Welcome to part second part of the movie Jurassic Park in which I am trying to analyse the story-telling.
In a previous post I discussed the first fifty minutes of the movie including the introduction of the central characters. In this part I am going discuss the remaining two hours of the movie which might conceivably make for a very long post were it not for the fact that most of the movie is a lot of the same stuff: the humans trying to deal with the predatory dinosaurs and the dinosaurs trying to deal with the humans(by eating them).
We left part two with the picture of the dinosaur with the name I have a hard time typing properly: the triceratops, a kind of heavily armored rhinoceros(I am probably offending some dinosaur experts for this triceratops probably has got nothing to do with the rhinoceros.) The poor animal is ill and therefore lies prone on the ground. Which is handy for patting it.
This scene had me puzzled: why is there no fence between the cartrail and this particular dinosaur? I thought there were fences on both sides of the trail, but I was wrong apparently. The fence was meant to keep the meat eating dinosaurs inside I guess. But if so, why do Grant and the two kids climb a fence to get at the other side to escape an approaching T-rex(i think, for we don’t see it but only hear it) just to discover that there is a T-rex at the side they escaped to. Also this scene seems to add little to the story.. unless the illness of this triceratops and the illness of the brachiosaurus later in the movie are connected(which I though it was) and would point to a kind of War of the Worlds development in which the dinosaurs would all be killed by a disease. But nothing of the sort happens. This leaves me to believe this scene is just meant to show a dinosaur upclose. By the way, in the extra features there is a storyboard for a scene with a baby triceratops toppling Lex in a funny scene. It didn’t make it into the movie.
Part 3: The shit and the fan
We are now past the fifty minutes mark. In the previous part the scene is set and the characters are introduced. The domino pieces have all been put in their place. Time to make them fall. So it is time for action and we start with a rain storm. Storms are very neat devices in movies for the rain and the wind add to the confusion, help make communication harder thus adding to the isolation, make things more difficult to see and have then storm break things.. like power lines.
And after this climatic series of images the story actually settles down and is the same for the rest of the movie as Raptors and a T-rex make live difficult for the human cast and eventually kill four of them. There are a few more developments:
Grant’s character develops as he takes care of the kids, thus overcoming his unease with children.
Hammond and Sattler have an emotional moment. While Hammond in an emotional moment shows he has not learned anything and vows to do better next time, Sattler goes even more emotional on him and tells him that people are dying for crying out loud cause he fucked up.. How about some yoghurt?
After some tos and fros the surving cast ends up in the central building and Hammond calls for a helicopter to pick them up after Sattler reactivates the system. The group then heads for the helicopter pad while being chased by raptors. These manage to corner Grant, Ellie and the kids in the central hall, but they can escape when a T-Rex attacks the raptors.
Part 4: the end
So it’s time to finish the story and this is actually done in one of the better scenes in the story(in my humble opinion) which summarizes and then wraps up the storyline.
So this ends part 2 and we even have a part 3 to wrap up and make some overall observations.
I write reviews, but not because I want to criticize things. Actually I like to learn how to write and tell stories, so that is why I write them. On one level to learn to write the reviews themselves and on another level to analyse the storytelling of that which I am writing about. Also I like to look at pictures as part of storytelling. And I like to make pictures.
In this post I want to take a look at Jurassic Park, the movie made by Steven Spielberg based on a script written by Michael Crichton, which was an adaption of the book written by Michael Crichton himself. I will focus on the movie and not discuss the book or compare it to the book as I never read the book. It is also not important to me as I want to write about storytelling in the movie Jurassic Park.
I picked Jurassic Park simply because I just saw it together with my daughters and I think it is a good example of storytelling. It might surprise people that I never have seen the movie before, but there is a simple explanation for it: I live under a rock. Yup, a lot of things escape my notice.
Jurassic Park is a good tale and probably would have been an exceptional tale if it wasn’t for some (very) weak parts. I will try and address those weak parts as we go along so we can consider them and perhaps learn from it. Note that what follows are spoilers as this post is meant to analyse the story and thus will reveal the story and that means: spoilers ahead.
Summary of the movie
A group of people made up out of scientists, a laywer and two kids, inspecting a theme park filled with living dinosaurs before it opens become the target of ravening dinosaurs when a disgruntled employee sabotages the security systems to steal dinosaur embryos. After a few encounters and deaths the group and the park owner escape by helicopter.
The story of Jurassic Park is about a rich old man named John Hammond who is the head of a bio-engineering firm and who made a theme park filled with living dinosaurs on an Island belonging to Costa Rica. Before the park opens he invites a group of three scientists to inspect the park; the paleontologist Dr. Alan Grant, the paleobotanist Dr. Ellie Sattler and the mathematician Ian Malcolm. The scientists are joined by a lawyer representing some otherwise unnamed investors who are concerned about their investments after an employee has been attacked by a dinosaur. In addition they are joined by Hammond’s grandchildren Lex and Tim Murphy.
The group gets a tour of the park during which they run into problems as the electrical touring cars fail. These problems become serious when Dennis Nedry, a disgruntled employee of Hammond, sabotages the security programs to steal dinosaur embryos and deactivates the electrical fencing that help keep the dinosaurs inside the park. In addition a storm approaches the theme park to make matters worse.
The group is attacked by a T-Rex that eats the lawyer and the group splits in two. Grant and the two kids flee further into the park, while Sattler calls in the help of the head warden of the park, Robert Muldoon to help the now wounded Malcom. The three then reach the main building where Hammond and his chief engineer Ray Arnold are frantically trying to get security systems and fencing back online. They discover that the computer running the software that controls the park is made inaccessible by Nedry, who is nowhere to be found as he tried to escape the park with the embryos, but got killed by a dinosaur.
Hammond and Arnold decide that to restart all the systems to get them working again and gain access. So they shutdown all systems, but to start them they have to throw some switches in a nearby underground bunker. Arnold leaves for the bunker but disappears, so Dr. Sattle and Muldoon, leave for the bunker as well. When they reach the bunker raptors appear. Muldoon fights them and is subsequently killed, gaining time for Sattler to enter the bunker to restart the systems. Sattler succeeds in doing so and then discovers that Arnold has been killed by a raptor that is inside the bunker. She manages to escape the bunker and returns to the main building.
In the meantime Grant and the two children, Lex and Tim arrive at the main building after a stay in a tree and a trip through the park. Lex then uses the computer system to activate the parks systems and this allows them to call for help. In the meantime a raptor appears in the main building and the group decides to make their way to the helicopter pad. Chased by raptors part of the group gets cornered by them in the central reception area, but they escape when a T-Rex attacks and eats the raptors.
Everyone then leaves the island by helicopter.
The story in parts
Stories are cut in parts that have a certain purpose. These parts follow each other in chronological order in which time usually follows a natural order. In Jurassic Park the story develops along a natural and predictable way. There are no jumps or flash back for instance. and time is not garbled up with things that occur later in the movie actually occuring earlier in the story.
The first part
First there is a part in which the stage is set and we get introduced to the characters and some background. In Jurassic Park, this part is actually pretty long as it takes a whopping 35 minutes. To keep us interested we get a few cliffhangers along the way.
But first let’s first meet the main characters: Dr. Ellie Sattler and Dr. Alan Grant. We meet some other people along the way, including two kids, but in the movie the camera will follow these two. With an exception being made for the two kids at some moments. Grant will head out with the two kids and Sattler will team up with Malcom and other secondary characters. My eldest daughter said Ellie is the blond haired girl that is only good for getting into danger so she can be saved by men. I said she can’t be as she is a doctor and main character. It turned out that my daughter got it right.
If you want to strip the story down to essentials then it’s Grant who is the main character as he is the only one who has a story arc of sorts in the movie and he actually develops(he is learns to deal with kids!) Non of the other characters have any kind of arc and some are just in the movie to get eaten.
The other two important characters in the movie are god and the devil. It’s Hammond vs Malcolm as Malcolm, dressed appropriately in black, directs criticism against the creator of life Hammond(dressed in white) for meddling with nature and predicts he will be unable to control of his creation. It’s humans playing for god. It is science vs nature. And most of all: it’s a storytelling device to set the mood for what is about to happen. It will go wrong.. I tell ya! It will!
Beyond these roles they don’t have much more to add to the story. Hammond is the creator who witnesses his creation going wrong and we get a kind of wrap up into the end of the movie where he and Ellie discuss the failure. Malcolm flirts with Ellie Sattler for short period in the movie but then is out of the story because he is wounded. Yeah, he doesn’t get eaten.
And then there are kids who are there to get threatened so an Grant can save them and bond with them as a surrogate father.
And then there are the people who are meant to be eaten. The lawyer with dubious morals, the thieving nerd, the chain smoking black guy and the courageous but ineffectual park warden. They even got names in Jurassic park, but no personality. They are just lunch. And of course to give us the feeling that there is danger. For without someone getting killed or eaten we wouldn’t think the main characters are in any danger.
The story itself
The very first thing we see is the attack on the employee. This establishes various things. It alerts us to the danger involved: some dinosaurs are dangerous animals you know. It immediately grabs our attention. It gives a reason for the lawyer to be there and it is one of the reasons for the main characters to be there: Grant is invited partly to condone the park.
The second cliffhanger is about fifteen minutes into the movie. Here we witness Nedry making a deal with an representative of a competing firm to steal some embryos from Hammond. Nedry will be instrumental to the chaos of the latter part of the movie. His is a computer nerd and he is heavy build because computer nerds live in attics eating junk food and drinking coke. An unhealthy mind creates an unhealthy body. Or is it the other way around? We get to the characters somewhat later.
The third moment is not a cliffhanger, but more to shake us up a bit. A cow gets lifted into the park and is eaten by a dinosaur. Since the movie is PG we are spared the bloody bits and we see just some plants shake and hear shrieks. It’s not very scary. They also no doubt wanted to delay showing the monster. Not showing monsters is a very good practice. Only I felt a bit sorry for the cow. We learn from this part that Spielberg has a sadistic streak in him. Or do meat-eating dinosaurs only feed on live animals? Tsh. Choosy buggers.
To keep us interested also during this part of the movie we are enticed with the possibility to see some dinosaurs. Surprisingly the first dinosaurs appear about twenty minutes into the movie and they are the only ones we see in the first part.
Well… not quite.. we see some dinosaurs being born in this scene that reminds me of Alien somehow. No face hugger jumps out of that egg though. It’s a bird that hatches from an egg.. Eh.. a baby raptor.
We have some other things occur in this part.
There is nice sequence about 20 minutes into the movie that explains how they created the dinosaurs. This bit is actually introduced quite smartly as it’s introduced in the story to the main characters as what is going to be presented to the visitors of the park, but it’s also meant for the watchers of the movie to understand a bit of the science behind the movie.
At 32 minutes into the movie there is the discussion between god and the devil which I mentioned earlier which is part of a bigger discussion about using science to create these dinosaurs. Grant and Sattler: you don’t know what might happen. Malcom(the devil): it will go wrong. The lawyer: if there is a profit in it then do it. I found this attitude for a lawyer a bit strange as it seems to me that a lawyer is more concerned with lawerlike things and that profits are more the concern of business types. In fact a lawyer might as well be against it because of the judicial complexity this causes.
The second part
The second part starts about 35 minutes into the movie and last for about fifteen minutes. This is where the tour starts that will expose the the main characters to danger. Incidentally this is also the part where the children are introduced. If you were to cut of the whole first part from the movie you might still be able to follow the movie. This part is therefore a lead up to danger: the start of the movie. In other words a second setup.
This part is mostly for setting up some interaction between the various characters as until now we have just been introduced to them and we have been enticed with the non show of dinosaurs. Time for some action. The pace of the story picks up as various things start to happen. Malcom flirts with Sattler. Hammond and Nedry get into an argument. Malcom makes some snide remarks in the camera that Hammond reacts to. And Grant leaves the car, dragging the rest along. For some strange reason Sattler steps out of the car at the wrong side. I guess this might have something to do with the camera.
The party gets out so we get to see the first dinosaur upclose . It’s a triceratops. Hurrah! But it is ill! It is also the last time we get to see a dinosaur that close, except for a meeting with a brachiosaurus. And of course when people get eaten or attacked.
It’s about 50 minutes into the movie and it’s time that things start to happen before people start to leave the theater.. Hence things happen: the nerd makes his move, the rain hits the park and the electrical fences and cars start to fail.
Continued in the next post (as this post is long enough). To be continued…
I planned a long winded boring post on Dragon Age Inquisition and after reading the draft I deleted the draft and decided to redo it in a more fun style. So I let my two Nekos chat about Dragon Age. I had to bribe them with ice-cream because Jenney Penney doesn’t play games much, but only reads books and stuff like that and Krisp doesn’t like hurting things so she only plays games like Tetris, the Sims or Lollipop Chainsaw.) Because we need a level of supposed professionalism I will throw in the occasional remark.
Here are my two nekos so you get an idea of where this is going.
“Why is it called Dragon Age?” Krisp said while she was drinking a cup of mint tea very slowly cause it was hot.
“Cause it got a lot of dragons?” Jenney she shifted her glasses and bowed towards the screen because she was trying to get her party of heroes to deal with a huge lizard like creature.
“Won’t be any left after we are through.. We are going to kill like a whole lot of them and then we get to be called Dragon Hunter! Look.. we just need eight more.”
“Poor dragons. Whatever did they do to earn such treatment?”
“Well, eh.. it is part of a quest. Kill ten dragons and you did the quest! Like the quest to gather ten elfroots so the healer can heal people. Not that they seem to bother anyone.. except maybe for that first dragon that has scared off some dwarves who were operating a mine. And maybe those three in the Emprise who are nesting in human buildings.”
(Merit: it seems that standing in the way of free enterprise gets dragons killed.)
“Maybe people get a bit nervous when there are big flying creatures about that can eat them. I would be!”
“Some of these big creatures live in remote desert places..Not that it saves them from being done in by my band of marauding heroes! I got to finish this quest don’t I? Can’t have a 9 out of 10 score! Can’t be an almost-got-them-all-dragon-hunter. It is all or nothing!”
“Sounds more like a dragon exterminator than a dragon hunter to me.. doesn’t it?”
“.. And after we are done they have to change the title of the series from Dragon Age to.. eh…Undragon Age? Hurlock Age?”
“Whatever species is next in line to be exterminated.”
“Anyway, after we done with the dragons we are going to save the world.”
“Or die trying,” Krisp giggles.
“And then reload to try again.” Jenney said.
“So what did you like about the game so far?”
“I like the lookies. Look at the nice landscapes. And with the sounds and effects they are nice.”
“I like some of the art. Like those cards. I like the style,” Jenney said. It is different from the rest of the game. Cannot say why. ”
“And this creepy statue^^.”
“Yes.. very creepy. Reminds me of this artist Giger.The prettiest I think is the card from Leliana, the red hair with the black raven and the white skin. Very pretty combination.””
“And I like these little games.. with the stars and such!” Krisp made signs in the air as if she drawing lines.
“Oh the constellation games. Yes.. those are funny.”
“A bit of a break in the constant killing that makes up for most of the game. Nobody dies from drawing lines between stars on a map of the sky.”
“Uhm… not directly, although they lead to hidden treasure that basically is made up out of items you can use to kill better.”
“Kill..Kill… Kill! A short chat, then more killing. Turn in some thingies. More killing after that.”
“It is that kind of game.”
“There are games that don’t have constant killing as entertainment. Like beyond Good and Evil or The Cat Lady or This war of mine or The Walking Dead..”
“But it is that kind of game.”
“I know.. but there is so much of it that it is no longer exciting.”
“Hmmm. It gets tedious after a while, even if they change your opponents. It has a tendency to become a grind.”
“But to remain positive: I liked the characters such as Cassandra.”
“Yes, lets’ have some screenies of the most awesome character in Dragon Age Inquisition: Cassandra.”
“Well. In my opinion, because she has a lot of background story and interaction with the main character so she is seems more real than most. Also she seems pretty normal so it is easier to feel a connection with her.”
“And who would be the least awesome?”
“Uh,, I dunno, but that might be Cole, although I felt the most disappointed about Blackwall. He has a great background story.. but they make a… let’s keep that for later. So the least awesome to me would be Cole or Iron Bull.”
“I think Sera is the most awesome,” Krisp giggles.
“Yes.. I love her silly remarks. She is a brat!”
“She is a teen: unpredictable, bratty, opinionated, childish and untamed. She speaks before she thinks. She is very hard to please as you have no idea how her reaction will. She is almost the opposite in character of Cassandra, who is dependable and sturdy, although she has her uncertain moments and doubts in areas she feels out of her dept and their interaction is funny. She is also certainly the opposite of Vivienne, who is a proponent of everything Sera hates: a high society lady full of herself who is also a magic-user. It amazes me that there isn’t a kind of clash between the two as they were made to be enemies.”
“So let us recap. The good: the mood of the game, the various art and the characters and the occasional mini games.”
“And now the bad!”
“Do we have to?”
“You don’t, because I know you don’t like that. So I just do it myself with a little bit of help from Dreary.”
“There is much you can say against Dragon Age Inquisition gamewise.. People moaned about the fetch quests, and they groaned at the hampered pc controls. But you know… you can live with those. Even the controls you get used to eventually. So it is all cool…” Dreary lighted her smoke and coughed.
“… but for the bad story. Oh geez, how the storyline sucks. They made a whopping big game. A Titanic of a game.. and it hits the iceberg of bad writing. Dragon Age Inquistion has by far the worst story of all the three installments. It’s not just a crappy story in itself, it is just really badly told as well.”
“Uhm,,, wish to elaborate?”
“Well, a good story needs a few key ingredients. Let’s hold this game against the checklist of good story elements. Just Google for key story elements and you get something like this: the best stories have a strong theme, a fascinating plot, a fitting structure, unforgettable characters, a well-chosen setting, and an appealing style.”
“Okay. let’s check them,” Jenney smiled.
“One: strong theme… Care to figure what theme they got?”
“Good guys overcome evil?”
“Yeah, that is about it. It is like. Let’s have them beat evil once more. Nothing my mam can’t come up with!”
“But Dreary, almost all games are like that… with the exception of a few.”
“Well, true.. but this is just step one. Not very original.. Let’s get to step two: fascinating plot.”
“So? Is it fascinating?”
“The plot? I think it comes down to: evil threatens the overwhelm world while the world is busy with their petty disputes, but a hero comes and unites the world to face the evil.”
“And the hero is you.”
“Sounds like dragon age I.”
“Yeah.. archdemon threathens Ferelden, while the continent is busy with petty disputes and internal strife, but a hero comes and unites Ferelden to fight the evil. Just need to swap out Ferelden for Thedas and the war with that traitor is like the war between the templars and the wizards. Same story, same plot, different names.”
“It is not orginal.”
“Nope.. and it gets worse, for we are not there yet. I would want to discuss structure later because it is the single most badly executed element of the whole, so we keep that for last. Let’s get to element four: unforgetable characters. So.. care to recall any of the characters?”
“I think Krisp and me liked Cassandra and Sera. I think Leliana, Jospehine and Cullen spring to mind because you interact a lot with them. I liked especially Cullen’s background story. Of course Morrigan makes an impression as always.. although she has doesn’t appear much in the story. And Flemeth has a very strong personality but she only appears for a very short moment.”
“Well.. who do you recall, Dreary?”
“I recall that obnoxious git Dorian, and that arrogant <censored> Vivienne because they are full of themselves. And of the adversaries: Lord Lucius and Samson. I can’t even recall the name of the main villain. I call him Sicko, cause his name was something like Cyco. Oh and that Tevinter guy in that funny suit that looked like a clown outfit who takes over the control of the wizards at Redcliffe… But by far the worst thing I recall is the background story of Blackwall.”
“Let’s discuss the Blackwall story.. as I found it rather farfetched myself and it showed so much potential.” <for those who do not like spoilers, please skip this bit<spoiler> and continue after when you see <spoiler end> <spoiler> <spoiler> <spoiler>
“So the background story of Blackwall in a nutshell is that he is actually a mercenary captain called Thom Rainier and he assumed Blackwalls identity after Blackwall got killed by some Hurlocks and just after Blackwall recruited Rainier. Rainier is therefore not a grey warden, but a poser twicefold. In addition Rainier is responsible for a massacre of a group of innocent people for which his men now pay the bloody price. Rainier feels guilty and confesses when he sees one of his men about to be executed.”
“Okay.. so what is wrong with this, you might ask? Well for one. Why did the original Blackwall recruit Rainier? Remember that grey wardens recruit new grey wardens when they show certain abilities and have the potential to survive their test. So why would Blackwall recruit this former mercenary captain that was lying low because he was one the run? At what point did he figure Rainier for a grey warden? He must have gotten an idea of the potential of this man, but at what time did he have to time to do so? It is not told. But then the assuming of Blackwall’s identity. It is utter stupidity. Now anyone familiar with Blackwall would be a danger to Thom, including anyone who knew the old Rainier. So he now runs two kinds of dangers. What a strange thing to do.
But then comes the last bit that makes the whole so unbelievable. Blackwall strikes me as a stable levelheaded guy with a strong moral code. My god, he is even carving wood statues. He so dependable and levelheaded that he is boring. Am I to belief that this guy is supposed to be a soldier who killed innocent people for money, then suddenly saw the light and turned away from his former live and made a major shift in his character to fit the new Blackwall identity? It requires some good writing to explain that change. And there is nothing. It is just: well I felt bad about killing people and I got the opportunity to pretend to be a grey warden, so I took it. Nothing during the whole story line leads up to this. Nobody comes along and says: hey you look like this Rainier chap. Or someone who knew Blackwall saying: oh hey.. you don’t look like him at all. In fact Rainier doesn’t even try to avoid other grey wardens.”
“This strange handling of characters pops up at every corner. Take Leliana for instance. At some point you go with her to a small temple. At this temple is a sister who turns out to be a spy for someone who is against Leliana becoming the new pope.”
“I think it was not the pope.. it was something like the Divine, ” Jenney said.
“Whatever… So at some moment Leliana turns on this woman and slits her throat even though you try to talk her out of it. It not only shows her to be a cold hearted <censored>, but it seems totally out of character. She is a spymaster willing to kill if necessary, but at no time, not in any other moment she strikes you as a cold hearted killer of unarmed people. In fact in DA1 she tells you that she opted out of this killing business because she hated it. But now she changes and does in this unarmed woman and tells you that she will deal with all her opponents in the same way because that is how you deal with them. In fact.. when the game ends she gets to be elected the new Divine and you get told how her reign is quite bloody. And you see it coming, but you get no say in this, even though the game suggest that you have a say in supporting who becomes the divine.”
“But without a doubt the worst character handling in the whole DA series is Flemeth who made the journey from an evil witch in DA1 who kills people to extend her lifespan, to helpful scary woman in DA2 who somehow survived her death in DA1, to finally morph into good Elven goddess in DA3 without any explanation or story line to illustrate this change. It makes no sense. It doesn’t follow from what went before and it isn’t explained or made visible during the games. It just gets dropped on you: oh by the way, you know that Flemeth person? The evil witch that kills people? She is a goddess of Justice!”
<spoiler end> <spoiler end> <spoiler end>
“But probably the worst handling of a character of DA3 is the main villain Sicko(Merit: Dreary means Corypheus) . He is just so run of the mill that you totally feel nothing when you kill him. He’s a flat uninspired generic baddie with no characteristic at all. He has nothing of the epic badguys that have at least some background and unique personality to them that gets revealed during the game. Even better: he should reveals a flaw in his being that eventually can be exploited by the hero. Instead he is just the disappointing endpoint of a series of bosses of which he is no doubt the worst in character and in a fight he is actually easy to beat. All the other badguys have more personality, more depth and more storyline. Sicko has nothing of the sarcasm of Irenicus from Baldur’s Gate two. He has nothing of the irony and mirth Zinyak from Saints Row IV. He holds no candle to cold calculating superiority of Sovereign from Masseffect 1(when you get to speak to him the first time this is such a great moment.) or the Saren, who at the end, when you confront him seems almost to come over, but then cries out that he can’t resist the reaper.. A main villain should hang over the game like a sword of damocles. If he is to be the ultimate scare, he should not be revealed until the last moment, if he is to be the obvious opponent he should gleefully mock the hero during setbacks. When he traps the hero, he should be arrogant and leave the room, saying something like: finish this maggot, showing his disdain for the hero by turning his back to him or her and leaving him or her to be finished by an underling. He should get under the skin of the player and be in his every thought. The player should either hate him or pity him. He should invoke a profound feeling for this ultimate enemy. But you feel nothing for Sicko.”
“That is my opinion,” Dreary smiled mirthlessly.
“Alright.. I think we can skip the well-chosen setting and an appealing style for most of it has been addressed above and the post is getting long, ” Jenney said.
“Okay. Let’s get to structure.”
“How about the structure?”
“Isn’t that more of a your thing.”
“Alright. I think on a basic level it is okay.. but it never shines. Most of the structure in the story is pretty fixed even thought there is an illusion of freedom. The story simply follows a straight line that runs from: an evil appears to the evil gets defeated. There is a nice moment somewhere at the start that has a twist and I wished they had more of those, but in hindsight it seems almost as if it was just an excuse to give you a cool castle.”
“But this one nice twist is offset by a bad one: the Halamshiral episode. This is the one where you visit the court of Orlais to settle who will become the ruler of Orlais as Orlais is made impotent by a civil war and you have to put the power of the Inquisition behind one of the contenders to force a decision, have peace in Orlais and gain a powerful ally. On the face of it you are introduced into a game of intrigue. The intent seems to be that you gather information to figure out who is who and who is playing who for a fool. In fact.. it is a kind of detective story in which you have to find the clues(and proof?) that shows you who is plotting against who and then you use this to your own advantage.”
“There is even a mechanism to do this. You have a time constraint that goes up and down depending on how much clout you have with the nobility of Orlais. If your influence drops to zero you get removed from court. So you get to work to gather evidence and while you do so you have to hold off the persistent attempts of the game to force you to make a decision. And then at the end all that work is pointless as the bad person just drops the guise and reveals herself by attacking you. So the next thing you do is just to reveal this bad person in a classic detective showdown where you just spout some accusations and the villain breaks down and confesses. It doesn’t require any effort on your part. It is just shown in cut scenes and the outcome is fixed. The whole plot and gathering of evidence is a total waste of time as it never gets used in any fashion. Afterwards you get to choose who of the contenders becomes the ruler in a totally silly ending in which apparently the side that looses just throws in the towel merely because you tell them to.”
“It is silly.”
“It is silly and garbled.”
“A masterpiece of nonsense.”
“And that is about it really. It is trite, incoherent, the characters are badly made and the structure rambles. ”
“Yet is is hugely popular…”
“Because it offers a lot of other things. You don’t really need a good storyline to make a buck. It just has to be a good game.”
“As a story it is therefore not very great.”
Dragon Age is a mediocre tale that has a few gems to make it shine but these are offset by awful moments. Overall the story rambles, is illogical or nonsensical. Characters can shine, such as Cassandra, but others are bland, such as Cole or Iron Bull, or handled in a strange manner, such as Leliana and Blackwall. Also it seems few decisions make for a different story. The story just follows the same line, perhaps with a few detours. This makes it less interesting to do a second or a third throughplay.
However, despite the mediocre tale, the game keeps being epic just because of it’s size, it’s gorgeous landscapes, the many small details of artistry.
I will try to collect links to other people writing about the stories of Dragon Age. If you have any of yourself, let me know or email..