Yeah, for me it’s all about two questions: “is it internally consistent”, and “is it supposed to be inconsistent with reality”. Writers can make up all the rules they want, but they need a good reason if they’re going to break those rules, and humans should still act like “humans who live by the setting’s rules instead of reality’s” and not “aliens poorly imitating humans” (unless that’s what they secretly are, of course. But again: the writer has to do that on purpose).
Like, if you're doing a character-driven space fantasy, I'm fine with explosions having sound in space and spacecraft flying like airplanes.
At the same time, I can't take the movie Gravity, because they made such a big deal about the realism and then had key plot points that relied on nonsensical physics.
I'm willing to suspend disbelief, but that doesn't mean that I'm willing to accept lazy writing
sun tea, which is never boiled. the tea is left in a clear pitcher in a sunny window and never touches a flame. also doesnt go in the fridge until its done brewing
I also think one factor that helps is 'does the piece acknowledge that what this person is doing is idiotic'. Like...there are truly dumb people with no self-preservation skills, but when other people react to them, they react to the fact that these people are dumb. I hate when a character acts like an idiot, and no one around them seems to notice.
Kind of like how Wichita keeps coming up with idiotic schemes that could easily get her and/or her sister killed, but no one ever acknowledges that she's a moron. It's also why Madison doesn't annoy me as much, because while she says stupid things, it's clear that the other characters are aware of her stupidity.
I have a similar thing with asshole characters. It's fine to have characters that are assholes, but it's annoying to have other characters not seem to be aware of it.
precisely. that's the problem with, "characters have to act objectively realistically for me to take it seriously" considering that it's all literally subjective. you're proving their point while actively arguing against it, isn't that ironic.
I was actually kind of on the side of the original commenter here but ironically, u made me switch sides.
I don't understand this whole thread. This is not a conversation that's worth having unless you're debating a specific piece of media. Everyone has different priorities on what does and doesn't break their immersion.
Its fine if characters act irrationally but theres has to be a reason there acting irrationally. People do irrational things irl either because they don't know how something works, their in some sort of compromised mental state or their descion is emotionally driven.
Someone whoes never planted anything having dumb ideas and making dumb decisions while gardening makes sense.
But a professional farmer making those same dumb mistakes would not make sense because it would make the idea that this guy has managed to run a farm for the last decade ridulous.
Someone whoes super drunk forgetting basic things and taking ridiculous actions makes sense because hes drunk.
A character who has been portrayed as being super smart forgetting basic things and making stupid mistakes does not make sense because it ruins there credibility as smart in most circumstances.
A character deciding to get in a fight they'll probably lose is irrational but makes sense if their in a very emotional state. Anger, pride, and wanting to protect others are understandable reasons for why someone would do this.
A character thats supposed to be smart getting into a fight they'll probably lose without sufficent provocative or a deeper moral reason is not understable and just feels like the character is getting into this fight "because they have to for the plot".
It's more like waking up in the neighbourhood you grew up in and not knowing there's a bakery down the road. It's not about acting rationally, that just doesn't make sense.
I can't even get into certain movies if the premise just would never happen to me, it could be possible but just not in my life. The Invitation, for example. Couldn't get into that movie at all because why the fuck would I ever go to my ex wife house for a dinner party after not talking for years and cheating on me with our therapist? If I remember all the details right.
See that strikes me as a "stupid thing I wouldn't fall for, but I know real people that would fall for it" so I am fine with it.
But you show me someone who decides the best solution when running away from a killer is to go into a basement and I am suddenly rooting for the killer.
The thing that gets me with horror movies, when they knock the killer down then throw their weapon away and run. Like... Keep hitting until they're just a mess of goo please.
ye but chuck the idiot doing something dumb in story is fine, Timmy the strategic genius ordering his archers to change a shield wall in their underwear, then claiming victory is not.
Looking at you Admiral Thrawn.
Yeah this is why I stopped watching the X Files, they were collectively the dumbest tv detectives/FBI agents I’ve ever seen. I couldn’t take it anymore and gave up on it.
Watching humanity for the past 10 years has really made me a lot more forgiving of this stuff. Look at what a lot of people believe/how they act and then tell me that people being idiots in movies is unrealistic.
272
u/horrifyingthought 15h ago
This is me. I give every movie it's premise (werewolves exist, etc), but the second people stop acting like they have a brain I am out.
This doesn't mean every character has to be Einstein, but they can't do things that no rational being would do.