How this whole "tone" thing works anyway?

[MetalSkulkBane]

People talk about tone of different stories and say "Too serious tone for the subject" or "tone is all over the place" and stuff like that.

Well, I don't get it.

Take Bojack Horseman. Comedy, jokes, jokes, jokes KICK IN THE BALLS HARD DRAMA, comedy again. Is this a bad tone? Heck like 90% popular shows of 2010 are like this. Steven Universe, Adventure Time or Infinity Train.

And don't tell me that it's new thing. Remember 2005 Teen Titans? Episodes ranged from racism, brink of Insanity and treat of cyborg loosing his humanity to Evil Space Tofu.

Like IDK, I kinda assume that stories need juxtaposition. Some Disney movies can be pretty traumatic (Bambi or Pinokio), but they full of fun wholesome scenes too.

So what am I missing here?

[Tornado]

There's nothing inherently wrong with contrasting tones in a work, with the caveat that something that's explicitly comedic (especially things that aren't character driven) briefly becoming serious to try in service of a specific point (even if it's a frequent occurrence) tends in practice to be very different from something that is supposed to be a drama alternating between the serious story and something that's random and stupid; because what usually happens in that case is that the random and stupid elements undermine the rest of the serious story. That isn't to say that the former always works (which is why criticism about M*A*S*H in its later years is so common), but the context of the story, target demographic of the story and the medium used to tell it have effect on it as well; so much so that comedies frequently deliberately employ a shocking change in tone in service of the humor. That was the main schtick of Shaun of the Dead, for example; and a common thing used by the Coen brothers. There's also things like Boston Legal that employed it in virtually ever episode to great critical acclaim.And there's also a stark difference between a work having levity throughout even as it tackled serious issues as a dramatic movie (which something like Teen Titans virtually always did and Tarantino films have always employed to great effect) and:

 

 

 

 

Like, it's notable that your examples of why it shouldn't be considered a big deal all are highly lauded TV shows and movies; since skill of the creator comes into play just as much as well. Let's look at something that's fucking garbage instead where it's clear how it can become a problem:

This is a good scene. It wraps up a character arc from the previous two movies in the series, and even plausibly recontextualizes it as being something Bruce was struggling with the whole time. It shows how much Bruce cares for Dick Greyson and hopes for him to not go through the same mental anguish and bad decisions he did, even as he struggles with his own pain in his similar situation.

It's in the same movie as this. This is also a good scene, playing well to both actor's abilities and showing a side of Tommy Lee Jones in particular that is rarely seen compared to his more deadpan humor; and is really well shot and scripted and executed slapstick.

 

 

 

It's not a good scene for the same movie as the other scene; certainly not the same movie that has scenes like the above two alternate back to back constantly. Not only is the tone jarring (just one example of many where the movie takes turns being a silly Jim Carrey comedy and a retrospective look at the Batman character and his relationship with others in his world), but the tone seems deliberately changed to make. It doesn't make the funny parts funnier and the dramatic parts hit harder emotionally. It just works to cancel both of them out, seemingly on purpose; and make you question why they are in the same film. Jim Carrey and Tommy Lee Jones are both going to make silly faces and do Looney Tunes-level slapstick with goofy sound effects, so please don't feel bad or think too hard about Dick Greyson contemplating taking calculated revenge for when his parents were realistically murdered earlier in the film; even though the people that those two tones would appeal to basically have no overlap.

 

To say nothing about when the sequel pushed both ends to even greater extremes and even worse returns.

[Dr. Mechano]

It's mainly in the execution.

Some series veer way far off into darkness that feels contrived rather than earned. I feel like - as far as Sonic's concerned - Shadow the Hedgehog is a great example of doing this wrong. Taking a character who kinda skirted dark anime tropes in SA2 and then suddenly having him waving around realistic firearms and shouting mild profanities reeks of trying too hard. It comes off as a parody, not a serious attempt at a dramatic story.

Compare this to, say, some of the Mario RPGs - Games where we learned about a character losing his wife and sinking into depression, or saw an entire kingdom get wiped out of existence. These were stories that veered into somewhat darker territory than the mainline Mario platformers, but I feel they were done with enough care to still not feel completely out of character for the franchise. That humor and sense of whimsy was still present enough that these games still "felt like Mario" and not like they were desperately trying to be something else. 

Having a mix of both is good, I think. But I feel like it's easy to go way too far one way or the other and end up with a work that feels kinda disjointed.

[Kuzu]

I've noticed that so many people speak about this, but a lot do not actually understand how nuanced of a topic it is. Tone is not simply about whether something is serious or not, but the overall mood and quality that a work is trying to sell. Target demographics, and what the work is ultimately trying to sell play a factor in here too. 

Usually when people complain about tone, it's usually about how certain elements undermine the media's intended purpose; like Tornado posted above, how Batman Forever has great character drama, but is undermined by how most of the movie are over the top superhero antics. In general, when you want something to be taken seriously, you need to commit to it and remove most of the comedic elements for it to stick. There's nothing wrong having levity in a serious work, but it shouldn't come at the expense of the message you're trying to get across. 

Sometimes this is deliberate; a jarring tonal shift is a good way of shocking your audience when its done well. But more often than not, it is done poorly which only makes your audience confused about the tone of your work. Whether people see it as a drama that is undermined by its lighter elements, or if people see it as a lighthearted affair and how it suddenly shifting to drama makes it difficult for the audience to connect with what is going on. 

 

 

Since somebody already mentioned Sonic, I guess I'll follow up;  one of the biggest problems with Sonic games is that they often cannot decide whether want to be lighthearted affairs or be full on dramas, and have a lot of trouble balancing those two elements. Add to the fact that many fans have specific interpretations of this series that veer either light or dark, and hate it when the series contradicts that interpretation and you have a cesspool of people who all have different ideas on what the series` "tone" is. In its most general, Sonic is a series aimed at kids. No, I don't care how many people played SA2 when they were kids and didn't see it that way, you were a fucking kid when you played SA2 and you liked it, it's a series aimed for kids, end of story. 

But just because Sonic's target demographic is children doesn't mean that the series was afraid of actually constructing interesting character drama from it, and that's the part that resonated with people. Unfortunately, as with many things with this series, the execution leaves a lot to be desired and as a result, said character drama fell on deaf ears if it didn't resonate with you. The divide about Sonic's tone tends to manifest in people who resonated with the character drama in spite of its execution, versus the people who didn't care and felt those elements were dragging the games down. 

[Ryannumber1gamer]

Off topic, but also somewhat on topic, it's important to mention this year that we actually did find out there is a longer, and darker cut of Batman Forever that's completed and sitting in a WB vault somewhere, and that there's been several deleted scenes of said darker version floating around for ages, but we never got the full thing:

So what makes the tone problems in Forever even worse is more like it's a dark movie that's been designed to ask meaningful questions about the characters, and include decent drama, and yet executives forcefully dulled it down to what we got because after how dark Returns was, they wanted something more kid-friendly and marketable. 

So this leaves a film absolutely at odds with each other tonally, one half dark, gothic character study and drama about how much Bruce Wayne leans into his Batman persona, and if Bruce Wayne is the mask, or vice versa, and half Jim Carrey screwball comedy where the main love interest is more thirsty than a man who's spent three days in the Sahara Desert. To say it masters neither because of the forced tonal split is an understatement.

[FlameStream]

Interestingly, abrupt change of tone has been seen in long running anime series and depending on who you ask, they're mostly well received. It's typically as a one time filler but sometimes it can be an arc.