h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I quite agree with you that, in a story, you need to give your protagonist a reason for acting, then litter his, or her, way with obstacles.

But I think, in some films, the special effects outweigh the story. I watched Gravity with my husband the other day and we agreed the film amounted to striking special effects hung on a thin and improbable story. Even when we saw The Hobbit (part 2) I thought the dragon was great, but the filmakers have stretched out a relatively short book.


,

That's very true, isn't it? The film industry is in love with their CGI - and so, apparently, are a lot of filmgoers.

What I'm hungry for is story - and I suspect you are, too. If you can reduce the story to a postcard, don't tell it. I haven't seen 'The Hobbit' - and probably won't - but I saw a 'making of' clip, and it was all about the dragon. Big deal.

It's a sham when complex, interesting stories don't get the attention they deserve. SOmebody bleats about 'boring' and 'lack of production values'.

Go back and watch old episodes of 'Star Trek: The Next Generation'. Shot on sound stages, with limited effects. But the stories are psychologically complex. Or the old 'Twilight Zone' - one beautiful episode featured Agnes Moorehead, no dialogue, and some wind-up toy astronauts. Let me see if I can find it...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n99iNW9595o

Note: This was actually made before NASA took over.

Now compare that to the new movies.