D&D Movie/TV Spider-Man: Homecoming Writers Talk D&D Movie

Umbran · Jun 1, 2020

Fenris-77 said:
The only way that matters in general? Goodness no. The specific nature of the fourth wall breaking is precisely the difference in question though, so yeah, it is kind of important. I already granted the meta awareness of The Princess Bride, and was attempting to describe where that meta awareness differed from Deadpool.

Let me try a different way to approach the same question:

How is the Deadpool-style of expressing its meta-awareness materially different than any other way of expressing it? Why does it matter that it isn't Deadpool-style? Both stories are very much aware in the text that they are stories. They both tell the audience that they are aware. Why do we care which style of expressing it they use?

Fenris-77 · Jun 1, 2020

Umbran said:
Let me try a different way to approach the same question:

How is the Deadpool-style of expressing its meta-awareness materially different than any other way of expressing it? Why does it matter that it isn't Deadpool-style? Both stories are very much aware in the text that they are stories. They both tell the audience that they are aware. Why do we care which style of expressing it they use?

In the context of what we want in a D&D movie? Of course we care, well I care, maybe others don't. That was the initial taking off point here though. I think Deadpool-style meta awareness in a D&D movie is a disaster waiting to happen. A PB style could be made to work, but I'd still prefer not. I only brought the PB up in the first place as an example of a fantasy movie that managed humor well in terms of dialogue and character, nothing to do with the meta-awareness at all.

Dausuul · Jun 1, 2020

Umbran said:
Let me try a different way to approach the same question:

How is the Deadpool-style of expressing its meta-awareness materially different than any other way of expressing it? Why does it matter that it isn't Deadpool-style? Both stories are very much aware in the text that they are stories. They both tell the audience that they are aware. Why do we care which style of expressing it they use?

Each layer of story in "The Princess Bride" is self-contained. If you remove the frame story, all of the dialogue and plot of the main story still make sense. Likewise, the frame story still makes sense if you remove awareness of the context (it's a movie made by a certain studio on a given date, etc.). The grandfather and grandson aren't aware that they are characters in a movie, any more than Westley and Buttercup are aware that they are characters in a book.

Deadpool's comments show that he does know he is a character in a movie. His dialogue does not make sense without that knowledge. "Deadpool" breaks the fourth wall, where "Princess Bride" does not.

Umbran · Jun 1, 2020

Dausuul said:
"Deadpool" breaks the fourth wall, where "Princess Bride" does not.

This is still telling me what happens. It is not telling me why you think it matters.

Fenris-77 · Jun 1, 2020

Umbran said:
This is still telling me what happens. It is not telling me why you think it matters.

I did tell you why it matters. Because I think it would suck in a D&D movie. In Deadpool it's awesome.

Dausuul · Jun 1, 2020

Umbran said:
This is still telling me what happens. It is not telling me why you think it matters.

Because part of the pleasure of many stories is the ability to imagine the reality of the fictional world, as if the characters are real people with a life beyond the story itself. The more meta-awareness the story shows, the more difficult immersion becomes.

"The Princess Bride" is less immersive than, say, "The Lord of the Rings," because of the periodic interjections from the characters in the frame story. However, despite those interjections, both stories work as independent realities. "Deadpool" is another level of immersion-breaking; there is no pretense of independent reality, just a movie which Deadpool knows he's in.

It works for "Deadpool" because Deadpool isn't trying to immerse you in a story, he's trying to tell jokes. Those jokes work by riffing on the "X-Men" movies, which do have that pretense of independent reality, allowing Deadpool to use them as a "straight man." A D&D movie in the Deadpool style would need something else to serve as its straight man.

Snarf Zagyg · Jun 1, 2020

Fenris-77 said:
The only way that matters in general? Goodness no. The specific nature of the fourth wall breaking is precisely the difference in question though, so yeah, it is kind of important. I already granted the meta awareness of The Princess Bride, and was attempting to describe where that meta awareness differed from Deadpool.

First rule of arguing about fourth-wall breaking: don't argue Deadpool with a guy with a Deadpool avatar.

There are different kinds of "fourth-wall" breaking, on this I completely agree with you.

The "Deadpool" example is one where the character directly addresses the audience; the artifice of the medium is exposed. This isn't that uncommon. Ferris Bueller also did this, and we see this in Mel Brooks comedies (Spaceballs!) and Monty Python. But to directly address the audience is usually so immersion-breaking that you usually only see it in a straight out comedy. Woody Allen also did this, and for a non-comedic example, you can think of Kurosawa (Lower Depths), Do the Right Thing, or Funny Games.

When we think of breaking the "fourth wall" that is what we are really discussing; this is a term that has traditionally described the wall between spectators and performers, the wall that the performer cannot see through but the audience can.

...but, we also now will use this term interchangeably with not just the "pure" concept of acknowledging the audience or speaking to the audience, but also the general concept of "meta-reference" (in other words, the in-fiction acknowledgement of the the fiction). So is a movie that is explicitly "meta" an example of breaking the fourth wall? For example, does The Cabin in the Woods break the fourth wall, or is it merely referential? What about a movie that is even more explicitly commenting on its own genre (like Scream)?

Personally, I see the distinction you're making; we often refer to something as breaking the fourth wall when we are really discussing the ways in which it is meta-textual, referential, or just plain ol' fan service-y.

Paul Farquhar · Jun 1, 2020

Snarf Zagyg said:
When we think of breaking the "fourth wall" that is what we are really discussing; this is a term that has traditionally described the wall between spectators and performers, the wall that the performer cannot see through but the audience can.

Breaking the forth wall is explicitly a reference to theatre, where it is much more common, and where the performer can see and interact with the audience. I would argue that it isn't actually possible to break the forth wall in cinema, since it is not possible for the performer to see and react to the audience in the way they can in theatre. At most you can have a pre-recorded narrator why may show some narrative voice, and may also be a character in the story.

Snarf Zagyg · Jun 1, 2020

Paul Farquhar said:
Breaking the forth wall is explicitly a reference to theatre, where it is much more common, and where the performer can see and interact with the audience. I would argue that it isn't actually possible to break the forth wall in cinema, since it is not possible for the performer to see and react to the audience in the way they can in theatre. At most you can have a pre-recorded narrator why may show some narrative voice, and may also be a character in the story.

I completely disagree. It has nothing to do with interacting; it is enough to acknowledge the presence of the audience. That's the raison d'etre of the term.

In fact, treating the audience as if they exist within the world of performance (to either address them directly, or to acknowledge their existence within the fictional world) is the entire issue with breaking the fourth wall. Moreover, it has noting to do with interacting with an audience member or the audience.

Finally, your last statement is not correct; it is not the case of having a pre-recorded narrator with some narrative voice, who may also be a character in the story.

So, I cannot disagree more strongly than I do with pretty much every single thing you just said.

EDIT: And you are probably in the minority of one to state that breaking the fourth wall is not possible in cinema.

Whizbang Dustyboots · Jun 1, 2020

Breaking the fourth wall is just acknowledging the audience in the theater, as Prospero does at the end of the Tempest. It's not required for him to go out into the audience or anything to do so, like he was in Hair. (Although Prospero would really fit in with the rest of the cast of Hair.)