Poll: Do you think there can be too much action/violence in a book/movie/story?

[Jacco]

I was talking with my friend the other day about books and movies and how sometimes they can just be exhausting or boring to watch because there is just so much going on all the time.

For instance, the film Black Hawk Down is slow getting going, but after the first 45 minutes or so, it gets going and it is literally just pure fighting and violence for the rest of the movie.

Compare that to a movie like, say, Batman, where there are large set piece action sequences but in between those there are long periods where not much really happens in terms of action.

Do you think if there is constantly fighting in a story, it is a bad story? Or do you prefer more action?

 

[Jacco]

Too much in terms of total, or too much relative to everything else?

Either. If action takes up 50% of the movie, then that could be both total and in relative to everything else

 

[Soviet Heavy]

Overexposure to anything breeds contempt for it.

 

[Relish in Chaos]

No, although I'm not a fan of films that have gratuitous violence, because they tend to be lacking in anything substantial elsewhere.

 

[ErwinGodfrey]

For me it kind of depends on the genre, the source material (If there is any), and basically what amount of action I expected from it before I actually went to see it. Like In the Christopher Nolan Batman films I expected a hefty amount of action broken up by some remarkably powerful drama for a film based on a popular DC comic, and that is what I got.

 

[StriderShinryu]

No, although I'm not a fan of films that have gratuitous violence, because they tend to be lacking in anything substantial elsewhere.

This is pretty much where I stand as well. Action, particularly when it's ultra violence topped with excessive blood and gore, is often found in media simpy because there's nothing else to grab your attention. It's not that violence is bad, in some of even the greatest movies it's downright necessary, it's just that it's easy to use it to mask shortcomings in other areas.

 

[Esotera]

Black Hawk Down was awesome...granted I've only seen it when drunk, but sometimes you don't ask anything from a movie other than to see people shoot at each other and make explosions for the majority of the film.

As for the original question, I'd say that beyond a certain point, if there's too much violence in the film in terms of time, it can detract from the plot, especially if it's unrealistic. The nature of the violence (whether it's like American Psycho or a cheesy B-movie) also affects this.

 

[Andy Shandy]

I wouldn't say so, I love The Expendables and half the script just seems to be Slyvester Stallone grunting to the best of his ability.

 

[dracina]

I feel it depends on the tone of the story, the world you create, the audience you write for, and if it serves a purpose. Senseless violence doesn't belong in your story unless the world you create is a very violent chaotic and/or dangerous world. And even if it is a dangerous world, you don't have to focus on it unless you want that sort of tone. Yet, if you glaze over the violence, even if it is extreme, it can still work. It's a delicate balance just as character development is. It's about balancing your world to make it believable and interesting.

 

[tippy2k2]

It's been stated but I'll state it again: Depends on what you are going for

For myself, BHD is one of my favorite movies because of how it handles the action. You start off slow as they introduce the few primary characters and then don't allow you to stop for most of the movie (you know, kind of like they were in a battle!

Along with that, there are movies that have the barest of story for the sole purpose of giving the guys reasons to do cool shit:

Shoot-out, Crank/Crank 2, and Kill Bill are a few right off the top of my head (I'd also, to a lesser extent, put Falling Down on this list). I considered putting The Expendables on that list but I absolutely hated that movie and therefore I pretend that it doesn't exist.

 

[IFS]

Yes, you need pauses between action to create pacing, or you will wear out the audience.

 

[Mr Binary]

Well, I don't have any problem with violence or gore or anything as long as there's breathing room to expand the story. I mean, I don't like action for the sake of action. It's all your own preference though.

 

[Vault101]

there has to be a point to it.....I dont belive in censorship if the work loses its edge..

like for example requiem for a dream..not exactly violent but theres alot of unpleasantness...but thats the point

 

[soren7550]

... For instance, the film Black Hawk Down is slow getting going, but after the first 45 minutes or so, it gets going and it is literally just pure fighting and violence for the rest of the movie. ...

That's because that's what happened. They were dropped into the middle of a very violent and very hostel part of Mogadishu and they quite literally had to shoot their way out. Their quickie mission lasted over a day, so there was a lot of fighting to be had.

So within the context of what the fuck happened, no, Black Hawk Down did not have too much action/violence. It quite accurately portrayed what happened during the Battle of Mogadishu.

Anyway, more on topic, there was this book I got from a book signing two years ago I think. Isinda [http://www.tatepublishing.com/bookstore/book.php?w=978-1-61663-305-9]. Was very over the top with the violence.

 

[Olas]

I love violence in movies, and if you don't, it's like you don't like tapdancing, or slapstick, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be shown. My mom doesn't like Abbott and Costello or Laurel Hardy, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't have been making movies.

This, violence isn't some inherent objective good or bad. It's an element in storytelling. Everyone will have their own perspective on it, react to it differently, and the creators just have to try their best to try and appeal to as many people in their target audience as possible.

 

[L0dest0ne]

A book with too much action would be boring. That's what movies are for.

 

[FalloutJack]

There is no overkill. There is only "Open fire!" and "Time to reload!".

 

[Jacco]

there has to be a point to it.....I dont belive in censorship if the work loses its edge..

What do you consider to be a "point?" Serious question.