In Praise of Great Exposition
Вставка
- Опубліковано 23 чер 2024
- Get Nebula using my link for 40% off an annual subscription: go.nebula.tv/thomasflight
Watch an extended version of this video on Nebula: nebula.tv/videos/thomasflight...
Exposition in film and TV has a bad reputation but it’s really just another tool in the writer's toolbox, and the quality of exposition can range from bad to great. This video examines some examples of truly great exposition.
// WATCH MORE THOMAS FLIGHT
-Ad-Free Videos and Exclusive Content on Nebula: nebula.tv/thomasflight
-My Podcast Cinema of Meaning:
Ad-Free and early on Nebula: Nebula: nebula.tv/cinemaofmeaning
Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/4n6zZZQ...
iTunes: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
-Rent or Buy My Experimental Documentary:
labyrinthion.com
-Read My Newsletter:
thomasflight.substack.com/
// SUPPORT MY WORK
-Support my channel directly on Patreon: / thomasflight
Patrons get access to a discord community, monthly podcast reviews of everything I watch, and more!
-Sign up for Nebula using my Link: nebula.tv/thomasflight
(using my link helps support my channel financially)
// FOLLOW ME
-Twitter: / thomasflight
-Website: www.thomasflight.com
-Letterboxd: letterboxd.com/thomasflight/
-TikTok: / thomas.flight
// CONTACT ME
-sponsorship and Business inquiries: thomasflight@nebula.tv
-Questions, feedback, other stuff: contact@thomasflight.com
(check out my FAQ as well: www.thomasflight.com/faq)
// GEAR I USE: thomasflight.com/gear
#ThomasFlight #VideoEssay - Фільми й анімація
Hey folks, I recorded this video before it was announced so I didn't have time to include it in th ad-read but you can now give Nebula as a gift: gift.nebula.tv/thomasflight
I AM INSIDE THE WALLS
what's the difference between your patreon and nebula?
I thoroughly enjoy your videos, as for Nebula, I tried it for a year when it first started. one thing keeping me from re-subscribing is lack of 4K/UHD support (at least that I can tell on my Apple TV app). I ended up watching many of your videos and other UA-cam creators on UA-cam instead because it was a noticeable improvement in video quality over Nebula app.
😅😅😅😊
No one views exposition as a bad thing - bad exposition is bad, good exposition is good. Usually in film, exposition doesn't include dialogue - I think you're incorrectly explaining what "exposition" actually is from the get go.
the only "hello, brother" i accept is Buster from Arrested Development
The "hello brother"-hate on the internet is always so funny because I've been calling my brother that for eternity 😅
It also has the best moment of 'turning on the news to see the subject being talked about' where they have to sit through unrelated stories and commercial breaks. "Now imagine the impact if that had come on just as I turned on the television!"
Annyong
@@anthonyfossi Hello Annyong
Azula
One aspect of forced exposition is the phrase "As You Know", which tends to be clunky. If the character apparently already knows the vital information, then why are you telling them? It's purely for the audience's benefit.
"as you know, your father, Darth Vader, and I were great friends..."
"Your father, the king."
I think “as you know” has its place, depending how your characters talk. Like using it as a recap, then follow it up with new information as a twist. Kind of like this:
Character 1: As you know, he was hit by a car, then ran from the scene, behind the building, then came back a minute later, right?
Character 2: (annoyed) why are you telling me this?
Character 1: Well, according to cctv, 3 men were waiting for him behind the building. Someone else went back to the scene in his place. Look.
Character 2: (looking at cctv) …he was abducted…
"....but you already know that, don't you?"
'As you know' is the sort of thing that a real person would only ever say because they think the other person probably doesn't know or has forgotten, but they're hedging against being wrong/being passive aggressive about it.
Another factor is just how interested is the audience in getting the information delivered by the exposition?
Like, in the Matrix, there's a scene where Morpheus just tells Neo what's going on in the real world. It's an extended minutes long sequence of pure exposition, delivered mostly through dialogue of one character talking.
But it works, mostly because it's information that the audience has been teased with for the whole first act. They care a lot about getting all this revealed, so their tolerance for an extended exposition dump is as high as it can be.
I think similar exposition dumps usually don't work because the viewer doesn't care enough about what's being revealed. The movie hasn't invested the time to make them care.
Also, Neo doesn’t know the information, so it makes sense that Morpheus is telling him. It’s such a simple thing, but filmmakers still often don’t account for why a character is saying the exposition.
Makes sense!! You can also see this in Harry Potter & the Prisoner of Azkaban, where Lupin and Sirius finally explain everything that's going on to the trio. Despite being a REALLY long info dump, the explanation is intriuging because you're hearing all this for the first time. Whereas upon rereads, you can notice how long it really is because you already know the information.
This is also why I think a lot of people misunderstand the architect scene from the sequel. People complain about it being confusing exposition but like... that's the point? The character doing the talking is a machine that considers humanity to be a resource; he's dumbing down his language the bare minimum required to be able to communicate in some sense with Neo. This is a conscious choice, and the only reason it works is because we (and Neo) are finally getting answers to questions we've had for 1.5 movies. It's also just nice to see someone in these movies regard Neo as something other than Computer-Jesus.
This is a great point. I'd also in that case the ideas contained within the exposition (especially in 1999) were just pretty novel and interesting on their own. This is part of what makes Inception's exposition partially forgivable (although there are some rough patches) because most of what they're explaining is actually kind of interesting.
If the exposition is just menial details about the characters it's not nearly as interesting as information that is interesting to the audience on it's own.
@@shar3859 Also its implied that Ron is dying of his injuries so it adds an element of suspense to the scene.
Thomas giving exposition on exposition is the meta I need to start off my week.
its too monday in the morning for my THC-addled brain to be kicking around the idea of potential meta-loops
Great critique of the wildly overrated 3 Body Problem, which was precisely as paper-thin as those final seasons of GoT.
And it was all an elaborate setup for a Nebula ad.
That’s Mr. Flight to you.
Or you can edit video like dunkey which is great example of showing but not telling also while saying a lot through editing alone
Oh my god I spend so much time thinking about bad exposition, thank you for this. “Diana, we’ve been married for seven years, I think I know what kind of cake you want for your fortieth birthday party. My name’s Steve by the way.”
"Don't forget to pick up our son Danny from middle school on your way home from work."
@@ThomasFlightI think a great example of visual exposition is in Who Framed Roger Rabbit. The camera pans over Eddie’s desk and SO much information can be gathered there. I’ve always enjoyed the process of writing, but it’s the economic use of exposition that I consider to be the hardest puzzle to solve.
@@ThomasFlight Okay, but now I'm interested, because they've been married seven years but their son is in middle school. What's going on there? Is one a step-parent? Did they have Danny then break up then get back together? Did they just remain unmarried until he was six? I want to know.
@@davidbjacobs3598 Danny’s adopted. Diana and Steve decided that they would rather adopt than have a child of their own. Steve went through the foster system when he was young and vowed he would one day save a kid from having to go through that. They were planning on adopting more but just the one is quite the handful, and despite Diana’s mother’s passive aggressive remarks about “having at least one real kid”, they’re content with their family of three.
This makes me want to write an 80s style meta b movie. Just absolutely shit exposition and the characters look at the screen after every sentence of exposition 😂
I think the spirit of "show don't tell" becomes clearer when you realize the rule applies not just to visual media, but also to novels, where we can't literally "see" anything that happens. Everything is "told" to us in some sense, but within that we can still make the distinction. "Show don't tell" really means something closer to "Don't state, demonstrate."
That's true! Still, "show don't tell" is arguably more important in movies and TV than in novels. I don't know why, but the very same exposition that is boring in a movie can be perfectly fine in a book. Compare, for example, Lord of the Rings with its movie adaptation. The books contain a lot of background exposition while the movies cut most of that out in favor of fast pacing. I think it also applies to episodic TV shows that aren't so constrained by time.
@@cube2fox It's true you can get away with longer digressions from the plot in novels--but honestly I'm inclined to argue the rule if anything applies even MORE to novels, since efficiency isn't as much of a concern. You can afford time to show in detail what in a film you can't give more than a line or two.
But that's almost just a semantic difference from what you're saying. The tricky thing is that in a novel, if you put ENOUGH detail into an exposition dump, it essentially ceases to be exposition and just becomes a flashback. A character talking for twenty minutes straight in a TV show might be bad writing, but in a novel it's just a new narrator.
@@robertmalone9511 Interesting point. In novels, long exposition becomes narration, and narration becomes flashback/action etc. Basically the text disappears in favor of what the text describes. That may seem as if "show don't tell" is satisfied automatically, but novels should still leave enough things to the reader to infer for themselves, just like movies, in which not all works succeed. I guess that's what you meant with "don't state, demonstrate".
Still, I wonder why narrators are often so awkward in movies. They don't disappear like they do in books. Many movies specifically add sidekick characters which ask the main character "stupid questions" in order to avoid a narrator or inner monologue.
Yes, obviously
trust me if youve ever read bad fanfiction you'll know why this is a golden rule.
The fact that Dave Bautista also puts on glasses tells us early that even though he's a replicant, replicants age and deteriorate like human beings, foreshadowing Harrison Ford appearing later and still potentially being a replicant, but also showing the humanity inside a replicant that this world ignores.
And here I thought he wore fake spectacles for style
@@HungL0W and stylish they are
I thought he had them as PPE for the ass whoopin' on Joe.
Damn, that’s great observation
That always came across to me as a disguise he used to appear more human and hide the fact that he was a replicant.
That exposition scene from Three Body Problem is so unforgivable to me because the book has such a brilliant cinematic scene that explains how the accelerators are going against all of physics. The POV character is talking to a physicist friend of his who is drunk. The drunk friend is at a pool table and does an experiment. He knocks a ball into a pocket. Then he makes his friend move the whole pool table around the room three times to repeat the experiment in different parts of the room. By the end he's out of breath and barely finished his metaphor: the pool tables give the same result no matter the location of the table, but the accelerators are all giving different results. And as soon as he explains it, he passed out. End scene.
That wouldve been lovely to see i the show, alas
The writing on the Three Body Problem is terrible. The character dialogue is so cringe I about gave up on it. It only gets by on the brilliance of ideas in the source material
@@TheMattyNation Yeah it's a shame considering the books are good
@@teneleven5132 The Tencent show does scenes like those justice. Like Wang Miao investigating the countdown and the cosmic background radiation in a scientific manner, or Ding Yi explaining how the laws of physics are broken through the table example. Though it is NOT necessarily better than the Netflix show, because of how repetitive and stretched out is. Still, it's highs are higher than the Netflix show and I'd suggest giving it a watch if you REALLY like the book. It's free on UA-cam.
Thank god i saw it was d&d adapting a book series so i just went to read them instead
My favourite "exposition" is in the original Blade Runner when Deckard goes to the burlesque dance club and there's a boa snake in the changing rooms. He asks the dancer "is this real?" and she responds with "if that were real do you think i would work in a place like this?"
to this day it blows my mind. that bit of dialogue tells you about the state of the fauna on earth and the economy and her social status ahhhh
Your video made me realize something about the exposition in "Arrival". When you watch Dr. Banks watch television news, the exposition is no longer about aliens arriving. The most amazing thing in the history of the world JUST happened - and she's watching it alone in a dark house. She doesn't even rush to be with her mother. in one minute, we understand just how profoundly alone Dr. Banks is - and she never utters a word.
It adds contrast to what comes later in that through learning the heptapods language she can truly never be alone again.
That scene wasn't just good - it made me fall in love with the movie. It gave me such a sense of wonder.
"Do you remember that time when you..." with a LOOOOOT more detail than would be necessary in a normal conversation.
I HATE WHEN THEY DO THAT SOO MUCH. That in my book is breaking the fourth wall. (The watcher doesnt know so lets remind them) type shi
It’s only accurate when your boyfriend has ADHD and a terrible memory 😂
“remember when” is the lowest form of conversation
I can't believe that the opening of _Lord of the Rings_ doesn't get a mention here. It's a couple of minutes of pure exposition, before any characters are introduced, takes place outside of any scene, is a monologue aimed solely at the audience, and even starts in a made-up language. It breaks every rule. And yet it's absolutely amazing. Sometimes, the trick might just be to have great exposition to tell, and not be shy about it; poorly disguised exposition might be the worse sort.
I might be wrong but I think I’ve seen him do an exposition video mainly on the lotr intro alone haha
I don't think you were listening very closely. There are no bad forms of exposition, just poor execution and poor selection. When you've already got a 3 hour movie and need to dump a lot of information it isn't just acceptable to use a monologue, it might even be optimal.
We all know this, as Thomas does also. The LOTR could and has had its own videos regarding every moment.
To be fair, that also mainly works for people who like Lord of the rings in general. My parents tried watching them and didn't enjoy it and my dad to this day keeps making fun of the first 10 minutes being just exposition. Sure, it's done well but it also works because the story in general repels everyone who doesn't want to spend hours learning about middle earth.
@@oyuyuyYou sound like you enjoy the smell of your own shit.
“Somehow Palpatine returned”
unintentionally the funniest bit of exposition i've ever seen
A great example of neither showing *nor* telling.
seriously worst writing of the 21st century.
The beginning of rise of skywalker is one of the most insane examples of forced exposition i have ever experienced
@@TonyBlue87I mean tbf that's not really when the movie is giving that exposition, right in the opening scene you see Snoke clones and Palpatine basically said he was revived by using the dark side of the force. You can say that THAT is vague/lazy exposition but the "somehow palpatine returned" line isn't really relevant.
surprised fleabag wasn't mentioned, i feel like that show is the prime example of good exposition dumping
Season 2 is in my top three favorite things ever on film. Absolutely incredible.
NOT AT ALL
Honestly, I think unless its absolutely necessary, there is no need to firmly establish characters relationships with each other. You can infer from peoples interactions that they're likely siblings, or past lovers. Having that aire of mystery about it just adds to the intrigue.
Tell that to the Luke & Leia shippers.
Agreed. A great example that comes to mind would be Matt and Elektra in the Daredevil series. While it's not the greatest show ever, I absolutely loved how the complexity of their relationship was immediately implied, yet obvious. Without any exposition whatsoever, from the very first scenes you understand that it's a long-lasting, problematic, heart-breaking situation just by the way they talk to each other.
People understand relationships; show one on screen and we'll get it.
I agree! I noticed when I was first watching Better Call Saul that they didn't explain the nature of Jimmy and Kim's relationship. I remember being unsure if they were friends or lovers.
@@youllbemytourniquetyeah, they just had them share a cigarette in her smoke break. Ok. They are intimate, but maybe only office intimate, smoke break is a thing, and they don't mind sharing body fluids...
And sometimes it's completely obvious but the writers still decide to spell it out. Like, there's an adult woman next to a boy on a funeral, both looking kinda sad. Yeah, how could anyone guess who's funeral that ought to be. Of course we need the one guy patting the boy on the shoulder and telling him, "I'm so sorry for your father".
My favorite writing hack: When a character does something unbelievable, have them say, "I can't believe I'm doing this."
😂😂
And when they tell a character what happened, they say "you're not gonna believe this"
@@GabrielsLogic Perfect!
Awesome whedon dialogue bro
my favourite FAVOURITE instance of exposition / infodumping is the opening to Hot Fuzz, where we get fed bullet-fast background info on nicolas angel telling us how proficient and overly-seriously he takes job as a cop. any other movie would have taken the show-don't-tell rule literally and decided to show us the protag at a crime scene and solving the case quickly, while the other cops roll their eyes and whisper among themselves about how stick-in-the-mud the protag is. that technically works, but it also 1) takes a lot of time 2) has been overdone to hell and back.
by going the complete opposite route of just telling us everything right away, Hot Fuzz can get to the main story as quickly as possible WHILE STILL being able to give us ridiculous extra info (such as angel being a biking expert) that doesn't really matter to the story but tells us a lot about who angel is as a person. it also fits the overall vibe of the movie, a fast-paced over-the-top comedy.
also, the crafty part of this infodump is that it doesn't tell you everything--it tells you JUST ENOUGH to get the story started. it doesn't tell you that angel's coworkers are jealous of him and dislike him and want him out of their precinct; they show this to us later on. it doesn't tell you angel takes his job so seriously that he has no friends and has trouble keeping his girlfriend; this is revealed when he has an argument with her later.
and one last bit that makes this infodumping work: it's a voiceover that makes sense within the context of the movie itself. it's not just the protagonist telling the audience his own backstory; it's his sergeant reading through angel's profile before meeting with him.
does it break the "show don't tell" advice? yes. but does it work? is it entertaining? does it give you the right amount of information without feeling forced and awkward? yes, and i think that matters more!
Yes!!! I love hot fuzz and this info dumping scene is perfect, pure Edgar Wright magic!
Hot Fuzz legit might be my favorite screenplay; not a single word wasted the entire way through and every little detail is in fact a joke whose punchline gets delivered later on in the movie.
I feel like comedies, by nature, have their own rule wrt exposition where as long you can get a laugh out of it, you can get away with a good amount of telling over showing. Roger Rabbit has a great and I guess kind of recursive example of this with the scene in the speakeasy: "No, not at any time. Only when it was funny."
0:07 me and my sister DEFINITELY talk like this.... but to your credit, we probably do it because it is awkward, and inspired from awkward media.
@@_I-OvO-I_ That’s a profound perspective. I am glad to finally understand the root cause of my sister and I greeting each other in formal terminology is not simply an inside joke, between siblings(as we always perceived it to be). But in truth, was caused by the psychological damage of consuming the media of such uncivilized imbeciles. Thank you dear friend. I will strive to be more like you, and consume a higher grade of media, so that I no longer call my sister, sister. Thank you, you wise, noble, and mysterious messenger of truth.
3 body problem getting random strays is so funny
Maybe I'm just bitter about what those guys did to GoT
Those scenes aren't in the books. The exposition is done in different scenes in the books, which are much much better. Some of the changes in 3 body problem make sense, and overall the series is decent, but they also made some really unfortunate choices. The books are so damn good.
@@ThomasFlightdespair
It deserves some, frankly. Especially mrs Salazar. For some reason it's the genius characters played by bad actors that usually scream "I need to be taken seriously" in a super cringy way.
I read the book
I was excited
I saw some scenes on yt
Now iam not
Primer is my favorite example of invisible exposition. The characters never sound like they're speaking for the benefit of the audience. You're there as a fly on the wall, listening to the characters talk to each other and if you pay close enough attention, you can start to piece together what they're doing...just in time to understand the reveal when the character understands it.
primer is super confusing the first watch through. It makes sense for a bit, but then it steps up into overdrive. Yes it all makes logical sense, but you really have to be paying attention, or have to read up on the movie
@@plr2473 I'ver never felt bad about not understanding every scene in Primer, I don't think it's required, and I suspect that it would take away from the experience. IMO the point of the last 30 minutes can be summed up as 'when you screw with time travel, things are gonna get FUBAR.' and that message is clear-as-day even if you can't figure out exactly which Adam is which. It's like Donnie Darko...there's a director's cut that 'explains' things, but the clarity detracts from the story rather than adding to it.
I had to rewatch Primer and then google what was going on before I understood it. But I still don't think I fully understand it.
I love that movie!
My problem with Primer is that the characters never once sound like real people throughout the entire movie. I get that some of that is purposeful because they are repeating lines from previous iterations (even when that doesn't make sense), but a lot of it just seems like bad acting.
Some of the best use of inworld-media exposition has to be the TV montage from Shaun of the Dead.
That scene is genius
It works because we the audience are learning things at the same time as the characters in the scene. Oh, and it’s also brilliantly edited and extremely funny, so, you know, there’s that.
@@GorgeDawesI'd say that we're not really learning something at the same time as the characters. We already know it's a zombie movie. We know there's going to be a zombie outbreak. We know all the little clues we've already seen are hints it's about to happen. But the characters don't know any of this, it's just a normal day to them.
one of the most wonderful expansions on "show don't tell" i ever read was a slight shift into "describe don't explain"
because with "show" people will assume u mean 'use less dialogue' or something similar. which is not the answer in every case. "desribe don't exaplin" is a great way to remind people to focus more on presenting the exposition without it feeling like a lesson to the audience, which i think a lot of clunky dialogue comes from. u want to describe to create an experience for an audience, not lecture to them
In another comment someone said "Demonstrate, don't tell." I think that gets at what you mean?
Exposition, when done perfectly, is capable of delivering the most emotional scene in the film. My favourite example is in How To Train Your Dragon 2 when Valka says the line "..but a mother never forgets". That line was so smooth and gut wrenching.
One of *my* favorite examples of brilliant exposition is the control room scene in Pixar's *Wall·E* where the captain furiously argues but fails to persuade Auto (Axiom's HAL-esque AI auto-pilot) to fly the ship back to Earth. He then looks at the portraits of all the captains that preceded him for generations, notices Auto ominously in the background behind every one of them in the photo, and realizes that the auto-pilot is the one really in charge of the ship, not the captain.
Every time I hear someone say "hot water heater" I die a little inside.
"ATM machine" is another one that causes that feeling.
@@EveloGraveit’s such an redundant tautology.
@EveloGrave RIP in peace.
It's unnecessary exposition, really
PIN number
look at that subtle off-white room lighting. the tasteful script writing.
oh my god. it even has a nebula ad read.
One of my fav exposition is when Miike in Better Call Saul tell story about his son. It was so heartbreakingly written and Jonathan Banks's delivery is top notch
The walter junior water heater scene (5:17) also shows a lot in the tone and reactions. There's no money AND Walter is ashamed in front of his son AND Skyler stresses about holding the family together. Breaking bad is great at moving multiple playing pieces with each event.
heavy voice over enjoyer here, and one thing i love about it is how it can set the tone so well, for example Galadriel in lotr and Travis Bickle from taxis drivers opening monologue set the tone perfectly.
extra shoutout to adaptation (2002) for being one of my other favorite uses of voice over.
For me, one of the greatest exposition scenes in movie history is in the first pirates of the Caribbean. It's really random but the scene between Geoffrey Rush and Keira Knightley on the Black Pearl where he explains his curse and the medallion and finishes by biting the Apple and telling her she better start believing in ghost stories cuz she's in the one. The camera, the acting, the script, the set, this scene lives rent free in my mind as one of the greatest exposition scenes of all time despite it telling more than showing.
Black pearl has a lot of expositions and to me its an example doing it well!
Jack Sparrow's entrance tells you everything you need to know about him without a single word.
@@HBarnillYeah the movie also has a ton of excellent examples of the opposite kind of exposition. Will Turner also has excellent introductory scenes which get further built upon in subsequent scenes(as Will and his background is a central thing other character are trying to uncover).
This is one of the main reasons I love Denis Villeneueve's films. In a good example, Alejandro's character in Sicario was originally supposed to have a lot more dialogue, with scenes of him expositing his whole backstory to Kate, but Villeneuve and del Toro decided it would be much more interesting to illustrate and slowly reveal this through his actions and snippets of speech, and adds so much intrigue and mystery to his character.
You know a movie is about to have the siblings kill each other if it starts out with one of them joyously saying “BROTHER!”
Better Call Saul's pilot is excellent at "show don't tell", and I would argue the whole series excels at it.
Exposition works when it’s in service of an argument. People naturally exposit when trying to convince others.
“I wanted to be a gangster.” Works because the movie is Henry’s argument for why he loved the life, literally ending on him explaining how bad life is without it.
I think a brilliant bit of exposition/world-building is the opening scene of Children Of Men.
children of men is a masterpiece
One of my favorite exposition drops I've ever seen is that beautiful scene in Eddie Valiant's office in Who Framed Roger Rabbit. The staging of the props and photographs, Alan Silvestri's wonderful score, Bob Hoskins' humane performance, and each seamless movement of the camera tell you everything about Eddie's grief and who he is as a character without a single word spoken.
It has always been the gold standard of exposition to me since I was a kid
The first example from breaking bad is great for other reasons, too.
Their son enters the room on crutches while they're both sitting, so despite being physically disabled has the dominant posture in the shot. The shot reaction shot is not showing his parents together, and they have varying reactions, implying they're split on the issue and how to handle it. Then when he treats the mother rudely it's not immediately reprimanded, showing both that this kind of talk is normal in their household, and they're even split on how to raise their son. Then when they're talking about the finances later, he's drinking in the kitchen and she's sitting on the counter ages away from him, creating distance and putting them both in different light, implying that they're not even on the same page as to the severity of or solution to their financial problems, and showing that it's putting a strain on the relationship not just by the way they talk and what they choose to avoid talking about.
Exposition through dialogue is great, but incorporating it into framing, blocking, lighting and direction is so much harder.
My favourite exposition in a movie is the sadly late Donald Sutherland's entire part in JFK. It's like 20 straight minutes(!) of exposition but you're glued to the screen because of him. Quite literally a "could read a phone book" actor.
Rip
bro this mf has been carrying film analysis youtube on his back for years now like at a certain point we need to start talking about how his legacy measures up against goats like every frame a painting
Film analysis on UA-cam seems to mostly be a ghastly pit of content farms. It’s so refreshing that a handful of channels actually know what they’re talking about and make quality videos.
Do you guys have suggestions for other good film channels? I’ve found a lot of cookie cutter content farm ones but very few good channels
@@Bandofbeebles Yhara Zayd, The Cinema Cartography, Pop Culture Detective, Lessons From The Screenplay, In Praise Of Shadows, Broey Deschanel, off the top of my head. There's probably quite a few more (I didn't mention the obvious ones like RLM), plus a lot of mixed media channels, social commentary channels etc. that incorporate film and media into their discussions
@@Bandofbeebles I'd like to add "Like stories of old", which i rather enjoy.
@@Sporting1210 Thomas Flight and Like Stories of Old are my fuckin' GOATs
I was extremely into the lack of exposition in M Night Shyamalan's Glass, I saw it without knowing it was the third movie in a series. I was fascinated with how little the movie actually needed to tell me about these characters
An example of exposition that always got under my skin is from Candyman (2021) where one character (from the recently urbanised area) explains to the protagonist (an artist documenting the urbanisation of the same area) what gentrification is. Both clearly know that the other understands the concept but they shoehorn it in very heavy handedly and undermine the audience as a result.
Strongly agree.
Gentrification should have been the subtext of the movie, instead they stop the narrative dead to have characters discuss gentrification for five minutes.
I appreciate you clarifying that show don't tell can be about subtext - that the "showing" can still be with words rather than images. In my search for a similarly concise or pithy expression, I refer to this corollary as "Say; don't explain."
Perhaps "convey, don't explain"?
I'm glad you included the three body problem because I couldn't stand the dialogue.
It's an interesting example because the books its based on are *notorious* for having poor wooden dialogue. It's my favorite book series, but the story is basically a vehicle for the author to convey his answer to the Fermi paradox, and so characters are very one dimensional and exist purely to convey this. The TV show, if you can believe it, actually gives the characters and dialogue more depth than the source material (at the massive expense of the actual science and ideas)
@@shridharambady2069honestly prefer the relatively simple book characters to the cringey millennials
Honestly the dialogue and characters were kinda worse in the book. It may be an artifact of the difficulty of translating a work from Chinese to English, but I never actually liked any of the characters in the book (except for Da Shi -- Clarence in the show).
Still it's one of my favorite series of all time because of how COOL the scifi elements are, and because of how much I love scifi in general.
that three body problem scene had legit 'The neutrinos have mutated' vibes
@@shridharambady2069 Common issue with sci fi. Writers are often more interested in conveying high level concepts and the actual story and characters come after.
My favourite expository voiceover, at least off the top of my head right now, is Taxi Driver, because it gives you the view of Travis Bickle's fairly insane mind parallel to the more objective view of the camera, making it not just useful to speed up exposition, but something you could not get as well otherwise. Those kind of unique insights are probably the greatest advantage books have over films, where internal monologue is so easy.
At a writing convention I went to earlier this year, an author called Matthew Bockholt gave a presentation on another approach to the "Show, Don't Tell" concept he called, "Write What You Can't Say." There was a lot to it, but basically, taking the time to present an idea rather than reporting facts, to give an audience questions to fill in themselves rather than always give the answer right away. I think that's the kind of worldbuilding or scene-setting I enjoy most as a reader or audience member.
He also suggested making the first draft without worrying about the specifics of how the exposition looks so it can be whittled into a more intriguing form later.
My face lit up when 12 Angry Men came on screen OMG I was literally thinking about that film the entire time when this video was going on. How it can introduce 12 characters, and not only have it not be overwhelming, but develop all of them as their person, reveal things about their history and personality - ALL the while having the main conflict build. What a masterpiece.
Thanks for bringing up 12 Angry Men!! What an absolute writing masterclass of a movie. I need to rewatch it, it's been a year or two.
Okay, YES. 12 Angry Men! One of my favorites of all time and just rewatched a few days ago. It's incredible in its subtle yet strong exposition through a dialogue-driven, singular location movie. I think all of the examples you used for displaying great feats of exposition done well treat the audience with respect and have them engage with the story rather than sit back and be told everything. Great video, Thomas!!
11:15 "...they turn the information the audience needs to learn into something that one of the characters is desperately trying to figure out." My favorite example of this is probably the anime series Attack on Titan. There are 5 or 6 different episodes in the series that are almost *entirely* exposition dumps; however, the *dozens* of episodes leading up to those ones are FILLED with suspense, mystery, and intrigue all revolving around the characters being thrust into worldview-bending situations that they spend sometimes YEARS struggling to unravel & understand. So when the exposition finally comes, it's a relief and incredibly satisfying, even if it feels like being mouth-fed a fire hydrant's torrential output.
Yes! That's what immediately came to mind. Three seasons of drip-fed exposition disguised as the drama itself, when really you don't know what the show is even ABOUT until the final season. It's just brilliant.
great video! for me personally, Children of Men by Alfonso Cuaron is the manifestation of "show, don't tell" I love this movie so much
for example in the first scene, they made use of the "TV broadcast exposition" while also introducing us to the main character to a certain extent AND having a dramatic (and by the way well shot) scene that reveals how instable the country is, in which the story takes place
Can we take a moment to appreciate the way Thomas' editing is unlike any video essayist on UA-cam? He never bounces from movie to movie. Instead, he slows it down, treating each movie like a case study in the topic he's covering.
glad you mentioned arrival. it shows in a "dazzling" way, where the start of the movie starts off with the audience being shown some weird vision that doesnt really make any sense. the alien's language, is shown. it makes the audience feel engaged, through their own capacity to pay attention or rather to see "what is going on" because of these showings. the emotional payoff at the end wouldn't be possible without some sense of showing, because SHOWING is one of the themes of the entire movie. showing, which is really observing (to show is to show to someone), isn't possible without time. moreover showing love isn't possible without time, feeling pain isn't possible without time.
Not even gonna mention the greatest voice over exposition ever in Fellowship of the Ring?
Almost did! One of the best prologues.
Avatar: The Last Airbender as well.
@@ThomasFlight I can't believe you actually replied to my comment! I am one of your biggest fans so i'm not surprised you had to consider the Fellowship exposition!
@@ThomasFlight 1000%
Well, the world is changed.
One of the best examples of a voiceover clever exposition is the one at the start of Trainspotting. "Choose life". The sardonic way he describes a sober life in a way that makes it sound boring and soul crushing and part of a system he doesn't want to be part of. "Choose a fixed rate mortgage". The way it's contrasted with the chase scene. The way it echoes drug recovery language before it even reveals at the end that he's a heroin addict. Amazing.
Always a good day when Thomas posts a video
I'm glad someone's explaining why 3BP is so awkward
I couldn't finish the first episode. The writing, acting, and casting were all so bad. It had so much potential, I've heard good things about the book and the concept sounded good. But yeah it just felt like just a shitty network TV show.
It just felt like "content" instead of people really trying to make something special. Maybe it gets better but that first episode is just so bad.
@@thenetworkingstudy2208 yeah it's a 6/10 at best. I pushed on and want to say it got better around ep4, but even then, not by much
@@thenetworkingstudy2208 Read the book
@@thenetworkingstudy2208 Read the book
i watched the first episode and totally forgot about it the next day. i wont be watching it again lmao
Glad to see you used Severance as an example. Really looking forward to season 2. Everyone should see it!
It's so, so boring. And from reviews (at least from those not taken in by the blatant pretentiousness of the show) it seems it doesn't get better.
I think Memento has a great twist on this, in that a character has to tell himself what he doesn't know, because he can't retain information for any length of time.
MY favourite bit of expo from Only Lovers Left Alive is when Eve talks to the plant using its scientific name, and she says it's too early (or too late) to be out this time of year or something along those lines. Like yeah, someone who lives 600 years would totally notice tiny things like that. If I were to ever write an immortal character I'm using that line as inspiration
When I think of an example of "master class in great exposition," I always think of the 1999 version of "The Mummy." Goofy action movie/blockbuster that it is, I consistently find cinematic appreciation for the way they tell the story. We not only get appropriately used (and not over-used) narration/voice overs, every bit of spoken exposition is lovingly baked into conversations that entertain as much as they inform. For example, one of the biggest pet-peeves I have in cinema is when a sibling is introduced the words "brother or a sister" (bro or sis, even) is forced into the conversation to explain the relationship, which usually never happens again in the film and tends to *feel* very much like blatant exposition. In contrast, in "The Mummy," Evelyn's brother is first introduced as with a *character- appropriate,* semi-sarcastic quip, "my dear, sweet, baby sister." It flows naturally and and sets the mood for character, which is my point. The film is full of moments like that: all pertinent details, from lore, mythos and credentials, are either shown or given in dialogue that feels natural to the characters and the situation, even when it's way over-the-top. It is just so...""chef's kiss" and I am glad to see the film given more appreciation in recent years.
When a character asks "why are you doing this?", all I hear "explain your motivation to the audience."
theres a malayalam short film called "night call" here on youtube. it only has one character and takes place in his house. i think it has done an excellent job in doing exposition the correct way. u might find it a bit awkward cuz its another language tho.
Where are the English subtitles for that?
@@boygeniuspavement I think it's in yt itself. Try going to settings and settings subtitles to english (uk)
In the short film "The Hire - The Follow", a short film Wong Kar Wai made for BMW, Mickey Rourke's character asks Clive Owen's "You have a wife?" to which Owen's character replies ever so sharply "Not anymore". This answer, paired with the sarcasticly toned delivery, gives us so much insight into this character, not only does it show the viewers so much about the characters approach to the world and to other people, but it also delivers substantial information about his personal history and atleast 2 crucial moments of his life, making us know AND feel the character a little bit better.
I once wrote a short about a man seeing his fiancé for the first time since leaving for medical school. A guy in a critique group told me, "Now, a basic principle in writing is, show don't tell. So maybe instead of TELLING us that he went to medical, you could have a flashback SHOWING him being in medical school." This is why you need to find a competent critique group.
I do actually greet my sibilings with "Hello Brother" or "Hello Seeester" but it's always a reference to Arrested Development.
We appreciate your efforts. We hope to see more content like this.
And you, Thomas Flight, we will watch your career with great interest!
One of my favourite ways to deliver exposition is when it happens in the middle of a big chase / action scene. The Bourne or Terminator series have loads of these.
When you said, "Exposition is always going to be more interesting to the audience when we understand why this information is important to the characters", I immediately thought of the finale of "Chernobyl" in which Legasov explains the nuclear meltdown at Dyatlov & Co.'s trial-we need to know, it's what the whole series is building up to, how this awful catastrophe occurred, but it's also important for the in-world "audience" (those present at the trial) because they must make a legal determination based on their understanding of the events. It's also important for Legasov to communicate the information because in doing so he's able to expose the government's negligence. AHHH, SO GOOD!
Great video 😃
gotta get a sopranos series like you did the wire
I would love to do this some day, just gotta carve out the time to rewatch the whole series.
@@ThomasFlight I researched it recently for the first time ever, and it makes perfect sense why it's Donald Glover's fave series.
So much of Atlanta's surrealism is Sopranos' coded. I think it's worth a revisit if only to show its impact in less well-known ways.
I immediately thought of the Severance pilot when I saw this video pop up in my feed. Creating a situation in which the exposition comes so naturally, which works two-fold (to introduce Helly's innie into this world and to help Mark getting used to his new tasks), is one of the most brilliant ways around it that I've seen, while keeping the audience gripped on just how this world works.
How could anyone even get through that pilot. So boring, over-rated and pretentious.
Your ability to breakdown and teach these abstract topics is so incredibly valuable; this is going to help me improve my filmmaking so much 🙏🏼
"i like the way succession does it" is a line I can use for about everything. The writing and directing in that show is so exceptionally good.
My all-time favorite use of voiceover is _The Informant!_
[SPOILERS]
...
As much as it is exposition, it's also just the main character's inner monologue as he gradually succumbs to bipolar disorder. The narration becomes increasingly eccentric and rapid-fire until he can't keep up with his own thoughts. And then when he gets treatment, it's gone.
Furiosa's opening motorcycle chase was great exposition.
"Nobody really talks like this..."
I always just say "sister" when getting my sister, and she almost always just says "brother".
I think an interesting positive case is Paris, Texas, where it works because the big "exposition dump" is the climax of the story, and for Jane it is about reliving the past through the Travis' point of view
Something that always bothers me is that, when a character in a scene turns the TV on, the news presenter is ALWAYS just about to start a new sentence talking about exactly what the audience needs to hear. You never catch them half-way through a sentence, which is statistically what of course would happen 8 out of 10 times.
It already pops up in the video a couple of times but I've got give a shout out to Jurrasic Park for very effectively sidestepping a lot of potential clunkiness. The simple and quite frankly obvious solution of letting your intelligent characters actually be intelligent plays out excellently. The central trio are clearly smart and openly curious which allows them to explain things from their specific areas of expertise to the others and ask for explanations without seeming like they are denser than a box of rocks. It's very well done (too bad that Dr. Grant never had a chance to tell Muldoon his theories about how raptors would hunt, could have saved his life).
I like it when the exposition actually has an effect on the scene/characters. One shining example is Aliens, when Ripley is in the briefing meeting: she's finding out first-hand what happened to her colleagues, while also trying to impress upon the committee how lethal this creature is, while we also get to see how dismissive said committee can be (the foreshadowing itself is its own reason to be pissed off on Ripley's behalf) ... the marriage of the situation + writing + Sigourney Weaver's pitch-perfect acting manages to pump a dense amount of backstory + setup into one scene, and justifies Ripley's emotions/behaviour throughout - her anger, defiance, caution, distrust, grief, survivor/mother/badass-ness - all in one scene, in one room. It's exposition very well executed, charged with cause-and-effect that both belongs in this sci-fi otherworld and is very tangible and easy to sympathise with as an audience.
Also, Black Mirror, especially the first two seasons. Masterclass in exposition, how it moves the short story along one choice, meaningful reveal at a time.
I'll never forget the channel changing in Shaun of the Dead... It is pure TV exposition, but so subtle that you miss it the first time, and laugh after that
Nolan needs to watch this.
Nolan doesn’t give a fuck
You've got no time for creating good exposition when your only goal is to cram as much heavy plotting into your film as possible.
Why? His writing style has netted him millions of dollars and fans, I doubt he wants to change anytime soon.
I can think of one example in a Nolan film where a single remark conveys a wealth of expository information. In “Dunkirk”, the French poilu’s sardonic “bon voyage, anglais” as he hoists the British soldier over a barricade tells you everything about what the immediate future holds for each of these characters and, by extension, their respective armies, as well as demonstrating how one of them feels about it. For me it is as effective as the shot of German soldiers piling up life jackets at the end of “The Battle of Britain”.
Apart from that though, yeah, having characters painstakingly explain things to each other (preferably during a single conversation that somehow encompasses multiple locations) is much more his thing.
ua-cam.com/video/lsqvmZbskGo/v-deo.html
3 body problem was so bad, first episodes were promising but then it went down hill non stop
It's weirdly inconsistent. Some of the actors do better job than others, some scenes and subplots are better some are dogwater.
What did you dislike about the later episodes?
@@personalanonymous3172 I found the characters anoying, specially the main girl, they took dumb desitions all the time, they repeated the same things multiple times (cancer guy did the same death monologue at least three times). And nothing made much sense, the hole show raised a lot of interesting quiestions and answered them in the dumbest ways. The hole laser thing was visually cool af, but it made cero sense, the thing magically pased from being tested in a lab in a hand sized scaled, and then in the blink of an eye turns out that the thing can work just as effectively across a giant river? No way. Also they never raise the quiestion that the lasers most likely would have cut the the hard drive or whatever they were trying to get. They never measured shit, just sliced the ship apart and hoped that they didn't destroy the hard drive.
That's just one example, I had gripes with almost everything else as well, dialogue, characters, etc. I really want it to like it, it's such a good premise, but it falls to pieces as the episodes progress. The detective and the asian girl where really good tho.
A fantastic example of voiceover is in The Batman.
The whole introductory monologue is a journal entry. It gives crucial information about the setting and the psyche of the protagonist. Plus it’s stinkin cool.
Great video. Exposition via subtext is not just the most effective imo but also the most respectful. It demonstrates a writer understands that their audience is intelligent and capable of piecing information together.
great
was wondering if you went to school for film or cinematography? how’d you become so knowledgeable
No formal education, I just worked in film and commercial video for a few years and basically have been studying film on my own full time for about a decade.
@@ThomasFlight So sick. can really sense
the passion in the videos. AND THE EDITING!? keep it up.
struggle with exposition and cannot seem to grasp the whole concept all together. However, in little as 20 minutes duration, you taught me the concept in simplest ways with great examples. I've been a subscriber to your channel little over 3 years and amount of stuff I've learnt from your thorough, informative and engaging videos are immense. Thank you, Thomas for being a TRUE lover of storytelling and sharing this knowledge ~for the people like myself~ in this UA-cam space! 👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽
I always liked how the TV show Burn Notice gave the watcher exposition through narration. Instead of telling other characters in the show who would already know and understand spycraft (or whatever information was pertinent), the main character would just voice over something to the audience... As opposed to any other crime show.
"I am your father" is NOT an exposition. It's a plot twist. It's a fucking climax. Exposition is the setting of information necessary to understanding the background of a narrative. Not every information given through dialog is exposition. Expository information can be given through other means. Exposition can be shown, it doesn't have to be told.
Something can be two things at once. It is indeed technically exposition (reveal of important background information or details). Your definition may vary but 'I am your father' is about as expository as it gets under this definition.
I’m an idiot. I need exposition.
We all do, that's why it should be well done!
Better Call Saul is what I think of when I think about "show, don't tell". They refused to tell the majority of the time it felt like. It still works, but I think you need to be ok with the audience being confused some of the time, maybe even bored. But you still get there
@@keithmichael112 Yup, BCS is a text-book example of creative and risky exposition. But this channel already has videos dedicated to that show, so he would be repeating himself by including it here.
Man I love severance I hope it gets a second season soon. But yeah I think that opening scene is stellar, plus on top of that I think that the visual set up does a lot to help as well. The start of the scene has Helly sprawled out on a conference table. It's a relatively mundane setting, but obviously that's not how a table work, and then of course the only other sense of life is this strange voice coming out of a small box asking "Who Are you?" repeatedly. And then as she gets up, she looks around the room and you see that there are no windows and only one door, which is locked. So before you actually even learn anything about the characters or the setting, it's already setting you up for this setting to simultaneously feel mundane, but also uncomfortable and probably a little fucked up. It waits to give you the exposition because by creating this sense of uncomfort and dread first, I think that *that* is what makes you *want* to hear the exposition, because suddenly now you want to know just what is going on as much as the character does.
Love the videos, man. Keep it up!!!
Denis Villeneuve is great. Arrival is a highly underrated film. Sicario, Prisoners, the Dune films, Blade Runner 2049.
I think on the topic of voiceovers, what makes Fight Club so effective is that we have an unreliable narrator. Without all his exposition, we wouldn't feel the same shock at the twist when it's revealed he is Tyler Durden all along.
Exposition is cool again because its impossible to sit down for two hours and stare at a TV screen without distraction. The smartphone is challenging the fundamental concept of "show don't tell". The future is a return to a more radio-play style of storytelling. The new way should be "show AND tell".
You're absolutely right. And some shows are literally written and produced to be "second screen" content. It's fine for people who want to watch that way, but I prefer one screen at a time and will always highlight the kind of thing I actually want to watch.
In the recent film La Chimera, there's the best exposition dump ever - I was just getting frustrated with the film for not being clear enough when a folk band turn up and start singing about the main character. They explain everything in a fun, ironic, meta way (an equally fun montage accompanies it) and I was back on board!
One of the movies that makes great use of overt exposition is "The Terminator" (1984). Indeed, you can make a case that around half of the plot of The Terminator is conveyed to us through exposition. Why is the terminator here? Who sent it? Why is Reese here? Who sent him? Why is Sarah Connor being targeted? Why is she important? All of this is told to us explicitly by the character of Kyle Reese, in three key scenes. None of the exposition scenes are boring: one takes place during a car chase (and the lull in that car chase, hiding in a parking lot), one is a police interrogation, and the final one, a moment of calm at the start of the third act, transitions nicely into a "future flashback". All three are organic, and none of them feel clunky or forced. Also, importantly, we as an audience want to gain a better understanding of what's going on, and only Reese can really give us the answers we want. If you were going to explain the plot of The Terminator to somebody who had never seen the film, at least half of what you tell them is likely to be a precis of Reese's exposition dialog. The true Big Bad of the movie - Skynet - is never really seen in the film at all. It's an entity whose existence you know about purely through the anecdotes told to Sarah (and Silberman) by Reese.
Yeh nice one man. Terminator was peak action movie cinema. Its has all of the bombastic action you'd expect, Arnie as an absolutely badass villain and great storytelling. There's nice world building with Sarah's waitress job and how much it sucks. She's established as a likeable slightly ditzy suburb girl who is kind of a bit lost in life and bit of a wallflower at the same time which sets the crazy contrast with what she transforms into in the sequel. It spends just the right amount of time with Reese so he doesn't feel like a throwaway character just there as a plot device to keep the story moving. The pacing is great. It shows us how far action movies have fallen since. So many of the best action movies in the 80s and 90s had well written stories. The action was the icing on the cake. While today its all about the action while the story takes a back-seat. This is why most modern action movies suck and why the John Wick and Bourne movies stand out as the better types of modern action because they heavily incorporate an interesting story and world building.
Did anyone else find 3 Body Problem to be underwhelming? I thought the writing of Auggie’s character to be especially awful. It’s the worst example in recent memory of writers having no idea what they wanted to do with a character, besides conveniently use them to move the plot along when needed.
I liked it, read the books immediately after and the character changes they made were a double edged sword. They basically turned on character from the book into 3-4 in the show. I thought character interactions were done well in the show but individual characters could feel left out to dry sometimes.
@@jxn314 Are you sure that one character in the book becomes 3 to 4 in the show? I don't really think that's the case. Maybe a couple of them are doubled...
Spoilers for season 1:
Clarence is Shi Qiang (detective)
Auggie is kinda Wang Miao (nanotech expert)
Saul is Luo Ji (wallfacer)
Jin is Cheng Xin (was gifted a star)
Will Downing is Yun Tianming (brain in Staircase Project)
Ye Wenjie, Mike Evans, Sophon, are basically the same
The San-Ti are the Tri-Solarans
Thomas Wade is Thomas Wade but I feel like he's a little different.... can't pinpoint how
Jack Rooney apparently was in book 3 but I don't even remember him lol
I actually found the characters in the show to be more interesting than in the books, which isn't saying much since the characters in the book were pretty _flat_ (anyone get the reference?). Still, since I love scifi so much and the ideas in the books were just so _cool_ it's one of my favorite series of all time.
@@personalanonymous3172 the way I interpreted it, from just book 1 they give character traits and plot points from the main character, Wang Miao, to Auggie, Jack and Jin. Jin is also based on a character from book 3, Cheng Xin, but has qualities of both like playing the VR game. I liked the changes overall, and hope they continue to make the characters shine going forward.
Perfect timing. I was just doubting if I really want to write, and now suddenly I do.
I love the example of exposition in the very first scene of "Killing Eve", where we were given info on the main character long before the first line, only with facial expressions and close-ups/fulls. No lines, no real "atmosphere"/setting, just pure cuts and wide/close shot combination - yet we discover crucial clues on who the main character is as a person.
Love your channel, good stuff.