Is Technology Ruining Movies?
Can you hear me now?
First off, the question the headline poses has nothing to do with CGI or actual advancements in filmmaking. I am asking whether everyday technology seen in movies is ruining the ability for filmmakers to tell their stories? This involves cell phones, satellite technology, wireless signals, Internet, etc.
My biggest problem over the past few years involves cellular telephones. Everyone has a cell phone now and the movies mimic this advancement in technology, but it always seems to cause logic problems or moments I simply throw my hands in the air and say, "Not again."
One example I can think of off the top of my head — and I am sure many of you can think of others — involves the little seen thriller P2 released by Summit in 2007. In this film a woman is stalked by a crazy man in the bowels of a building parking garage. While down there she can't get any kind of cell phone signal until she finds a closed gate she can fit her arm through and, bingo, a signal! Of course it is at this moment she drops the phone and other stupidity follows, but it is the losing and finding of cell phone signals that can be so maddening. But would audiences accept a protagonist in trouble without their cell phone? I think so and would prefer they be written out of most every thriller ever made.
Another example that comes to mind is 2008's thriller The Strangers in which Liv Tyler's character's cell phone runs out of power. Wah-wah. So she decides to plug it in and wait for it to charge so she can make her call. Uh, is this the only cell phone you can't use while you have it plugged into an AC adapter? Stuff like this just burns me up. Again, just bail on the cell phone. Don't even introduce it into the equation.
I recently got to thinking about this again while watching the remake of The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 in which the transit command center looks more like Kennedy Space Center than what Walter Matthau was working with in 1974. Instead of simple technology and having to patch people in Denzel was operating on an entirely different system, one I don't think those money grubbing thieves at Microsoft could even come up with, or at least won't release to the public until 2025. What did it add to the story? Nothing but a sense of disbelief. Why is it these guys are working with systems NASA would be envious of just to run the subway system in New York City?
The other aspect was the use of Internet connectivity in the tunnels. I'm not sure what the bad guys hooked up down there, but suddenly we were up and running with a wireless connection and even had a little webcam that was then streamed online and allowed the cops to see what was going on on the subway. Such luck!
Speaking of the Internet, how about those moments in movies when the protagonist decides to do a little sleuthing of their own? Just who is my crazy stepmother? These moments inevitably lead us to a scene where Google is utilized and our lead is directed to a made up homepage where the entire story comes together. Ha, toldja he was a killer! Johnslistofkillers.com has all the details! Remember folks, when in doubt just hit up Google.
Of course, I can't completely abandon the fact we have become a technology dependent society as no one talks to anyone anymore as much as we send text messages in 140 characters or less back and forth while meeting anonymous stalkers on Craigslist. However, I think some movies have taken it to the next level and seem to think their audience doesn't realize how things work. They're wrong.
We know when a signal would be dropped. As a matter of fact there is a parking garage I frequent in Seattle that basically drains my phone if I leave it on as it looks for a signal, and no matter how much I walk around I'm not going to find one. I also know if I plug my phone into the wall I can use it no matter how low the battery is. As far as using Google as a research tool… well, I wouldn't exactly bring print-outs as Exhibits A and B in the court case.
As for these technological loop-holes such as a jury rigged wireless connection where there is no wireless signal. Sure, it could probably happen, and my local Radio Shack most likely has the equipment to do it, but isn't there another way to accomplish our goals? Do we need to really waste any time with the crossing of wires and checking the stock tickers while we are dealing with hostage negotiations underneath NYC?
I only wonder about these things because it seems so many of today's thrillers become instantly forgettable while so many of the older films are the ones we return to. In the days of rotary phones and drop spots there was so much more tension. Now we get a couple of characters asking if they are talking on an "encrypted line" or some higher-up telling people to get to work with a quick pan to fingers tapping away on a computer keyboard. By the way, what exactly are people typing into those keyboards that ends up solving any problems? Let's get some mouse work set to techno music from The Prodigy and really get wild. Movies have become so redundant nothing seems new anymore.
A cell phone looking for a signal isn't what creates tension, it's the dude chasing the person in the dark that is freaking us out. If we came to a movie expecting the protagonist could simply dial 911 and escape I am not sure anyone would ever show up at the box-office.
I don't know, just a thought…
Showing 20 Comments
~ PLEASE NOTE ~
If, in any way, your comment is an attack on the author of this post or a previous commenter, your comment will be deleted without question.
Add a New CommentNOTE: The Facebook login option has been disabled. We apologize for any inconvenience. |
Click to Read Our Commenting Rules & Guidelines
Hey, hey, hey, hey, hey.
Text messages are in 160 characters or less. Twitter is the one with the 140 character limit.
But seriously, I think that how films use technology is an attest to how well-written they are. If Google is used as a means to keep the plot going, then you know a movie is poorly written. For example, look at "Silent Hill" (the best looking video game movie in my opinion- as a film though it's lacking). I always found it dumb that instead of getting the daughter some psychological help or something, the mother (or is it the father? I don't remember that movie) just googles "Silent Hill" and voila, there it is and the location and everything. And so they went.
Um…ok.
The problem with writing technology (aside from carelessness) is time. Even if the project's been green lit, there's still well over a year between the final shooting draft and the release date. How is even the most educated and up to date writer supposed to compete with that kind of lag.
Example: 'Why didn't he just use the video option on his iPhone?' Cause when the script was written (or when the scene was shot) iPhone's didn't support video.
@Vince: The Google search might make for a boring story but the idea of finding the basic info online is sound. Do a search for "michael's bay" and you find a few sites referring to an old lumber town in northern Ontario built on top of a native settlement. Poltergeist reboot, anyone?
The overarching issue is that as communication gets faster, it also has less depth. Communicating in 140 characters isn't really saying anything, is it? So I think we're reacting to how shallow the storytelling is.
My other problem is that they use it as a crutch way too often. Let's see how here, how can we drum up suspense? Have her cell phone not work. Then people will start getting worried. It's an artificial way to provoke tension.
Anyway, good article.
The cellphone in The Departed should've been given a best supporting actor nomination.
In regards to the cell phone arguement, it does bug me that every film has to establish some sort of incident that either eliminates or hinders the possibility of using a phone but
"Again, just bail on the cell phone. Don’t even introduce it into the equation."
is rarely a valid option because of the echoes of "What none of these people have cell phones" heard through every theater in America.
Great article. I've been thinking about this too, but more specifically for TV. I like to say cellphone killed the sitcom. Every night I was Seinfeld at 10 and 1030 and I love it! Even though just about every episode can be solved by a text message pretty much. It's always more enjoyable to watch George speed off to see the bubble boy or Kramer getting lost on a short cut than to sit there and just say "that would never happen"
@HardRockZombie: Your point is valid, but without arguing too deep I would say audiences would be more willing to accept the fact the cell phone is just never brought up than if it was and coincidental mishaps happen when they try to use it since there are really only two major options: low battery or no signal. What it boils down to is a waste of storytelling time.
If people are asking, "Why didn't they have a cell phone?" I would think it would be more of one of those things they may ask others after the movie after having enjoyed it rather than during the movie, which takes them out of it completely. Of course, this is just an assumption. :)
I think The Strangers would have been better had it been set in the 80's, there is really no need to set it in modern times. There can't be a good thriller or horror set in "present time" the clocks should go back a solid twenty years or so for a good one. Even then that's wishful thinking.
@GregM: Greg, your example is a perfect reason as to why I don't like the Google search. Poltergeist did it without it so why would a new movie need to rely on it?
Of course, this also brings up the old school technique of people running off to the library to look up old newspaper clippings, which may actually be worse logically than Google. Who knows?
This is a stupid argument. Simply because there were bad commercial movies with plot holes before technology and there are films that don't bother mentioning technology that are great. It is up the film-maker and screenwriter to present either characters or plot or just a general mood that makes sense for an audience and works. Technology does not prevent that. It just makes it easier for a few idiots to write an action or horror script. They can just say "Ohh I know we will have a computer feed in the train", but there will always be good scripts and bad scripts and good films and bad ones. Now if you want too argue that CGI could ruin films as I love it, like america in the 70's and 40's and Europe/asia in the 50's and 60's then I would get behind that
Amazingly you actually saw P2- I did also and liked it! There is NO doubt that screenwriters are now fully aware with every scene they write if a cell phone will be part of it. It is annoying! Bad signal seems the easiest plot device to get out of that trap.
chuck
I understand the problem of cellphones in horror and thrillers, but how about in romantic comedies?
Nancy Meyers – SORRY DON'T THROW ROCKS AT ME – I think knows how to use phones and instant messaging well. Or at least it doesn't look too awkward when she writes a scene with those objects. It's an essential part of her movies, as much as they are crutches that she and her characters use. And it kinda shows how upper middle class they are.
Again, easy on the stones.
Some of the most aggravating moments in recent films occur when characters decide to start sending Instant Messages to friends or possibly murderers in recent slasher flicks. I can't think of anything more boring than staring at a movie screen, where the image on screen is that of a computer screen with IMs being exchanged.
Film is supposed to be an art. I don't have anything against incorporating new technologies into the medium as it reflects modern life, but there has to be some other way to relay the message to the audience other than watching a boring IM conversation that goes:
slacker123
ROFL i h8 my parentz
murderer666
Turn around!
STAB STAB STAB…
I can go on and on for hours about how text messaging, instant messaging and modern advancements in technological communication have ruined the English language, but this is not the forum for that.
@Paolo: Yeah I think almost every other genre benefits from technology, especially the romantic-comedy genre. It's mainly the thriller/horror that takes the biggest hit.
@Matt: Maybe not the '4m' (I had to) but check out the link in my name.
Hilarious piece, Brad. And can I add that it saps the drama out of a scene when the plot is advanced via a cell phone conversation, more common on TV cops shows than movies.
I have to add. Have you ever seen "The Way of the Gun"? It was made in 1999. There's a deliberately funny plot point concerning some hoodlum's goons trying to follow two inept kidnappers into the Mexican dessert, and they keep losing their cell phone signal. The actors give it just the right spin that shows the juxapositon of power and powerlessness that is typical of the humor of this film. At one point one of the kidnappers is standing at a pay phone trying to call in the ransom to a cell phone that keeps giving him a recording. Trust me, it's funny.
Reminds me of the Chloe character in Smallville who can even hack alien computers with her trusty PC, and who can forget how the earth was saved in independence day, thank god the aliens bought windows 95 or we would have bitten the dust.
@Patricia: Not always. The Wire not only used cell phones effectively to advance the story but it was also able to 'document' how the characters use of technology evolved as the story/series progressed.
@GregM: "The Wire" is the exception to almost any and all criticism directed at television programming.
(Thank you for not pointing out that I spelled "desert" as in dry, arid land, as "dessert" as in yummy confection. But for humor, picture the hoodlums and kidnappers driving into a chocolate covered sundae. More accurately, a Mexican chocolate covered sundae.)
A slightly different angle here, cell phones are ruining Cinema for me, every time I go to a movie I am distracted constantly by idiots using their cell-phones! Why? Stop it!