misc Another question on story telling and the audience.

I like to get everyone's thoughts on this.

I've already said that my type of science fiction involves thought experiments, which would include intellectual discussions. One issue going through the genre is the nature of a Creator - call him "God" if you will - and how religion and science interact. And a related problem that comes through is the issue of falsifiability - in other words, if a miracle happens, it's the work of the Creator, as opposed to some unknown scientific phenomenon. So an atheist would say, "No, that's not a miracle; it's just physics in action." So, no matter what, the atheist would say that.

This then cannot be falsified, because, the atheist can always say that. And, yes, the same would be true of the believer - theist - who would say there is a higher power, regardless of the evidence or lack thereof. I've gone through this debate many times during my college years, and it's something I want to bring to my writing.

Here is my question, then.

If my character says, "Yes, but that it cannot be falsified, because, no matter what we say, you'll say that." That would refer to the "falsifiability hypothesis" by Karl Popper, which I learned about as an undergrad. There's also the "verifiability hypothesis", which is the flip side of falsification. Anyway, if and when this episode is shown, on streaming or cinema, the audience will quickly look it up on the internet - this is known as the "second screen phenomenon", which means, even as they watch TV, they use their laptops to figure the background behind the story.

How does that help or hurt my story? By the way, thanks for helping me in my previous posts.
 
if and when this episode is shown, on streaming or cinema, the audience will quickly ... use their laptops to figure the background behind the story.

How does that help or hurt my story?
:hmm: Probably no more or less than when I look up an unfamiliar phrase used in any other film, or an actor's nationality to figure out if they're speaking with a native or learnt accent, or search for time zone info to see if it makes sense that it's daytime (or night-time) while two characters are talking to eache other in locations on opposite sides of the world.

I understand the question, but don't understand the point of the question.
 
Last edited:

onebaldman

Pro Member
indiePRO
Worrying about how your audience will research your film sounds like marketing level strategy. So all this depends on how far along you are in the professional sense with your film making. If you've made several films or shows, and know the entire process from start to finish, I think you could start playing around with the audience and make your film based on marketable research.

If this is your first film, or series, or experience in film making... Then I would focus more on telling a great story before worrying about marketing.

If your story is interesting enough, people might research it, especially if your film states that it is based on something.

If your story isn't interesting, they will probably move on to another film and forget your ideas entirely.

If your story is offensive to their personal values and interests, they will actively research everything they can to prove you wrong.

So it could go either way, depending on if you inspire or offend their sensibilities. Dabbling with Creator vs. Creation is going to probably split your audience. But in order to do that, you will need to have your own strong opinion to share when people start asking you why you made the story.
 
Last edited:

indietalk

IndieTalk Founder
Staff member
Admin
It depends if you as the director are making a message film (episode etc.), or, this is fiction and the sole beliefs of the characters. You can play it either way and that may be important.
 
The point of the question is that, as the characters discuss the issues, the audience will quickly figure out where the thought experiment came from. My concern is that they would say, "Oh, this debate has been going on for a hundred years - you've done nothing new, so ... droll!"

As I write this, I realize that my core audience would be well-read, and they understand that, as a writer, I get my story from my personal experience and the ideas out there so they wouldn't mind.

OK, let's put my question this way - if they do research and find out where I got my story, would that ruin their enjoyment of it? As a story teller, my paramount goal is their entertainment. I would presume not, especially after I've discussed this with all of you.
 
The point of the question is that, as the characters discuss the issues, the audience will quickly figure out where the thought experiment came from. My concern is that they would say, "Oh, this debate has been going on for a hundred years - you've done nothing new, so ... droll!"

As I write this, I realize that my core audience would be well-read, and they understand that, as a writer, I get my story from my personal experience and the ideas out there so they wouldn't mind.

OK, let's put my question this way - if they do research and find out where I got my story, would that ruin their enjoyment of it? As a story teller, my paramount goal is their entertainment. I would presume not, especially after I've discussed this with all of you.
My thoughts on this is that you gotta try and not be too “preachy.” Have these discussions and all in your film and make an interesting story to go along with it. Do what you wanna do but the issue with these “discussion” films is clear. They just seem a bit desperate or “preachy” with their views. It seems less of an entertaining experience and more like a lecture In philosophy. That makes people bored and makes them hate the film if it seems like a lecture. But if you can find a way to make your type of film entertaining, to keep the audience hooked, then It could be pulled off. In the end this is film and no matter what genre, what message, or discussion you go for it needs to be entertaining. Which means:
-Good story
-Good emotions
-Good music
-Good sound
-Production design

Everything, you get the gist. You have your topic, your discussion and what you wanna convey in ur film is clear in your mind. But it also has to be clear in the audience mind, and it has to be entertaining. There was once a film I watched about a crum of blooming sand on a concrete pavement. There was narration and it turned that crum of sand into a philosophical discussion. But it was interesting because the way it was filmed, the music, the narration quality, the writing and the story was amazing. The crum of sand had been seperated from its family (the beach) but eventually the wind blew it back into the beach. Then waves came along and pulled it into the sea. I’ll spare the details but it was a philosophical style film with a cool message and discussion about the nature of family-cause and affect-and unseen events. And it was portrayed interestingly.
So in the end that filmmaker made a single crum of blooming sand-ONE CRUM-Lol-interesting/captivating.
And at the end of the film was a website telling people to check out more about the discussion that was presented in the film. So I guess you can learn from that crum of sand film. On the other hand you could do a film with some people talking and discussing some sort of ethical ideas about atheists or creation and just have them talking bla bla bla and the audience will lose interest. You gotta find the best way possible to convey it. That’s the only way.
Sorry for such a long post lol
 
Last edited:
I don't think people need to google this age-old debate. Unless I am missing something.
Yeah people woudnt really google that debate anyways. Only the trolls who wanna diss others and little kids who think they know the answer to existence would lol. Just have the philosophical topic in your film, no need for a google Link but then again it’s up to you.
 
...if a miracle happens, it's the work of the Creator, as opposed to some unknown scientific phenomenon.
My personal POV on this "philosophical discussion" is that miracles are scientific phenomena, and that scientific phenomena are miracles; that "God" gave us intelligence and has created challenges and unknowns so we can stretch our minds and our hearts.

Take modern medicine - we can restart hearts with electronic paddles, reviving people from death. Or how about communications? We can communicate almost instantly with anyone in the world via the internet and cell phones. Who would have thought either of those possible 100 years ago?
 

onebaldman

Pro Member
indiePRO
So are you more afraid of people looking up the information and trying to debunk your book? Or are you actually trying to spawn an original idea from age old information?

Either way, there is only so much knowledge you currently have. Researching more doesn't hurt, but it does delay and mess with your original vision.

I know I changed my script and background story many times, as I gained more and more info during research. Similar to you, I was worried that folks would research the science, and be disappointed in the film.

Eventually I refined my knowledge of the science, and the back story evolved because of it. As Neil deGrasse Tyson kind of said, learn the actual science then bend it to fit your story.
 
Similar to you, I was worried that folks would research the science, and be disappointed in the film.
Yes, I was concerned that viewers would do the research then say they were disappointed because I took the ideas from the outside world, and I did nothing new. But I now realize the viewers would know that - my audience would be the geeks who read widely and they would know any writer doesn't just get his ideas out of nowhere, that he is a product of his time and the knowledge pool of his time. If the viewers enjoy my story, knowing the background would actually enjoy it more, because they know the context.

In other words, this is a non-issue.
 
Top