Debate on Plot

[rainbowsaregay56]

Recently, i watched an animation that had no plot whatsoever. Random crap pulled out of their asses. Which isn't what I didn't like. Creativity is randomness itself.
I didn't like the fact that there was no plot. It was supposed to be a collab, but lacked interesting parts of a collab. Some people agreed with me that a plot was the missing element, some disagreed, because they pointless things.
Well I would love for a reply from you guys on whether plot is important in a flash. Username "MorrowDays"(the guy that led Cardboard City's production) disagrees, saying collabs don't have plots. I disagree saying firstly, that wasn't a collab, and also, that plot was what gave the flash purpose.
Now I realize that some flashes can be completely random with no direction or plot, and still be front page material. But that is very rare and most simply don't possess the creativity required for such a feat.
Basically, just give me feedback on whether plot is necessary to a good flash or why it isn't and the reasons for your choice.
Thank you
RG56

[Dad00]

collabs dont tend to have plots because it is just a collection of animations have a look at the red line

[PastryMan]

Its very difficult and challenging to have a well developed plot within a collaborative effort, simply because each part would have to have the same characters.

If everybody needed to use the same character then styles would clash and it would be a very strange animation. It can be nicely executed if done well, and it has been done before, but is still a challenge.

Now, you CAN have a plot that consists with each part having different characters, for example: a certain danger that each artist's character/s must face.

In conclusion, most collabs on New Grounds are either purely for shits and giggles, or a more artistic approach (such as the "Cardboard City").

[Jin]

Plot is a choice, and so is collaborating.

Solo project with plot, solo project without plot, collab with plot, collab without plot.
What is good or bad cannot be judged by the presence of plot, but the content.

[rainbowsaregay56]

At 7/14/08 03:43 AM, PastryMan wrote:

Now, you CAN have a plot that consists with each part having different characters, for example: a certain danger that each artist's character/s must face.

In conclusion, most collabs on New Grounds are either purely for shits and giggles, or a more artistic approach (such as the "Cardboard City").

Exactly. All you guys raise the same point, which would be the main one. Collabs don't have plots.
But I disagree. I believe that each artist in the collab should create his own section of the collab with a plot. That makes it more like a bunch of small stories, and the rapid changes are more likely to keep my interest as well as others that agree with me.
As I see it, his collab was utterly boring. I assume you've all seen it on the front page? Well, as artistic and unique it was, I could not finish it. It was just too random. Now the author called me out on this, calling me "impatient" and telling me that I have no value or appreciation for abstract things.
Well that's wrong for one of my favorite authors is Salvador Dali, the most abstract artist I know.
Cardboard City didn't have any meaning. MorrowDays claims it used subtext. I challenged him with the fact that if I can't see the subtext, chances are every other NG user cannot.
It's just cardboard. With water. Then getting dried. Then some guy in a balloon
Where's the plot? Where's the story?
Responses?
thank you and forgive me for the rant

[MorrowDays]

I actually didn't say it used subtext.

you said that none of the reviews said it was good, and I said that if you were being observational, and using subtext, you'd have noticed that if they didn't flat out say 'it was good', they left a nice score.

this whole thing is getting really childish.

but I'm intrigued by the answers to this thread. I liked what you had to say jin, thats a very good point, about content over plot, whatever form the content happens to take.

cardboard city was meant to be peaceful, and relaxing. there was no intended story when we set out. just so you know.

[Pwntrocity360]

Collabs are just suppose to have random shit in them lol.

[PastryMan]

At 7/14/08 03:36 PM, rainbowsaregay56 wrote:

At 7/14/08 03:43 AM, PastryMan wrote:

Now, you CAN have a plot that consists with each part having different characters, for example: a certain danger that each artist's character/s must face.

In conclusion, most collabs on New Grounds are either purely for shits and giggles, or a more artistic approach (such as the "Cardboard City").

Exactly. All you guys raise the same point, which would be the main one. Collabs don't have plots.
But I disagree. I believe that each artist in the collab should create his own section of the collab with a plot. That makes it more like a bunch of small stories, and the rapid changes are more likely to keep my interest as well as others that agree with me.
As I see it, his collab was utterly boring. I assume you've all seen it on the front page? Well, as artistic and unique it was, I could not finish it. It was just too random. Now the author called me out on this, calling me "impatient" and telling me that I have no value or appreciation for abstract things.
Well that's wrong for one of my favorite authors is Salvador Dali, the most abstract artist I know.
Cardboard City didn't have any meaning. MorrowDays claims it used subtext. I challenged him with the fact that if I can't see the subtext, chances are every other NG user cannot.
It's just cardboard. With water. Then getting dried. Then some guy in a balloon
Where's the plot? Where's the story?
Responses?
thank you and forgive me for the rant

I appreciate what Card Board City was doing, it was a look into a world where everything was made of cardboard. It was artistic and brought up little interesting details for if a city like this existed.

The rain and everything wasn't trying to hint at a plot or some sort of conflict, it was showing how these people lived and what they did when there was a bit of downpour. The whole animation was basically "Theres a cardboard city, lets show the audience that hasn't been there what it's like".

[rainbowsaregay56]

At 7/14/08 06:29 PM, PastryMan wrote:

At 7/14/08 03:36 PM, rainbowsaregay56 wrote:

At 7/14/08 03:43 AM, PastryMan wrote:

Now, you CAN have a plot that consists with each part having different characters, for example: a certain danger that each artist's character/s must face.

In conclusion, most collabs on New Grounds are either purely for shits and giggles, or a more artistic approach (such as the "Cardboard City").

Exactly. All you guys raise the same point, which would be the main one. Collabs don't have plots.
But I disagree. I believe that each artist in the collab should create his own section of the collab with a plot. That makes it more like a bunch of small stories, and the rapid changes are more likely to keep my interest as well as others that agree with me.
As I see it, his collab was utterly boring. I assume you've all seen it on the front page? Well, as artistic and unique it was, I could not finish it. It was just too random. Now the author called me out on this, calling me "impatient" and telling me that I have no value or appreciation for abstract things.
Well that's wrong for one of my favorite authors is Salvador Dali, the most abstract artist I know.
Cardboard City didn't have any meaning. MorrowDays claims it used subtext. I challenged him with the fact that if I can't see the subtext, chances are every other NG user cannot.
It's just cardboard. With water. Then getting dried. Then some guy in a balloon
Where's the plot? Where's the story?
Responses?
thank you and forgive me for the rant

I appreciate what Card Board City was doing, it was a look into a world where everything was made of cardboard. It was artistic and brought up little interesting details for if a city like this existed.

I never thought about it like that. But that still doesn't change my thoughts

The rain and everything wasn't trying to hint at a plot or some sort of conflict, it was showing how these people lived and what they did when there was a bit of downpour. The whole animation was basically "Theres a cardboard city, lets show the audience that hasn't been there what it's like".

OK let's say that was their goal. So why did it only show what they did during the rain? And Morrow also said it had subtext. But I have yet to see what hidden meaning comes from this flash. Can somebody point it out, specifically Morrow himself. He organized the thing but he still hasn't told me
the theme/moral/subtext of it all
Which leads me to doubt that there is any at all. I never thought there was anyways. There's no plot or subtext. This makes it a boring flash at least to me and many others. While some people liked it, they simply like random things. Which I think is a required taste
But really, abstract art is the most ridiculous thing ever created. While some artists succeed using it, others merely splash paint onto paper. I see this flash as the random splash of paint on paper.
It was executed well, but it didn't have a story.
Now please stop sounding like a broken record Morrow, always saying it wasn't suppose to have a plot. Well I suppose you can't because you don't have any other argument. But what's the point of the flash if it didn't have meaning?