Quote from: blakkieEven better yet Luhrmann's version Romeo+Juliet chopped the script down and made it into this glizy extended music video. Complete with a Cardigans song. Not something you'd typically associate with 'deep'. But hot damn did the movie ever work.

I have to add Kurasawa's Throne of Blood, which was his version of Macbeth (if memory serves). I mean this is a template of taking an idea and running with it.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: David RI have to add Kurasawa's Throne of Blood, which was his version of Macbeth (if memory serves). I mean this is a template of taking an idea and running with it.

Toshiro Mifune, running around at the end with, like, four thousand arrows sticking out of his armor, eyes as big as dinner plates, screaming at the archers?  So visceral.  Possibly some subtext to be garnered from the image, too.  

:toast:

Quote from: ReimdallToshiro Mifune, running around at the end with, like, four thousand arrows sticking out of his armor, eyes as big as dinner plates, screaming at the archers?  So visceral.  Possibly some subtext to be garnered from the image, too.  

:toast:

You know, that scene always left me flat.  Toshiro Mifune could produce a range of emotions, but terror never seemed to be one of them.

If it's a game that's primarily about the system, then there's not likely to be much subtext or theme involved, beyond perhaps some of the author's perspectives on how reality works.

But if it's a game that's primarily about a world?  Abso-fuckin-lutely I want it there.  Them and subtext tell me more about what a world is really like than some long list of place names and timeline bullet points.  It tells me what the game is about, what the conflicts are, what it feels like to live there.

But any subtext can easily be avoided.  I myself have bitched about a lot of the themes in the WW series, but I still played the games.  IME most of the players ignored all the angst and anti-establishment BS, and just played a game about some guy who's like, dead, but not dead, and can flip out and kill people.  Some people play Paranoia as a serious metaphor on society, and some take it for the laughs it was written to inspire.

But I want it to be there, because it helps me get a feel for what's going on, and I can then decide to keep it or toss it at my leisure, or just pass on the game.

Subtext is one of the things that separates good writing from great writing.  If it manages to get the writer's ideas about what the world is like into the back of your head without you noticing then it's great writing.  The oWoD, particularly Mage, fails in this because it wears on it's sleeve that same postmodern bullshitty "reality is relative" crap that I feel like I'm fighting against every day of my life

YotZ is loaded with subtext, both my stuff and the stuff that Tim's written.  I haven't yet read any of the other writers stuff, but I'm sure it's the same

Here's an example: which Jungian archetype (and this was utterly deliberate, I've asked Tim) do you think Becka represents?

Quote from: Dr Rotwang!I hadn't thought of that, but now that I do...what's the plot of Romeo & Juliet?  Teenagers from rival families wanna bonk, right?

  Except of course that Romeo and Juliet is full of subtext.  I'm not an English scholar but, for example, there's the fact that the play is structured not like a tragedy but like a comedy.  That Shakespeare in Love film reflected this by suggesting that he'd been hired to write a farce when he produced the play but one could also suggest that while R&J is a tragedy, Shakespeare was actually mocking the stupidity of their actions. (because if you ask me that ending's pure black comedy)

  It doesn't have to be something as subtle as that.  It can just be a strong authorial voice or vision that underpins the adventures.

  For example, in the group I'm currently playing with the adventures frequently take the form of our group starting off at the bottom of the ladder, going on a few adventures and slowly getting rich and acquiring status from the risks we've taken.  In the way the NPCs are played and the way our characters progress there's the constant idea that ultimately regardless of the time frame, human nature does not change and what has driven people to take risks is always money, sex and power.

  That's a message, and a subtext, and it's nothing more than someone with a clear idea of what humanity is writing adventures and while those adventures might well be vikings going on raids or Italian social climbers or Roman spies; they're always about the GM's picture of what motivates humankind.

Quote from: Hastur T. FannonSubtext is one of the things that separates good writing from great writing.  If it manages to get the writer's ideas about what the world is like into the back of your head without you noticing then it's great writing.  The oWoD, particularly Mage, fails in this because it wears on it's sleeve that same postmodern bullshitty "reality is relative" crap that I feel like I'm fighting against every day of my life

But that's in a very concrete sense the basic premise of the game: not only the writing but even the mechanics are built around the malleability of reality. Expecting all of it to be hidden inconspicuously somewhere in the background is not unlike being disappointed that a zombie RPG involves actual non-figurative zombies, and that instead of struggling to get out of a busy mall through the crowds during a holiday rush your character might have to fight against creatures that don't exist in the real world.

Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalExcept of course that Romeo and Juliet is full of subtext.  

Absolutely - that's a given.  No argument here.

This was a reference to the idea that complexity does not immediatlely qualify as high art and that simplicity is not necessarily equal to lowbrow.

Quote from: ReimdallAbsolutely - that's a given.  No argument here.

This was a reference to the idea that complexity does not immediatlely qualify as high art and that simplicity is not necessarily equal to lowbrow.

But If R&J IS full of subtext then it proves my point.  It's a simple enough plot that's rich in subtext and has impeccable highbrow credentials.

Quote from: Mr. Analytical

But If R&J IS full of subtext then it proves my point.  It's a simple enough plot that's rich in subtext and has impeccable highbrow credentials.

Pfft... the thing that makes Shakespeare awesome is that he appeals (appealed) to both high and low brow. Even his "intellectual" or "tragic" pieces were chock full of not-quite-necessary violence (the opening scene?) and crude sexual comments (also the opening scene?) in addition to the specific appeals to the highbrow (waaaaaaay too much allusion to waaaaay to obscure works for most of the lowbrow crowd) and the universal issues (if someone isn't hit by lowbrow comedy and doesn't feel smart for getting a joke no one else did, one could always fall back on empathising with one or more of the characters)...

So no, Shakespeare was hardly straight highbrow, at least not in his day. It's a simple plot. It appeals directly to multiple audiences. The subtext is just what you don't notice right off the bat because it was aimed at someone else in the audience.

EDIT: Not that I see RPGs as remotely Shakespearean. I just think a proper breadth is necessary, where depth is overrated.

Quote from: beejazzPfft... the thing that makes Shakespeare awesome is that he appeals (appealed) to both high and low brow. Even his "intellectual" or "tragic" pieces were chock full of not-quite-necessary violence (the opening scene?) and crude sexual comments (also the opening scene?) in addition to the specific appeals to the highbrow (waaaaaaay too much allusion to waaaaay to obscure works for most of the lowbrow crowd) and the universal issues (if someone isn't hit by lowbrow comedy and doesn't feel smart for getting a joke no one else did, one could always fall back on empathising with one or more of the characters)...

So no, Shakespeare was hardly straight highbrow, at least not in his day. It's a simple plot. It appeals directly to multiple audiences. The subtext is just what you don't notice right off the bat because it was aimed at someone else in the audience.

EDIT: Not that I see RPGs as remotely Shakespearean. I just think a proper breadth is necessary, where depth is overrated.

But see, that's exactly what he did. Started with the basic and layer on a huge amount of depth while keeping the basic intact and unclutterd. Four hundred years later he is still an incredibily popular playwright, if not the most widely famous among English speaking people.