Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Chekhov's Gun

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 181 posts

Re: Chekhov's Gun

#31

Post by Sharlin »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #7

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ChekhovSGun There are articles about the other linked concepts as well: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Foreshadowing https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MacGuffin https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RedHerring https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ShaggyDogStory

(Edit, sorry. Just an attempt at some dry humor, brought to you by the SCP infohazard division.)

  ****************************************************
  *         CAUTION: MEMETIC HAZARD DETECTED         *
  ****************************************************
  *                                                  *
  *   THE ABOVE COMMENT INCLUDES LINKS TO CONTENT    *
  *  CLASSIFIED AS A CLASS 1.3 WEAK MEMETIC HAZARD.  *
  *   VIEWER DISCRETION ADVISED BEFORE PROCEEDING.   *
  *                                                  *
  ****************************************************

Re: Chekhov's Gun

#32

Post by [deleted] »

xaedes wrote: post #27

"The Room", by Tommy Wiseau, is a movie where Chekhov's gun isn't applied. It contains lots of small happenings with no further relevance. It has lots of other issues, technically speaken. But together they make this film not only amateurish, but it also gives it a certain kind of realism. In real life stuff happens and still may have no further relevance to the "story" after all. In real life there is nobody enforci…

[deleted]

Re: Chekhov's Gun

#34

Post by nickthemagicman »

Sharlin wrote: post #31
matheusmoreira wrote: post #7

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ChekhovSGun There are articles about the other linked concepts as well: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Foreshadowing https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MacGuffin https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RedHerring https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ShaggyDogStory

(Edit, sorry. Just an attempt at some dry humor, brought to you by the SCP infohazard division.) **************************************************** * CAUTION: MEMETIC HAZARD DETECTED * **************************************************** * * * THE ABOVE COMMENT INCLUDES LINKS TO CONTENT * * CLASSIFIED AS A CLASS 1.3 WEAK MEMETIC HAZARD. * * VIEWER DISCRETION ADVISED BEFORE PROCEEDING. * * * ************************…

Am I on reddit right now?

Re: Chekhov's Gun

#35

Post by [deleted] »

pvg wrote: post #23
croes wrote: post #3

This principle kills surprises because a soon you see the rifle you know what will happen. A little bit of misleading is not a bad thing.

On the day they were going to kill him, Santiago Nasar got up at five-thirty in the morning to wait for the boat the bishop was coming on. He'd dreamed he was going through a grove of timber trees where a gentle drizzle was falling, and for an instant he was happy in his dream, but when he awoke he felt completely spattered with bird shit 'knowing what will happen' is not in itself a limit on good literature. You kno…

[deleted]

Re: Chekhov's Gun

#36

Post by matheusmoreira »

Sharlin wrote: post #31
matheusmoreira wrote: post #7

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ChekhovSGun There are articles about the other linked concepts as well: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Foreshadowing https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MacGuffin https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RedHerring https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ShaggyDogStory

(Edit, sorry. Just an attempt at some dry humor, brought to you by the SCP infohazard division.) **************************************************** * CAUTION: MEMETIC HAZARD DETECTED * **************************************************** * * * THE ABOVE COMMENT INCLUDES LINKS TO CONTENT * * CLASSIFIED AS A CLASS 1.3 WEAK MEMETIC HAZARD. * * VIEWER DISCRETION ADVISED BEFORE PROCEEDING. * * * ************************…

Sorry if I ruined anyone's weekend...

Re: Chekhov's Gun

#37

Post by ben_w »

croes wrote: post #3

This principle kills surprises because a soon you see the rifle you know what will happen. A little bit of misleading is not a bad thing.

I attended a talk from Digger webcomic author and artist Ursula Vernon, and she seemed to have a different approach. If I remember right, she said that instead of planning the whole thing in advance and placing specific Chekhov’s Guns as needed, she put in a lot of small detailed world building everywhere, allowing her to choose from whatever seemed appropriate at the time.

Chekhov‘s Guns are important for short stories (which is what Chekhov was famous for), but short stories are not the only type of fiction and they don’t fit everywhere.

Re: Chekhov's Gun

#38

Post by Sharlin »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #36
Sharlin wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Edit, sorry. Just an attempt at some dry humor, brought to you by the SCP infohazard division.) **************************************************** * CAUTION: MEMETIC HAZARD DETECTED * **************************************************** * * * THE ABOVE COMMENT INCLUDES LINKS TO CONTENT * * CLASSIFIED AS A CLASS 1.3 WEAK MEMETIC HAZARD. * * VIEWER DISCRETION ADVISED BEFORE PROCEEDING. * * * ************************…

Sorry if I ruined anyone's weekend...

Nah, I just meant it as a humorous reference to the well-known cognitive blackhole properties of TV Tropes.

Re: Chekhov's Gun

#39

Post by krsdcbl »

croes wrote: post #3

This principle kills surprises because a soon you see the rifle you know what will happen. A little bit of misleading is not a bad thing.

I'd argue that if the gun is shown to lead the audience on, but it not beeing fired is a twist to the plot or a relevant conclusion, then in the sense of the metaphor it still "has gone off"

Re: Chekhov's Gun

#40

Post by krsdcbl »

bambax wrote: post #15
croes wrote: post #3

This principle kills surprises because a soon you see the rifle you know what will happen. A little bit of misleading is not a bad thing.

Surprise is overrated. Suspense is superior. The best explanation of the difference is given by Hitchcock in an interview with Truffaut. We see two characters talking for 45 seconds. Then a bomb goes off, that was under the table. The audience didn't know there was a bomb: big surprise; but the dialogue between the characters is completely irrelevant and eclipsed by the explosion. Now imagine the same scene, but befo…

yet in OPs example, the "surprise" consists of a threat not being enactioned, therefore it is an instrument of suspense
Post reply on HN