RE: book review: God's Bolt, by Ron Forsythe

You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

book review: God's Bolt, by Ron Forsythe

in review •  2 years ago 

I think possibly we do, and that's sad because I'm a happy ending sort of person. I remember watching and then reading "When Worlds Collide" ... the earth was destroyed, but even then some of humanity managed to get to a safe place. There are still plenty of good stories to be told in which the evil is beaten and there's at least some hint of a better world beyond--but the entertainment industry hates that kind of story, as for some reason do most creators. Everybody celebrates "darker" ... I hate that.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

Well, in a way I can understand the writers who look for a different kind of ending to stories. That "happy end" thing does have worn off a bit. It does make a story a bit too predictable, don't you agree? With that, you always know from the beginning that everything works out well, you just don't know how. Basically, like the original Star Trek series. Well, except for the unnamed guy in the red shirt, for him it doesn't end well...
So in a way I can understand that writers take different approaches lately, and I'm not against it. I found stuff like Dexter or Breaking Bad quite innovative, for example. That being said, they are not doomsday stories really, only on a personal level. But those "Asteroid destroys earth. The end." stories now are a bit weird.

No, I don't really agree--there are lots of ways to get to a "happy" ending, up to and including bittersweet endings, or endings that aren't happy so much as having an opening for the characters to work toward happiness. Having said that, if someone wants to put unhappy endings into their creations, that's their business! After all, I don't have to watch them.

But in the end it all depends on how they do it. Having a protagonist struggle hard to overcome all obstacles, and in the end just lose, isn't my thing. Emily and I read a Stephen King novel called "Cell" that we really liked--the ending was open ended as far as whether the protagonist succeeds, but it was still possible at the end of the book. Then we watched the movie version, and the ending was nothing but "everyone is dead now and it was hopeless all along". I'm a big NO with that.

Sure it also a matter of personal preference, to be more inclined to positive ending stories. No doubt there is enough depressing stuff going on in the world, that there is no need to invent some more.
And of course the "unhappy ending" stories are not a new thing - also here the old Greeks were first and called it Tragedy.
At the end of the day its more important what happens during the story, rather than how it ends. What I'm saying is just, that things are shown in a different way today, especially in movies and TV. In the past it used to be all black and white - not the picture, the story line - good vs. bad, and good always wins. And it was like that for decades.
But thats what people wanted to see and pay for, I guess.

Often it's a reaction to what's going on in the world--like how musicals and screwball comedies were so popular during the Great Depression. I love a good musical, too! But even those don't necessarily have a happy ending, as "West Side Story" shows.

True, in difficult times people prefer "light entertainment". So what does that mean for our time? Is it too easy? Doesn't seem so to me...

It depends on the creator, I suppose, but light entertainment doesn't have to be easy, at all. I give you "The Sound of Music", for example, a joyous musical--about escaping from Nazis.