• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

JJ Abrams and his brand of storytelling

Ryan Thomas Riddle

Ryan Thomas Riddle

Vice Admiral
Admiral
I didn't want to hijack Lapis Exilis's thread, so I just brought out her quote.

Lapis Exilis said:
When it comes to JJ Abrams' creative work, not much of it has held my attention. From what I understand about it, he's good at hooks but not so great at resolution. At least according to the few fans of Lost that I know who are quite frustrated with the series' direction.
Click to expand...

The lack of resolution is because JJ Abrams believes in the "Mystery Box," which he discussed in his TED speech.

Here is all 18 minutes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpjVgF5JDq8

Let's speculate as to what that mystery is that won't be resolved in his Trek. In MI:III, it was the McGuffin. What will it be in Star Trek ('09)?
 
middyseafort said:
I didn't want to hijack Lapis Exilis's thread, so I just brought out her quote.

Lapis Exilis said:
When it comes to JJ Abrams' creative work, not much of it has held my attention. From what I understand about it, he's good at hooks but not so great at resolution. At least according to the few fans of Lost that I know who are quite frustrated with the series' direction.
Click to expand...

The lack of resolution is because JJ Abrams believes in the "Mystery Box," which he discussed in his TED speech.

Here is all 18 minutes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpjVgF5JDq8

Let's speculate as to what that mystery is that won't be resolved in his Trek. In MI:III, it was the McGuffin. What will it be in Star Trek ('09)?
Click to expand...

If he does that thing like in MI:3 where he gets you interested in a mystery and doesn't tell you what it is like with the Rabbit's foot I will hunt Abrams down and kick his ass. That was my only problem with Mission Impossible 3. Other than that Abrams can do what ever he wants in this movie.
 
It's all about showmanship, leaving the audience wanting more. George Costanza learned that lesson as seen in the two successive meetings in this scene starting at 1:09.
 
Starship Polaris said:
It's called a "mcguffin" or "macguffin." Hitchcock liked the gimmick a lot, and "The Maltese Falcon" is built around it. ;)
Click to expand...


A Macguffin isn't always a mystery box. The letters of transit in Casablanca are a Macguffin, but there's nothing mysterious or unknown about them (except possibly how a cowardly little toad like Ugarte managed to kill the couriers that had them originally).
 
It annoyed me in Twin Peaks. Also, I do have some reservations about the movie, mostly because I have never been able to get into Lost.
 
seigezunt said:
It annoyed me in Twin Peaks.
Click to expand...

The mystery box can be a real gamble. Some mysteries are intriguing and there's enough development around them for the audience to be able to develop theories and have some fun arguing. Some mysteries are undercooked and just end up being frustrating. Some mysteries are the product of a creator (like David Lynch) trying too hard (ooo, look how weird and mysterious this is - and this - and this - and, explanation? screw you, enjoy the weeeeeiiiirrddnessssssss, and watch the dancing midget!) and some are the product of creator having a great idea for an intriguing mystery but not really knowing where s/he is going with it. It's a little bit of lightning in a bottle - some work, some don't.

As for the Maltese Falcon, by the end everyone knew what it was, just not where the real one was, so I'm not sure it even qualifies as a mystery box.
 
Not sure why people are bothered about the Macguffin in MI:3 - the characters themselves acknowledge that it's unimportant (and almost wink at the audience while doing it).
 
JoeZhang said:
Not sure why people are bothered about the Macguffin in MI:3 - the characters themselves acknowledge that it's unimportant (and almost wink at the audience while doing it).
Click to expand...

Unimportant the damn thing was supposted to be used in some huge terrorist attack to cause the US to conqure the Middle East, I consider that pretty important.

If I were Hunt and Fishburne's character had pulled that if you come back to work for us I'll tell you what the thing that was ultimately the cause for me nearly possibly killing you is, I would have probably punched him in the face.
 
Hartzilla2007 said:
JoeZhang said:
Not sure why people are bothered about the Macguffin in MI:3 - the characters themselves acknowledge that it's unimportant (and almost wink at the audience while doing it).
Click to expand...

Unimportant the damn thing was supposted to be used in some huge terrorist attack to cause the US to conqure the Middle East, I consider that pretty important.

If I were Hunt and Fishburne's character had pulled that if you come back to work for us I'll tell you what the thing that was ultimately the cause for me nearly possibly killing you is, I would have probably punched him in the face.
Click to expand...

eh? what does it matter if it's a quantum spodolizer or a flastdon blastatorn? The whole point of the McGuffin is that beyond setting the story in motion (We must stop this happening!) that it's actually unimportant, it doesn't do anything in the story or change the course of the story.
 
Pulp Fiction had a pretty famous MacGuffin, too.

Self-sealing stem bolts in DS9 could qualify, I suppose. The characters always mention them in passing, but they never talk about what they actually do. Shipments of them tend to have some value.
 
JoeZhang said:
Hartzilla2007 said:
JoeZhang said:
Not sure why people are bothered about the Macguffin in MI:3 - the characters themselves acknowledge that it's unimportant (and almost wink at the audience while doing it).
Click to expand...

Unimportant the damn thing was supposted to be used in some huge terrorist attack to cause the US to conqure the Middle East, I consider that pretty important.

If I were Hunt and Fishburne's character had pulled that if you come back to work for us I'll tell you what the thing that was ultimately the cause for me nearly possibly killing you is, I would have probably punched him in the face.
Click to expand...

eh? what does it matter if it's a quantum spodolizer or a flastdon blastatorn? The whole point of the McGuffin is that beyond setting the story in motion (We must stop this happening!) that it's actually unimportant, it doesn't do anything in the story or change the course of the story.
Click to expand...

Well its just that in the last two movies we were told what the main characters were on the mission to get and I feel a little cheated that this wasn't the case in MI:3
 
Cyke101 said:
Pulp Fiction had a pretty famous MacGuffin, too.
Click to expand...
I liked how Roger Ebert theorized that the brief case in Pulp Fiction was also the one in Ronin, and that this goddamned brief case just kept going round and round starting the plots of movies and getting people killed. Next to the grey alien, the brief case may be the most frequently recurring villain in all of film.
 
What's important about a MacGuffin is that what it is isn't important. :lol:

IOW, whether it's a mystery box or a statuette of a black bird, its importance is that its existence motivates the behavior of the characters - not what it actually is or can do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top