h a l f b a k e r yContrary to popular belief
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
Not really an original idea because the idea has been
floated
from time to time, but only as an afterthought once a
series
has garnered a reasonable following. If a series is very
popular it would make financial sense to put the final
episode in
movie form
shown
in theaters, but I think
the reason it hasn't been done is
because
it wasn't planned from the beginning. For instance, a TV
network isn't going to give away it's best TV show's grand
finale ratings bonanza, unless of course it's replaced by a
box
office smash hit ticket sales bonanza. But they can't spring
that on a loyal audience who might feel betrayed and
angered that they're being squeezed for a ticket after being
loyal followers for years.
The series would be written from the very start to have all
it's
character and plot arcs able to end in a two hour episode
that would be played only in movie theaters. Breaking Bad
would be the perfect nomination for this. Lots of loose ends
that need to be wrapped up. The audience would
be
told this right off the bat so they didn't feel taken
advantage
of when they're told that they're going to have to spend 12
bucks a ticket plus an additional ten bucks in popcorn and
hot
dogs to see the end episode.
Going to the final episode movie would be a social event
like
going to a concert where you'd get to mingle with fans of
the
show from years back.
Again, I think the only reason this hasn't been done is
inertia.
It's just not the way TV shows and movies are made. They
do
a series, they end a series, then somebody does a horrible
re-
boot movie years later that's a re-hash to cash in on the TV
show. I
think planning it from the beginning to be a hybrid
entertainment product, TV to movie, would help the
writers
to craft it effectively as such. You wouldn't have any more
final episodes where the guy goes nuts, or it was all a
dream or everybody goes to jail etc etc. People would
demand satisfaction or the movie would bomb. Writers
knowing this from the beginning could plan accordingly
instead of just getting a notice that this is the last year of
the run so come up with something palatable to wrap things
up.
I believe it was actually done as an afterthought with the
TV show Battlestar Galactica. They just got cancelled and
had a lot of crap left in film cans so they called it a movie,
printed some posters and had a big box office hit. Some of
my facts might be off on that but I seem to remember that
was the case. Not a fan since I thought it was a crappy Star
Wars ripoff myself.
Anyway, if it was done right, it could be a great
entertainment
event that was years in the making.
[link]
|
| |
you could extend the idea both ways - the show starts with, say, some Tweets, and ends up on Jumbotrons ... |
|
| |
The way wide-screen TVs have become popular,
and have similar "aspect ratio" to movie-theater
screens, there is no reason why the final episode
couldn't be shown both ways. Logically, the first
place to show it is in the theater. But afterward,
well, lots of movies are currently shown on TV,
with TV advertisements inserted throughout.
Nothing exists to prevent taking the movie and
showing it on TV. Finally, with respect to sales of
the "collected series", the movie would obviously
be included as the last part of the collection. |
|
| |
Stargate did it but they never made it to theaters. |
|
| |
I'm pretty sure they played the Breaking Bad climax
at the PCC in London, live I believe. |
|
| |
//But afterward, well, lots of movies are currently
shown on TV// |
|
| |
Absolutely, it's not an either/or. People too cheap to
go the theater could wait maybe a year or so for the
TV
showing. |
|
| |
//I'm pretty sure they played the Breaking Bad climax
at the PCC in London, live I believe.// |
|
| |
Like I said, not really an original idea except for the
part about planning this from the beginning so the
writers are basically writing dozens of episodes that
are all leading up to a single episode climax. Breaking
Bad happened to do this but I know from interviews
that they had no clue how it was going to end until
the last season. (spoiler alert) The scene where the
M60 machine gun was introduced was nothing but an
introduction, not a foreshadowing of an already
written scene. Although Walt presumably knew how
he was going to use it, the writers had no
clue at the time that the scene was shot. |
|
| |
Openly planning to do things this way would be something new, and I would guess, effective. An additional variant might be the very thin development of one of the plot threads, deliberately (and openly) to lay the foundations for yet another series-based movie. Let it be known that you can't properly appreciate Movie#2, unless you follow every episode of the series. (ie. Just trying to run your idea in the opposite direction) |
|
| |
Sure, go for it. Like all other entertainment, it's not
about the format, it's about the combination of all
other art involved (Story, characters,direction,
tempo, execution). |
|
| |
Meaning, this format idea will not hurt or help a
story as much as the other factors. |
|
| |
Well, it's a business model more than artistic
execution outline. Although writers might have a
different approach knowing they're writing a run-up
to a movie. I know that past series finales would
never have made it in a movie theater. Many of them
have been sappy "bye-bye" vignettes built around
some premise about why the situation is ending. I get
the feeling of a filmed cast party at the end of a
Broadway production. In other words, lots of
sentiment, not a lot of
excitement. |
|
| |
A movie would have to have payoff, closure and
satisfaction, Breaking Bad being the best example I've
ever seen. There's also one example of an ending that
was ok for TV that might not have made it in the
theater, specifically the Sopranos when Tony gets
whacked and you see the hit from his perspective,
namely the lights just going out. |
|
| |
Might have worked, but might have pissed people off,
not sure. |
|
| |
Satisfaction is (often) based on expectations. |
|
| |
Even for the same person, they have different
"audience" expectations in a theater/movie than in a
TV show. |
|
| |
In TV shows, we expect "short term fun" with some
"long term mystery" (arc) to get us to want to tune
in for the next episode. Any "lull" in the story is
intentionally put in the middle, to leave cliff
hangers & bait at the bookends. (Not to mention we
expect commercial breaks, requiring segues &
context-resetting) |
|
| |
In Movies, we expect the entire long arc to finish.
The pace needs to be solid the entire length with no
lulls. |
|
| |
So, the type of storytelling, & pace changes with the
format. Not all audiences recognize this, but it
would explain why most SNL-based movies are soooo
poor. (We expected short sketches with 50%
failures, but instead get a 90 minute failed sketch) |
|
| |
And, as you point out, Breaking Bad ended well due
to the storytelling, not the format. |
|
| |
I think it would be 4 or 5 years of storytelling
foreplay all leading up to one big bang of a finish. |
|
| |
//And, as you point out, Breaking Bad ended well
due to the storytelling, not the format// |
|
| |
Of course it would have to be good. No substitute for
quality writing. In fact, I've noticed that if there's a
clever enough gimmick behind the thing writers can
fall into a "It writes itself" mode. Some of the
greatest stories don't sound all that interesting on
their face. Chemistry teacher turns drug dealer, the
trials and tribulations of a mafia family, (the
Godfather) an archeologist hunts for a lost relic from
the Bible, guy obsessively goes after a whale etc. On
the other hand, you've got transforming robots from
another planet coming to Earth for the final battle
between good and evil in Transformers. Sounds great
right? Totally un-watchable. |
|
| |