Re: Caprica On SyFy: 1/22
Plot and character are the same thing. If you feel the show ran off the rails in latter seasons (and I agree with this opinion) it’s because the characters were, quite frankly, not as well realized.
Well, you're the writer and I'm just the audience member, but I tend to distinguish between the two. The plot, I think, is separate from the characters in that it represents the overall story of the show, rather than the development of each of the individual characters.
Let me put it this way. Pick up your average Sherlock Holmes story. Let's go with The Speckled Band, for example. You don't get a lot of character development in the story. The regular characters (Holmes and Watson) don't really change or develop as a result of anything they do, nor do they seem any different from the last umpteen adventures of theirs that you may have read. On the other hand, the plot about the crazed old man slowly murdering his daughters through the use of a trained snake, the particulars of which must be gradually discovered and uncovered by both the reader and teh characters, that tells a story. A plot. While it's dependent on the characters doing XYZ to solve the mystery, it's still pretty much all about revealing the mystery gradually. Uncovering clues which ultimately reveal a greater answer.
BSG -- apparently at the behest of the network -- included several "mystery" elements. Who are the human cylon models? What is the cylon plan? How the hell are all of these mysterious things happening and what's the explanation? Where did Head Six come from and then, suddenly, where did Head Baltar come from?
The final seasons address the human cylon thing -- and admittedly Moore had NO IDEA who the "final five" were until he got to the episode where he revealed the identity of four of them. His reason for choosing those four? He thought it'd make for interesting character arcs. So, not only did he not know what he'd do going into it, he didn't know where he'd go coming out of it.
That's just sloppy. That's making **** up on the fly and, I'm sorry, but when you're telling a story the way Galactica was advertised at the beginning of EVERY SINGLE EPISODE, there's just no excuse for that kind of flying by the seat of your pants. Were I the one writing the show, and were I the one who was tasked with creating a mystery of "What's the plan" and "Who are the cylons?" I'd have planned it out from day freakin' one. You can still play with the characters in between their initial introduction and the moment you reveal them to be cylons, but you gotta know who they are and where you're going with 'em. Moore admits he didn't do that. He just made it up as he went along.
As for the other mysteries, his answer is a cursory "It's god. Next question?" And yeah, you can look at the mysterious elements in the earliest seasons (IE: all the coincidences) to see other points where that happens, but I still think that the way the "it's God" thing is revealed was not handled particularly well. Classic case of mismanaging audience expectations. You can't set up a mystery whose answer is simply a mystery. "God" is unfathomable and could be/mean/stand for anything. "God" is also a very convenient answer for ANYTHING at that point which isn't resolved. "God did it and God wanted it this way." He might as well have just said "Well, it's a mystery," as the answer to the big mysteries. Which, really, isn't much of an answer at all. All it does is turn the whole mystery element of the show into a giant rooster-tease. Now, some may say "Ah ha! Brilliant artistry in defying convention!" And you know what? Maybe it is. But it's extremely unsatisfying and as I said, it totally mismanages the audiences expectations.
If at the end of a Sherlock Holmes story, Holmes simply turned to Watson and said "Bugger me, Watson, I've no idea what the truth was. I suppose it's a mystery..." do you think those stories would have survived this long?
My other gripe with it is that it seems too tossed off. It's like Moore couldn't be bothered to answer the mysteries, or he'd made them so elaborate and built them up so much that he realized he'd never be able to deliver a satisfying answer, so he simply sidestepped it and forestalled any further discussion of the matter. "God did it. Now **** off. I have characters to write, stupid."
It’s not hard to figure out why this happened; as Ron Moore began to spend more time on other projects (i.e. developing Caprica) he was required to spend less time on the day-to-day writing of BS:G. And the characters suffered.
Fortunately Moore re-engaged in the creative process for the climax, and the result, although controversial, is as well written as anything the series ever produced.
For the characters, yes. Very satisfying. Lee and Kara's juxtaposed sequences from very early in their relationship against their final goodbye, Adama's loneliness on top of the mountain, Baltar's final redemption, all of that was brilliant and beautiful and highly satisfying. But the whole "God did it" aspect of the mysteries and "How the hell did we get here" bit? Moore might have just as well said "Because I said so."
So, again, Moore can blame the studios all he wants. He can say "Oh, but viewers are just sheep who have been trained to want neat conclusions and happy endings." And you know what my response is? "**** you. That's a cop-out answer if ever I heard one. By the way, you can't plot worth a damn."
Maybe Moore NEVER wanted to do the whole "mystery" thing. Maybe Moore always was held back by the studio in terms of emphasizing the mystical aspects of the show in a way that'd make it clear that "No, seriously GOD is doing ALL of this." Maybe he hates being constrained by some defined endpoint because he feels it limits his ability to write believable characters, and maybe his ability really IS restrained by that.
But I still don't cut him any slack for how he manages the audience with that stuff. Joss Whedon and his writing team also have created very human, very well defined characters. AND they know how to manage a plot. Even if they don't give the audience the neat little package wrapped up with a bow, they damn sure don't give 'em nothing but a rooster-tease (unless a show gets canceled early) by saying "Well, it's a mystery" at the end of things.
J. Michael Stracynski wrote the vast majority of the episodes of Babylon 5 and, while I'd say his characters are a good bit broader and less nuanced than what you see in BSG, he absolutely knew how to plot METICULOUSLY so that you'd get from A to B to C in a natural way. And while his final episode has some "happy ending" elements to it, it also does things that audiences probably wouldn't say "Yes, do that. We want to see that."
My point? You can defy convention while still offering an emotionally satisfying conclusion to your plot. You can play with the audience's expectations while still giving them solutions that "fit" and don't come across as "Couldn't be bothered. I have other **** to do." Finally, it IS possible to manage plotlines AND create believable characters. It's possible to know at any point in the story where you are, how you got there, and where you're going if you take the time to plan ahead early in the game. Moore didn't do that, and that, in my opinion, was his biggest failing in BSG. Great characters, **** plot resolution.
