I remember when I watched I am Ledgend I found the whole thing really odd that there were small moments and scenes that were obviously building up to somthing but went nowhere (because the decided to remove the enite point of the film and change the ending)FalloutJack said:OT: Speaking AS a writer, I'd like to say that some people probably complain too mucm, but also that some concerns are even shared by me. For instance, while this is not a deep complaint, I've made mention that we need to be a little more subtle with our Chekov's Guns and Macguffins. When a movie introduces a thing, but then doesn't have much of a reason for having said it right then and there, it's clear that it WILL be relevant later. Suspense keeping us more in the dark can be a power for good in this case.
A good use of the mechanic? Let's check on Ripley for a second in Aliens. Had to get a new job loading cargo with an exo-suit. It gets mentioned off-hand as part of Ripley's unfortunate circumstances after the Company dropped her, and then it gets USED in an amusing scene where she starts carrying her own weight around the marines, literally. It doesn't become apparent at the time that in a movie involving the terror of fighting acid-blooded aliens with guns and flamethrowers that the main character will fight off the Queen on the ship with a loader-suit.
anyway, just to clarify...
is checkovs gun a thing that its mentioned/seen earlyer in the work...and then used again at a time of great importance?
and is the macguffan an object that drives the plot? so like in Indinana Jones everyone is after "the ark" or "the grail"