A hundred and twenty minutes doesn't seem like a long time. In fact, it can pass by well before you know it. However, it is truthful to note, that two hours of torture is an eternity of suffering. I've struggled to get through movies that run for 90 minutes, and they felt like they took twice as long.
If you take a moment to think about the better experiences, I think you'll find that variance plays a key part in them. Of course, it's vital to our regiment of entertainment, but it also needs to be in the single serving. We want each moment to be delightful, and to make us eager for the next one. So in that way, a story is a meal and a meal is an amusement park.
Classic Movie Trailers - Jurassic Park (1993)
Of all the available genres, I believe that Horror can be the one note song. A slasher film is a really good example of this point, because the same thing happens, over and over. Jason can kill with his machete, or a bat or chainsaw, but he does catch his prey and they will die. A trip and fall in a gore movie is laughably cliché, but only because we've seen it happen for almost thirty years.
In a way, there is comfort to be had in the familiar. There's a part of us that welcomes the same old story beats. It's kind of like sitting down and enjoying a pizza. Sometimes, we don't want any changes from what we know and love.
Still, that brand of fiction treads into dangerous territory; as I see it, there are two big pitfalls to avoid. The first one, is the creation of a story that the audience has seen and heard. That way lies boredom, and that's not what we want. The second trap is over-reliance on a single story element. If you venture far in that direction, you get a bland narrative.
Jurassic Park could have been one of those movies. It's unlikely given the subject matter, but it definitely could have been worse. Steven Spielberg knew he had an awesome story element, and just like any great storyteller, he didn't rely on it.
It's fairly obvious to me, watching this twenty years later, that a lot of time and money was spent on the dinosaurs. The effects hold up pretty well, even today, and that is an achievement in itself. In order for the movie to work, we have to believe in the giants, and they did an awesome job bringing them to life. So please don't take what I'm saying as a knock on their importance; I'm just pointing out the other attractions.
For instance, there was a sequence involving a security fence. It was a precious moment of suspense that didn't have anything to do with the monsters. We can talk about the car crash, and what that brought to the story. There's a small subplot about a love triangle, and that played a role as well.
In order for a film to be truly epic, the blueprint behind it has to be big. Failing that, there better be more than just one thing to consider. Think of it like a machine, with a lot of moving parts. They should all work together, but they should be distinct.
Zombie movies can be boring, and if you've seen a bad one, I'm willing to bet that it focuses on the zombies too much. No no, a zombie movie is not about the zombies; it's really about the people and how they react to them. Personally, I think a T-Rex is much more interesting, but if that's all you've got, it's far from enough. The big guy is just another Michael Myers; he's taller, and he eats his victims but he does the same job.
Kudos to Steven, Crichton and the rest for presenting a well-layered cake. I'm obviously hungry, but the point is that the story is full and rich. It's not mind-blowing, but it really could have been worse. If the different dinos were the only selling points, we would have had half as much patience.
--------------------------------------
@ChannelSeals
See "Jurassic Park" on Netflix !
Next Week: "Jaws" !
No comments:
Post a Comment