Why does Bandersnatch have dead ends?












22















I saw Black Mirror: Bandersnatch (2018) and got a dead end by choosing the option where the protagonist destroys his computer when his "finished" code turns up buggy. But instead of continuing the story forward, the show kept repeating that scene and asked me to make a different choice where he just hits the desk, thus indicating a dead end.



The protagonist is already frustrated to the breaking point at this point, as his demo was a failure with his boss, so I felt the natural reaction would be that he would destroy his computer; but the show said otherwise.



Strictly from a screenplay point of view, why were there dead ends like this in the story? Why didn't they lead to one of the filmed endings? Keeping dead ends in this novel approach to storytelling seems very odd.



PS: The answer to another question indicates there are more dead ends too










share|improve this question




















  • 5





    @yshavit It's very unclear to me what spoiler you are talking about. If you mean the actual question title as it currently is... I do not understand how that is a spoiler. At worst it's like a meta-spoiler; but it definitely does not reveal any of the plot.

    – JMac
    yesterday






  • 4





    @yshavit Meta-information like this isn't a spoiler though. All it does is tell you something extremely vague about plot structure. It really doesn't seem reasonable IMO to consider that a spoiler. It should also be worth noting that having a dead end in a choose your own adventure/interactive story is actually expected behaviour anyways. Not all adventures are the same length.

    – JMac
    yesterday






  • 5





    @JMac Telling me what does and doesn't constitute a spoiler for me is like me telling you whether you like ice cream. My experience watching the show will be different than it would have been had I not seen the title. I didn't want it to be. I had no way of opting out of this community without opting out of all of SE. I'm asking, pretty nicely imo, for this community to be aware of its impact on other communities which may not share its guidelines. If you'd rather not, then okay.

    – yshavit
    yesterday








  • 3





    I feel the same, like I just received a spoiler while finding a resolution to my code related issue. I didn't know it has dead-ends, I definitely count "meta-information" if it has any indication of something you could know only from "trying" or "watching" the thing, as a spoiler. Plus ice cream is awful, everyone has opinions. Not trying to raise fire, just pointing out I experienced the same kind of "I scrolled on SE today, and the sidebar made me want to try Bandersnatch less" feeling.

    – Joshua Hedges
    yesterday






  • 2





    @yshavit I'm just pointing out that such a guideline seems to fill a really specific niche. It's not a very common thing to consider a spoiler, and I can understand why the OP and members of the community wouldn't consider it one. I also don't see how such things could even be applied as a rule. You could look at many questions and say the same thing. Some examples: "In Reign of the Supermen movie, who is trying to be Clark Kent / Superman" -> Spoils that someone is trying to be CK/Superman. "How did Travelers bring matter/objects/artifacts into the past?" -> Spoils they bring objects...

    – JMac
    yesterday
















22















I saw Black Mirror: Bandersnatch (2018) and got a dead end by choosing the option where the protagonist destroys his computer when his "finished" code turns up buggy. But instead of continuing the story forward, the show kept repeating that scene and asked me to make a different choice where he just hits the desk, thus indicating a dead end.



The protagonist is already frustrated to the breaking point at this point, as his demo was a failure with his boss, so I felt the natural reaction would be that he would destroy his computer; but the show said otherwise.



Strictly from a screenplay point of view, why were there dead ends like this in the story? Why didn't they lead to one of the filmed endings? Keeping dead ends in this novel approach to storytelling seems very odd.



PS: The answer to another question indicates there are more dead ends too










share|improve this question




















  • 5





    @yshavit It's very unclear to me what spoiler you are talking about. If you mean the actual question title as it currently is... I do not understand how that is a spoiler. At worst it's like a meta-spoiler; but it definitely does not reveal any of the plot.

    – JMac
    yesterday






  • 4





    @yshavit Meta-information like this isn't a spoiler though. All it does is tell you something extremely vague about plot structure. It really doesn't seem reasonable IMO to consider that a spoiler. It should also be worth noting that having a dead end in a choose your own adventure/interactive story is actually expected behaviour anyways. Not all adventures are the same length.

    – JMac
    yesterday






  • 5





    @JMac Telling me what does and doesn't constitute a spoiler for me is like me telling you whether you like ice cream. My experience watching the show will be different than it would have been had I not seen the title. I didn't want it to be. I had no way of opting out of this community without opting out of all of SE. I'm asking, pretty nicely imo, for this community to be aware of its impact on other communities which may not share its guidelines. If you'd rather not, then okay.

    – yshavit
    yesterday








  • 3





    I feel the same, like I just received a spoiler while finding a resolution to my code related issue. I didn't know it has dead-ends, I definitely count "meta-information" if it has any indication of something you could know only from "trying" or "watching" the thing, as a spoiler. Plus ice cream is awful, everyone has opinions. Not trying to raise fire, just pointing out I experienced the same kind of "I scrolled on SE today, and the sidebar made me want to try Bandersnatch less" feeling.

    – Joshua Hedges
    yesterday






  • 2





    @yshavit I'm just pointing out that such a guideline seems to fill a really specific niche. It's not a very common thing to consider a spoiler, and I can understand why the OP and members of the community wouldn't consider it one. I also don't see how such things could even be applied as a rule. You could look at many questions and say the same thing. Some examples: "In Reign of the Supermen movie, who is trying to be Clark Kent / Superman" -> Spoils that someone is trying to be CK/Superman. "How did Travelers bring matter/objects/artifacts into the past?" -> Spoils they bring objects...

    – JMac
    yesterday














22












22








22


3






I saw Black Mirror: Bandersnatch (2018) and got a dead end by choosing the option where the protagonist destroys his computer when his "finished" code turns up buggy. But instead of continuing the story forward, the show kept repeating that scene and asked me to make a different choice where he just hits the desk, thus indicating a dead end.



The protagonist is already frustrated to the breaking point at this point, as his demo was a failure with his boss, so I felt the natural reaction would be that he would destroy his computer; but the show said otherwise.



Strictly from a screenplay point of view, why were there dead ends like this in the story? Why didn't they lead to one of the filmed endings? Keeping dead ends in this novel approach to storytelling seems very odd.



PS: The answer to another question indicates there are more dead ends too










share|improve this question
















I saw Black Mirror: Bandersnatch (2018) and got a dead end by choosing the option where the protagonist destroys his computer when his "finished" code turns up buggy. But instead of continuing the story forward, the show kept repeating that scene and asked me to make a different choice where he just hits the desk, thus indicating a dead end.



The protagonist is already frustrated to the breaking point at this point, as his demo was a failure with his boss, so I felt the natural reaction would be that he would destroy his computer; but the show said otherwise.



Strictly from a screenplay point of view, why were there dead ends like this in the story? Why didn't they lead to one of the filmed endings? Keeping dead ends in this novel approach to storytelling seems very odd.



PS: The answer to another question indicates there are more dead ends too







analysis black-mirror black-mirror-bandersnatch






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited yesterday









Johnny Bones

38.5k14102196




38.5k14102196










asked yesterday









KharoBangdoKharoBangdo

4,639124281




4,639124281








  • 5





    @yshavit It's very unclear to me what spoiler you are talking about. If you mean the actual question title as it currently is... I do not understand how that is a spoiler. At worst it's like a meta-spoiler; but it definitely does not reveal any of the plot.

    – JMac
    yesterday






  • 4





    @yshavit Meta-information like this isn't a spoiler though. All it does is tell you something extremely vague about plot structure. It really doesn't seem reasonable IMO to consider that a spoiler. It should also be worth noting that having a dead end in a choose your own adventure/interactive story is actually expected behaviour anyways. Not all adventures are the same length.

    – JMac
    yesterday






  • 5





    @JMac Telling me what does and doesn't constitute a spoiler for me is like me telling you whether you like ice cream. My experience watching the show will be different than it would have been had I not seen the title. I didn't want it to be. I had no way of opting out of this community without opting out of all of SE. I'm asking, pretty nicely imo, for this community to be aware of its impact on other communities which may not share its guidelines. If you'd rather not, then okay.

    – yshavit
    yesterday








  • 3





    I feel the same, like I just received a spoiler while finding a resolution to my code related issue. I didn't know it has dead-ends, I definitely count "meta-information" if it has any indication of something you could know only from "trying" or "watching" the thing, as a spoiler. Plus ice cream is awful, everyone has opinions. Not trying to raise fire, just pointing out I experienced the same kind of "I scrolled on SE today, and the sidebar made me want to try Bandersnatch less" feeling.

    – Joshua Hedges
    yesterday






  • 2





    @yshavit I'm just pointing out that such a guideline seems to fill a really specific niche. It's not a very common thing to consider a spoiler, and I can understand why the OP and members of the community wouldn't consider it one. I also don't see how such things could even be applied as a rule. You could look at many questions and say the same thing. Some examples: "In Reign of the Supermen movie, who is trying to be Clark Kent / Superman" -> Spoils that someone is trying to be CK/Superman. "How did Travelers bring matter/objects/artifacts into the past?" -> Spoils they bring objects...

    – JMac
    yesterday














  • 5





    @yshavit It's very unclear to me what spoiler you are talking about. If you mean the actual question title as it currently is... I do not understand how that is a spoiler. At worst it's like a meta-spoiler; but it definitely does not reveal any of the plot.

    – JMac
    yesterday






  • 4





    @yshavit Meta-information like this isn't a spoiler though. All it does is tell you something extremely vague about plot structure. It really doesn't seem reasonable IMO to consider that a spoiler. It should also be worth noting that having a dead end in a choose your own adventure/interactive story is actually expected behaviour anyways. Not all adventures are the same length.

    – JMac
    yesterday






  • 5





    @JMac Telling me what does and doesn't constitute a spoiler for me is like me telling you whether you like ice cream. My experience watching the show will be different than it would have been had I not seen the title. I didn't want it to be. I had no way of opting out of this community without opting out of all of SE. I'm asking, pretty nicely imo, for this community to be aware of its impact on other communities which may not share its guidelines. If you'd rather not, then okay.

    – yshavit
    yesterday








  • 3





    I feel the same, like I just received a spoiler while finding a resolution to my code related issue. I didn't know it has dead-ends, I definitely count "meta-information" if it has any indication of something you could know only from "trying" or "watching" the thing, as a spoiler. Plus ice cream is awful, everyone has opinions. Not trying to raise fire, just pointing out I experienced the same kind of "I scrolled on SE today, and the sidebar made me want to try Bandersnatch less" feeling.

    – Joshua Hedges
    yesterday






  • 2





    @yshavit I'm just pointing out that such a guideline seems to fill a really specific niche. It's not a very common thing to consider a spoiler, and I can understand why the OP and members of the community wouldn't consider it one. I also don't see how such things could even be applied as a rule. You could look at many questions and say the same thing. Some examples: "In Reign of the Supermen movie, who is trying to be Clark Kent / Superman" -> Spoils that someone is trying to be CK/Superman. "How did Travelers bring matter/objects/artifacts into the past?" -> Spoils they bring objects...

    – JMac
    yesterday








5




5





@yshavit It's very unclear to me what spoiler you are talking about. If you mean the actual question title as it currently is... I do not understand how that is a spoiler. At worst it's like a meta-spoiler; but it definitely does not reveal any of the plot.

– JMac
yesterday





@yshavit It's very unclear to me what spoiler you are talking about. If you mean the actual question title as it currently is... I do not understand how that is a spoiler. At worst it's like a meta-spoiler; but it definitely does not reveal any of the plot.

– JMac
yesterday




4




4





@yshavit Meta-information like this isn't a spoiler though. All it does is tell you something extremely vague about plot structure. It really doesn't seem reasonable IMO to consider that a spoiler. It should also be worth noting that having a dead end in a choose your own adventure/interactive story is actually expected behaviour anyways. Not all adventures are the same length.

– JMac
yesterday





@yshavit Meta-information like this isn't a spoiler though. All it does is tell you something extremely vague about plot structure. It really doesn't seem reasonable IMO to consider that a spoiler. It should also be worth noting that having a dead end in a choose your own adventure/interactive story is actually expected behaviour anyways. Not all adventures are the same length.

– JMac
yesterday




5




5





@JMac Telling me what does and doesn't constitute a spoiler for me is like me telling you whether you like ice cream. My experience watching the show will be different than it would have been had I not seen the title. I didn't want it to be. I had no way of opting out of this community without opting out of all of SE. I'm asking, pretty nicely imo, for this community to be aware of its impact on other communities which may not share its guidelines. If you'd rather not, then okay.

– yshavit
yesterday







@JMac Telling me what does and doesn't constitute a spoiler for me is like me telling you whether you like ice cream. My experience watching the show will be different than it would have been had I not seen the title. I didn't want it to be. I had no way of opting out of this community without opting out of all of SE. I'm asking, pretty nicely imo, for this community to be aware of its impact on other communities which may not share its guidelines. If you'd rather not, then okay.

– yshavit
yesterday






3




3





I feel the same, like I just received a spoiler while finding a resolution to my code related issue. I didn't know it has dead-ends, I definitely count "meta-information" if it has any indication of something you could know only from "trying" or "watching" the thing, as a spoiler. Plus ice cream is awful, everyone has opinions. Not trying to raise fire, just pointing out I experienced the same kind of "I scrolled on SE today, and the sidebar made me want to try Bandersnatch less" feeling.

– Joshua Hedges
yesterday





I feel the same, like I just received a spoiler while finding a resolution to my code related issue. I didn't know it has dead-ends, I definitely count "meta-information" if it has any indication of something you could know only from "trying" or "watching" the thing, as a spoiler. Plus ice cream is awful, everyone has opinions. Not trying to raise fire, just pointing out I experienced the same kind of "I scrolled on SE today, and the sidebar made me want to try Bandersnatch less" feeling.

– Joshua Hedges
yesterday




2




2





@yshavit I'm just pointing out that such a guideline seems to fill a really specific niche. It's not a very common thing to consider a spoiler, and I can understand why the OP and members of the community wouldn't consider it one. I also don't see how such things could even be applied as a rule. You could look at many questions and say the same thing. Some examples: "In Reign of the Supermen movie, who is trying to be Clark Kent / Superman" -> Spoils that someone is trying to be CK/Superman. "How did Travelers bring matter/objects/artifacts into the past?" -> Spoils they bring objects...

– JMac
yesterday





@yshavit I'm just pointing out that such a guideline seems to fill a really specific niche. It's not a very common thing to consider a spoiler, and I can understand why the OP and members of the community wouldn't consider it one. I also don't see how such things could even be applied as a rule. You could look at many questions and say the same thing. Some examples: "In Reign of the Supermen movie, who is trying to be Clark Kent / Superman" -> Spoils that someone is trying to be CK/Superman. "How did Travelers bring matter/objects/artifacts into the past?" -> Spoils they bring objects...

– JMac
yesterday










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















23














Not all those ends are as dead as they look



Some of those dead ends lead to new content which helps establish the feeling something strange is going on, that time isn't strictly linear in this story, and that something else is somehow in control.



For example, when Stefan first arrives at Tuckersoft, Colin's code encounters a bug (what was it again? A buffer overflow caused by some kind of sprite?). From there, everyone goes into Mohan's office and Stefan presents Bandersnatch (game). Neither Colin nor Mohan have heard of the book.



Then, Mohan asks if you want to work with Tuckersoft. If you select "Yes", you immediately run into an ending where Stefan releases the game, it's buggy and half-finished, and a terrible game. Then you encounter what you've described as a dead end. The movie prompts you to go back to your last decision and try again.



BUT! This "second" time Stefan arrives at Tuckersoft, things go a little differently. This time, when Colin's game breaks, Stefan cuts Colin off and explains the bug he runs into. Further, inside Mohan's office, both Colin and Mohan know all about Bandersnatch (book). This shows the viewer that although you're repeating the major events, your choices have a lasting effect on the Bandersnatch (tv show) world. Colin even breaks the fourth wall on this during his acid trip (a few other places as well), and is so confident of it he's happy to jump off a building to demonstrate.



Further, some future options change based on the decisions you've made in the past. In the answer you linked to, you'll see you can pick up some "qualities" along the way, which affect the options you have. It's possible to encounter an apparent dead end, only to realize you unlocked another path along the way. For example, you can go back in time and find Stefan's rabbit as a child, but only if you've talked about Stefan's mom.



Then, of course, from a game perspective (because Bandersnatch lands somewhere between game and TV), every choice can't be equally as significant or correct. That's bad game design. You can see a couple of places where they thought about this: the non-consequential choices at the beginning show the viewer how choices work; selecting "yes" at Tuckersoft makes sense, so most viewers are immediately shown how they can go back and change a choice (and how that affects the story). So dead ends are a little necessary if you want the viewer to feel like they need to put effort into their decisions.






share|improve this answer








New contributor




Lord Farquaad is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 1





    Should point out that those 2 choices (Which cereal? Which music?) at the beginning are not insignificant. The cereal does show up in ads later in the episode on some branches, and the music choice influences the music you hear throughout the whole thing. More to the point, if you're Netflix, those two are arguably the MOST important choices you can make, since they're likely collecting data on you for their advertisers.

    – Darrel Hoffman
    19 hours ago






  • 1





    @DarrelHoffman What ads does Netflix serve? I've never seen an ad on Netflix.

    – Azor Ahai
    11 hours ago



















13














Another reason it may be done this way to motif the video game concept. In some games, you don't always just die, as much as you may have some "players" left and can return to previous checkpoint. (ie: the difference between losing something vs losing everything/the whole game)




Checkpoints are locations in a video game where a player character
respawns after death. Characters generally respawn at the last
checkpoint that they have reached.**A respawn is most often due to the
death of the in-game character, but it can also be caused by the
failure to meet an objective required to advance in the game.

Checkpoints might be temporary, as they stop working when the
character loses all of its lives. Most modern games, however, save the
game to memory at these points, known as auto-saving.



Checkpoints might be visible or invisible to the player. Visible
checkpoints might give a player a sense of security when activated,
but in turn sacrifice some immersion, as checkpoints are intrinsically
"gamey" and might even need an explanation of how they work. Invisible
checkpoints do not break immersion, but make players unsure of where
they will respawn. Usually, if a player does get a game over, then
there progress will be lost, and the player would lose all of their
checkpoints.




"...why were there dead ends like this in the story? Why didn't they lead to one of the filmed endings? Keeping dead ends in this novel approach to storytelling seems very odd."



But also to go with Johnny Bones' great answer, the notion of different kind of endings also does not only point out that we don't have full control and that there are still limitations, but it also gives us a contrast to consider what an ending really is, which the creators behind Bandersantch seem to want us to contemplate, as they themselves have...




Even Netflix says that while there are five “main” endings, there are
multiple variants on each that they are daring viewers to uncover. And
Brooker and Jones are clear as to not “prescribe” one ending over the
others, especially because they couldn’t agree on what exactly defines
one.



There were quite heated debates about what constitutes an 'ending,'”
says Brooker. “There’s a school of thought that says any time it stops
and you go back, that’s an ending. In Bandersnatch, there are endings
that are really abrupt that are still endings, in my mind.”



Besides, Jones points out: “In a world of parallel realities, maybe
there is no ending?”







share|improve this answer





















  • 4





    I think you meant "losing" rather than "loosing"?

    – phyrfox
    yesterday



















8














The show is based on the "Choose Your Own Adventure" series of books, and in fact the publisher of said books has sued Netflix over this series.



The point is, in the "Choose Your Own Adventure" books, your character could die, thus making for a shorter story. In the TV show, it must run a specific length, thus the dead end forces you to choose an alternate course of action to progress the story along.



Keep in mind, they're on a budget. It's easier (and less expensive) to force you to make an alternate choice than to actually script and film every possible outcome.



Of course, the simple fact is that you don't really have a choice. ;o)






share|improve this answer





















  • 5





    Considering the medium (internet streaming) there is no real reason to fill a fixed runtime. They could have just decided that this concludes the story and roll the credits.

    – Philipp
    yesterday








  • 16





    Not sure what you mean about needing the show to run for a specific length. Netflix and other streaming services have famously freed television from the 22-minute episode format, as there are no time slot restrictions on how long each episode must be. This is particularly relevant for Bandersnatch, which can run anywhere between 40 and 150 minutes depending on the choices taken. There's no logistical reason why they couldn't have included a version of the story that reaches an ending in the first 5 minutes.

    – Nuclear Wang
    yesterday








  • 5





    It's also totally Black Mirror to point out that your choice sometimes is irrelevant an there is no way out from the mess you got into.

    – rbanffy
    yesterday






  • 1





    @Moyli - Noted and corrected. Thanks!

    – Johnny Bones
    yesterday






  • 1





    I'm really surprised that "Choose Your Own Adventure" really not a generic name. I've never read a real "Choose Your Own Adventure" book; but I always remember referring to the Goosebump ones as such.

    – JMac
    yesterday



















3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes








3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









23














Not all those ends are as dead as they look



Some of those dead ends lead to new content which helps establish the feeling something strange is going on, that time isn't strictly linear in this story, and that something else is somehow in control.



For example, when Stefan first arrives at Tuckersoft, Colin's code encounters a bug (what was it again? A buffer overflow caused by some kind of sprite?). From there, everyone goes into Mohan's office and Stefan presents Bandersnatch (game). Neither Colin nor Mohan have heard of the book.



Then, Mohan asks if you want to work with Tuckersoft. If you select "Yes", you immediately run into an ending where Stefan releases the game, it's buggy and half-finished, and a terrible game. Then you encounter what you've described as a dead end. The movie prompts you to go back to your last decision and try again.



BUT! This "second" time Stefan arrives at Tuckersoft, things go a little differently. This time, when Colin's game breaks, Stefan cuts Colin off and explains the bug he runs into. Further, inside Mohan's office, both Colin and Mohan know all about Bandersnatch (book). This shows the viewer that although you're repeating the major events, your choices have a lasting effect on the Bandersnatch (tv show) world. Colin even breaks the fourth wall on this during his acid trip (a few other places as well), and is so confident of it he's happy to jump off a building to demonstrate.



Further, some future options change based on the decisions you've made in the past. In the answer you linked to, you'll see you can pick up some "qualities" along the way, which affect the options you have. It's possible to encounter an apparent dead end, only to realize you unlocked another path along the way. For example, you can go back in time and find Stefan's rabbit as a child, but only if you've talked about Stefan's mom.



Then, of course, from a game perspective (because Bandersnatch lands somewhere between game and TV), every choice can't be equally as significant or correct. That's bad game design. You can see a couple of places where they thought about this: the non-consequential choices at the beginning show the viewer how choices work; selecting "yes" at Tuckersoft makes sense, so most viewers are immediately shown how they can go back and change a choice (and how that affects the story). So dead ends are a little necessary if you want the viewer to feel like they need to put effort into their decisions.






share|improve this answer








New contributor




Lord Farquaad is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 1





    Should point out that those 2 choices (Which cereal? Which music?) at the beginning are not insignificant. The cereal does show up in ads later in the episode on some branches, and the music choice influences the music you hear throughout the whole thing. More to the point, if you're Netflix, those two are arguably the MOST important choices you can make, since they're likely collecting data on you for their advertisers.

    – Darrel Hoffman
    19 hours ago






  • 1





    @DarrelHoffman What ads does Netflix serve? I've never seen an ad on Netflix.

    – Azor Ahai
    11 hours ago
















23














Not all those ends are as dead as they look



Some of those dead ends lead to new content which helps establish the feeling something strange is going on, that time isn't strictly linear in this story, and that something else is somehow in control.



For example, when Stefan first arrives at Tuckersoft, Colin's code encounters a bug (what was it again? A buffer overflow caused by some kind of sprite?). From there, everyone goes into Mohan's office and Stefan presents Bandersnatch (game). Neither Colin nor Mohan have heard of the book.



Then, Mohan asks if you want to work with Tuckersoft. If you select "Yes", you immediately run into an ending where Stefan releases the game, it's buggy and half-finished, and a terrible game. Then you encounter what you've described as a dead end. The movie prompts you to go back to your last decision and try again.



BUT! This "second" time Stefan arrives at Tuckersoft, things go a little differently. This time, when Colin's game breaks, Stefan cuts Colin off and explains the bug he runs into. Further, inside Mohan's office, both Colin and Mohan know all about Bandersnatch (book). This shows the viewer that although you're repeating the major events, your choices have a lasting effect on the Bandersnatch (tv show) world. Colin even breaks the fourth wall on this during his acid trip (a few other places as well), and is so confident of it he's happy to jump off a building to demonstrate.



Further, some future options change based on the decisions you've made in the past. In the answer you linked to, you'll see you can pick up some "qualities" along the way, which affect the options you have. It's possible to encounter an apparent dead end, only to realize you unlocked another path along the way. For example, you can go back in time and find Stefan's rabbit as a child, but only if you've talked about Stefan's mom.



Then, of course, from a game perspective (because Bandersnatch lands somewhere between game and TV), every choice can't be equally as significant or correct. That's bad game design. You can see a couple of places where they thought about this: the non-consequential choices at the beginning show the viewer how choices work; selecting "yes" at Tuckersoft makes sense, so most viewers are immediately shown how they can go back and change a choice (and how that affects the story). So dead ends are a little necessary if you want the viewer to feel like they need to put effort into their decisions.






share|improve this answer








New contributor




Lord Farquaad is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 1





    Should point out that those 2 choices (Which cereal? Which music?) at the beginning are not insignificant. The cereal does show up in ads later in the episode on some branches, and the music choice influences the music you hear throughout the whole thing. More to the point, if you're Netflix, those two are arguably the MOST important choices you can make, since they're likely collecting data on you for their advertisers.

    – Darrel Hoffman
    19 hours ago






  • 1





    @DarrelHoffman What ads does Netflix serve? I've never seen an ad on Netflix.

    – Azor Ahai
    11 hours ago














23












23








23







Not all those ends are as dead as they look



Some of those dead ends lead to new content which helps establish the feeling something strange is going on, that time isn't strictly linear in this story, and that something else is somehow in control.



For example, when Stefan first arrives at Tuckersoft, Colin's code encounters a bug (what was it again? A buffer overflow caused by some kind of sprite?). From there, everyone goes into Mohan's office and Stefan presents Bandersnatch (game). Neither Colin nor Mohan have heard of the book.



Then, Mohan asks if you want to work with Tuckersoft. If you select "Yes", you immediately run into an ending where Stefan releases the game, it's buggy and half-finished, and a terrible game. Then you encounter what you've described as a dead end. The movie prompts you to go back to your last decision and try again.



BUT! This "second" time Stefan arrives at Tuckersoft, things go a little differently. This time, when Colin's game breaks, Stefan cuts Colin off and explains the bug he runs into. Further, inside Mohan's office, both Colin and Mohan know all about Bandersnatch (book). This shows the viewer that although you're repeating the major events, your choices have a lasting effect on the Bandersnatch (tv show) world. Colin even breaks the fourth wall on this during his acid trip (a few other places as well), and is so confident of it he's happy to jump off a building to demonstrate.



Further, some future options change based on the decisions you've made in the past. In the answer you linked to, you'll see you can pick up some "qualities" along the way, which affect the options you have. It's possible to encounter an apparent dead end, only to realize you unlocked another path along the way. For example, you can go back in time and find Stefan's rabbit as a child, but only if you've talked about Stefan's mom.



Then, of course, from a game perspective (because Bandersnatch lands somewhere between game and TV), every choice can't be equally as significant or correct. That's bad game design. You can see a couple of places where they thought about this: the non-consequential choices at the beginning show the viewer how choices work; selecting "yes" at Tuckersoft makes sense, so most viewers are immediately shown how they can go back and change a choice (and how that affects the story). So dead ends are a little necessary if you want the viewer to feel like they need to put effort into their decisions.






share|improve this answer








New contributor




Lord Farquaad is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.










Not all those ends are as dead as they look



Some of those dead ends lead to new content which helps establish the feeling something strange is going on, that time isn't strictly linear in this story, and that something else is somehow in control.



For example, when Stefan first arrives at Tuckersoft, Colin's code encounters a bug (what was it again? A buffer overflow caused by some kind of sprite?). From there, everyone goes into Mohan's office and Stefan presents Bandersnatch (game). Neither Colin nor Mohan have heard of the book.



Then, Mohan asks if you want to work with Tuckersoft. If you select "Yes", you immediately run into an ending where Stefan releases the game, it's buggy and half-finished, and a terrible game. Then you encounter what you've described as a dead end. The movie prompts you to go back to your last decision and try again.



BUT! This "second" time Stefan arrives at Tuckersoft, things go a little differently. This time, when Colin's game breaks, Stefan cuts Colin off and explains the bug he runs into. Further, inside Mohan's office, both Colin and Mohan know all about Bandersnatch (book). This shows the viewer that although you're repeating the major events, your choices have a lasting effect on the Bandersnatch (tv show) world. Colin even breaks the fourth wall on this during his acid trip (a few other places as well), and is so confident of it he's happy to jump off a building to demonstrate.



Further, some future options change based on the decisions you've made in the past. In the answer you linked to, you'll see you can pick up some "qualities" along the way, which affect the options you have. It's possible to encounter an apparent dead end, only to realize you unlocked another path along the way. For example, you can go back in time and find Stefan's rabbit as a child, but only if you've talked about Stefan's mom.



Then, of course, from a game perspective (because Bandersnatch lands somewhere between game and TV), every choice can't be equally as significant or correct. That's bad game design. You can see a couple of places where they thought about this: the non-consequential choices at the beginning show the viewer how choices work; selecting "yes" at Tuckersoft makes sense, so most viewers are immediately shown how they can go back and change a choice (and how that affects the story). So dead ends are a little necessary if you want the viewer to feel like they need to put effort into their decisions.







share|improve this answer








New contributor




Lord Farquaad is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer






New contributor




Lord Farquaad is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









answered yesterday









Lord FarquaadLord Farquaad

33116




33116




New contributor




Lord Farquaad is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Lord Farquaad is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Lord Farquaad is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.








  • 1





    Should point out that those 2 choices (Which cereal? Which music?) at the beginning are not insignificant. The cereal does show up in ads later in the episode on some branches, and the music choice influences the music you hear throughout the whole thing. More to the point, if you're Netflix, those two are arguably the MOST important choices you can make, since they're likely collecting data on you for their advertisers.

    – Darrel Hoffman
    19 hours ago






  • 1





    @DarrelHoffman What ads does Netflix serve? I've never seen an ad on Netflix.

    – Azor Ahai
    11 hours ago














  • 1





    Should point out that those 2 choices (Which cereal? Which music?) at the beginning are not insignificant. The cereal does show up in ads later in the episode on some branches, and the music choice influences the music you hear throughout the whole thing. More to the point, if you're Netflix, those two are arguably the MOST important choices you can make, since they're likely collecting data on you for their advertisers.

    – Darrel Hoffman
    19 hours ago






  • 1





    @DarrelHoffman What ads does Netflix serve? I've never seen an ad on Netflix.

    – Azor Ahai
    11 hours ago








1




1





Should point out that those 2 choices (Which cereal? Which music?) at the beginning are not insignificant. The cereal does show up in ads later in the episode on some branches, and the music choice influences the music you hear throughout the whole thing. More to the point, if you're Netflix, those two are arguably the MOST important choices you can make, since they're likely collecting data on you for their advertisers.

– Darrel Hoffman
19 hours ago





Should point out that those 2 choices (Which cereal? Which music?) at the beginning are not insignificant. The cereal does show up in ads later in the episode on some branches, and the music choice influences the music you hear throughout the whole thing. More to the point, if you're Netflix, those two are arguably the MOST important choices you can make, since they're likely collecting data on you for their advertisers.

– Darrel Hoffman
19 hours ago




1




1





@DarrelHoffman What ads does Netflix serve? I've never seen an ad on Netflix.

– Azor Ahai
11 hours ago





@DarrelHoffman What ads does Netflix serve? I've never seen an ad on Netflix.

– Azor Ahai
11 hours ago











13














Another reason it may be done this way to motif the video game concept. In some games, you don't always just die, as much as you may have some "players" left and can return to previous checkpoint. (ie: the difference between losing something vs losing everything/the whole game)




Checkpoints are locations in a video game where a player character
respawns after death. Characters generally respawn at the last
checkpoint that they have reached.**A respawn is most often due to the
death of the in-game character, but it can also be caused by the
failure to meet an objective required to advance in the game.

Checkpoints might be temporary, as they stop working when the
character loses all of its lives. Most modern games, however, save the
game to memory at these points, known as auto-saving.



Checkpoints might be visible or invisible to the player. Visible
checkpoints might give a player a sense of security when activated,
but in turn sacrifice some immersion, as checkpoints are intrinsically
"gamey" and might even need an explanation of how they work. Invisible
checkpoints do not break immersion, but make players unsure of where
they will respawn. Usually, if a player does get a game over, then
there progress will be lost, and the player would lose all of their
checkpoints.




"...why were there dead ends like this in the story? Why didn't they lead to one of the filmed endings? Keeping dead ends in this novel approach to storytelling seems very odd."



But also to go with Johnny Bones' great answer, the notion of different kind of endings also does not only point out that we don't have full control and that there are still limitations, but it also gives us a contrast to consider what an ending really is, which the creators behind Bandersantch seem to want us to contemplate, as they themselves have...




Even Netflix says that while there are five “main” endings, there are
multiple variants on each that they are daring viewers to uncover. And
Brooker and Jones are clear as to not “prescribe” one ending over the
others, especially because they couldn’t agree on what exactly defines
one.



There were quite heated debates about what constitutes an 'ending,'”
says Brooker. “There’s a school of thought that says any time it stops
and you go back, that’s an ending. In Bandersnatch, there are endings
that are really abrupt that are still endings, in my mind.”



Besides, Jones points out: “In a world of parallel realities, maybe
there is no ending?”







share|improve this answer





















  • 4





    I think you meant "losing" rather than "loosing"?

    – phyrfox
    yesterday
















13














Another reason it may be done this way to motif the video game concept. In some games, you don't always just die, as much as you may have some "players" left and can return to previous checkpoint. (ie: the difference between losing something vs losing everything/the whole game)




Checkpoints are locations in a video game where a player character
respawns after death. Characters generally respawn at the last
checkpoint that they have reached.**A respawn is most often due to the
death of the in-game character, but it can also be caused by the
failure to meet an objective required to advance in the game.

Checkpoints might be temporary, as they stop working when the
character loses all of its lives. Most modern games, however, save the
game to memory at these points, known as auto-saving.



Checkpoints might be visible or invisible to the player. Visible
checkpoints might give a player a sense of security when activated,
but in turn sacrifice some immersion, as checkpoints are intrinsically
"gamey" and might even need an explanation of how they work. Invisible
checkpoints do not break immersion, but make players unsure of where
they will respawn. Usually, if a player does get a game over, then
there progress will be lost, and the player would lose all of their
checkpoints.




"...why were there dead ends like this in the story? Why didn't they lead to one of the filmed endings? Keeping dead ends in this novel approach to storytelling seems very odd."



But also to go with Johnny Bones' great answer, the notion of different kind of endings also does not only point out that we don't have full control and that there are still limitations, but it also gives us a contrast to consider what an ending really is, which the creators behind Bandersantch seem to want us to contemplate, as they themselves have...




Even Netflix says that while there are five “main” endings, there are
multiple variants on each that they are daring viewers to uncover. And
Brooker and Jones are clear as to not “prescribe” one ending over the
others, especially because they couldn’t agree on what exactly defines
one.



There were quite heated debates about what constitutes an 'ending,'”
says Brooker. “There’s a school of thought that says any time it stops
and you go back, that’s an ending. In Bandersnatch, there are endings
that are really abrupt that are still endings, in my mind.”



Besides, Jones points out: “In a world of parallel realities, maybe
there is no ending?”







share|improve this answer





















  • 4





    I think you meant "losing" rather than "loosing"?

    – phyrfox
    yesterday














13












13








13







Another reason it may be done this way to motif the video game concept. In some games, you don't always just die, as much as you may have some "players" left and can return to previous checkpoint. (ie: the difference between losing something vs losing everything/the whole game)




Checkpoints are locations in a video game where a player character
respawns after death. Characters generally respawn at the last
checkpoint that they have reached.**A respawn is most often due to the
death of the in-game character, but it can also be caused by the
failure to meet an objective required to advance in the game.

Checkpoints might be temporary, as they stop working when the
character loses all of its lives. Most modern games, however, save the
game to memory at these points, known as auto-saving.



Checkpoints might be visible or invisible to the player. Visible
checkpoints might give a player a sense of security when activated,
but in turn sacrifice some immersion, as checkpoints are intrinsically
"gamey" and might even need an explanation of how they work. Invisible
checkpoints do not break immersion, but make players unsure of where
they will respawn. Usually, if a player does get a game over, then
there progress will be lost, and the player would lose all of their
checkpoints.




"...why were there dead ends like this in the story? Why didn't they lead to one of the filmed endings? Keeping dead ends in this novel approach to storytelling seems very odd."



But also to go with Johnny Bones' great answer, the notion of different kind of endings also does not only point out that we don't have full control and that there are still limitations, but it also gives us a contrast to consider what an ending really is, which the creators behind Bandersantch seem to want us to contemplate, as they themselves have...




Even Netflix says that while there are five “main” endings, there are
multiple variants on each that they are daring viewers to uncover. And
Brooker and Jones are clear as to not “prescribe” one ending over the
others, especially because they couldn’t agree on what exactly defines
one.



There were quite heated debates about what constitutes an 'ending,'”
says Brooker. “There’s a school of thought that says any time it stops
and you go back, that’s an ending. In Bandersnatch, there are endings
that are really abrupt that are still endings, in my mind.”



Besides, Jones points out: “In a world of parallel realities, maybe
there is no ending?”







share|improve this answer















Another reason it may be done this way to motif the video game concept. In some games, you don't always just die, as much as you may have some "players" left and can return to previous checkpoint. (ie: the difference between losing something vs losing everything/the whole game)




Checkpoints are locations in a video game where a player character
respawns after death. Characters generally respawn at the last
checkpoint that they have reached.**A respawn is most often due to the
death of the in-game character, but it can also be caused by the
failure to meet an objective required to advance in the game.

Checkpoints might be temporary, as they stop working when the
character loses all of its lives. Most modern games, however, save the
game to memory at these points, known as auto-saving.



Checkpoints might be visible or invisible to the player. Visible
checkpoints might give a player a sense of security when activated,
but in turn sacrifice some immersion, as checkpoints are intrinsically
"gamey" and might even need an explanation of how they work. Invisible
checkpoints do not break immersion, but make players unsure of where
they will respawn. Usually, if a player does get a game over, then
there progress will be lost, and the player would lose all of their
checkpoints.




"...why were there dead ends like this in the story? Why didn't they lead to one of the filmed endings? Keeping dead ends in this novel approach to storytelling seems very odd."



But also to go with Johnny Bones' great answer, the notion of different kind of endings also does not only point out that we don't have full control and that there are still limitations, but it also gives us a contrast to consider what an ending really is, which the creators behind Bandersantch seem to want us to contemplate, as they themselves have...




Even Netflix says that while there are five “main” endings, there are
multiple variants on each that they are daring viewers to uncover. And
Brooker and Jones are clear as to not “prescribe” one ending over the
others, especially because they couldn’t agree on what exactly defines
one.



There were quite heated debates about what constitutes an 'ending,'”
says Brooker. “There’s a school of thought that says any time it stops
and you go back, that’s an ending. In Bandersnatch, there are endings
that are really abrupt that are still endings, in my mind.”



Besides, Jones points out: “In a world of parallel realities, maybe
there is no ending?”








share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 20 hours ago

























answered yesterday









Darth LockeDarth Locke

10.8k12360




10.8k12360








  • 4





    I think you meant "losing" rather than "loosing"?

    – phyrfox
    yesterday














  • 4





    I think you meant "losing" rather than "loosing"?

    – phyrfox
    yesterday








4




4





I think you meant "losing" rather than "loosing"?

– phyrfox
yesterday





I think you meant "losing" rather than "loosing"?

– phyrfox
yesterday











8














The show is based on the "Choose Your Own Adventure" series of books, and in fact the publisher of said books has sued Netflix over this series.



The point is, in the "Choose Your Own Adventure" books, your character could die, thus making for a shorter story. In the TV show, it must run a specific length, thus the dead end forces you to choose an alternate course of action to progress the story along.



Keep in mind, they're on a budget. It's easier (and less expensive) to force you to make an alternate choice than to actually script and film every possible outcome.



Of course, the simple fact is that you don't really have a choice. ;o)






share|improve this answer





















  • 5





    Considering the medium (internet streaming) there is no real reason to fill a fixed runtime. They could have just decided that this concludes the story and roll the credits.

    – Philipp
    yesterday








  • 16





    Not sure what you mean about needing the show to run for a specific length. Netflix and other streaming services have famously freed television from the 22-minute episode format, as there are no time slot restrictions on how long each episode must be. This is particularly relevant for Bandersnatch, which can run anywhere between 40 and 150 minutes depending on the choices taken. There's no logistical reason why they couldn't have included a version of the story that reaches an ending in the first 5 minutes.

    – Nuclear Wang
    yesterday








  • 5





    It's also totally Black Mirror to point out that your choice sometimes is irrelevant an there is no way out from the mess you got into.

    – rbanffy
    yesterday






  • 1





    @Moyli - Noted and corrected. Thanks!

    – Johnny Bones
    yesterday






  • 1





    I'm really surprised that "Choose Your Own Adventure" really not a generic name. I've never read a real "Choose Your Own Adventure" book; but I always remember referring to the Goosebump ones as such.

    – JMac
    yesterday
















8














The show is based on the "Choose Your Own Adventure" series of books, and in fact the publisher of said books has sued Netflix over this series.



The point is, in the "Choose Your Own Adventure" books, your character could die, thus making for a shorter story. In the TV show, it must run a specific length, thus the dead end forces you to choose an alternate course of action to progress the story along.



Keep in mind, they're on a budget. It's easier (and less expensive) to force you to make an alternate choice than to actually script and film every possible outcome.



Of course, the simple fact is that you don't really have a choice. ;o)






share|improve this answer





















  • 5





    Considering the medium (internet streaming) there is no real reason to fill a fixed runtime. They could have just decided that this concludes the story and roll the credits.

    – Philipp
    yesterday








  • 16





    Not sure what you mean about needing the show to run for a specific length. Netflix and other streaming services have famously freed television from the 22-minute episode format, as there are no time slot restrictions on how long each episode must be. This is particularly relevant for Bandersnatch, which can run anywhere between 40 and 150 minutes depending on the choices taken. There's no logistical reason why they couldn't have included a version of the story that reaches an ending in the first 5 minutes.

    – Nuclear Wang
    yesterday








  • 5





    It's also totally Black Mirror to point out that your choice sometimes is irrelevant an there is no way out from the mess you got into.

    – rbanffy
    yesterday






  • 1





    @Moyli - Noted and corrected. Thanks!

    – Johnny Bones
    yesterday






  • 1





    I'm really surprised that "Choose Your Own Adventure" really not a generic name. I've never read a real "Choose Your Own Adventure" book; but I always remember referring to the Goosebump ones as such.

    – JMac
    yesterday














8












8








8







The show is based on the "Choose Your Own Adventure" series of books, and in fact the publisher of said books has sued Netflix over this series.



The point is, in the "Choose Your Own Adventure" books, your character could die, thus making for a shorter story. In the TV show, it must run a specific length, thus the dead end forces you to choose an alternate course of action to progress the story along.



Keep in mind, they're on a budget. It's easier (and less expensive) to force you to make an alternate choice than to actually script and film every possible outcome.



Of course, the simple fact is that you don't really have a choice. ;o)






share|improve this answer















The show is based on the "Choose Your Own Adventure" series of books, and in fact the publisher of said books has sued Netflix over this series.



The point is, in the "Choose Your Own Adventure" books, your character could die, thus making for a shorter story. In the TV show, it must run a specific length, thus the dead end forces you to choose an alternate course of action to progress the story along.



Keep in mind, they're on a budget. It's easier (and less expensive) to force you to make an alternate choice than to actually script and film every possible outcome.



Of course, the simple fact is that you don't really have a choice. ;o)







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited yesterday

























answered yesterday









Johnny BonesJohnny Bones

38.5k14102196




38.5k14102196








  • 5





    Considering the medium (internet streaming) there is no real reason to fill a fixed runtime. They could have just decided that this concludes the story and roll the credits.

    – Philipp
    yesterday








  • 16





    Not sure what you mean about needing the show to run for a specific length. Netflix and other streaming services have famously freed television from the 22-minute episode format, as there are no time slot restrictions on how long each episode must be. This is particularly relevant for Bandersnatch, which can run anywhere between 40 and 150 minutes depending on the choices taken. There's no logistical reason why they couldn't have included a version of the story that reaches an ending in the first 5 minutes.

    – Nuclear Wang
    yesterday








  • 5





    It's also totally Black Mirror to point out that your choice sometimes is irrelevant an there is no way out from the mess you got into.

    – rbanffy
    yesterday






  • 1





    @Moyli - Noted and corrected. Thanks!

    – Johnny Bones
    yesterday






  • 1





    I'm really surprised that "Choose Your Own Adventure" really not a generic name. I've never read a real "Choose Your Own Adventure" book; but I always remember referring to the Goosebump ones as such.

    – JMac
    yesterday














  • 5





    Considering the medium (internet streaming) there is no real reason to fill a fixed runtime. They could have just decided that this concludes the story and roll the credits.

    – Philipp
    yesterday








  • 16





    Not sure what you mean about needing the show to run for a specific length. Netflix and other streaming services have famously freed television from the 22-minute episode format, as there are no time slot restrictions on how long each episode must be. This is particularly relevant for Bandersnatch, which can run anywhere between 40 and 150 minutes depending on the choices taken. There's no logistical reason why they couldn't have included a version of the story that reaches an ending in the first 5 minutes.

    – Nuclear Wang
    yesterday








  • 5





    It's also totally Black Mirror to point out that your choice sometimes is irrelevant an there is no way out from the mess you got into.

    – rbanffy
    yesterday






  • 1





    @Moyli - Noted and corrected. Thanks!

    – Johnny Bones
    yesterday






  • 1





    I'm really surprised that "Choose Your Own Adventure" really not a generic name. I've never read a real "Choose Your Own Adventure" book; but I always remember referring to the Goosebump ones as such.

    – JMac
    yesterday








5




5





Considering the medium (internet streaming) there is no real reason to fill a fixed runtime. They could have just decided that this concludes the story and roll the credits.

– Philipp
yesterday







Considering the medium (internet streaming) there is no real reason to fill a fixed runtime. They could have just decided that this concludes the story and roll the credits.

– Philipp
yesterday






16




16





Not sure what you mean about needing the show to run for a specific length. Netflix and other streaming services have famously freed television from the 22-minute episode format, as there are no time slot restrictions on how long each episode must be. This is particularly relevant for Bandersnatch, which can run anywhere between 40 and 150 minutes depending on the choices taken. There's no logistical reason why they couldn't have included a version of the story that reaches an ending in the first 5 minutes.

– Nuclear Wang
yesterday







Not sure what you mean about needing the show to run for a specific length. Netflix and other streaming services have famously freed television from the 22-minute episode format, as there are no time slot restrictions on how long each episode must be. This is particularly relevant for Bandersnatch, which can run anywhere between 40 and 150 minutes depending on the choices taken. There's no logistical reason why they couldn't have included a version of the story that reaches an ending in the first 5 minutes.

– Nuclear Wang
yesterday






5




5





It's also totally Black Mirror to point out that your choice sometimes is irrelevant an there is no way out from the mess you got into.

– rbanffy
yesterday





It's also totally Black Mirror to point out that your choice sometimes is irrelevant an there is no way out from the mess you got into.

– rbanffy
yesterday




1




1





@Moyli - Noted and corrected. Thanks!

– Johnny Bones
yesterday





@Moyli - Noted and corrected. Thanks!

– Johnny Bones
yesterday




1




1





I'm really surprised that "Choose Your Own Adventure" really not a generic name. I've never read a real "Choose Your Own Adventure" book; but I always remember referring to the Goosebump ones as such.

– JMac
yesterday





I'm really surprised that "Choose Your Own Adventure" really not a generic name. I've never read a real "Choose Your Own Adventure" book; but I always remember referring to the Goosebump ones as such.

– JMac
yesterday



Popular posts from this blog

How to label and detect the document text images

Vallis Paradisi

Tabula Rosettana