Comments on: We’re Running Out of Time!

By: Jason Mittell

Jason Mittell — Sat, 10 Apr 2010 21:20:31 +0000

My gut is with Sean, of course, but I do think we can point to 24 offering a different set of aesthetic pleasures than Lost, while highlighting how it frequently fails to meet those ambitions. For me, the promise of (pseudo-)”real time” storytelling would imply a degree of tightness in design – I find that the show is ‘taught’ but not ‘tight’ typically, if you catch the difference. Certainly not every serialized program should strive for Lost-like planning & complexity, but being different in approach isn’t an excuse for failing to live up to the promise of that approach.

So given the unique “pleasures” of 24 (which I think include the yelling-at-the-screen frustration), what would be the most organically consistent ending?

By: Jonathan Gray

Jonathan Gray — Fri, 09 Apr 2010 16:48:31 +0000

If it’s anything to judge by, the 24 videogame’s reviewers seemed to feel its lack of time-sensitivity was one of its great problems. I just finished a project in which I read all the reviews for this game, and while the script was universally praised, and the gameplay universally panned, a key problem seems to have been that it didn’t capture the show’s temporality. Which leads me to believe that said temporality is a huge part of the franchise.

As you note, it’s also important for allowing suspension of disbelief, since we’re willing to allow the story a whole bunch of silliness due to it. Take that away, and for the game, it was just another game, and take it away, and a movie will be just another movie.

By: Erin Copple Smith

Erin Copple Smith — Fri, 09 Apr 2010 16:25:58 +0000

I’m not a 24 viewer, but I tend to agree with you on this. Reading the article, I kept thinking, “Yeah, but…the real-time conceit is kind of the point and the beauty of the whole thing, no?” Plus, if the movie is still following the “crazy stuff happens over 24 hours” format, then the travel issue is still an issue, no? And if it’s stretched beyond 24 hours, then…what’s the point?

And a hearty HA! to the resurrection of Jack Bauer…the EW article actually mentioned that, too. 🙂

By: Derek Johnson

Derek Johnson — Fri, 09 Apr 2010 16:09:25 +0000

Thanks, Erin! It’s as loving as a eulogy can be, i suppose, when you spend most monday nights yelling angrily at the TV!

I’m equally ambivalent-to-negative about the purported film version. Yes, the real time conceit is a chore and is stretched to ridiculous degree every episode. But it’s that real time conceit that I think makes a lot of what 24 does pleasurable and tolerable. I recently read a blog entry that I can’t seem to find again right now that argued 24 would be great if it wasn’t 24. I couldn’t agree less. The fact that we can’t stop to ask a lot of questions and have to keep running with what the writers throw at us is what makes the show work (when it does). I’d be much more interested in seeing something more like the 2008 24 tv movie, “Redemption,” which took place in real time in just two hours, instead of 24.

Add to the fact the lackluster history of TV franchises extended into film (X-Files, Firefly, ST: TNG), and I’m definitely skeptical.

The beauty of 24, of course, is that they CAN kill Jack off in the finale, and then just resurrect him for the movie 🙂

By: Erin Copple Smith

Erin Copple Smith — Fri, 09 Apr 2010 15:20:43 +0000

Thanks for this, Derek. I admit that when I heard the final word (after weeks of speculation) that the series was being cancelled, my first thought was, “I want to know what Derek thinks about this!” I appreciate this loving and knowledgeable eulogy, as it were.

I’m interested in what you know/think about the purported 24 movie that Keifer and the gang say is forthcoming. In an interview with Entertainment Weekly, Keifer says he’s excited about the fact that a movie won’t have the real-time constraints that the conceit of the TV series put upon issues like travel time, etc. As he notes, because of this issue, the drama has always had to come to them–in California–whereas in a film, they’ll be able to expand the scope. At the same time, though, I have to wonder if that, then, makes a film version less “24” and more “terrorist-based storyline featuring characters you know and love.” Which might be OK, of course, but is still different.

Not only that, but the fact that there is likely a 24 movie on the horizon means that the series has additional narrative constraints as it wraps–they can’t exactly kill off Jack Bauer, etc.

By: Sean C. Duncan

Sean C. Duncan — Fri, 09 Apr 2010 14:38:25 +0000

Yeah, the difference is that 24 sucks!

(Sorry, couldn’t resist.)