Do you think the Comic is too predictable

[GaySailors]

TL;DR: Twists for the sake of twists are not needed and will only upset the audience while making the plot convoluted and overly complex. From a basic writing or filming standpoint, theres no reason to unless... well... you have a reason! Sure, one of the cast members could suddenly catch a flu and die with lack of medicine: but why? For the sake of it being realistic? Heroic stories aren't meant to be realistic, they're meant to be the exception! How fun would it be to play a game as the hero of the world, and at the very end, get one hit and killed, and you lose as the end of the game. That game would suck, it would feel like you played through the whole story for nothing. Sure, it could be realistic, but no one would like it. No one would buy your games, or read your books, or watch your films.

Spoiler!

The reason Lord of the Rings was so successful is because it had a great story and fun cast of characters who went through a magical world and saved the day! Add in all the good bits and details and the blessings of J. R. R. Tolkien's genius, and it was done. The heroes came out on top, albeit tragic events. But it also had a small hint of that realism: not every experience HAD to end in a good one. The good guys didn't always come out on top like a Disney show, sometimes, they legitimately failed, but they had reasons to. It gave motives and inspired the main characters further. The ever growing fan-base of Game of Thrones has a similar situation but on the other end of the creative spectrum. George R. R. Martin does the polar opposite - he kills characters and changes the plot dramatically at a hats drop. Yet the fan base is loves it. According to what I just said, he should have failed long ago. So why is he successful? Well, aside from his creative talent as a writer and personal reasons for making war realistic (Vietnam), he understands the human psyche. There was a quote from a Wikipedia article I remember seeing a while back.

Spoiler!

However, for many fans, it is precisely this level of "realness" and "completeness"–including many characters' imperfections, moral and ethical ambiguity, and (often sudden) consequential plot twists–that is endearing about Martin's work. Many find that this is what makes the series' story arcs compelling enough to keep following despite its sheer brutality and intricately messy and interwoven plotlines; as TM Wagner points out:

There's great tragedy here, but there's also excitement, humor, heroism even in weaklings, nobility even in villains, and, now and then, a taste of justice after all. It's a rare gift when a writer can invest his story with that much humanity.

I feel it sums it up well. When you take away those moments of happiness and make it "realistic", those little moments when something good happens becomes intense. Its the exact opposite of the Lord of the Rings. One author gives heroism and fun abundantly, which makes the sad moments more painful, and the other gives a grim, depressing reality that makes the good moments great. One fan-base likes one because its the classic hero story done perfectly, and the other fan-base likes one because it isn't a hero story - it's a tragedy where tragic events, hero, and anti-heroes all play in with consistent twists. You might be able to look at Frodo and see a hero who will win, but perhaps not with GoT characters. But that still doesn't answer why pointless twists are bad and, from there, why GoT is successful.

It's because the twists aren't pointless. They're grim and depressing, yes, but they're also calculated. Its why M. Night Shyamalan fails yet Psycho and Citizen Kane or even Friday the 13th were so successful: Shyamalan did it to do it, the others did it for interesting reasons that completely changed how one viewed the movie. And thats where Twokinds can come in. Tom could suddenly axe off Natani or Keith, or Trace kills Flora in a bout of rage or anything else: but how would that help? It wouldn't really improve the plot or make things interesting, it would just make the story worse. Instead, Tom takes those smaller twists that are still somewhat tragic, yet recoverable and happens for a reason that inspires the plot. Laura's death could be considered unexpected, I don't think anyone was prepared for Natani falling into a coma, and I would assume Rose's entrance again caught some off guard. I can't speak for the last one as its WIP, but all of which were important and really helped the plot. Mike getting stabbed wouldn't really. Natani killing Trace for her job wouldn't really be an exciting new plot line.

I know its painfully long, but its true. There are dramatic principles in storytelling, things you should and should not do. Confusing your audience in a contemporary epic while also turning them away from the plot for the sake of it isn't a good idea. Imagine if during The Return of the Jedi Princess Leia took over the Emperor's throne and continued the Empire under her and Luke's rule. That'd be a shot out of nowhere and would completely ruin the rest of the story. A shock that could be felt on the Richter scale for sure, but pointless. All it does is confuse you. If theres a twist, you should be able to ask, "Why should this exist and can it make the plot-line make sense or become better" and give an immediate response.

[Warrl]

George R. R. Martin does the polar opposite - he kills characters and changes the plot dramatically at a hats drop. Yet the fan base loves it.

By definition - those who don't love it are not part of the fan base.

I read the first book in the series and found no reason to pick up the second or watch the TV show.

[NiWo21k]

From a basic writing or filming standpoint, theres no reason to unless... well... you have a reason!

I wouls say this is one of the reasons why we are going "Not again!" when we hear "plot twist" today. Everyone thinks they have to have a twist in the story, even if it doenst make sense and there is no reason (sometimes it also looks like they were a last minute idea just cramed in) - We are oversaturated with this.

Thats what i menat when i said earlier authors should think twice before putting something like this in.

I know that mostly that was done (a) because there was a trend rising but also (b) people thought it was getting boring to know how a story will go on - and thats what i find sad. Just because you know how story works and maybe also could tell where it will go doesnt mean its bad (i mean lets face it, over 90 % of all of the movies we see today, we know that good guys win), i think its more importont to focus on the way to the end, and not to have soemthing just shoehorned in at the last second, to think its cever. Or lets say it this way: Even a good twist cant make a good movie bad, it can make it memorable but not more.