My sweet idea for a war movie
(Please ignore the previous few weeks of silence, MHP is back in a big way.)
One common problem with war movies, IMHO, is that it's obvious from the beginning that the main characters are going to be... main characters. You know in Saving Private Ryan that the story is about Tom Hanks, Tom Sizemore (eeeh), Matt Damon, etc. You know that Tom Hanks isn't going to get shot in the face thirty seconds into the movie; it's Tom Hanks, and the movie's kind of about him. (Aside 1, the best part about _Deep Blue Sea_ (ie, the only good part) was where Samuel L. was torn in half by a shark 40% of the way into the movie. Great surprise.) (Aside 2, Doug Hofstadter in _GHB_ talked about how it's hard to be surprised in mystery novels. If it looks like it's about to be wrapped up, and there's still a hundred pages left, it's not really about to be wrapped up.)
So, my idea for a war movie (taking some cues from _The Things They Carried_, which is totally great, is too have the movie be a series of little vignettes. The movie would start by following some big star (probably Christian Bale, because he's the best) as he talked to his men about charging up some hill or whatever. Well, they start up the hill and BAM, Christian gets his head shot off. But the shot doesn't stop, it just starts following the guy next to him, and he kills some bad guys or whatever, but then gets nailed, so the camera just goes over to the next guy. Eventually they take the hill, and the guy it's currently on gets like twenty minutes of story before he dies and the camera just keeps going. (I should mention that the entire thing would be shot in Shaky-cam. Of course, I really believe a law should be passed requiring all filmed media to be shot in Shakycam or mockumentary style.) The whole gist is that you would really have no idea what's going to happen to the guy. _Saving Private Ryan_ was really good or whatever, but the only suspense was "Is Tom Hanks going to die a poignant death or will he instead survive in a poignant manner?" My movie would have real suspense, and it would be really interesting to follow a guy around camp for twenty minutes and then see him get blown away.
Of course, there would be some greater narrative arc kind of tying the stories together. Are there any movies like this out already?
posted by Nate at 7:11 PM
10 Comments:
Utterly off topic, but did you mean GEB, or is GHB some Hofstadter book I've neve heard of?
5:56 AM
Welcome back, MHP (Not THP--Silly rabbit, definite articles don't count!)
This post reminds me of an idea for a TV show I once had. Basically, the idea was that characters could die in one episode but then show up again in later episodes, which would proceed as if the earlier death had never happened. This device could also be used for marriages, sordid love affairs and revelations that characters were long lost brothers. This narrative device, however, wouldn't be the focal point of the show. It could be a fairly straightforward sitcom, crime drama, or whatever. An example of where it might have worked is when Buster loses his hand on Arrested Development. He'd lose it, and the "next time on A.D." at the end could draw out some humorous implications of his having lost it, but in the next episode he could either still be without his hand or have it restored--depending on the whims of the writers. Perhaps he could be without it for three or four episodes, but then have it suddenly restored for no obvious reason.
Regardless, I can't think of any war movies like what you've described. Then again, I'm not big on war movies, so who knows.
CT
7:35 AM
Yeah, todd, I totally meant _GEB_ not _GHB_. I guess keeping my ear to the ground in the daterape community has given me a screwed ontology of acronyms (I'm trying to work "ontology" into more things, I can never remember what it means.)
CT, wasn't Seinfeld sort of like that? No one lost a hand or anything, but there were definitely developments that weren't ever mentioned again. And I think _Band of Brothers_ had a big enough cast with people coming and going that some characters randomly died, so it's kind of what I'm going for. I only saw like the first four episodes, though, and I saw them over a period of six months, so it's entirely possible I just never learned/remembered who the main characters were. It was an exciting show, though, to say the least.
9:34 AM
What'd you think of GEB? I heard (from a table containg the majority of Bard's math/cs professors, with whom I was having lunch) that it pretty much wasn't worth the work.
9:58 AM
The difference between my show and Seinfeld is basically that people would lose hands and stuff; that is, crucial plot points that on a normal show could never be ignored in the next episode would be ignored on my show, at least sometimes. It's not just that certain storylines would be abandoned; it's that completely contradictory storylines would be taken up. Maybe on this episode the protagonist defeats the bad guys; maybe he doesn't and dies. Either way, it has no necessary bearing on the next episode, in which he could re-emerge, evil-fighting powers fully intact. Perhaps each episode could open with a tangential scene--like the opening scenes on Law and Order right before the dead body is discovered. As things develop, you start to figure out what, if any, continuity there is from the last show. You don't know if a character is dead until you either see him or hear people talk about him being dead. Perhaps there could be an overarching meta-narrative framing device to give the whole project some structure; the entire show could be presented as one writer's attempt to tell a perfect story of X, be X true love, good triumphing over evil, whatever. Episodes that break the continuity could be seen as the equivalent of crumpling up a page and starting over. The writer could change his mind about certain details along the way, or abandon his initial project in search of another. I dunno, I'm basically just kicking it from my head at this point (I can do that; no disrespect, but that's how I am.)
In response to the substance of the intial post, I'd comment that it seems the "recognizing main characters right away" aspect of war movies (and other kinds) seems to cut both ways. Yes, this feature allows the viewer to predict what will happen to some extent, especially in the middle of the movie--where no matter how bad it looks, Tom Hanks isn't going to die yet. But identifying the main characters right away allows the audience to come to know the character, form an emotional attachment, etc etc, which can make his death/heroic victory at the end all the more powerful and fulfilling, even when you know all along its coming. What the TTTC-inspired war movie idea gains in surprise value, it seems to forfeit in cathartic value. Unless the greater narrative arc serves this purpose. I dunno.
CT
12:58 PM
Yeah, I guess that would be different from Seinfeld. I like the idea of having it be this kind of meta-story about someone trying to write a story. It reminds me of Adaptation, which was great.
And you're right, of course, you do lose a little of the "Oh my God, they got Tom Hanks." But it seems like a good thing to me. I think to try and put a point like that on war is kind of dumb. The Things They Carried didn't have a point, and it was consciously lying/fabricating throughout. There was this little great vignette in there about how you can tell if something is a true war story or not. "In a fake war story, someone jumps on a grenade and saves all their buddies. In a real war story, someone jumps on a grenade, but it's a real big one, and everyone gets blown to shit anyways. And as they're all laying there dying, someone asks the guy who jumped, "Hey, Bill, what the hell did you do that for?" And he responds with "I don't know, it seemed like a good idea at the time!" and then they all die." that's my paraphrase of it.
Anyways, I think the poignancy would come from watching 25 "main" characters get shot and blown up, and not one MAIN character.
4:26 PM
I am trying to remeber for sure, but I think there was a war movie similiar to you ideas. A old black and white flick called "The Longest Day", about D-day no less. All I really think I remeber is that at the start there is a paratrooper or something caught in a tree and about when you start to think he is the main dude he gets shot. Then the camera picks up on someone else, and I think he gets it too after he meets up with a few other soldiers. Not really sure if any of this is accurate however.
"Lost" fallows that completely disconected approach pretty well, but not to A T. the first couple episodes they shoot a polar bear on a tropical island and then there is almost no more talk of it excpt for a passing joke. Or the cripple that can walk after the plain crash for no reason only to loose the abilty again for no real reason and with no warning.
I just think most people espeically women need to identify with some main character to evoke any reaction or hold attention. without which an audience will be caught up in trying to form one.
KS
3:48 PM
I am trying to remeber for sure, but I think there was a war movie similiar to you ideas. A old black and white flick called "The Longest Day", about D-day no less. All I really think I remeber is that at the start there is a paratrooper or something caught in a tree and about when you start to think he is the main dude he gets shot. Then the camera picks up on someone else, and I think he gets it too after he meets up with a few other soldiers. Not really sure if any of this is accurate however.
"Lost" fallows that completely disconected approach pretty well, but not to A T. the first couple episodes they shoot a polar bear on a tropical island and then there is almost no more talk of it excpt for a passing joke. Or the cripple that can walk after the plain crash for no reason only to loose the abilty again for no real reason and with no warning.
I just think most people espeically women need to identify with some main character to evoke any reaction or hold attention. without which an audience will be caught up in trying to form one.
KS
3:48 PM
sorry for the doulbe post.
3:49 PM
The things they carried IS great. I'm glad you enjoyed it.
8:27 PM
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home