Can there be too much realism in stories? Are there cases where realism actually becomes a liability to the story?

[henrymidfields]

This thread from the same subforum actually made me think about the realism question. And I wonder if realism in stories can actually be detracting, unpleasant to watch/read, or otherwise be a detriment to the story.

Now, I'm not talking about obviously detracting cases where there is a rare case of realist physics/biology in what otherwise plays like Looney Tunes like this example (though that example can be a good story in a dark way). Or, say, an episode which features a more realistic drama when the rest of the series features zany comedy (say, maybe a serious and non-comedic episode about violence and bullying in Malcolm in the Middle - but even those can be good special episodes if done well). Nor I am talking about realism interfering with gameplay, like how logistics often get ignored for better gameplay experience for generally good reason.

I'm talking about cases where the movie, book, or video game is consistently played realistic (and/or serious). Is there a point where realism becomes too much for people and just becomes unpleasant, no matter how serious the story is meant to be? Are there cases where the realism applied (be it whether from current or historical events) becomes a turnoff? I'm looking for both graphically and non-graphically portrayed examples.

Edited October 7, 2022 by henrymidfields

[Zapp Branniglenn]

4 hours ago, henrymidfields said:

I'm talking about cases where the movie, book, or video game is consistently played realistic (and/or serious). Is there a point where realism becomes too much for people and just becomes unpleasant, no matter how serious the story is meant to be? Are there cases where the realism applied (be it whether from current or historical events) becomes a turnoff? I'm looking for both graphically and non-graphically portrayed examples.

I imagine the only cases where this is a Yes comes down to the personal tastes or experiences of the audience member in question. There are some films that are explicitly about graphic subject matter that few people are in the mood for. A Rape Victim would likely not want to engage with a story about rape, for instance, especially with no content warning. How this story ends - how the characters behave, and what scenes the writers decide to spend precious screentime showing can wildly impact their view on the narrative because it's their lived experience. That, to me, is the only danger of grounded/realistic narratives. An audience that becomes a co-author. But there's plenty of that same risk in less realistic stories. For instance, an established franchise with explicit lore or an adaptation/remake of an existing, fictional story. If the new story conflicts with the tenants set by previous entries, the audience becomes a co-author and says "no, that wouldn't happen". And in our world of fan wikis and clickbait media critiques, these bad audience members are overtaking the idea that Anything Can Happen in Movies. That we should suspend our disbelief.

[Hrothgar777]

I say yes. Video games have at times shied away from physics or graphics that were too realistic because this would've ended up taking the fun out of it. Anime as a medium embodies this principle. I see no reason why it doesn't also apply to literature.

[Fire Emblem Fan]

There can be too much anything in a story. Realism, fantasy, etc. Being too heavy-handed with anything will result in something less enjoyable.

[AnonymousSpeed]

On 10/7/2022 at 11:16 AM, henrymidfields said:

I'm talking about cases where the movie, book, or video game is consistently played realistic (and/or serious). Is there a point where realism becomes too much for people and just becomes unpleasant, no matter how serious the story is meant to be?

I mean, you kinda listed off a bunch of the major examples already as exceptions, but the fact that a movie can take place over days or years while only taking up a couple hours of real time is technically unrealistic. I'm just kinda wondering what still counts as realism at this point, I guess I don't understand the question.

As for "serious", I definitely think things shouldn't take themselves too seriously. Even a very serious movie shouldn't assume that it's art already.

[Original Alear]

Sometimes I really don't like when an author focuses on trying to make something real by using imagery to carve out an illustrated scene without any actual graphics/pictures. I know it's probably something some readers can really enjoy, but I don't have a really imaginative visual faculty. I guess I'm more about dialogue and character development. I do try and follow depictions of battle to understand why various factions will win or lose a battle.

Also, even though I consider myself a fan of the Trails series, and I try and do most of the sidequests (though I usually don't hunt down most of the hidden ones that you don't get via bracer guild/computer/request from teacher/etc), but ultimately I feel like the constantly updating character dialogues keep me from trying to experience all the worldbuilding the game has to offer. I think that's probably a form of realism.

EDIT-I'm reminded of Tristram Shandy, which sort of presents the absurdity of a form of ultra realistic story which captures every detail. "You can't get cover everything", it points out.

Edited October 14, 2022 by Original Johan Liebert