Writing, Fridge Logic, and Plot Contrivances [Spoilers: All is Lost]

Recently posting in the Gravity thread and watching 'War of the Worlds' a couple days ago, I have been thinking about bad writing and plot contrivances.

The guys have done a great job of creating some terminology for discussing a lot of this (such as 'magic bean'). But, knowing my own thoughts while viewing movies, I'm wondering if a couple new terms might be useful to me for describing problems I have with some/many movies. I'll try to lay out my thoughts using as few movies as possible. [Edit] Clearly not few words.

1. In 'All is Lost', Robert Redford's boat hits a floating shipping container. This isn't a magic bean. But, it kind of is. The odds are incredibly low for such an event. We give it a pass because it's actually a kind of initial event or catalyst for the plot. I've been in a lot of English classes (including full semesters each of Shakespear, the Bible as literature and Science Fiction) and neither I nor Google seem able to recall if this event has a name. Regardless, I feel the more unlikely the initial event, the less I can suspend my disbelief for future, unlikely events. In short, you get one magic bean; Do you also get one highly-improbable event?

2. In 'Mission to Mars', Tim Robbins needs to connect a lifeline to a capsule so the crew can reach the surface. He succeeds. He also doesn't secure himself. As a result, he drifts towards Mars to die. There is no 'Fridge Logic' here. Maybe it could happen as depicted on screen. My first thought, though, is: What astronaut doesn't tether himself? It is a constant in space, right? Drilled into their heads with a para-military regularity. He has a line to connect, he would connect himself to it. If he connects the line, he is automatically also connected. What astronaut would trust to a hand grip; through a space suit; after an impact; at speed? It boggles my mind. But, it is not Fridge Logic. Just a very unlikely and kind of nonsensical event. My biggest problem with it is that there are consequences: the death of a character. The small, unlikely event is tied to the death of the character and makes me feel the entire situation is contrived. But, it's an emergency and high stress. Is this a baby contrivance? How about the nearly identical layout of the scene in Gravity? George Clooney didn't have to get tangled in a parachute. There are odds involved in something like that. Maybe even training conducted to recognize or avoid it. Since it leads, inexorably, to the death of the character, the tangling is important. Is it a contrivance or reasonable or something else?

To me, it feels like things are more contrived when they are more obvious or have less set-up time. If someone dies as an immediate result of a long-odds event, I can get annoyed. But, when Doc Holiday dies of a health condition he's had for the entirety of Tombstone, I am ok. Someone is still trying to manipulate my emotions, but it's somehow different for me. The idea of time and set-up leads me to:

3. In 'All is Lost', Robert Redford is sailing the ocean. Alone. Anyone who knows anything about small vessel sailing knows there is a huge difference between sailing with a crew and sailing alone. Alone, there are things you just have to do or you will die. Robert Redford's character, from the outset is set to die. Moreover, he does not do the things he needs to do to survive. [Spoiler] It's why he ends up on a raft. The biggest and, to me, most obvious issue is the radio. If my cellphone stops working, I'll ask to borrow one or use a pay phone. Hundreds of miles from another human, Robert Redford can't do that in the movie. When he sees the boat is flooding, he needs to move the radio. He walks past it repeatedly and does nothing. Anyone sailing like was should have a small, waterproof lockbox with a back-up radio. He does not have any backup. He also doesn't have: a few lengths of lumber for emergency hull repair, fabric for sail repair, or even a handle for his bilge pump. None of these shortfalls are fridge logic. There's really no dialogue so we don't get to know the character's past. What we glean about the man is mostly conjecture. But, crash + no backup radio + no patching lumber + no pump handle = I am annoyed and kind of want the guy to die. He has failed at living repeatedly in what we should all understand is a dangerous situation. Am I being an ass? A government or union boat would ship with all of those things and at least one extra crew, right? Is there a name for "the unlikely stacks to such a height as to be preposterous"? Or, "the supposed protagonist earned death but survived"?

I think everyone understand the need to suspend disbelief and everyone can feel the most clumsy attempts to manipulate their emotions or back-fill a plot hole. The questions I'm asking, I know, are more nit-picky to the majority of the viewing public. But, they make the difference between enjoying a movie and not, for me.

I sincerely apologize if I've wasted your time,
John

Last edited by Jp12x (2014-05-20 16:21:38)