- It's only been viable in this age of box sets, streaming and binge-watching etc. Online is changing the way stories are told and it's still quite a new thing. You can't blame people for taking time (years even) to adjust their expectations of what a TV show is, after decades of the old episodic approach.
- As the maker you'd have to be damn confident in its success to know that 3+ seasons will be commissioned and the story will end satisfactorally. Say if this current story IS finished off nicely in S3, then what do you do? Commit to another 3 season/year story arc or end on a high and move on to a brand new IP?
- You run the risk of viewers getting bored/impatient/distracted. Just my personal experience, but the plot is getting so out-there that i'm having trouble keeping up, with week-long gaps between shows (now there's a 10 month gap!). Especially as I have other shows to keep tabs on too. I think for season 3 I might be better-off binging the entire season after it's all available. If enough other people feel the same then viewing figures would look bad until it's all available.
-
NotASpeckOfCereal — 9 years ago(October 01, 2016 11:41 AM)
You can't blame people for taking time (years even) to adjust their expectations of what a TV show is, after decades of the old episodic approach.
Yes I can. First off, it's bloody apparent by now that this is the case, so they shouldn't be surprised. After that, I can only wonder why they don't praise the fact with appreciation for much better story telling, not being strapped to a corporate-approved episode-centric arc.
You run the risk of viewers getting bored/impatient/distracted. Just my personal experience, but the plot is getting so out-there that i'm having trouble keeping up, with week-long gaps between shows (now there's a 10 month gap!).
So which is it that you like the most, the old way or the new way, because your points conflict. TV shows have always gone away off-season. Nowadays, with Netflix streaming meaning that all episodes come out on the same day, you're waiting even longer for a new season.
Mr. Robot is more traditional, releasing on an episode per week.
Be sure to proof your posts to see if you any words out -
alphabase17 — 9 years ago(October 31, 2016 09:24 AM)
This has got me thinking about this "huge story arc" approach to making a TV show:
- It's only been viable in this age of box sets, streaming and binge-watching etc. Online is changing the way stories are told and it's still quite a new thing. You can't blame people for taking time (years even) to adjust their expectations of what a TV show is, after decades of the old episodic approach.
I have doubts about that. Has streaming really changed story-telling so dramatically? We had a lot of shows in the "old" times which were partly serialized, too.
- It's only been viable in this age of box sets, streaming and binge-watching etc. Online is changing the way stories are told and it's still quite a new thing. You can't blame people for taking time (years even) to adjust their expectations of what a TV show is, after decades of the old episodic approach.
-
iguil — 9 years ago(October 19, 2016 08:55 AM)
Before I continue this post, I want to clarify that; I am still a fan of this series, I will continue watching, and, at least for the time being, I consider it one of the best shows currently airing. But I am, however, getting a bit concerned. And not because the S2 finale didnt rise to epic, it was more than enough for me, but it wasnt really on the scale of epic.
Mr. Robot is in many ways similar to LOST in the way it presents seemingly weird mysteries left and right. We have gaps in time where seemingly important events took place, we have characters referring to such events, people who are believed to be dead and then not, and then to be a hallucination, and then not, and so on. We now have several phases of an implied master plan, which seemingly is grand enough so that it can turn people like Angela to fully support and commit to it within 30 minutes or so. When were on the subject, I dont feel like Angela is the kind of person who would take lightly upon blowing up a building with potentially hundreds of, in principle, innocent lives in it, so its got to be a pretty awesome plan.
(On a sidenote, by supporting the plan, Angela is sort of doing the same as the E-corp executives, when they decided that her mother would die, along with the others in the accident, but moving on).
Sure, I dont need to be spoonfed answers to these mysteries, I dont want to either. For a lot of them, its perfectly possible to piece together the answer by just paying attention and using common sense, and thats OK. I dont need a narrative of Elliot or Mr. Robot walking through the events like: and then we went there and did that, and then., and then or something of that nature. A lot of questions
are
better when the viewer can and should piece them together themselves. Provided its realistically possible.
And I can accept that this is a long-game series, where we will have to watch multiple future seasons to then be mindblown by the big picture. I can wait, AS
long as
I feel confident that there actually
is
a big picture and reasons and answers behind all this weirdness.
When LOST was airing, there were times where I would sit down and try to think out possible explanations behind the mysteries and the big picture, applying different types of math to the numbers to see if something came out of it and so on. Not a lot though, plenty of people spent more time on it than I did, but it was always this drive to try to make sense of it, because, at the time, the show seemed consistent, it seemed intelligent, we were all convinced that there was an explanation to everything, and that it would blow our minds. Of course, there was not. It was made up as they went on, and in the end it tried and failed to save itself with the BS: it was about the characters, not the mysteries.
Yes, LOST had tons of
really
(REALLY) great characters and backstories, which on their own, I really enjoyed. In the same way I can enjoy the tech-aspect of Mr. Robot, or just the overall beep scenes on their own. If nothing else, its (probably) fun to watch stoned. But in the same way that LOST
did
present itself as a mystery series with an implied promise of resolution, so has Mr. Robot done.
And as the show goes on, now through 2 seasons, without really giving signs of such a resolution, my skepticism does rise. After all, how can I
know
that the writer really is as clever as everyone claims?
After LOST, Im a lot more hesitant to to spend my time sitting down trying to figure out series like Mr. Robot. Because, if in the end there is no answer, why should I bother? If it all collapses in some sort of everyone can make out their own interpretation of what they think happened BS resolution, to reference the greatness of the human mind of some beep I would feel really cheated if I once again spent time of my life trying to solve mysteries that in reality had no answer to them.
The problem with weird scenes like the fish tank interview, is that, given that this show operates within the realms of the real world, or at least the notion that the characters we se are real human beings, then behaviour needs to be explained within the realm of human behaviour. Sure, you can have really beep up behaviour, but it must still be motivated by something an actual human being could come up with. So for the interview scene, there must exist a reason for the character Whiterose to actually design and execute it that way. Maybe to test out the level of absurdity a person (Angela) would put up with, or something, as a measurement of open-mindedness or whatever. I dont know, but there has to be a reason. Because, if its just weird for the sake of weird or just to reference some scene from a book or movie, then its poor writing.
Scenes like the sitcom-sequence are sort of exempt from this, as this was a dream/hallucination, and you can dream up some really crazy beep And its totally plausible that a TV running in the background can influence ones dreams, no problems there. Im -
SforSmile — 9 years ago(October 25, 2016 11:36 AM)
I was a great fan of Lost which was great up until season 4 after that it gradually declined in quality getting more and more ridiculous and it doesn't necessarily have something to do with explaining everything, it's all about being credible and suspenseful and so far Mr. Robot remained just that and even when the following seasons might decline in quality, it doesn't change the fact that I enjoyed season 1 and 2 looking forward to the next ones.
"Some people are immune to good advice."
-Saul Goodman
"I ignore pathetic trolls" -
iguil — 9 years ago(October 27, 2016 12:06 PM)
Absolutely, and I'm not saying Mr. Robot is bad or really going downhill as of now. I have enjoyed watching both seasons a lot. If the writer has everything under control, everything is fine. I can appreciate a well executed "long game".
It's just that, after LOST, I've become a lot more skeptical against shows of that nature, and this just makes me a bit worried.