How much fan service is a bad thing?

[checkers65477.livejournal.com]

Although not a huge fan of the show, I've watched all the episodes of Downton Abbey over the years. I read a few reviews of the recent movie and many of them sing a common song--that it includes too much "fan service." I assume they mean the Wikipedia definition, "material in a work of fiction or in a fictional series which is intentionally added to please the audience." (Manga and anime fan service usually has a slightly different meaning, to include racy content meant to please fans.) The reviewers say the movie includes too many story arcs--a plot for every character--so no one is disappointed that their fave character isn't featured enough. A couple of reviews have also said that because no one dies or ends up unhappy (of course poor Edith can't be totally happy) the movie is fan service.

Well, I'm not sure how I feel about that and, of course, I started thinking about it in terms of the last QT book. The books have all had bad things happen to the characters but the endings have always been...hopeful, though not completely "happily ever after." Does a book have to have beloved characters die in order to be taken seriously? I feel like the Harry Potter and Hunger Games series both threw in a bunch of painful character deaths at the end there to, what, satisfy critics and be seen as realistic?

I love the Masterpiece Mystery Endeavour series, which has often ended a season on a real downer note, with deaths or tragedy for the main characters. This most recent season was different, with a really kick-ass exciting happy ending. And, when it was over, I thought, "this was so unrealistic as to the show's past universe but BY GOD I LOVE THE HAPPY ENDING." 

What do you all think about it? If an author gives readers a satisfying ending with a low body count, is that a bad thing? I guess what I'm getting at is...Gen doesn't have to die, does he?

Oh, and this is cute: Book Nerd Problems: Your Favorite Character Dies

Comments

[ibmiller.livejournal.com]

As a Jane Austen fan, I don't think happy endings are an artistic cop out or anything of the sort! That being said...each of the QT books has had a fairly satisfying ending, but also usually involves some fairly substantial loss along the way. I'd be pretty happy with that kind of ending in Return of the Thief.

[checkers65477.livejournal.com]

Exactly, me too. But, with each book Gen seems to suffer more and more and I worry a lot about him. Even if he ends up healthy/alive, he still bears the burden of the decisions he has to make as king.

Happy endings

[tiegirl.livejournal.com]

Wait, what’s this about Endeavour?????

Re: Happy endings

[freenarnian.livejournal.com]

I need to know more too, because I dropped off that bandwagon when it got sooooooooooooooo melodramatic. (Seriously, a tiger? And that weird/lame Great Gatsby rip-off episode?) But a happy ending sounds nice...?!

Re: Happy endings

[checkers65477.livejournal.com]

Yes, so melodramatic! I wonder if they did that to hide the giant plotholes. :-)

To make it worse, PBS cut out about 5 minutes of each episode to fit their time frame and some things just didn't make sense without having seen those scenes. But this season ended in a really, really good way, I thought. The last episode was super-cheesy and, maybe, fanservice-y for people like me who forgive it a lot of things to not have main characters die.

Re: Happy endings

[checkers65477.livejournal.com]

tiegirl, you watched season 6, right? The one that was on here in the US in July?

MILD SPOILERS BELOW
*
*
*
Other years ended with some bad stuff happening (characters shot or in prison) and the final episode this year (Degeuello) had me biting my nails and yelling at the television. But it ended in such a satisfying way!

[freenarnian.livejournal.com]

I've noticed this sad tendency of fan service/becoming self-aware in many TV shows and movies. Thor: Ragnarok, for example, was where I started to fall off the Marvel train. Not because it was a bad movie, but the tone was like a fan-parody of the previous films. That's just one example. Sherlock fell from such a great height (see what I did there?). I only bought seasons 1 & 2 of Downton Abbey because it got so kitschy after that. Also, because the characters I felt the most investment in where dropping like flies and being replaced by ones with no development or likability. I understand the reasoning behind the deaths of some characters, especially for a story like Hunger Games. I think most readers/viewers can tell when it's important to the plot vs. a cheap emotional prompt. I think it really boils down to good vs. lazy writing. I have no fears for QT in that regard! I mean... I DO fear, a lot, for Gen and all his gang, and hope they all make it out alive... but if they don't, I suspect there will be good reason. *gulp*

[checkers65477.livejournal.com]

I DO fear, a lot, for Gen and all his gang, and hope they all make it out alive... but if they don't, I suspect there will be good reason.

I hate it when you make so much sense. :-)

[freenarnian.livejournal.com]

I may talk sensibly but I assure you I will react emotionally.

0:)

[whataliethatwas.livejournal.com]

I haven't hard of fan service before so I had to go looking, and it sounds like there's a pretty hefty amount that's sexual in nature (accidental glimpses of private moments, zooming closer in on different body parts, etc.), or adding things to the story purely to please fans whether it fits within the overall context of the story or not. In the case of Downton Abbey, I see this kind of thing as more of a pandering to their fan base in order to increase said fan base and because of money. I don't have a problem with knowing what the audience wants and trying to create content that appeals to the public necessarily, but if you're cheapening what you're creating purely to increase the power of your cash cow, I don't respect your artistic efforts.

I think MWT's said she knew the entire story and told it to friends/an editor/someone for hours years ago. If she'd known all along that Gen was going to die and then after a major fan discussion on Twitter about needing him to live and then pushing back the deadline to completely rewrite the plot in a way that didn't fit with the careful structuring she's done over decades, I'd see that as negative fan service. Or if she were to suddenly retcon the story so that Pol never really died but had implausibly been doing secret spy service for the Attolian government in a way that was obvoiusly false or put in an entire chapter about a Costis/Kamet makeout scene that drastically differed from her romantic but 'less is more' approach, I'd see that as this kind of bad fan service.

I don't want to see anyone die, but so long as it is written in the same style and with the same level of crafting that has been in the series so far, I will find a way to make peace with it like I did the big zinger at the beginning of QoA years ago. :) I don't see MWT suddenly deciding 'oh, by the way, this is a Greek tragedy and everyone dies. The end.' At least not without writing it believably instead of just a dark Deus ex Machina ax chop at the end.

[freenarnian.livejournal.com]

Well said!

[readsintrees.livejournal.com]

I think by now we can safely say that MWT is impervious to fan pressure. Otherwise her rule of Not Telling would have been broken ages ago.

I do want to make a point about HP....although there were character deaths, she also did some fan pandering with that awful epilogue. THAT for me was the worse part of the whole series. There needs to be a happy medium between George RR Martin killing of major characters all the time in order to stretch the series, and never killing anyone and having them live happily ever after.

[drollittle.livejournal.com]

In a way, fiction in its entirety is fan service. Isn’t the point of it all to be enjoyed—the tragedy along with the happiness? If a story is poorly written it doesn’t really serve the fans.

In that sense, MWT is awesome at fan service :)

[ninedaysaqueen.livejournal.com]

*emerges from pile of 1040s like a vampire* Did somebody say Downton Abbey? :)

At first I was a little confused about why DA was in the same sentence as fan service, as I am most familiar with the definition of fan service that translates to beeewbs. XD

I just saw the movie, so I'll address that first.

I don't think the plot having an arc for every character was anything different then what DA has always done. Each season of DA has each main character having there own thread in the overall plot. That's just how the story structure of DA is set up.

As far as the character death issue... Hasn't DA had enough character death for you already, people? Though to be fair, I don't think JF intended half of the characters in the show to either leave of die. That was mostly due to actors wanting to leave the show.

I would also argue on that point, since (SPOILER ALERT) Granny Grantham talked to Mary about her approaching end. In other words, her character's death.

Furthermore, DA isn't a gritty, realist drama. I don't think a tragic ending would've suited the movie. There's nothing wrong with a happy ending.

Moving on... I think reviews like that are a symptom of a broader issue. Mainly, nostalgic properties getting spin-offs, re-makes, and extensions that serve little purpose to the art itself, but are intentionally rushed, cash grabs capitalizing on a popular media.

It didn't feel like that was the case with the DA movie, as it was written by the original author and felt like an organic extension of the story to me. Kind of like the Gilmore Girls revival.

Which brings me to my final point...

Killing off characters may give an author critical merit points, but unless your story has been building up to that moment and it actually serves a purpose in the narrative, the reader is going to receive it as either emotionally unsatisfying or pointless.

My worst offenders list for character death is Crooked Kingdom, BBC Merlin, and the Hunger Games. Some of the deaths worked and should be in there, but some served no purpose and just felt like the author waving their manuscript around yelling, "SEE HOW GRITTY AND REALISTIC I AM!"

Thus, I prefer believable over realistic. If an author truly wants realism in their story, write about a bunch of people eating, chatting about the weather, and groaning about how tired they are. Now that's realistic!

My favorite use of character death is in the Rooster Teeth series, Rwby (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ej-Yp35Y5Gg). Oh, and the Squire's Tales used character death very well. What those two have in common is that the character death was built up to and served a big part in the narrative.

This is all my long-winded way of saying, I don't believe MWT is leading up to a tragic character death. I'm certain Gen is up to something and there's more to his rumored illness, but I don't think he's going to die.

[checkers65477.livejournal.com]

Killing off characters may give an author critical merit points, but unless your story has been building up to that moment and it actually serves a purpose in the narrative, the reader is going to receive it as either emotionally unsatisfying or pointless.

Very true. But it's funny that what we expect in fiction isn't how the real work truly works. Random bad things happen all the time in real life that serve no purpose. Or maybe they do, in the narrative of life. In fact, now that I think about it, since we're all shaped by our experiences, each random bad thing changes us.

And yes, speaking of random character deaths, Crooked Kingdom is right up there.