To explore the rhetorical capacities and limits of film (or motion pictures), and to compare and contrast them with those of or for television, I want you to re-conceptualize the movie “the social network” as a TV show and the long-running NBC sit-com “The Office” as a major motion picture.
There is no need to go into plot here, to develop a storyline; that’s not the point. You should, however, highlight what would be different about the adaptation from the form we already know. In other words, what would mark the film version of The Office as different from the 22-minute show? (Imagine that the movie is the world’s first exposure to “The Office” and its characters, by the way. In this thought experiment, the TV show has never existed.) Use some of the concepts, terms and artifacts explored in class and in the textbook. Your post should be analytical, in other words, not mere opinion.
“The form in which ideas are expressed affects what those ideas will be.” –Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death
Your post due by 9am (EST) Wednesday, Nov. 30.
Film and television have very different ways of presenting a story. Television shows don’t leave room for serious social commentary. They are solely for entertainment so that the audience will keep coming back for more. “The social network” as a TV show would have to present the development of facebook in a milder, more entertaining way than the movie does. “The Office” as a motion picture would actually have the capacity to be a serious commentary on the life of an office worker while still remaining true to its humorous nature as a TV show.
Further, in adapting “The Office” for film, characterization would have significantly less time. In order to give the audience a sense of each stars character, short dramatic scenes would be needed, showing how they interact with each other. Because of this, there would not be enough time to characterize every employee in “The Office” so just the main characters would be developed. A definitive end would have to be chosen as well because the luxury of an ongoing story through multiple seasons would not be possible. A specific plot would need to be chosen instead of merely day-to-day stories and office interactions shown.
In making “the social network” into a TV show the opposite steps would be taken. Characterization could occur more slowly and thoroughly and more characters could be introduced. More time could be devoted to explaining how Mark Zuckerberg came up with the idea for facebook and how his personality and character influenced him.
The Social Network: The story would have to be developed into a series of smaller arches, with multiple overarching conflicts to take up season finales and smaller conflicts to be (mostly) resolved within a TV show’s time slot. As Kelly noted, this will give the characters and setting of the movie more time to develop. However, I do think that the show can still create social commentary. It would have to be balanced with a strong cast of characters and plots, but many shows are exploring the world of drama television as a form of criticism on society, philosophy and morality (I’m thinking of LOST). The medium of television is relatively young, and in some ways, I think, is still feeling out the best way to convey serious stories over a longstanding period. I think the key would be to create characters that continue to unfold over a period of seasons–who don’t become flat, boring or predictable–and a plot that asks enough questions (and good enough questions) that the audience is willing to wait for the answers.
The Office: As Kelly mentioned, the most obvious change would be the time limit, which resorts in limitations on characters and plots. Much of the filler information/episodes would have to go. One of the beauties of the show is its ability to explore relationships over a number of years. This would have to be highly condensed, resulting in faster character development and changes, and some characterization that wouldn’t get in at all (thinking now of Firefly -> Serenity). Some benefits to The Office as a movie would be to narrow in the focus of the story. As a show, The Office can fluctuate between a parody of reality TV, a comedy and (in some episodes) a drama. As a movie, it would have to narrow into a clearer genre.
The Social Network: The story of The Social Network to me as a whole is definitely one to look into the specifics of how Facebook was created. By looking into it in TV form I can see the story being dragged out and could slowly lose content throughout the years of filming, and quickly lose viewers. As the previous two commentators have said, in a television format the characters would develop more, but again the Social Network only having a few main conflicts within the movie would give it very little room to develop over the years. I agree with Alyssa that many television networks are still trying to find ways to express dramatic shows throughout seasons without running out of ideas or it becoming repetitive or to lose its “shine.”
The Office: The Office as a television show is very effective due to its ability to reach out to the audience with various characters and seeing how they develop as a whole throughout each episode. If the show was a movie it would be difficult to elaborate on each character in the show. There are so many people in the show, and each of their relationships to one another are able to be expressed within each episode for either a brief or elongated amount of time. With the restriction of a film we as an audience would not be able to see those relationships change and the interactions would not be as detailed with a 1-2 hour time frame of a movie script.
The Social Network: The Social Network would make for a very interesting tv series. In order to make this a tv series, the producers would have to find more conflicts and stories pertaining to Facebook and it’s creation. The bit shown in the movie is not near enough to make a tv show. They would have to have episodes about Facebook; pre-creation, creation, and today/post-creation. The episodes could follow the current changes of facebook. This could get a little monotonous after a while.
The Office: If The Office was made in a movie, it would have to focus on a certain point in time for those portrayed in the show. The show is based over a long period of time, following the office and those working in it. This is way too much for a movie. Many movies have been made from tv shows and they act as a slice out of the pie. It doesn’t show the amount a tv show would but it does show a certain piece and goes into great detail with it. The Office movie would be very entertaining.
The Social Network: As others have already said, the making of this movie into a television show will change a lot. First, the characters will have to be explained in more depth. A tv series gives The Social Network characters more time for the audience to get to know each character. Also, more drama would probably be added in order to keep the show interesting and lasting for a whole season.
The Office: If The Office was turned into a movie, it would have to reverse the examples from above. As far as characters go, the movie would not allow the audience to really get to know the characters. The Office as a series allows each character to actually talk about what they think. As a movie, the characters would not have time for this. Things will have to be missing from the tv show, such as character interactions. The movie would speed up the series to fit into about two ours, so there will be big chucks missing.
I never actually saw The Social Network, but based on what I know about it, I think I can assert that it would be hugely unsuccessful as a television series. Unless it was one of those documentary-type series, but even then there’s no way there could be enough interesting material to capture the prolonged attention of an audience. Each twenty or forty minute segment (depending on what kind of show it is) would have to focus on one aspect or time period of the development of Facebook or of what’s-his-name’s (Mark something? I don’t care enough.) life and background. More attention would have to be focused on the personal relationships between the people behind Facebook because let’s face it – that’s what viewers are interested in.
I can’t say that The Office would be definitely unsuccessful as a movie, but that’s only with the assumption that the television series had never existed. However, seeing as time travel is not yet a viable option (and because altering the past is a bad idea based on every movie ever), The Office: The Movie would really suck compared to the preexisting series. One of the many wonderful things offered by television shows and not movies (besides hours and hours of available procrastination) is the chance to watch the characters develop. 90% of the time, main characters are completely different in season 5 than they were in the pilot episode. The audience enjoys the experience of getting to watch their favorite characters overcome obstacles, learn from their mistakes, and get rewarded with the things they want most. The Office: The Movie would really have to depend on the major episodes, like season finales, whereas the television shows have inconsequential episodes with maybe 30 seconds of a tense moment that completely alters what will happen later in the season.
Watching a movie is like watching your life flash before your eyes, but watching a television show is like actually living it. Except on your couch, and with no actual interaction. It’s not a perfect comparison.
The Social Network: It’s a bit difficult not to echo what others have said, especially when they might as well have taken the words out of my mouth. As a series instead of a movie, the Facebook centric theme would be a novelty factor that would certainly draw people in for the first season or so I imagine, if that. But a much stronger, more dramatic plot would be necessary to keep people’s attention and drawing them back to the next episode. Unlike a movie, where viewers are essentially in for a two block show whether they love it or are annoyed by what is being shown, viewers of a television series have the choice of not tuning in next week. An emphasis on character development would have to be taken, so that the people at home could find themselves relating more and would therefore be more interested in what would happen to the character next.
The Office: The biggest part of The Office that everyone seems to love is the character interactions and development. The people of The Office are all very unique (and odd) in terms of personality, making how they talk and act around one another funny and amusing in unexpected ways. True to the generic television script, it chooses to have a basic plot for each episode with the undercurrents of a bigger plot tying the episodes together. To become a movie, The Office would have to take what makes it funny and change it completely: Far less time on character development and more time with one, centric plot. We would miss a lot of the events and interactions that define the characters, moments that really make the show great.
The Social Network: To transform this movie into a television show, the plot line would have to be somewhat altered in a way that it could be developed over the course of episodes. If too much is given away too quickly, then there is nothing to look forward to. Also, the conditions of the plot line in all of its drama would have to be extended and multiplied. Television shows are filled with many small conflicts and dramatic encounters that help build anticipation for the last episode or “grand finale.” The introduction of characters would be much different as well. A way that television shows stay interesting is by introducing new characters later on in the season. If all characters are introduced in the first episode then it does not take much time to understand their personalities and then periods of conflict between characters may become predictable and therefore boring. Finally, the dialogue would be different. Since a regular television show only runs for no more than an hour, long periods of extensive, boring dialogue can easily lose an audience. There would need to be much quicker and engaging dialogue that kept the interest of the viewers.
The Office: in presenting The Office as a movie, many of the previously discussed issues would be reversed. The plot line would have to be simplified in order to run in the usual 1 to 2 hours allotted. As a result, the development of characters would not be nearly as extensive. On television, viewers grow a type of bond with the characters because they get to know them so thoroughly due to the many side interviews that make up the show. As a movie, The Office would have to shorten the interviews in order to respect the time capacity of a regular movie while leaving room for more important plot points. Finally, there would have to be some sort of climax that stands out among any other points of conflict during the movie. Basically, the season finale would have to be included in the movie and be developed much more quickly.
I am only somewhat familiar with The Office and I have never seen “The Social Network”, so I apologize if I make any erroneous assumptions about either of them.
The biggest factor to consider in the transition from “The Office” to a movie and “The Social Network” to a television series is time.
The plot of the office is presented in a series of half-an-hour long episodes over the course of several seasons, while “The Social Network” is roughly two hours in length.
Therefore, in order to make The Office into a movie, its plot must be incredibly condensed. A typical episode of “The Office” (from my understanding) has several small “stories” dealing with the different characters in the show and how they interact with one another. Over the course of a season, there are dozens of different “stories” among the characters and several large overarching stories that continue throughout the season. In order to fit the time constraints of a movie, some of these large overarching stories must replace the smaller stories that make up each episode. In a sense, the movie would have to be one long episode.
In a reversal, “The Social Network” would have to elaborate more on its conflicts and character interactions. An issue that may have lasted 15 minutes in the movie would perhaps be stretched out to last an entire season of a television show. For instance, let’s say that Zuckerburg is trying to convince someone to help him create Facebook (I have no idea if anything of the sort actually occurred, but let’s pretend that it did). In the movie, his attempts to enlist that person’s help through persuasion may last roughly 10 minutes of him being shown at different times pleading, wheedling, and arguing with that person. As a television show, these attempts would be extended to at the very least an entire half an hour episode, if not several episodes.
Levels of drama would also need to be changed for both “The Social Network” and “The Office.”
“The Office” (from my understanding of it) is not an overly dramatic show. There is no background music, the conflicts are not life or death, and most of the characters appear to be very unemotional with a few exceptions. Although you could argue that the style of the television version of the office could perhaps be transferred into cinematic format in order to make a stylistically unique and appealing product, one would assume that in making “The Office” into a movie drama would need to be inserted in several ways. The conflicts in the movie would still most likely not be life or death, but they would need to be significantly more pressing than the ones presented in the television show or provoke more intense reactions from those involved in the conflict. For instance (and once again, I am merely doing guesswork), a conflict in the television version could be between two characters over who can use the new desk at the office. In the transition to film, this conflict could be changed from over a desk to over a management position. By raising the stakes ever so slightly, the audience can be more engaged during the two hours that they have invested in the movie. If the desk is left as the conflict in question, then the actions of the individuals fighting over it would need to be intensified. On television, one of the feuding workers might cover their opponent’s work space with toilet paper. In the movie, the retaliation may be kicked up a notch with one worker flipping the other worker’s car upside down or some similar over-the-top course of action. The key to this transition from television to movie is to increase the intensity of the action so the audience is engaged for the entire two hours that they are sitting there.
For “The Social Network”s shift from film to television, the drama would not have to be reduced but would instead have to be elaborated on more. More dialogue would need to be introduced to show character’s emotions toward one another in greater depth and to fill up excess time in episodes. Also, smaller dramatic events could also now be incorporated. For example, if in the movie Zuckerburg lost one of his friends over ownership issues about Facebook, the television show should expand on how this friendship deteroriated, showing more fights between the two and how little things slowly chipped away at their relationship. For television, more details are good.
If “The Social Network” were made into a TV show, the story line would inevitably be dragged out to consume much more time than it does in the film. The character development would go more in depth and take more time as well. Each episode would have a separate plot, but still be within the larger plot–the creation and sustaining of, and the credit for, Facebook. One episode might perhaps be devoted solely to Mark and his girlfriend’s relationship falling apart, which is only the very beginning of the film, but is ultimately the catalyst for all the subsequent events of the story.
On the opposing end of this assignment, turning “The Office” into a film would be a bit easier, in my opinion. At least, I always think it’s a lot easier to make something long into something shorter, than vice versa. One of the distinctive characteristics of the TV show is that it’s about the little mundane things of an everyday office worker, so probably the biggest obstacle would be finding a plot line dramatic enough for film. It would no doubt involve bringing in many more characters, relationships, and settings than the average Office TV episode entails. The character development would be forced to happen pretty quickly, and a sense of closure for the audience would need to be obtained at the end, unlike in the TV show, when an episode can be left totally open-ended, simply because viewers know there are more episodes coming up.
In short, some key differences between film and TV are that in film, there must be a “bigger” plot that can be resolved to some degree by the end, and in TV, particularly in “The Office”, there is the luxury of taking one’s time in resolving drama and developing the characters.
The Social Network and The Office are perfect examples of the types of narratives that each of their respective media provide. A television show is made up of a succession of smaller stories. In The Office, characters are developed through how they interact with each other based on glimpses of smaller individual incidents. Most of the time these are largely unrelated to each other from episode to episode, with the exception of the basic underlying storyline. This is characteristic of TV shows in general; smaller stories are encapsulated in segments that develop characters over extended periods of time. Longer films function in an entirely different way, condensing an over-arching story into a fraction of the time a television show would take. A film relies less on the anecdotal style of television and more on the grand significance of each scene to the story on the whole. As in Social Network, each action a character takes, or each thing that is said (mostly) directly pertains to the narrative being told, and is meaningful in its development. There is less being presented, so the importance of each clip that is included is dramatically increased, just as there are fewer characters that become developed on a much deeper level.
The purpose of The Office is solely humor and entertainment. If the television show were to be converted into a movie without making any changes, we would be watching the same clips we thought were funny before, but at the end we would ask, “What was the point?” That is what is expected out a film – a theme or an intentional sequence of events with a progression, to a climax, to a resolution. Although I think the show has attempted to show the continuation of an ongoing story throughout the more recent seasons, the focus remains on the humor of the smaller moments.
The Social Network serves the purpose to communicate to us the story of Mark Zuckerburg’s journey and the birth of Facebook. This is the easily identifiable plot line. In order to convert the film into a television show, the plot would have to be broken down into smaller subplots or segments of the story, taking away from the impact of the larger story. A television show is comparable to the chapters of a novel, while a movie would be more like a poem. Each chapter focuses on smaller events that may not by themselves present a whole theme, while a poem relies on each word to convey its meaning.
With its thirty to forty five minute episode each week, a television show has plenty of time to be subtle. The Office, a t.v. show that uses British humor adapted for American audiences, completely thrives on subtlety. The characters take so much time getting to know one another and forming complex relationships with one another that by the time Jim actually gets down on one knee in the pouring rain in front of a gas station, after seasons and seasons of waiting, audiences everywhere are crying tears of gratitude. The wait is finally over. The humor is usually greatly heightened by our prior knowledge (context) of the characters which would be much less were the series converted into a film. The events would need to be much more succinct- fewer wavering emotions between Jim and Pam. The many mini-conflicts found in the brief episodes (downsizing, Jan leading on and then ignoring Michael) would need to be consolidated into a much bigger, more dramatic WHAMBANG conflict. The details of the office would be melt away (no more examinations of sexual harrassment day or what Valentine’s day feels like at the office) and the main characters (Michael, Jim, Pam, Dwight) would come to center stage, along with their conflicts and passions.
To convert Social Network into a television show, one would need to get the audience emotionally invested– long term. Some degree of lightness might want to be added within the darker, more mellow tones of the film that currently exists. The subtleties of Zuckerburg’s relationships with those around him, how his mind developed when he was younger– all these things would need to be used. I think it would be interesting to have such an anti-hero as the main character of a television show, as long as he were made to be a complex anti-hero. The main drama/climax in the movie (unknown) could still exist, maybe towards the end of one season, to keep the crowd “hooked” until next season to see the resolution, but it would be important to find other equally compelling if less dramatic moments in his story. No television show can stay on air with the existence of only one climax.
First off, the Social Network. While I haven’t seen it, there are dramatic changes that would need to be made to any plotline to transform it from a movie to television. The biggest difference would be amendment of the plotline into shorter mini-dramas. The whole point of a movie is that it follows one story for about a hour and a half or two hours and is then concluded. Furthermore, it normally wraps up neatly at the end, with all the conflicts being solved, characters saved, falling in love, etc. But for the Social Network to transition into the world of television, it would have to be broken up significantly, though I simply couldn’t imagine it being engaging enough to last more than a season. Development of the characters and the plot would have to be more gradual, though that could worsen the already slow pace of events, risking the loss of viewers. I was also told that The Social Network contains frequent cutting back and forth between locations as well as time, with heavy use of flashbacks. That would complicate things in a television show because of the ever-changing nature of the plotline. Alfred Hitchcock once said “a movie (or drama) is life with the dull bits cut out.” I think that accurately portrays the whole point of movies – if they were designed to be an escape for viewers, then they must eliminate the mundane nature of certain daily events and routines. Television has a little bit more freedom to portray real life in a slightly realistic perspective. It draws viewers in through the long-term growth and mystery of the characters, making us feel as if we know them….More accessibility to their quirks and flaws furthers the feeling that we are friends.
Likewise, though I have also never seen a full episode of “The Office,” I am much more familiar with the broad overview and have caught snippets here and there. It seems quite unique to television shows in general with its almost documentary/home video style of filming as well as the witty dialogue. However, the producers seem to do a pretty good job of portraying a normal, even boring, office in such a way that it is entertaining. I would argue that that seems to be due more to the characters and their unique roles than the back story of the show itself. For a movie version, the pace of the action would have to be quickened and the focus would need to be on just one or two plotlines to prevent a ten hour movie. Events would have to be funnier, edgier, faster, and more dramatic. Ultimately, time is the big issue in both of these role reversals. There is not one simple answer to what would or wouldn’t work.
The mediums of film and television are completely different forms of communication, but that goes without saying, I’m sure. Whereas, television thrives off of its ability to build off of character development and how that in turn resonates with the lives of the audience (or in some cases doesn’t resonate at all, providing that feeling of escape that so many people search for in entertainment), movies have the opposite mission. Movies focus more on the “pow” moment. They have to start off strong with an action that immediately draws the audience in and then they have to continue to provide captivating material over a period of one and half to two hours, in order to hold the audience’s attention. These media might have various ways in which they address their main purposes, some riskier than others; however, they are both trying to accomplish the same goal: catch and hold a loyal audience.
Now, in terms of what would happen if “The Office” were a motion picture as opposed to a television program; the feel would be quite different. “The Office” thrives off of its ability to create moments of awkward and dry humor through the premise of an almost home video feel filming technique. It has a very casual and almost mundane technique, but with biting wit and clever quips, it is able to take a scenario (working in an office) that all of its audience would be familiar with, to an extent, and make it a more entertaining experience. If “The Office” were turned into a movie, then I believe it would lose some of its silver screen gems. For example, a privilege it has as a television show is its ability to fully develop as many characters as it wants, when it wants, and how it wants. Now, this may exist in film as well, but it would be limited in its ability to delve into more insignificant characters and bring them to the forefront of an episode and many times it is those characters that are most relatable to the viewers. It also would lose its simplicity. The power of “The Office” is its “America’s Funniest Home Video” feel, which would be out shined by any addition of cinematic quality. Focusing on any particular story line, as compared to the ability to approach stories from many vantage points, could hinder the magnitude of the show. For example, the Jim and Pam story line. It is fantastic in the 22-minute show because it is drawn out and almost used as a teaser to keep an audience interested; whereas, if it were in a film as the primary story line, it would be overshadowed by all the other romantic comedies showing that weekend.
Moving on to “The Social Network.” This movie is applauded for its cinematic gusto and driving story lines and characters. The power from this film lies in its audience’s knowledge of the topic, but also in its swift moving pace. It may not be incredibly realistic feeling, quite the opposite of “The Office;” however, it provides that non-stop feeling that is associated with most movies. If it were a television show, it might not hold up to the same critical praise. I say this for a few reasons. First of all, it would require deeper characterization. Now, don’t get me wrong, these characters are interesting, but they would not hold up to the permanence of television character icons. This is mainly because they are limited in their development due to the existence of their real-life counterparts. I don’t know if that is supposed to be taken into consideration or not, but it would definitely be difficult to work with the characterization of a character who really exists and is maybe not operating in the direction you would like his doppelganger to. Another reason it might not hold on television is the limitation of the story line. Facebook was created and controversy happened, but the history can not span over more than a season or two. This is why many historical pieces are turned into mini-series and not long-running programming, because eventually you catch up with history.
Basically, either of these forms would lose their spark if they transitioned to another entertainment medium. Now, one problem I did encounter in doing this thought experiment was that it is hard to imagine either of these without the preconceived notions of them in their preexisting medium. It is hard to let go of what has already been sculpted for “The Office” for television or “The Social Network” for film. It is a similar process to imagining someone you know with a different name. For example. if you have a friend named Amy, who you have always known as Amy, could you picture her as a Sarah. Probably not. This is the conundrum I found myself in with this. I tried to focus on Sarah, but Amy kept popping into the back of my mind.
It’s interesting how similar and yet how different film and television are. One tries to be grand and the other intimate. Even if a film has a personal story, there’s an air of “epicness” to films that television just doesn’t have. Looking at this assignment, I’m reminded of the show Firefly, created by Joss Whedon. The show was canceled and made into a movie, called Serenity. This wasn’t your typical movie either. The movie didn’t sum up the show; it continued it. But it’s interesting to look at the movie (which is roughly two hours long) and the pilot, (which is also almost two hour long). Yet these two forms of visual entertainment tell vastly different stories. The film’s is grand, with death, betrayal and revelation, while the show’s much more personal, focusing on one major conflict that spans a much shorter amount of time than the film.
If The Office were a film, its scope would have to be much larger than any television, more like a condensed season, but still, I don’t think even that correlation works. For The Office to work as a film, one of the firsts things that would need to change is a more centralized main character. It can’t be completely about all of them. There are often films with large numbers of central characters (even Serenity), but there is always one character that is more important than everyone else is. Film simply doesn’t give the audience enough time to care about everyone. With a television show, you have a given episode dedicated to fleshing out one particular character. That luxury doesn’t exist in film. Also, in film, you can’t have just have a “a day in the life” scenario. There must be a reason the audience feels like they are watching the film. The film must tell a story that seems important enough to take up two hours of our time. So, instead of a group simply experiencing a life at the office. The Office The Movie would need one main character and one main problem that he must face.
If The Social Network were a television show, many of the things listed above would need to be reversed. The Social Network could not simply focus on Zuckerberg, but all the people involved with the making of “the facebook.” Antagonists would need to be fleshed, given more time to be seen as “people” rather than enemies. Also, the story would (obviously) have to take on an episodic nature. This doesn’t mean simply chopping it up into 22 half-hour or hour long pieces. In television, there cannot be the kind of focus that a film has. It’s not about a story. It’s about a billion stories. Thus, The Social Network The Series would have to be not about the creation of facebook, but about Zuckerberg and his friends (or lack thereof).
The social network:
If this was changed from film to a TV show, it would have to get more exciting in order to really hook people in. Television shows (that are successful) are usually funny and well written, or have a ton of action packed into them. If it were a TV show, it would really need to just be one season or else I fear that the audience would get bored with the show. The show would need to have more than one main character, and explore different ways to make each character interesting, and a key part in the show. It would be important to keep the audience hanging on to the show by making it seem more dramatic than the actual event.
The Office:
I feel like making The Office into a movie would be extremely difficult because it is not a fast paced show. It would really need to pick up the pace as far as events went so that it could be smashed into two and a half hours or so in order to make the movie. I feel like the movie would need to have one centralized event that it needed to focus on, so that the audience does not get confused or have trouble following the movie.
The Social Network: Television shows are structured in a way to end each episode with a cliffhanger, or at least, several salient questions that spark curiosity, so the Social Network would have to be expanded drastically and given a few more subplots with which to add suspense. The audience has to be intrigued enough to return the following week, so TV shows have several overarching plotlines that extend indefinitely through the seasons (i.e., one unresolved mystery, a relationship), so the primary plot of the movie could stay the same at a basic level, but all of the details, characters and scenes would have to be redeveloped dramatically. Character studies and philosophical musings are also a big part of Television (at least in the genre The Social Network would likely be placed), so many of the decisions made by The Social Network’s characters could easily be given broader significance to drive home a few philosophical points.
The Office: Just thinking of The Office as a movie makes me laugh. It would be a comedy, but it would be very difficult to structure it in a way to give it a definite beginning, middle, and end, with buildup and climax thrown in there. A couple of the more drawn-out stories would have to be chosen to “star” in the movie, because there would not be enough time for all of the characters to take a prominent role. Most of the subplots would have to be eliminated, and the musings of the characters to the camera would have to be cut short. A climax would most likely come in the form of a romance (as with most films in this genre) and the rest of the plot would simply be the skeleton for the romance to exist. Hopefully the bigger themes of the show wouldn’t be accidentally stripped away in an effort to convert it to the big screen.
The Office transferring into a motion picture would require a massive increase in the plot and story line. The story would probably need to entail more of their home lives in order to capture the audience and allow the story to continue for a longer period of time. Perhaps the show could pick up a different medium as a motion picture, encompassing fancier software programs (as discussed on pg 317) to make the basic television show more intriguing for longer viewing.
While both The Office and The Social Network take on the cultural perspective of having social impact and spreading a truth, it would need to be altered in both in order to fit into a different time frame with an extended/shortened (respectively) plot.
The Social Network would need to cut down all “fluff” and get straight to the point. Each episode should make a single point in order to last for a season rather than extending the idea for two hours. The screenplay would have to played out differently, capturing the audience in a different way.
The Office: For most movies there is one overarching theme and plotline that draws the audience in, keeps them entertained, yet ties it all up with a neat little bow at the end. The Office is a show that can be a little all over the place so if it was a movie, a more significant plotline would have to be taken. While a lot of it could be shot at the actual office, some filming would have to move outside of the office so that the audience could get to know the characters on a different level, rather than on a superficial work basis. Time would have to be changed to develop more quickly or the movie producers would have to speed time up to show more progression. Instead of working with 22 minutes on a weekly basis, the produces only have about 2 hours to tell the audience everything they need to know about the characters, the background, and what is going to happen. One storyline that The Office might follow would be the burgeoning romance between Jim and Pam and how that affects the rest of the office dynamics. It would need one central, unifying theme so that it wouldn’t be so scattered.
The Social Network: I think this could be made into a great television series. The main characteristic about TV shows is that they always leave the audience hanging so that they will tune in next week. Mark Zuckerberg is portrayed as the quintessential bad guy who will hurt anyone to get what he wants, and as much as we like to say we don’t like to see pain and anger, we do love drama, and we love to hate a bad guy so it would be entertaining to see how he gets out of his scrapes and binds and how his friends take his treatment. In a show, even though there is less time in an allotted frame, there is more time in the long run so more information could be shown about his time at Harvard, how he became friends with the guy that helped him start financially, how he mostly stole the idea from others, etc. The dynamics and the pure drama of Zuckerberg’s story is what made it a great movie, but it is also what could make it into a better show. The show could also follow the other characters in the movie to a greater extent. More point of views could be taken.
timestamp check