I.R Joey
11-05-2003, 01:30 AM
Welly, welly, well just this week as I was going through my college bookstore I came across the book "Jump the Shark" by Jon Mein. For those of you not familiar with the term jumping the shark, it is in effect when a good show sells out, and becomes a shell of its former self. Some of the most commen ways to jump the shark are.
1. Having a charecter become pregnant.
2. It was all a dream (Dallas fans ;) .)
3. New charecters.
4. Special guest stars.
5. Charecters who are attracted to one another admiting it and thus breaking up all the secual tension that had made the show dramatic.
In my opinion shows usually jump the shark when they deviate to far from the themes, premises, and ideas that made them appealing in the first place. When this happens we see that charecters begin to do things that we know they wouldn't, the storys become more contrived, and we are left shaking our heads wondering if this is the same show that captivated us. It is easy for us to pass of blame for this on mindless executives, and it sometimes is their fault, but sometimes burned out writers and egotistical actors can be just as much at fault.
Anyhow as I reflected on what I had read I began to think about an animated series I myself was writing, a story that I hoped to one day pitch. In a moment of self epiphany I became aware of the fact that I myself had done many of these things in my story (A wedding, two deaths, two pregnanices, one person admiting their love for another, adding a blind person, and another main charecter.) I honestly began doubt my own writing abilities had I fallen into that same web of cliches that had trapped so many others? As I thought about these things however, and I analyzed my work I found myself being of the opinion that much of my writing after these "events" was actually better then the stuff before. However, I still I fear that I'm to close to my work to make an honest judgement, even though I'm usually pretty brutal in my self reviewing.
The story is in the middle of what one might consider its second season (by the time its done it'll probably be forty-something eps) and looking forward I see several more shark bait moments including dealing with abusive parents, giving birth, and people with terminal illness. It's tough.
But then I also began to think about the legitamacy of the idea of jumping the shark itself. I mean it seems people complain when things change, yet they also complain when things don't change. I mean isn't the essence of a good story often how dynamic it is, how we see the charecters change? Yes it can change the dynamic of things, but I thought we were suppouse to like that kind of evolution...or should I say progresiveness.
Anyway I guess the point of this post is to ask the question. How does one walk that line between stagnation, and to many changes?
P.S Yes I do think to much, and overanalyze things, my thought process is weird. I make things sound more pompus and important then they really are :p Oh well.
1. Having a charecter become pregnant.
2. It was all a dream (Dallas fans ;) .)
3. New charecters.
4. Special guest stars.
5. Charecters who are attracted to one another admiting it and thus breaking up all the secual tension that had made the show dramatic.
In my opinion shows usually jump the shark when they deviate to far from the themes, premises, and ideas that made them appealing in the first place. When this happens we see that charecters begin to do things that we know they wouldn't, the storys become more contrived, and we are left shaking our heads wondering if this is the same show that captivated us. It is easy for us to pass of blame for this on mindless executives, and it sometimes is their fault, but sometimes burned out writers and egotistical actors can be just as much at fault.
Anyhow as I reflected on what I had read I began to think about an animated series I myself was writing, a story that I hoped to one day pitch. In a moment of self epiphany I became aware of the fact that I myself had done many of these things in my story (A wedding, two deaths, two pregnanices, one person admiting their love for another, adding a blind person, and another main charecter.) I honestly began doubt my own writing abilities had I fallen into that same web of cliches that had trapped so many others? As I thought about these things however, and I analyzed my work I found myself being of the opinion that much of my writing after these "events" was actually better then the stuff before. However, I still I fear that I'm to close to my work to make an honest judgement, even though I'm usually pretty brutal in my self reviewing.
The story is in the middle of what one might consider its second season (by the time its done it'll probably be forty-something eps) and looking forward I see several more shark bait moments including dealing with abusive parents, giving birth, and people with terminal illness. It's tough.
But then I also began to think about the legitamacy of the idea of jumping the shark itself. I mean it seems people complain when things change, yet they also complain when things don't change. I mean isn't the essence of a good story often how dynamic it is, how we see the charecters change? Yes it can change the dynamic of things, but I thought we were suppouse to like that kind of evolution...or should I say progresiveness.
Anyway I guess the point of this post is to ask the question. How does one walk that line between stagnation, and to many changes?
P.S Yes I do think to much, and overanalyze things, my thought process is weird. I make things sound more pompus and important then they really are :p Oh well.