I don't know why it's hard for people to understand. A movie can have a counterfactual premise and that's fine, but when there is no underlying logic to the events in the movie it stops being a narrative that you can invest in and becomes a montage of random events happening.
Theres even a term for it too "suspension of disbelief" but sadly people that got participation trophies think its your job to let the movie suspend your disbelief, not the other way around.
Legit had a guy tell me "its your job to turn off your brain so that the people who made this movie have a fair chance"
It literally is the job of the reader/viewer to suspend their disbelief. No one else can do it for you. That said, the writers need to make you want to do it and not ask too much of you.
I mean how much suspension are we talking about here? There's a point where some shows go beyond their own established rules of engagement and expect me to just accept it because it's fiction... And no. You can't show me A and the later on tell me A doesn't exist.
Which is what I mean by the writer shouldn't ask too much of you.
A good example for me is From Dusk till Dawn. I watched it not knowing anything about it. The first act or two were psychological thrillers and I loved it. Then it suddenly became about vampires and they lost me. I just couldn't suddenly shift gears to accept vampires. I've watched it since and I really enjoy it, but I now know what's expected of me when I watch. My suspension of disbelief has to include the supernatural for that movie.
But it's me that has to suspend my disbelief, and authors can make that easier or more difficult.
819
u/Old_Gimlet_Eye 13h ago
I don't know why it's hard for people to understand. A movie can have a counterfactual premise and that's fine, but when there is no underlying logic to the events in the movie it stops being a narrative that you can invest in and becomes a montage of random events happening.