Use my link to get a 30-day ad-free trial of the VRV Premium!
Support this channel on Patreon:

MacGuffins are ubiquitous in Hollywood blockbusters, and are often the root cause of overly simplistic storytelling. In this episode, I take a look at the pitfalls of using this narrative device, as well as 5 ways to make this trope more interesting, unique and effective.

New videos every other Friday (at least in theory!)

Join the community!
Website ▶
Twitter ▶
Facebook ▶

Music:
“Enjoy” Music by Joakim Karud

“Electric Mantis – Daybreak | Majestic Color”

source

29 COMMENTS

  1. Sometimes i worry about how good of a movie Infinity War can be? There is an obvious mcguffin in place. I also worry that Thanos is too familiar of a character to have the mystery that a good villian often needs. Not to mention that the movie makers have to juggle so many characters. I want it to be great but i feel like it will be a challenge.

  2. That definition of MacGuffin is very different from the one I'd heard. According to TV Tropes, a MacGuffin is distinguishable from other plot devices primarily for the fact that the only reason it's important is because it's desired, and you can exchange it for literally any other object and the plot would remain the same.

    So the One Ring isn't a MacGuffin, because it's important because it has a direct effect on the plot, totally outside of the fact that it's desired. It's not just an object that happens to be desired by a lot of people – it's an object that does something directly that affects the plot… specifically, it has a corrupting influence on the people who hold it. That makes it an Artifact of Doom, not a MacGuffin. The Tesseract is the same. In fact, most of your examples are not, strictly speaking, MacGuffins, because they're not interchangeable. The Philosopher's Stone was wanted (by Voldemort) for a specific reason (to reincarnate himself), for example, so you can't just exchange it with a magic snowflake or something and have the plot still work.

  3. This is reminding me of This is the End, where James Franco and Seth Rogen (playing themselves) are discussing possible ideas of making a sequel to their movie Pineapple Express. When slightly stoned Franco suggests his Pineapple Express character gets eaten, it seemed like a weird suggestion. But then, after the events in This is the End comes to pass, a situation presents itself where James Franco gets, well, eaten.

  4. Gah! Watched the entire video waiting for your insightful commentary on the One Ring. In my opinion, it both follows and defies the MacGuffin formula because it IS just a super weapon that needs to be destroyed, but it also has influence over the characters' actions.

  5. While the MacGuffin of "Justice League" was a tad overplayed, it did make sense. Hell, it was an almost-mandatory continuation of the "Who Watches the Watchmen" theme started in "Dawn of Justice".

    I mean, the core crux of the film is the retrieval of the three "Mother Boxes". They connect three different characters (Wonder Woman, Aquaman, and Cyborg) to the plot. They are the items the villain requires for his conquest of the world. But their power, their energy, can be used to restore and enable life (seen in Superman's "frankenstein"-like revival) and better mankind (as seen with Cyborg's technological capabilities and ensured survival). They are tools, not unlike fire or electricity. And as with tools, while people can destroy with them others can just as easily create with them.

    And this also carries with the heroes' powers: they could easily be villains, as Superman's momentary post-resurrection fight with the heroes shows. But instead they use their abilities to help others, and this makes them heroes. They are given chances to leave, to stop fighting, to give up. But when the threat shows itself they stand and fight for what is right, to what is noble. They dedicate their league to the pursuit of justice. Their powers are their tools, and they choose to use said tools to create hope.

    And the posters show Superman being alive, so I don't think that actually counts as a "spoiler".

  6. I liked the video but if I may offer some feedback…it something felt a little off compared to your other videos. The editing was strange in some parts and you don't sound as enthusiastic. But anyway, still a good video and great explanation!

  7. I always thought MacGuffin only applied to unexplained plot devices. The first one that always comes to mind is the Rabbit’s Foot in Mission Impossible 3. We know it’s big and serious but have no clue what it does. So I never thought of the One Ring in LotR as a MacGuffin. We know it turns the user invisible and corrupts those near it.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here