FSM # 24: God, I’m so tired of flashbacks and backstories!
- This topic has 24 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I appreciate these narrative mechanisms in literature, but I’ve never enjoyed them in film or TV. In the last two decades, we’ve experienced a Golden Age of TV in terms of quality writing and mise-en-scene. But at the same time, there has been this insistance on doing constant flashbacks and backstories to “flesh out the characters”. For me, they’ve always taken me right out of it, like a Brechtian verfremdungseffect. First of all, I prefer to stay in the moment, to absorb the settings and narrative as they unfold in the presence. Second, I like to create my own back stories in my mind for the characters as witnessed through their behaviour and dialogue. I don’t need constant exposition. Show, don’t tell.
The latest “offender” in this regard is the new version of THE STAND. I’ve read King’s novel, and appreciate all the back stories there, but in TV format, it becomes sluggish and even confusing. I could list like a million other films and TV shows that have done the same recently (I mean, flashbacks themselves are not a NEW phenomenon, but they have become particularly prevalent in the Golden Age of TV).
Anyone else share this frustration?
I should add that this frustration became current again while recently watching through the Disney+ series PARADISE, among others.
No such frustration on my part, at all. I don’t mind flashbacks and backstories any more or any less than any other filmic device, it just depends on how they are handled. I mean, some of what I consider to be among the greatest movies of all time are practically all flashback (I’m thinking of Citizen Kane and Sunset Boulevard here). I have neither adversity nor special fondness for any particular narrative technique, it’s the result what counts for me. I don’t watch many TV series though, perhaps the examples you mention don’t work, I don’t know. But I have no adversity to any filmic device as such.
I also don’t have any adversity towards flashbacks as a narrative device (as such), but I do have an issue with its proliferation in television. It’s become a crutch.
I was a big fan of LOST (in general) which did put this to the extreme with flashbacks and flashforwards. But I am very tired of reboots and endless sequels. But especially prequels of things you never wanted to have told exactly as it was more fun to not “know” everything. I like to call the “disease” prequelities or rebootpresequelitis.
As you describe this, Thor, I wonder why you like Solo A Star Wars Story as this is just one long more or less superfluous back story.
A really painful example I found the second season of The Last Of Us. It starts some time later after season one. You see that the relation of the protagonists deteriorated. You get a few hints here and there why that is, and that was fine with me. I got, that’s the situation. Now the story can go on. But more or less after accepting this as the premise of the next story the season used the rest of the time explaining in flashbacks how it came to that situation. But there I didn’t want to know anymore. Something happene. Fine. I don’t need to know. Go on.
If you wanna tell me how it came to this don’t start with the ending.
As you describe this, Thor, I wonder why you like Solo A Star Wars Story as this is just one long more or less superfluous back story.
Yes, but it takes place in “real time”. No flashbacks that I can think of.
I agree on THE LAST OF US. Yet another example with wonderful intensity in the presence, watered out by endless flashbacks.
I agree that some of modern day “backstories” are not only completely unnecessary, but actually flatten what might have been a deeper, round character, because these backstories tend to just “explain” everything and make “simple” characters out of complex characters. Perhaps that’s the problem with some backstories in some of modern day stories, franchises, TV series… they use flashbacks and backstories to “explain” the character, which may be what Thor rightfully annoys, I’m with you there. I think a good flashback or backstory should reveal something, perhaps put a completely new and different spin on a character or situation, rather than just “explain” the character.
I really feared they were going to “answer” the question whether Deckard is perhaps an android himself in Blade Runner 2049, because that would be totally at odds with what Blade Runner (1982) was about: about questions rather than answers. They didn’t in the end, though I did not even like how Blade Runner 2049 grabbed the idea just to circle and dance around it and toy with the audience.
My prime example is always actually Star Wars for unncessary back stories: Did we really neeed to know how Darth Vader became Darth Vader? I mean besides that the journey of Annakin turning to the dark side was really not convincing or not convincingly told at all. For me at least… It would have been much more interesting to not know at all.
I suppose we didn’t need it, but I don’t mind it. I should have specified that I have no issue with backstories or prequels as such, if the universe is rich enough to support it, which STAR WARS certainly is. But I prefer stories that are (mostly) played out in the presence. It’s the widespread narrative mechanism I have an issue with, not telling more stories within a fictional universe.
I should have specified that I have no issue with backstories or prequels as such, if the universe is rich enough to support it, which STAR WARS certainly is
I did get that and in general I follow that. But I think especially with an iconic villian like Darth Vader it harms that status to tell how exactly he got to be. A little more mystery to things like that I find more exiting actually.
The issue of prequels and their backstories within is kind of a separate topic, but anyway:
I’m torn on that. As we’ve discussed in the ALIEN thread, the prequels certainly robbed some of the mystery of the The Pilot of the first film, but it added some super interesting philosophical questions in return.
A hidden part of me wants to see an origin story for the emperor/Palpatine in STAR WARS, but I’m often too scared to say it out loud, because most people won’t. After all, it can result in disaster, which the Hannibal origin film did.
My prime example is always actually Star Wars for unncessary back stories: Did we really neeed to know how Darth Vader became Darth Vader?
Star Wars is a special case… I really love(d) Star Wars
Oh, I could write an essay about Star Wars. Though it’s Easter Saturday, traditionally, we just have the family over and BBQ, so I just spend the day getting drinks and water and lemonade and getting our Broil King ready from winter storage… and we’re still having guests over. (I just snuck into my office to check on something else and ended up posting here).
Oh, I could write an essay about Star Wars. Though it’s Easter Saturday, traditionally, we just have the family over and BBQ, so I just spend the day getting drinks and water and lemonade and getting our Broil King ready from winter storage… and we’re still having guests over. (I just snuck into my office to check on something else and ended up posting here).
Haha. One of my favourite posts of the board so far. Reality, man.
A hidden part of me wants to see an origin story for the emperor/Palpatine in STAR WARS, but I’m often too scared to say it out loud, because most people won’t. After all, it can result in disaster, which the Hannibal origin film did.
Or badly told like Anakin… Maybe if that would have been told so I could believe it I would have liked it…
Oh, I could write an essay about Star Wars.
You surely will then have more time to do the next days 😉
Biggest problem with these backstory flashbacks is probably that they often trivialize the character development by cutting it too short. While the development of the protagonist’s character took his whole lifetime, they are compressing it to one to three key events in flashbacks. As if this makes him what he is. Often this feels insufficient. When it’s badly made.
Watching my way through THE WALKING DEAD again, and even these have too many flashbacks. Enough already!
I am not that offended but don’t remember that many. Since I last year finally watched the last 5 seasons I think they have far less.
I was really looking forward to delving into the third season of SILO. Loved the first two, and especially their “here-and-now” presence, like that great opening episode of season 2, when Rebecca Ferguson is just exploring the second silo. But then in the first episode of season 3 just now, they’ve decided to opt for flashbacks to the present time, to explain how the intitial disaster happened 350 years ago. I assume that’s going to be the case for the remainder of the season as well.
*sigh*
Enough with the exposition already! Drags the tempo and feel down.
I appreciate these narrative mechanisms in literature, but I’ve never enjoyed them in film or TV. In the last two decades, we’ve experienced a Golden Age of TV in terms of quality writing and mise-en-scene. But at the same time, there has been this insistance on doing constant flashbacks and backstories to “flesh out the characters”. For me, they’ve always taken me right out of it, like a Brechtian verfremdungseffect. First of all, I prefer to stay in the moment, to absorb the settings and narrative as they unfold in the presence. Second, I like to create my own back stories in my mind for the characters as witnessed through their behaviour and dialogue. I don’t need constant exposition. Show, don’t tell.
I agree with every word you wrote here. To me, a flashback feels as if the movie suddenly stops and another movie starts. The only good way to avoid this in a TV series is to devote an entire episode to backstory, thereby creating a short movie all on its own. Episode 6 of Dahmer was like that and it was the best TV of that year.
Yes. As with prequels. They’re their own thing, their own story. I’d had the same issue if they constantly used flashbacks within a prequel.
IF a prequel is its own thing, it’s fine. But I experienced a lot of prequels which mainly just tell the story which has already been explained in the original film. In that sense the Star Wars prequels are on the better side. But for example the X-Men prequels suffer from not really having anything to contribute to the overall story except contradicting and destroying storylines and characters from the original films.
It all depends on the situation. I agree that some franchises use flashbacks (and prequels, and whatnot) to explain and show backstories that should only be hinted at.
On the other hand, as I said, flashbacks can be masterfully integrated into the story, they can be revealing (like ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE WEST), or the flash forward and backward can heighten the story (like Leone’s original 4 hour cut of ONCE UPON A TIME IN AMERICA with lots of flashbacks is much better cut than the truncated US chronological cut), or they can BE the story (like AMADEUS or CITIZEN KANE), or they can even be essential to the story (like RASHOMON). So flashbacks are like any other device, if they are done well, great, if not, not. No movie is better or worse simply for using or not using flashbacks.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.