This week’s screenings highlight how the ludic impulse from games can influence more traditional forms of media like film and television. How do you see the influence of gaming on films and television, in Run Lola Run, The Simpsons, or other texts we’ve watched this semester? Do you think that future viewers of linear media will want to see interactive elements or other ludic forms influence the viewing experience? How?
3 thoughts on “Responses for 12/2”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
The set up of Run Lola Run is definitely influenced by the ludic form. Lola has a mission that she must complete within a restricted amount of time. She has 20 minutes to somehow stop Mannie from robbing a bank to get money that was stolen from him–money that he owes to a drug dealer. She must find a way help him out, and she chooses to try to get her father to give her his money so that Mannie does not end up in trouble. She fails twice, through her and Mannie’s deaths–but the narrative is able to “restart,” allowing her to find the best possible way–within the repeated space/journey–to achieve her goal. Even the smallest battles, as if in a game, must be done to the best extent. This includes her bypassing the dog, which she does swiftly within the final attempt. She is not injured, she wins money, etc. She does everything better than expected by the end.
At the end of Portal, for example, I found a faster and more convenient way of killing the computer after the few times that I died. Of course, the difference between the movie and the game is that I had prior knowledge of what I did wrong to benefit my subsequent attempts, whereas the narrative completely restarts for Lola, the character. Then again, my character/avatar did restart, as opposed to me, the player, who knew what was going on. It’s an interesting concept and I think it would be awesome to see it explored in future narrative in film and TV.
It’s tough to say that she didn’t actually do anything for Mannie by the end of the narrative because her journey shifted during each time as a result of her actions. And as a result of her action and interactions with others, the world around her shifted. I think that’s a significant aspect about this film as it relates to games. It goes to show how narratives emerge from the player’s interactivity within the confines of the game and with other people taking part of it as well, especially in a multiplayer format. The only real constant in the movie was her mother, who she completely dodges each time.
Our first movie, Groundhog Day, is very similar to Run Lola Run in that starting over/best possible journey format.
I would just like to add that the thing that’s different about Groundhog Day, in regards to Run Lola Run, is that Bill Murray’s character Phil is aware that he is starting over. It is even more like a game in that sense.
Groundhog Day definitely involves a lot of exploring space and seeing what the character can do. What makes it feel less game-like for me is the shifting goal: does Phil want to escape, kill himself, have sex, fall in love?
As for Run Lola Run, I think there was one part where she did something she had to have learned in a previous life. The bank security guard told her she didn’t know how to use a gun and she switched off the safety, which Manni showed her how to do when they were robbing the store.
Also, there are the scenes where it feels like Lola doesn’t have control of her actions, the cut-scenes, if you will, at the beginning when she is establishing the rules (they can’t just run away), and after the first two lives, when the music changes and we watch the consequences of her actions play out. As a powerless movie-goer, I can identify with Lola’s inability to do things like grab Manni and leave town.