Popular Posts

Sticky Post

I want to make a brief point about why I think a “Happy Ending” is the best kind of ending to a story.         Now I can already hear some of the writing critics and lit-majors out there plotting my demise. I want to state ahead of time that this is simply how I feel. It's not a doctoral thesis on the right way to do tell a story. I also want to dispel the myth that what I mean by a happy ending is this:
Not so.
Perhaps a better term would suffice. Instead of a “HAPPY” ending, let's go with a “POSITIVE” ending. This is the point: When you end a sentence there are a variety of punctuation marks you can use to create a feel for the statement. A period ends the sentence matter-of-factly, an exclamation point gives it energy, and a question mark leaves us waiting a response. In the same way, the ending to a story will leave the viewer feeling a certain way about what they've just experienced. When you have a “POSITIVE” ending, it means we get what we wanted: the world is saved, the villain is defeated, the right couple falls in love, the skater makes it to the Olympics, friends forgive each other, ect. Generaly something good happens that we've been waiting for, because up till now, it was a question as to whether or not it would.
In other words fiction is the result of conflict. If there were no conflict in the world there would be no story telling. If everything was hunky dorry? If there really was world peace and everyone was rich and nothing bad ever happened?

Then what about the ninjas?

What about your action movies?

No villains to fight,

No Batman,

No Arnold Swartzeneggar,

No Chuck Norris,

No superheroes sitcoms, soap operas, stand-up comedians, or Saturday morning cartoons.

You see: Story Telling = Conflict + Characters trying to end said conflict. A problem exists. The characters need to fix it. We follow the characters in their efforts to fix it. At the end the problem is resolved and the journey is over. We get a sense of closure and the story has come to a peaceful and satisfying rest. But in a “NEGATIVE” ending, we are refused this privilege. All of the above happen except the last. The villain wins, the romance ends, the bank forecloses. What we were waiting on never happens and as a result there IS no closure. Without a solution to the conflict, the reason for the story is left open like a sentence with a question mark. Our reason for engaging the story is unrewarded. And WE are left holding the bag. A negative ending fails to resolve the issues that make up the story and therefore leaves the audience thinking: “Wait... was that it? Is that the end? Wasn't there supposed to be more?”

It's like if you were to tell a knock knock joke.

“Knock, knock” “Who's there?” “Andy” “Andy Who?” “An-dey lived happily ever after.” Yes it's a pun. Yes it's the lowest form of commedy. It's also my specialty so zip it.

With a negative ending, it would be more like this:

“Knock, knock” “Who's there?” “Andy” “Andy Who?” “Andy.”
...
Not a very fulfilling joke, and not a very fulfilling story. I believe that the best kind of ending is one that rewards the audience for their attention. Plays to their emotions on a positive level and thus leaves them feeling good that they chose to participate.

AND

I say “the longer the wait the bigger the reward” Don't make me sit through some 3 hour movie just to watch the Joker win in the end. I paid 8 bucks for that movie.
NOTE: All this of course, excludes the concept of cliffhangers and minor defeats. A shorter story that exists as a small part of a larger one is already unfinished, when you leave the audience hanging on until next week they know the story's not over; that there will be more to come next week. They know that even with a cliffhanger, a sudden twist, or even a downright sad ending, that the big picture moves on. That there will be a chance for a positive ending in the future. BUT DO NOT make us sit faithfully through a storyline for YEARS only to let us down at the very end.
This is why I feel that the greatest line ever written:
Does not come from Shakespeare or Mark Twain,
Does not come from Louis or Tolkien,

It comes from "Toy Story 3"

Those who have seen this movie, I'm sure can agree on the brilliance of it's plotline. We all understand how it hits home, using the concept of growing up and leaving our childhood behind to tug at our heartstrings and makes us connect to the movie as it ends it's long running legacy.
You might even say that while the film has a "Technically Positive" ending, it is actually quite bitter-sweet, as it hits home for all of us.

But then something Incredible happens. 

Andy looks back toward the house.
He looks almost directly into the camera and says:

 

"THANKS GUYS"

This is not just Andy speaking to the toys. It is Disney and Pixar speaking to us; the audience:
"Thanks guys, for sticking with us, for being fans. for being there at the beginning, for helping make us what we are. Thanks for believing in the first movie, for liking the second, and for wanting a third. For all the movies you've watched, the money you've spent and the time you've given us, we appreciate you. So from the hearts of every producer, director, actor, and animator..."
"THANKS GUYS." 
This is the single most wonderful gesture I have ever seen from a film company and the perfect way to end not only a movie but a series that watched us grow up. A final goodbye, a unique gem and perfect reward for our time and attention. Now THAT is a "HAPPY ENDING"

There I've said what I have to say. Now come at me with the torches and pitch-fo...

Sunday, September 29, 2013

HERO TIME (Assembling a Super Team)

When putting together a group of characters with special abilities, (or sometimes without), I find it important to follow some guidelines, to keep your team relevant and uncrowded.
Basically you don't want 14 characters on a team who all have flight, invincibility, and super strength. Nor do you want to end up with an arsenal of 5 different colored energy blasts.

A good example is the avengers.

While they may be able to make a good movie, there is a lot of redundancy in Marvels leading super hero team. Pretty much everyone on the team is able to take a hit, shoot a blast, lift something heavy, and fly through the air.

Or they're fighting hand to hand.
And they all do it through science/technology.
It gets a little old people.

I think it's vital to keep track of the archetypes you're working with, and try to work roughly within the realm of one each. Some examples:

SNIPER
The sniper is just that; a specialist in long range attacks. This may be through a weapon or a power but always on the offensive side. Basically this character uses their ability to cause HARM while staying out of the fight. Some snipers may use a travel power like flight to keep their distance. Others may choose to hide in their surroundings like a ninja. Whatever the form, the sniper chooses to act on the OFFENSIVE, yet their approach is always DEFENSIVE.



TANK
The tank is well known in the gaming world as the indestructible wall whom the other players hide behind. This role is expanded however, in fiction where personal action is vital and where the characters often find themselves split up and unable to rely on a meat shield.

The classic Tank has vast amounts of either Toughness, or Strength... or both. Which is sometimes ok, if you want your tank to specialize in being an unstoppable mayhem machine, just be sure to watch the other attributes like speed, smarts, combat ability, as that kind of power can quickly get out of hand.

Then you have a PARAGON to deal with.

     

SCRAPPER
The little guy who doesn't look like he can do much damage but can pack a wallop when you're not looking. This usually comes in the form of the UN-POWERED CHARACTER.
The trick is to focus on things like speed, agility, acrobatics, things that allow the character to overcome their lacking in raw power and get around their enemies strengths. A good tactic is to keep these attributes to this character alone. That way they stand out.

 MAGE
Also taken from the gaming world, I use the word MAGE to refer to one who uses tactics other than straight out offense or defense. A magician can be a form of this archetype but so could a beast master, or an inventor.
NOTE: 
(This means Captain Nemo not Iron Man)

The MAGE often finds him or her self acting as support using things like telekinesis to help their allies and hinder their foes. Or they may be a mastermind who commands others to do their bidding. 

SPECIALIST
Not to be confused with the MAGE, a SPECIALIST can be similar in style (like an animal trainer for instance.)
The difference is the SPECIALIST is someone who does ONE thing really well. Travel powers like Super speed and Teleportation are generally good when left in the hands of a single user, and better when that's generally all the user can do.
The thing about some abilities is that they get overly powerful fast. Things like invisibility, invincibility, mimicking, and mind control are so easy to use effectively and so annoying for someone else to have to fight. It's best not to add to the cheapness.
OR
Try adding a power that works directly with the first; like running real fast lights you on fire, or having electrical powers that allow you to absorb into a power line. Another good idea Is to have a drawback to a host of abilities. i.e.: Ghost powers that let you be invisible, intangible, fly, and use telekinesis, but no one can see, touch, or hear you.

GADGETTEER
When Tony Stark puts on a metal suit. He quickly becomes a PARAGON. This is a character that for all intense purposes comes off far too powerful. That is, unless of course you're a Dragon-ball worshiping, perfectionist, power monger with a geek level of OVER 9000!
It's hard to be a team player when you've got everyone elses abilities put together.

On the other hand if you can manage to tone things down a bit, then the character with magical armor, the computer hacker with a mechanical glove, or the gadget collector with an unlimited supply of goodies, can be just what is needed to fill in the gaps. A few tricks here and there, a little bit of improv, and maybe some light crossover with a team member or two, and you've got yourself a living skeleton key to unlock all those pesky obstacles in your way.  

Here's how it might work out:

I like to put the TANK and SCRAPPER together. Because they are allays opposites, they can play off each others weaknesses: Speed for strength, damage for toughness, whatever. And because they are usually both melee, they can easily be set in the same area. It's quite fun and interesting to see the TANKER take a hit while the SCRAPPER dodges one; or a large punch followed by a quick “Hiya!”
The SNIPER and the MAGE are the back up, standing by awaiting the best chance to intervene. Meanwhile the SPECIALIST is best used to engaged in a "one on one" with an enemy on the sidelines. The team may not necessarily have both a MAGE and a GADGETEER as they might step on each other toes. Although if they are different enough in theme you might get away with it and then the team might not even need a SPECIALIST.I've seen teams end up with two forms of MAGE with one being the offensive as a manipulator, and another the defensive like a healer. The problem lies when rolls start to get mixed. It's best to do this only when working with small groups of people. Then the various tasks can be accurately defined rather than having several different versions of the same thing.

Then again many animes have often assembled teams of nothing BUT Mages. In these cases it usually falls on all members of a team to do all tasks, just each with a different theme. A really successful example of this lies outside the anime multiverse in the form of “Avatar: The Last Air Bender”,
Where the characters powers are more specific and narrowly defined.

But notice, even then they add a couple scrappers.

I guess you can never have too many of those.

A few other good rules:

DON'T OVERPOPULATE
Keep the number of characters between about 4 and 7. Unless you intent to pull a Justice League Unlimited and just pick and choose randomly every time.

NOT TOO MANY FLYERS
Only one or two characters should be able to fly. Flight gives WAY too much freedom to most characters. especially if they already have a lot of power.

NOT TOO MANY RANGERS
You don't want to over rely on ranged attacks then the action really just becomes a shooting range. Unless you're writing about a band of Navy SEALS, let those who can handle the melee stay close up.

ONLY ONE INVINCIBLE
I personally prefer to keep all my characters vulnerable to an extent, but if you HAVE to make a character invincible, you should keep them unique. Their presence on the battlefield will be all the more important that way.

ONLY ONE UNPOWERED CHARACTER
My own little pet-peeve. This is to keep the unpowered character relevant and useful.
I'll explain more about this in another post.

NEVER HAVE AN AQUAMAN
If you a re a fan of Aquaman don't fret. He's not a bad hero. I'll explain this too in another post


post signature
  post signature 
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)