Stories are moving away from focusing on a single plot and moving towards creating entire worlds that fans can explore through different media. "[S]torytelling has become the art of world building, as artists create compelling environments that cannot be fully explored or exhausted within a single work or even a single medium," Jenkins describes (116). He encourages suspicion for claims that these changes mark the collapse of storytelling. More accurately, storytelling is evolving with the development of new story structures, which "create complexity by expanding the range of narrative possibility rather than pursuing a single path with a beginning, middle, and end." Albeit movies might feel a bit disjointed or incomplete, but these fragments allow consumers to make links "on their own time and in their own ways" (121).
I'm skeptical of transmedia stories. A person needs to connect the dots across multiple platforms but the plot lacks a clear beginning; where do you start? EA's Neil Young explains,
"The more layers you put on something, the smaller the market. You are requiring people to intentionally invest more time... Maybe it starts with a game and then a film and then television. You are building a relationship with the world rather than trying to put it all out there at once" (130).In my opinion, Young is right to worry that some people, including myself, will reject such a massive time commitment. Can the transmedia format catch on when it demands so much from consumers?
Jenkins cites plenty of examples that show the disadvantages of transmedia stories. Movie critics who, unaware of Niobe's character in the game Enter the Matrix, disapprove of Niobe's prominent role in The Matrix Revolutions. High school students who struggle to glean meaning from The Odyssey. Parents and grandparents who watch X-Men with confused faces. The pool of people who show devotion to the narrative dramatically shrinks for transmedia stories, which warrants the question: is it even possible for someone to fully appreciate a transmedia story? Jenkins himself relied on the collective intelligence of Matrix fans in writing this chapter. He admits that a single person cannot contain all the knowledge surrounding the Matrix, or any transmedia world for that matter; I can't decide, is this a good or bad thing? I recognize that the the story is deeper and the intellectual or emotional pay-off is greater, but I simply don't care enough to take time away from my family, friends, academics, or hobbies to put towards becoming a hardcore Matrix fan. I wonder, do the rest of you agree or am I missing out on an enriching cultural experience?
Great post! I agree with some of your skepticism of transmedia storytelling. For example it seems like it only works in particular genres of science fiction and fantasy in which people are already predisposed toward searching out more information about the creation.
ReplyDeleteIt also seems like Jenkins is leaving out the opposite trend which has also emerged, in which people just want short tiny clips that aren't connected to anything at all like on youtube. It also seems like there are tons of people who just watched the matrix movies without doing more than that and had a decent experience with the film. So it appears a little disingenuous to be characterizing this as a trend writ large within convergence culture and the as an entire new hollywood style, rather than just a small niche of people who are obsessed with the Matrix.
I think that you're right, but I also wonder about whether it is a good or bad thing. I.e. is the matrix and the ways people are invested in its every aspect, distracting people from more important struggles.
It looks like transmedia storytelling will have to be for a niche market-- as you say, not everyone is willing to spend the time to hunt down all the parts. As with so many other things, it will boil down to priorities-- those who are huge fans of (insert movie here) will be willing to search things out; those who aren't will move on to something they'd rather spend their time on. If moviemakers are willing to have a small but committed audience, then the transmedia storytelling might be worth it for them.
ReplyDeleteI agree that transmedia story telling is really only for a specific limited market. While the creators of transmedia films, like The Matrix, may have grossed a fair amount of profit from their films it seems to be that they could have profited further by not cutting out a large percentage of their potential audience. After all, I believe the goal of Hollywood and its producation studios is to create the biggest profit possible from a film. So why limit your audience... aka potential paying customers.
ReplyDeleteIt seems that there is a consensus that transmedia storytelling is only appreciated by a small niche. Perhaps the answer to your question doesn't lie in making a value-judgment on transmedia storytelling but rather on figuring out how we relate to stories in general. Do we use stories as a means to escape or do we instead engross ourselves in stories because we find that we can relate to them?
ReplyDeleteFor example, take two movie franchises from the same genre (sci-fi):
1.The Transformers Series (Michael Bay ones, not the cartoons)
2.Avatar
I don't know about anybody else, but Transformers and its hilariously ingenious revisionist history is nothing but a loud escape from everyday life. Lots of explosions and fast cars can't really get creators far when it comes to transmedia storytelling.
Avatar on the other hand (despite some issues) can inspire questions about issues ranging from the historiography of imperialism to environmental issues. As a result, I feel that the Avatar franchise (once Mr. Cameron gets to expanding it more) has much greater potential for transmedia storytelling.
I think the posts that refer to transmedia as a "niche market" are pretty on point. To me, once I read your post, I was struck that this question might not be one of success or not, but of how to measure success.
ReplyDeleteI thought of the Rocky Horror Picture Show, and how, while it may not have been widely successful and probably turned off a lot of people when it came out, it enjoys a sort of cult following today. People go to theatres to watch people act out the movie as they watch and throw things at the screen along with the songs and yell lines back at the movie. Heck, I have the soundtrack on CD in my car.
To me, this seems to be a sort of success, even if it doesn't bring in much money for those who were in the film and if it doesn't make since to many people.
Jenkins writes that "each franchise entry needs to be self-contained so that you don't need to have seen the film to enjoy the game as a whole or vice versa" (p98), and the sentiment expressed in your blog post indicates why.
ReplyDeleteBut maybe thats not the point. Hardcore fans will search out an expanded universe whether it exists or not. In the lack of additional media many fans will result to movies their theories onto message boards or delve into writing and reading fanfiction. It would be smart for studios to take advantage of this niche market. I'd say that their pointof view is: if you can make money off of them let's give them the video game/movie/novel/comic/etc. of (insert franchise here) and see how much money we can make.