Does Current Pop Culture have a "Too Much Lore" Problem?

[HMARK Center]

Hearing people discuss a lot of recent movies based on 70s-80s properties, I'm struck by how often a major critique I hear is how the originals in the franchises had "simple premises". It's true, really:

-Predator is pretty much a slasher film, but with jacked, super-manly dudes instead of scared teens and an alien with a subtly hinted at backstory instead of a serial killer.
-Alien is a stalker film with similar slasher overtones featuring a creature with no established backstory.
-The Terminator is a chase film involving a nearly indestructible machine; again, only bits and pieces of the future he comes from are shown.
-The 1980s Thing is a paranoia-driven horror film (based on a short story/older film, of course) where, again, the creature doesn't have an origin beyond "a ship crashed here".
-The original Halloween doesn't try and tell us why Michael Myers is so messed up, dude's just a force of nature used to tell a story about fear and violence invading an idyllic suburban setting.
-Even Star Wars is a basic hero's journey arc with fantastical settings and magic powers, it just happens to be set in space.

Point is, at their hearts these are simple pitches: slasher film, horror film, paranoia story, etc., just with creatures or settings that provide a vehicle through which to tell that story. We don't hear a ton about their origins (Terminator excepted), because their backstories aren't really important: what's important is utilizing them to tell the type of story the filmmaker is looking to create. A nod or background element here and there is fine, like Predator cleaning/collecting his trophies, but it doesn't go much further.

As these films get more sequels, prequels, reboots, soft reboots, and soft se-boots (ENDLESS TRAAAAASH!), so often the new films spend a bunch of time explaining things and providing exposition on backstory, origins, and "lore"; and the films tend to suffer for it. Like, even if it wasn't bad or anything, is there really any reason for a young Han Solo film? Did we really need a prequel to The Exorcist to tell us "the demon doesn't like Fr. Merrin"? You know what I mean.

It's not limited to franchise movies, though: I think it's even happening too often in more original sci-fi, fantasy, and horror films. That kind of explains why a film like It Follows worked for a lot of people, I think, it was a relative simple premise where the antagonistic force was used to further the story, not to provide some weird background and lore.

I even think it's true for a lot of old school video game franchises: I don't think it's a coincidence that the two main old school video game franchises that have managed to stay very strong into the modern era, Super Mario and Legend of Zelda, star heroes who don't or barely speak, and don't typically carry a plot over from one game to the next. Zelda might have some lore to it, of course, but by its very nature, being a "legend", it means the tale and its characters and settings can be told and retold again without having to keep too many story elements consistent from game to game.

Is this all a residue of long-running, story-heavy franchises like Harry Potter and Song of Ice and Fire being popular over the past twenty years, implying that people want sweeping epics where every nook and cranny of a film/game's "universe" is expounded on? Is it just the desperation to keep making new films/games in 70s-90s franchises, since us Millenials are nostalgia-driven by that era, and studios feel compelled to add needless wrinkles and hope it gets us to show up and buy a ticket/game? Does stuff like this indicate we have an issue of indulging "geek culture" too much? And is it always necessarily a bad thing to do stuff like this? I mean, Terminator 2 is great, right? Just had this in my head and wanted to see what people think.

[Hit Girl]

Yes, way too much, Sick and tired of lore, mytholgies, universes, and similar shit.

[2coldMack is even more baffled]

Nah, love lore. The more I get, the more invested I feel in the universe. Even in a universe where the lore is hit or miss(looking at you, Star Wars/Harry Potter), there's usually more good than bad, and I can entertain myself with deep dives into it.

[Citizen Snips Has Left]

I was watching Teen Wolf a few weeks ago and was struck by the lack of explanation for anything. I guess they had the genes to be werewolves. The whole town seemed to accept it pretty easily. It really helped the movie move along, not having to worry about all the minute details of such a crazy situation.

[Mr PONYMANIA Mr Jenzie]

THE LEGO MOVIE

[Natural Born Farmer]

Nah. I think any adult viewer of a film like “The Predator” would wonder about the culture that creates such a being. If the filmmakers don’t answer, fan fiction will. May as well have fun with it.

What I think is a problem is planning for films as franchises, and consciously not telling a complete story in the hope people will show up to have those questions answered the next time around

The Matrix, for instance, creates a huge world with a lot of possibilities. But even if the first film had been the only story ever told in that universe, it’s still a satisfying experience. No post credits scene to set up the next one, no massive plot twist in the last ten minutes. Would that more films did it like that.

[Juice]

Too many movies are going for a universe because Marvels made billions. Sequels are made to make money, not build on lore. Most times sequels are cheaper than the first and make less at box office (most of the time not all, and there are exceptions).

Instances where people have wanted lore, horror, like The Conjuring universe has made tons of money while having tons of connected spin offs. Each film has added more lore to the over all Conjuring and has made it quite interesting and fun to re visit yearly.

DC ignored lore, instead just cameoing characters to pretend there was lore to capture the Marvel audience without using the method.

I wouldn't confuse greedy studios trying to make more money with audienced demanding more backstory/mythology. By all accounts today we have too many distractions and shorter attention spans.

If anything the streamers that have followed Netflix in original programming, and cable tv giving great long form and digestible stories have allowed things to be more intricate and detailed.

I haven't played a game since gta5 and cant speak for that. However Fable imo always did it right. The gamer was in charge, there wasnt hours of cut scenes and had more in game play.

[Fundertaker]

Mostly because "lore" is mostly "origin story" and "sequel/prequel/side project" fodder for big companies. I don't think any major pop culture studio gets a potential franchise on their hands and expects to be good with just one. It's mostly not actual lore but a away to have people to think "I have to watch/read everything to know!" and they make some more on it.

[Allie Kitsune]

I don't know if it's what people want so much as it is an easy licensing trap to fall into, because you figure that you have so much territory to cover that you can keep the gravy train running without having to change course all that much.

[Clash, Never a Meter Maid]

Not really, no. It’s easier than ever for people to find media to get into in 2018, and we process more information than ever. I’m not surprised that more lore-heavy movies, TV, games, comics, etc. are more profitable these days, and that a detail oriented plot with intricate buildup like Infinity War can make serious money with John and Jane Public.

However, I do feel the people behind these IPs should ideally target consumers who want to get sucked into its lore and more “casual” fans. It’s a tricky rope to walk across, but it’s possible. There’s some Star Wars fans who get deep into the mythology, the extended universe and developing their own Star Wars stories- and there are also casual, everyday people who just like to go see a SW flick every couple of years. They’re all equally valid SW fans.

The big reason why I don’t mind when things have a big story arc, or when a light hearted IP “grows the beard” and evolves (Adventure Time and Steven Universe being notable animated examples) is because they’re often a great source of inspiration for future creators. A detailed universe will often inspire fan art, fan fiction and OCs, and from there people start mixing and blending all of the lore they loved as kids into something totally original.

[Cyno]

I really enjoy world building but there's also a time and a place for everything. A lot of series benefit from rich lore, especially story-intensive franchises like fantasy and sci-fi series, and RPG's.

The cinematic universes are kind of out of hand but either because they're done poorly (DCEU) or really don't need them (Universal's "Dark Universe" that turned into a wet fart), but I've always appreciated efforts to flesh out a world so that it feels like it exists as a real place outside of our experience with it. This is especially nice with video games like the Elder Scrolls series and Final Fantasy XIV, which have incredibly well-done world-building and make me feel like I'm a part of a world that's existed for thousands upon thousands of years versus just existing for the sake of me playing around in it.

[Juice]

Van Helsing was great at the time. I haven't watched it in about 10 years, but it nailed the one and done crossover popcorn flick better than most of these long drawn out universe's have.

[Deleted]

People want to ape Marvel, which is funny since the reason Marvel has been one of the only companies to pull it off is the movies actually DON'T require you to see every one of them. Except for the big team ups, most of the universe building happens in post credit scenes. You can get by fine without seeing them. It's just like comics. People who don't read them go "I don't know where to start!" when the truth is you can just start anywhere and somewhere along the line someone in the work will have an exposition dump that catches you up.

[Starshine]

I don't necessarily agree, but at the same time I think there are problems with trying to get too deep into lore.

I think the deeper you get into the backstory of anything, the more niche you're making the property. Generally most audiences are fine with a one and done movie. The people who complain about how simplistic they are tend to lean more towards the more vocal fanatic base. Even with something like Marvel or Star Wars, despite them both being built on prior stories, you can still walk into those movies blind and understand the core story being told. I think something like Solo movie failing is a good example of what I'm getting at. Most general audiences don't care about the backstories. Especially when it deals with a character who in the context of the main series has already been written off.

[Fade is a CodyCryBaby]

Ultimately it all boils down to the The 7 story types:

Overcoming the Monster.
Rags to Riches.
The Quest.
Voyage and Return.
Comedy.
Tragedy.
Rebirth.

Is creativity a little bankrupt? Maybe. Maybe not. I guess it boils down to $$$. The industry is so vast these days (movies, Netflix, indies, YouTube, TV, etc etc) that I don't blame franchises going for an easy buck. As limp as it seems at times.

My Gf and I were just talking today how Harry Potter exploded when we were kids, is still selling a shitload of merchandise, has theme parks devoted to it, and probably has future films ahead. I wouldn't say there's too much lore...I'd say peeps should try to come up with new avenues of lore.

[Cela]

The internet has made it sort of needed. If people like a property, they want to delve really deeply into it. Used to be, you had to wait for a sequel or read a tie in book. But now everything has to have a wiki.

[sfvega]

I've never seen any of the superhero movies, but this constant same universe stuff just seems stupid to me. I like that people can nerd out about whatever they're into, and I like reading some of the super in-depth reddit posts/theories about TV shows I like. But if someone was like "Did you know that Cole Trickle from Days of Thunder and Paul Blake from Necessary Roughness exist in the same universe?" in real life, I would actively avoid talking to that person again despite the fact that I love those old trashy sports movies. Because I cannot imagine a timeline when I would ever be interested in something like that. So yes, have plenty of lore, but I'd rather not hear about it.

['Foretold' Joker]

It boils down to X-Files. Are you a conspiracy lore fan or a monster of the week fan?

I'm definitely the latter and it means I don't have to keep up every week/day/binge when watching tv or films.

[The Dark Order Inferno]

A standalone film should ne self contained and at the end it should make sense, even if there are questions unanswered. The problem is studios and filmmakers believe their film is good enough to kickstart a franchise and their focus is more on that and not producing the best film they can.

That said, the DC and Dark universes had bigger issues than lore, they were not good films. The Mummy was damaged by Cruise flexing his muscles and exploiting creative control to increase his screentime at the expense of everything else and the DC films were directed by someone who flat out doesn't understand the concept of selfless heroism, a core concept of the superhero genre. It's one thing to make superman flawed, it's another to make him cold, then he stops being superman.

[Futureraven: Beelzebruv]

Sept 24, 2018 6:22:49 GMT -5 The Dark Order Inferno said:

A standalone film should ne self contained and at the end it should make sense, even if there are questions unanswered. The problem is studios and filmmakers believe their film is good enough to kickstart a franchise and their focus is more on that and not producing the best film they can.

That said, the DC and Dark universes had bigger issues than lore, they were not good films. The Mummy was damaged by Cruise flexing his muscles and exploiting creative control to increase his screentime at the expense of everything else and the DC films were directed by someone who flat out doesn't understand the concept of selfless heroism, a core concept of the superhero genre. It's one thing to make superman flawed, it's another to make him cold, then he stops being superman.

Yeah, there's almost no such thing as "a film" anymore. At the very least everything successful is meant to be a trilogy if not a franchise or even a universe.

With TV, I think there can be a balance depending on the show. Some can be all myth arc, some can be story of the week, some can be a mix. It's like everything wants to be "important" now, whatever that really means.