Jul
17
Structure: Iron Man
Filed Under Structural Analysis | 1 Comment
A structural overview of Iron Man (Mark Fergus, Hawk Ostby, Art Marcum, Matt Holloway 2008)
Not just a great comic book adaptation and an exciting action flick, but also an elegantly written pieces of cinema entertainment, executed with a daring cast and grounded in a solid foundation of character.
ACT ONE
SEQUENCE A
- Tony Stark visits soldiers on duty in the Middle East.
- The convoy is attacked, the soldiers are quickly killed.
- Stark flees when a bomb explodes, severely wounding Tony’s chest.
- Tony is captured and recorded by a group of terrorists.
FLASHBACK
- Tony’s history as a child prodigy, taking over his father’s company at 21.
- Colonel Rhodes presents Tony with an award in his absence.
- Stane accepts the award in Tony’s honor.
- Rhody finds Tony partying in a casino.
- Reporter Christine approaches Stark with questions regarding ethics.Stane
- The two end up spending the night together.
- Christine is greeted by Tony’s assistant, “Pepper” as she leaves the house.
- Pepper helps Tony with some business before he heads out to the airport.
- In flight, Tony talks with Rhody, who is unhappy about Tony’s attitude.
- Tony gets Rhody to relax, they get drunk and have an in-flight party.
- At a military outpost, Tony demonstrates the Jericho, a missile system.
- Tony goes off with the convoy that is soon attacked by terrorists.
SEQUENCE B
- Tony regains consciousness, his chest is hooked up to a strange device.
- His cellmate Yinsen explains the device keeps shrapnel out of Tony’s heart.
- The captors tell Tony to build a Jericho. Tony refuses and they torture him.
- The terrorists show off a huge weapons stockpile and Tony starts building.
- With Yinsen’s help, Tony constructs a super power generator.
- Tony designs a powered weapon suit to defeat the terrorists.
- Terrorist Raza, attempts to torture Yinsen and gives them one more day.
- Yinsen and Tony set off a bomb as distraction as Tony powers up his suit.
- Yinsen grabs a gun and runs off to distract the surviving guards.
- Tony muscles his way through the cave, his suit deflects weapon fire.
- A dying Yinsen encourages Tony to not waste his life as he escapes.
- Tony destroys their weapons, the armor is ruined, but he is alive.
- US helicopters fly overhead, a group of soldiers led by Rhody, find Tony.
ACT TWO
SEQUENCE C
- Back home Tony announces to shut down Stark Industries’ Weapons.
- Agent Coulson tells Pepper he wants to talk to Tony about his capture.
- Stane confronts Tony about his actions, furious.
- Tony wants Stark Industries to move forward with Ark Reactor technology.
- Stane tells Tony to lay low for a while so the company can sort things out.
- During the upgrade of the Ark Reactor, Tony verges on cardiac arrest.
- Pepper helps in the process, she’s told to get rid of the old model.
- Rhodes says Stark is suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder.
- Tony starts upgrading his armored suit to “Mark 2,”.
- The terrorists gather all fragments of the original armor in the desert.
- Tony perfects the armor’s flight system.
- Pepper comes in and leaves a box on Tony’s desk.
- Stane and the board filed an injunction to gain control of Stark Ind.
- Tony completes the upgrade of his flight system.
- A test flight shows Tony the power supply shuts down at great heights.
- After a near-crash, Tony crashes through three floors of the house.
SEQUENCE D
- Tony finds Pepper’s box with “Proof That Tony Stark Has A Heart.”
- Tony rebuilds the suit to solve the icing problem, to code name Mark 3.
- Tony leaves to attend his benefit dinner while the suit is being painted.
MID POINT:
- At the charity event Agent Coulson wants to learn about the incident.
- Tony and Pepper share a moment together in the moonlight.
- Christine challenges him on his weapons being used in the Middle East.
- Stane reveals he filed the injunction against Tony.
- Tony is furious, transforms into Iron Man for the first time.
SEQUENCE E
- In the Middle East, Iron Man defeats the terrorists, destroys their weapons.
- Two F-22 jets spot him.
- Col. Rhodes contacts Tony, who plays ignorant.
- The jets are too much and Tony reveals to Rhodes he is responsible.
- Iron Man is hit by one fighter jet but saves a pilot’s life.
- Tony convinces Rhody to pass it all off as a “training exercise.”
- Back at home, Pepper catches him removing the Iron Man armor.
SEQUENCE F
- The terrorists are visited by none other than Stane.
- He paid them to kill Stark, but they demanded a much higher price.
- Stane takes the remnants of the Mark 1 armor they have gathered.
- Pepper agrees to help Tony.
- In Stane’s office she finds evidence he was behind Tony’s capture.
- Stane realizes what she was up to.
- Agent Coulson agrees to help stop Stane with his fellow agents.
- Stane cannot figure out how to create a power source for the suit.
- Stane arrives at Tony’s house and paralyzes him with a sonic weapon.
- Stane yanks out the power source from Tony’s heart.
- Tony gets the Ark Reactor that Pepper gave him.
- Tony gets the power source installed just as Rhody arrives.
ACT THREE
SEQUENCE G
- Pepper and Coulson spot the Mark 1 Armor, Stane attacks them.
- Iron Man fights Iron Monger, with half power in the suit.
- Tony grabs Iron Monger and climbs higher, then loses him.
- Iron Man is now almost completely powerless.
- Tony instructs Pepper to overload the building’s Ark Reactor.
- Pepper is hesitant, believing that Tony could also be killed.
- Tony manages to keep fighting while she builds up power to the Reactor.
- The Ark explodes, killing Stane, injuring Tony but saving him from death.
SEQUENCE H
- At a press conference Tony adopts the name “Iron Man”.
- Coulson: cover stories about Stane and the “truth” about Iron Man.
- Tony goes before the reporters once more, and declares “I am Iron Man.”
EPILOGUE
Back home, Nick Fury of S.H.I.E.L.D. talks about “The Avenger Initiative.”
Thank you to IMDb for the full synopsis.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
Jul
5
A structural overview of
A Room with a View (Ruth Prawer Jhabvala, 1985).
Without any doubt, this is one of the finest literary adaptations and a timeless romantic movie.
The film launched the careers of actors Daniel Day Lewis and Helena Bonham Carter, while it was a first major hit in a string of successful adaptations written by James Ivory’s scribe of choice Ruth Prawer Jhabvala.
The film formed the inspiration for my university thesis about film translation and subtitling back in 1988. For that purpose I had to view it dozens of times (on VHS). But it couldn’t stop me from watching it many times again over the twenty years that have since past.
ACT ONE
SEQ. A: The English – Boredom and bickering about a view
00.00 Titles: Cast of Characters. Lucy Honeychurch, Charlotte et al.
02.30 Florence. Lucy & Charlotte unhappy: room without a view.
03.30 Charlotte complains over dinner. The Emersons stir the pot.
04.00 George is after Lucy. His dad offers room w/ view: vision within!
06.30 Charlotte affronted: how to deal with these people?!
07.00 Sisters Allan: Tactless, Kindness / Delicate, Beautiful.
09.00 Rooms changed. George leaves question mark for Lucy.
10.00 Father & son Emerson put cornflowers on sisters’ beds.
12.00 Lucy at piano. Beebe: if she would live as she plays: exciting…
13.00 Charlotte and Eleanor go out together.
SEQ. B: The Italians – A call to adventure in Florence
14.00 Santa Croce Boredom. Emerson tells Lucy about George’s mind.
17.00 Ch. & Eleanor: physical sensation, smells, alleys. Adventure!
21.30 Lucy sees fight, blood. She faints; George catches her.
22.30 Her photos are blooded. The man is dead. George offers help.
25.00 By Arno, George: “Something happened to me. And you.”
27.00 (Out to see a view) Priest makes girl descend. Romance!
30.30 George in tree. He is declaring the ‘eternal yes’, father says.
31.30 Charlotte & Eleanor send Lucy away so they can gossip.
33.00 Lucy looking for George. He kisses her, while Charlotte watches.
ACT 2a: Lucy resisting George
SEQ. C: Leaving George and leaving Italy.
35.30 Leaving back for Florence in a storm. George is walking.
37.30 Charlotte: How to silence George? Promises: “Silent as the grave.”
39.30 Charlotte negotiates refund at the hotel.
40.30 George arrives back at the hotel.
SEQ. D: Officially engaged – Living a lie
41.30 (Home) Lucy has accepted Cecil Vyse’s marriage proposal.
44.00 Beebe about Lucy: “One day music and life will mingle.”
44.30 (Officially Engaged) News shocks Beebe in front of Cecil.
46.00 Lucy & Cecil walking, he is snobbish, elitist about Beebe.
MID POINT:
47.00 By lake: Cecil’s first kiss, clumsy, Lucy thinks of George.
ACT 2b: Lucy resisting Cecil
SEQ. E: Looking for new tenants – The Emersons
50.00 Lucy writes to the Allans for tenants.
51.00 Lucy plays to audience, Cecil takes credit for her culture.
52.30 Cecil and mum talk about Lucy & preparing her for London.
53.00 Cecil patronises her, then kisses her.
54.00 Tennis, Beebe reads letter; Freddy about new tenants ‘Emersons’.
56.00 Cecil tells about new tenants, he met them at gallery, Italian art.
58.00 Lucy mad at Cecil, calls him “disloyal”, he patronises her again.
SEQ. F: The Emersons are in town – The pot is boiling
58.30 Freddy & Beebe go to the Emersons: come and bathe!
60.30 George about coincidence & fate, Italy. The men bathe.
62.30 Cecil, Lucy and mum pass by, seeing the bathing scene.
65.00 Freddy at piano, Charlotte’s letter: she is coming over.
66.30 Mum complains about Cecil’s attitude.
68.00 Freddy raves about George.
69.00 Mum & Lucy: Charlotte will be arriving.
70.00 Charlotte meets George at station.
71.30 Charlotte arrives, chaos about cab fare.
73.30 Lucy & Charlotte: ‘no other source’, have you spoken to HIM?
SEQ. G: Cecil reads Lavish – Pandora’s Box opens
74.30 Cecil reads out loud from ‘Under a loggia’ by Eleanor Lavish.
76.00 Lucy and George recognise passage about kiss in Florence.
79.00 Lucy runs off, mad. George follows her and kisses her again.
80.00 Lucy challenges Charlotte. Coincidence! Eleanor no friend.
81.00 (Lying to George) Lucy orders her out, George declares his love.
84.30 (Lying to C.) breakup with Cecil “because he didn’t play tennis.”
87.30 Cecil seems to take it well.
ACT THREE
SEQ. H: Planning Escape to Greece
88.30 The Sisters Allan: letter to Lucy, raving about about Athens.
90.00 Freddy tells Mr. Beebe. Cecil: Greece is not for our little lot.
91.00 Charlotte, mum, Lucy; Beebe takes Minnie to the Beehive.
91.30 (Lying to Beebe, mum, Freddy, servants) Lucy plays piano.
92.30 Lucy: I must go away, Constantinopel, Athens…
93.00 Lucy to Charlotte: Help me, I must go to Greece.
94.00 Lucy & Freddy, he plays piano.
94.30 Charlotte talks to mum, Lucy has a plan. Go to Greece with her.
95.30 Emersons preparing to leave. George: ugly house anyway.
96.30 George leaves, his dad is sad.
SEQ. I: No more lies – Speaking up
97.00 Lucy and Allans about Cecil and travel.
97.30 Lucy and Mum: Glad! why not announce it?
98.00 Allans: Didn’t look like a future bride; she lacked radiance.
99.30 Emerson tells Charlotte George loves her, reason for move.
100.0 Charlotte: Lucy not marrying. Emerson: Time for speaking out!
101.0 Mum: why Greece? Mum hurt.
102.0 They see the moving. Mum: pity for the Emersons.
103.0 (Lying to Mr. Emerson) He pushes her to confession.
106.0 Lucy runs out: “Wait! Lucy has got something to tell us.”
SEQ. J: Aftermath
107.0 Charlotte reads Lucy’s letter from Florence
107.3 V.O. Dinner at pensione: “We have a view”.
108.0 Lucy reads letter from Freddy, with George in room with view.
108.3 The End
NOTES ON THE STORY STRUCTURE
The film stays relatively close to the original novel and I believe this may be the reason why the turning points are not all where you would expect them. But perhaps I’m just not seeing it right. Please compare notes and comment.
Act One
Much like Rose in Titanic, Lucy longs for adventure in her ordinary life. The inciting incident occurs quite late in the film (25mins) when she is alone with George for the first time, under emotional circumstances. The meaning of the moment is emphasised when George says “Something happened to me. And you.”
George kisses Lucy in the Tuscan flower fields, a moment that feels very much like a second Inciting Incident. But it marks Lucy’s decision to resist him, and the end of Act One.
Act Two
The conservative English upper-class mores, an abstract antagonist in Act One, is incarnated in the character of Cecil Vyse from Act Two.
Cecil’s kiss (at 47mins) marks the Mid Point and the moment Lucy realises she will never be happy with this man and the values he represents. The flashback to George’s kiss underscores her change of heart: from this point onwards she is no longer committed to Cecil. She will be moving apart from Cecil until the final breakup, which marks the end of Act Two.
Act Three
It is tempting to see the talk about “going to Greece” as a Road Back Home sequence, or break into Act Three, in which Lucy finally confronts her true feelings and admits her love for George.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
Apr
24
Structure: The Shawshank Redemption
Filed Under Premium Content, Structural Analysis | Leave a Comment
A structural overview of
The Shawshank Redemption
(Frank Darabont, 1994).
It was nominated for seven Academy Awards, including Best Picture, Best Actor (Morgan Freeman), Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Cinematography, Best Editing, Best Original Score, and Best Sound – but it failed to win a single Oscar.
This film has an interesting structure because of its unusual treatment of the protagonist. The POV character Red is not the character with the clearest objective. Andy drives most of the story, although he is not entirely ‘honest’ to the audience. Only at the end of the story we find out about his real agenda.
One might argue that prisoners by definition have a strong desire for freedom. This is not the case for Red. Red considers himself ‘an institutional man’ without hope of ever getting out. Despite the lack of a strong outer objective, Red is the character with the strongest transformation.
While the theme of the film is about ‘hope’ and Red’s arc is just about that, there is some sort of a weaker arc for Andy, too. After the death of Tommy and Andy’s two months in the ‘hole’ (a text book example of an Ordeal sequence), Andy has a redemptive moment when he says about his wife “She died. Because of me, the way I am.”
Because of the lack of a clear ‘outer objective’ for either character, the end of Act One is not really signposted. The end of Act Two however is very clear.
Have a look and see how you see the story structure of The Shawshank Redemption. Of course, there is no ‘right way’ of doing this. Depending on which criteria you use, you may have a completely different outcome and I would be very keen to hear about it.
ACT ONE
Sequence A: “Fresh Fish”: New arrivals at Shawshank.
00.00 Andy Dufresne in car with gun.
02.00 D.A. quotes: “See you in hell before I see you in Reno.”
04.30 Eight bullets, two victims. He reloaded.
06.00 Verdict: Two life sentences for Andy.
06.30 Shawshank: Red’s parole hearing: rejected.
07.30 Red: I’m the man who can get anything for you.
09.00 1949: Andy Dufresne arrives. Inmates look on.
10.00 Red bets on Andy, he will crack tonight.
12.00 Norton: Your ass belongs to me. Welcome to SS.
13.30 Shower, clothes, bible. Red has his bet on Andy.
15.30 Lights out. “Fat ass by a nose.” Andy holds up.
Sequence B: Andy takes initiative.
19.00 Lunch: fat man dead. Andy: “What was his name?”
22.30 Shower: Andy taken by The Sisters.
23.30 Andy orders rock hammer. Red: “Grow eyes on back.”
27.30 Rock hammer comes in. “Book delivery for Dufresne.”
28.30 Sisters take him again. “He always fought.”
31.30 Roofing. Andy’s offer Hadley: taxes for three beers each.
ACT TWO
Sequence C: Andy fights to improve conditions
37.00 Playing checkers. Getting to be friends.
38.30 Andy asks for Rita Hayworth. Red: I’ll get her.
40.30 Sisters take Andy in projection room.
43.00 Hadley beats up Bogs. To min. security hospital.
43.30 Rita Hayworth poster for Andy. No charge.
46.00 Norton sizes Andy up; cell checked, bible found.
49.00 Andy library assistant; wants funding.
52.00 Report over lunch; asks for pool table, organise funds.
Sequence D: Brooks and being Institutionalised
53.00 Sends a letter a week for funding; no answers.
54.00 Andy does all tax returns; Red assists.
55.30 Brooks goes crazy; 50ys in jail. Institutionalised.
57.30 Brooks lets Jake free; in halfway house. Bagging job.
61.00 Thinks of going back. Shoot boss? Suicide letter.
62.30 Andy reads letter. Red: “He should’a died in here.”
Sequence D: Hope and how Andy’s efforts start to pay off
63.00 Response to letters: $200 and lots of books donated.
64.30 Andy plays Norton’s record for inmates: 2 weeks in the hole.
68.00 Andy: “a place called hope.” Red: dangerous thing: Brooks.
70.00 Red: 30 years anniversary and parole rejected.
71.00 Andy’s parole rejection present to Red: harmonica.
71.30 Red’s ten years Shawshank present to Andy: Monroe.
73.00 $500 annual payment to library. Extension and music.
75.00 Inside – Out program and shady deals bringing in money.
77.30 Paper leaves a trail. No: Randall Stevens. A phantom.
Sequence E: Tommy offers a sparkle of hope.
80.00 New young Boy Tommy. Andy teaches him.
82.00 Tommy is sick of learning, loses interest and hope.
85.30 Red tells Tommy about Andy, Tommy realises who he is.
86.00 Tommy tells Andy and Red about Andy’s wife’s real killer
88.00 Norton wouldn’t let him go. Andy 1 month in the hole.
90.00 Red: Andy is innocent. 19 years.
90.30 Tommy passed his test: news brought to the hole.
91.30 Norton wants to see Tommy; Hadley shoots him.
Sequence F: Every man’s got a breaking point.
94.00 Norton lies: Tommy shot escaping. Andy refuses further work.
96.00 Another month in the hole.
97.30 “I killed her, Red. Because of me, the way I am.”
98.30 Andy about Mexico. Red: I’m an institutional man now.
101.0 Andy: get busy living or get busy dying.
102.0 Andy: go to Buxton. Something I want you to have.
103.0 Andy asked for a piece of rope for Andy. Breaking point?
103.3 Andy gives Norton three deposits. Norton wants shoes shined.
105.0 In cell: lights out.
ACT THREE
Sequence G: Andy’s Resurrection
105.3 Red: That was the longest night of my life.
106.0 Man missing: Dufresne.
108.3 Red called into cell, questioned by Norton.
109.3 Hole in cell behind Racquel Welch: escaped.
110.0 Andy tunneled through wall in less than 20ys.
111.3 FB of night: shoes, climbing out, 500yds sewers.
115.0 Out. Bank, cashing in. Posts envelope from bank.
116.0 Press: “Corruption and Murder at Shawshank.”
118.3 Police raid on Shawshank. Norton suicides
119.0 Andy driving in convertible.
120.3 Parole board for Red. “I don’t give a shit.” Approved.
Sequence H: Living with Hope
123.0 Out
123.3 In halfway house: “Brooks was here.”
124.0 Bagging. Asking “permission to piss.”
125.0 What to do? Break parole? Go back? Live in fear.
125.3 Fulfill the promise: Red goes to Buxton.
127.0 Finds box with letter: I’ll keep an eye out for you.
132.0 Red travels to Andy. “I hope”.
The Shawshank Redemption – Screenplay (Early draft by Frank Darabont)
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
Apr
20
Structure: Ghost World
Filed Under Premium Content, Structural Analysis | Leave a Comment
A structural overview of
Ghost World
(Daniel Clowes, Terry Zwigoff, 2001).
A cult comic, two charismatic teen actresses, an inspired director and a sparse score. Only six pages of still pictures were turned into one of the coolest movies of the decade.
Because the plot points are often quite subtle, structurally this film seems a bit fluid and the protagonist’s objective is never explicitly stated. Yet there is a clear Hero’s Journey, with Enid Crossing the Threshold to enter and discover the Special World of Seymour. But where does this happen, at the end of Sequence B or C?
Enid is a reluctant character, and although she decides to enter the Special World, it is under a pretext. She will be resisting her attraction to Seymour (the Call to Adventure) until the second half of Act Two, when she explicitly suggests to Seymour she could move in (an Approach to the Inmost Cave).
At the end of Act Two, Enid goes through the crisis of losing both Becky and Seymour. The truth about her cruel joke on Seymour has to come out (an Ordeal, both for Enid and Seymour) before she is ready to move on.
I’m not sure if Enid’s visit to the hospital should be seen as the end of Act Two or the first scene of Act Three. Because the scene can be experienced as Enid’s redemption (the victim of her joke she calls now her hero) and she is finally honest about her feelings, I decided to put it in Act Two.
The scenes printed in blue represent the comic book source material that is – almost verbatim – included in the film. It shows how this is more than just an adaptation. It is almost entirely an original story, inspired by the characters created in the comic.
ACT ONE
SEQUENCE A: Life after Graduation
00.00 Panning across rear windows, against 50’s music.
02.30 Eccentric Enid, in her room, is dancing to the music.
03.00 Student graduation speeches; Enid &Rebecca roll eyes.
04.00 Gossiping outside school.
05.00 Enid & Rebecca in bar, making fun of un-cool girl.
06.00 Todd, making fun of the two girls.
07.30 Dennis, dork – not seeing him again: depressing.
08.00 Enid at breakfast with dad: an icon of boredom.
09.00 Enid & Becky at diner making fun, follow old ’satanists’.
10.30 Wowsville, 50’s diner; Weird Al serves.
11.30 Personals ’striking blonde’: plan for joke.
SEQUENCE B: A Cruel Joke
12.00 At Enid’s: calling the number, date at Wowsville.
14.00 Annoying Josh at the store, Doug interferes.
15.30 Please, Josh, give us a ride.
16.00 Driving with Josh.
16.30 Rebecca about Al “I want to make love to him.”
17.00 Seymour walks in, has vanilla milkshake.
18.00 Seymour leaves, cruel joke
18.30 Seymour’s near-accident; following; E. feels sympathy.
SEQUENCE C: Getting closer to Seymour
19.30 Art class;teacher announces community show.
21.00 Looking for flat, stalking Seymour, check his mail.
21.30 Garage sale; Seymour sells record. E.’s impressed.
24.00 Diner, E.: he’s almost cool. Un-cool friend: “funky”.
26.00 Enid dyes hair green, father enters. Rebecca watching.
26.30 Let’s go hassle Josh. Old man Norman at bus stop.
27.30 Josh is not home; Enid’s note: “You are gay.”
28.30 Johnny (magazine shop) provokes “punk rock is over!”
30.00 Enid plays Seymour’s record on repeat.
32.00 Seymour shows her the original 78.
ACT TWO
SEQUENCE D: A Challenge for Enid
33.00 Art Class: politically correct art in ‘higher category’.
35.30 Jamie @ Masterpiece Video, 8 1/2, go to surprise party.
36.30 Seymour’s Record Party: loser cracks on to Rebecca.
39.30 Enid in his record room, to Seymour: “You’re cool.”
40.30 I am your personal Dating Service.
42.00 Seymour’s type? Introduce him to Josh; he is shocked.
42.30 Taking S. to Anthony’s Adult: having fun, cat mask.
44.00 Becca’s at work, sick of losers; E.’s job? working on it.
45.30 Dad & Maxine: to bed early – art class for retards.
SEQUENCE E: Enid and Seymour have things in common
46.30 Art class – controversial imagery!
48.00 At diner, invited to band performance, Enid jealous
49.30 In car w/ Seymour; about music, misanthrope
50.30 Bands perform; Enid pushes S. to date; ruins it
53.30 Driving back; can’t relate to 99% of humanity
54.00 At Seymour’s, the story of Coon. Can I borrow?
SEQUENCE F: Things change when Seymour has a date
56.30 Takes Coon to class
58.30 Candy counter, turning customers away
60.00 Fired after one day? Some ideas for money.
61.30 Yard sale. Not selling. Forgot birthday cake.
62.00 Birthday, tells S. about Josh obsession.
63.30 Voice mail from redhead, Enid pushes to call.
64.30 Shopping w/ Becky, who’s sick of Seymour.
66.00 Dana visits Seymour; Enid reads.
67.00 D. & S. dancing; D. wants to see art movie.
68.30 Enid jealous, calls Becky, doesn’t want to see her.
70.00 Seymour; “Dana works out”. Dana arrives.
71.30 Enid almost ruins it, claims she hooked them up.
SEQUENCE G: Lots of offers but no friends.
72.30 Art Class: scholarship offered.
73.30 Dad has job for Enid, she is not interested.
74.30 Art Exhibition: critics hate Coon.
75.30 Seymour doesn’t show because of Dana.
77.30 With Norman on bench. Leaving town.
78.30 Fighting with Becky over flat, they split.
79.30 Dad says Maxine will move in.
SEQUENCE H: Enid wants to move in. With anybody.
80.30 Art Academy: no passing grade, no scholarship.
81.30 To Seymour: move in with you. Don’t you like me?
85.00 Post-coital; Seymour about moving in. Sleeping.
86.00 Seymour wakes up, Enid is gone.
86.30 Seymour goes to break up with Dana.
87.30 Maxine acts like mother; Seymour msg: moving in.
88.30 to Becky: I really want to move in with you.
SEQUENCE I: Losing it all. A confession
89.30 Seymour alone, calls Enid, no answer.
90.00 Boss calls Seymour: Coon art in newspaper.
90.30 Becky’s new place.
91.30 Enid is packing.
93.00 Becky tells Seymour about Enid’s blind date joke.
94.30 Seymour threatens Josh, Doug: citizen’s arrest.
95.30 Enid visits Seymour in hospital: You’re my hero.
ACT THREE
SEQUENCE J: Different paths
97.30 Enid & Becky on bench, reconciling.
99.00 Norman’s bus arrives.
100.0 Seymour with shrink, mother waits outside.
101.0 Enid on bench.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
Nov
1
Mid-Point: One Flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest
Filed Under Free Content, Script Development, Story Basics | Leave a Comment
The two-disk release of ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO’s nest features a great commentary by director Milos Forman and producers Michael Douglas and Saul Zaentz.
Forman is known for his ability to bring out phenomenal performances and with his trademark Czech accent he expands on his process, from selecting the cast to cutting their dialogue. Zaentz tells how people at the time didn’t recognise Jack Nicholson (yet), but asked Michael Douglas for autographs instead. The anecdotes are at times moving, as Forman tells about William Redfield’s illness during the shoot and his subsequent death of leukemia.
From a story point of view, I found it surprising to hear that Forman wanted to cut the fishing trip out of the movie. Apart from marking the story’s mid-point reversal, this sequence also gives us a taste of how McMurphy’s story could possibly end. But the director had a problem with the duration and as he says:
“I cut it down television style, under two hours. And you know what was funny? It felt much longer.”
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
Aug
19
Adaptation: An Original Story
Filed Under Newsletters | Leave a Comment
You’re a screenwriter. And you’re SO stuck. Nothing is moving, nobody wants to make your movie. You are on a crusade for recognition, for people to tell you how great the idea and how successful you will be. But your phone calls are not being returned. Are you caught in the Draft One Trap?
To appease your conscience you will make scene level tweaks. Lots of them. You will call it draft two, three, thirteen. The reality: this is still draft one. You will finally get sick of the script and move on to the next Great Idea. Years go by and many scripts may come from your hand but none will ever get made, let alone reach an audience.
Did you just recognise someone you know in the above description? Perhaps yourself? Do you really believe, off all the readers of all the blogs in all the world I’m trying to convert you? No. The above was taken from a promotional blurb I wrote for a two-day story workshop at Metroscreen.
The course will be partially about the foundations of screen story and partially about practical ways to apply them to your work. You may not need those foundations for draft one. The first draft is all about “Don’t get it right, get it written.” But then comes draft two and reality kicks in. If you haven’t written your first draft yet, you still need to be aware of the elements that will come into play further down the road.
Successful feature screenwriters don’t cherish that first draft. They know it is crap so they won’t show it to anyone let alone shop it around, except for advise on how to move to the next draft ASAP. Successful screenwriters listen to the honest constructive criticism from industry professionals and follow a process on the way to a wonderful, radically different Draft Two.
For these writers the second draft is an easier and more important leap forward than any next draft of the script. This has to do with the ‘law of diminishing returns’, but more about that in a later post on this blog.
Apart from making sure you will not unknowingly fall in that Draft One Trap ever again, the Metroscreen course will focus on most of those issues I have come across in unsuccessful scripts during my six years as a producer. The second day of the two-day course will show how to implement a writing process that may significantly speed up the development and create a genuine opportunity when pitching your projects to producers, directors or funding agencies.
If you are interested in this course or would like to know more, send me an email or contact Metroscreen. Or just download the enrolment form and send it in! If you’re not a Metroscreen member, you can sort that out using this form.
But enough about me and my course.
TRIBE OR TRITE? STONEKING’S MANTRA
At a recent AWG NSW event poet and AFTRS teacher Billy Stoneking performed a short version of his ‘tribe act’. Many in the audience were confused. And yes, over the years some have questioned the contribution of the national film school to Australian screenwriting culture. But rather than fueling the controversy, I would like to give Stoneking credit where credit is due.
Stoneking’s ‘tribe’ theory focuses primarily on the writer’s connection with both the material and the audience. If you think Stoneking has a purely artistic, individualistic approach to screenwriting, think again. He pays ample attention to the importance and the meaning of ‘drama’ and he acknowledges that a good movie is made for an audience. And not just ‘an’ audience: it must be the audience you have – in some way or other – a connection with. Do read the article here. Being a poet, the man masters his language in a way I can only envy.
If on the other hand you would like to see the entertainer Stoneking, you might be lucky enough to still find his Sony Tropfest videocast of the ‘tribe act’. Have fun!
HOLLYWOOD VS. OZZYWOODAs you may have noticed from earlier posts on this blog, Creative Screenwriting Magazine is a personal favourite. It was recently named “the best magazine about screenwriting” by the Los Angeles Times.
Their ‘Story Department’ (photo above) web forum opened in April 2006 and since then they have received 42 posts from writers all over the world.
Closer to home, four months ago some passionate story consultant opened a little forum on the bulletin board of the Australian Writers’ Guild (photo left) to answer questions from writers.
The writers dropped by … and they keep coming back! If you’re an AWG member you should be able to check it out here. If you’re not, perhaps you should become an associate? The benefits are surely worth it.
WRITING FOR ACTORS
(Or: why writers should win the Best Acting awards)Until recently I was only a producer and story consultant. I can now add ‘writer’ to my credits. Well, in spirit that is. The credit will never be on the screen. It was a rewrite-for-hire job and although in my humble opinion the story is now 200% better, the original writers will get the praise, if any. In any case, it is exciting to know after my rewrite the script was deemed ready for consideration by a Hollywood Studio (Fox) where it is at the time of writing.
But all that is beside the point. The project in question is supposed to launch the career of a particular actor, which I could hardly believe after reading the draft I received. The actor’s character was NOT the story’s protagonist, he had limited screentime and worst of all: he was given the most unspeakable dialogue.
Which set me thinking. How do you write dialogue for a beginning actor? You don’t. You write emotion. And emotion the actor will not need to perform. I have had this conversation a dozen times over the past month so I apologise in advance for those who have heard me preach about this before.
Let’s go back about eighty years (or ten blogs) to the work of Lev Kuleshov (Photo: The Extraordinary Adventures of Mr. West in the Land of the Bolsheviks, 1924).
Kuleshov took unedited footage of a completely expressionless face [...] and intercut it with shots of three highly motivated objects: a bowl of hot soup, a dead woman lying in a coffin, and a little girl playing with a teddy bear.
When the film strips were shown to randomly selected audiences, they invariably responded as though the actor’s face had accurately portrayed the emotion appropriate to the intercut object.
As Pudovkin recalled:
“The public raved about the acting of the artist. They pointed out the heavy pensiveness of his mood over the forgotten soup, were touched and moved by the deep sorrow with which he looked on the dead woman, and admired the light, happy smile with which he surveyed the girl at play.
But we knew that in all three cases the face was exactly the same.”
(from David Cook’s splendid A HISTORY OF NARRATIVE FILM.)
These results are known today as the ‘Kuleshov effect’ and it explains why often actors win awards for performances they didn’t give. When Russell Crowe broke onto the Hollywood scene with his nomination for THE INSIDER, it had IMHO nothing to do with his acting skills but everything with Eric Roth and Michael Mann’s terrific writing, which effectively projected the feelings we share with the Jeffrey Wigand character onto Crowe’s blank face.
A more recent example is the late Ulrich Mühe’s performance in THE LIVES OF OTHERS (Das Leben der Anderen), which won him numerous best actor awards including at the European Film Awards. The second half of the movie is an emotional powerhouse, yet the actor’s face is near blank.
Conversely, great actors have been blamed of bad performances where the only culprit really was the screenwriter. The actor could have avoid the blame by politely passing on a screenplay that was not worthy of his attachment.
Bottom line: if you want to write great drama for any actor, irrespective of the experience level, don’t describe the emotion you want to see on the actor’s face. Make the audience feel the emotion before the character has to respond to it. Great drama does not have visible emotion; it makes you, the audience feel it. If you must, write a tear on an expressionless face.
Hitchcock would say: “I need actors who can do nothing well.” He understood perfectly that it was the writer’s job to convey the emotion, not the actor’s. He also perfectly understood the power of the Kuleshov effect and consequently: the power of editing.
Great actors are not those who can be express sadness, anger or desperation better than others. Great actors are those who can pick great scripts.
AUSTRALIAN FILM: FRANK COX AND ERIC BANA
Frank Cox of Hopscotch can help greenlight a feature film. He is one of the ‘good guys’: he looks at films that don’t necessarily fill the multiplexes. Better even: he reads those screenplays. But that doesn’t mean he will be betting the house.
“I ask ‘Who do you think the film is for?’ Some of them say ‘Frank, I make movies for myself, because I’m an artist and the audiences will follow it if I do something fantastic. I’ve got a vision.” “And I’m going ‘Good on you, if you’ve got the stuff to do this and you find a market, fantastic. But if you’re not going to talk to me while you’ve got these ideas, then don’t come to me at the end and get disappointed if I tell you I don’t know what to do with it.’”
I had to think of these words tonight while I was watching a freshly shot Australian film (I’m bound by secrecy as it’s not out yet). Multi-protagonist, not done badly but just not good enough. Another case of “I’ve got a vision”… In today’s market, anybody with a brain would steer away from multi-protagonist for a first feature. But what I found completely baffling was the fact that a government agency had put money in the project, both for development AND production. What are we doing? Anyhow, where does Frank Cox see the current Australian cinema?
“Australian films are a bit of a question mark.” The talent is certainly there, proved by the success of Australian industry people overseas, but “It seems to me that most projects in Australia are hurried. In other words, the development process lacks, the stories are not fully developed, and they don’t reach their optimum because everyone seems to be in a hurry to put their film in development and then production.” It’s a familiar story; the problem is understood throughout the industry.”
Thank you to ScreenHub for the kind permission to re-publish. You can read the full interview here. here.
Recently a good friend and fellow Belgian interviewed Eric Bana in Rome for his latest LUCKY YOU (another Eric Roth screenplay). My friend asked his opinion about Australian film and I have a funny feeling he would not have given this answer to a reporter on Australian soil:
“It may sound weird but working in Australia is not that important to me. It can even be dangerous to a career.”
[...]
“I know an ‘international name’ can help, for instance if you want to get a high budget film financed or if you want to launch a difficult project. But as I said, there is a real danger. You receive a lot of scripts that aren’t ready. The producers then believe a big name will solve the problem. So I am very careful”
THE STORY DEPT.: FROM IDEA TO PRINT
My preparations for the Metroscreen course explain why it’s been a bit quiet in The Story Dept.; for the other reason behind the temporary silence I have to profoundly thank many of you, the readers of this blog! Over the past months I have been increasingly busy as a story consultant, both on projects in development as some films in post-production.
Indeed the principles of story don’t stop with the shooting script. From a story perspective the assembled footage is a work that hardly ever reflects the story beats exactly as they were intended in the script. Or if they are, sometimes a better option becomes apparent in the editing suite.
For a team that has laboured over the same movie for months or years, it is hard to make far-reaching decisions without being consumed by feelings of insecurity and doubt. Fortunately there may be a guiding light as the principles of story still apply! If areas of the story don’t work for the outsider, sometimes the reasons can be found in a breach of (one or some of) those principles. Enter the story analyst!
Next to the consultancy work I have been happily producing the short animation ACID SUN (photo) by writer/director/animator Rodney March. The third OZZYWOOD short film is also the first one rigorously co-developed in terms of story and I am hopeful this will bear fruit at the film festivals once it will hit the screens later this year.
As a matter of fact the validity of my mission as a story consultant (see ‘about us‘) has been proven repeatedly over the past year. It’s been a wonderful ride and I hope my clients agree even if it has been rough at times. I have seen filmmakers look at their works with professional and passionate scrutiny, think outside the box and at the same time question the reasons and motivations behind their stories. In most if not all of the cases we have improved their works, sometimes immensely, resulting in a marketable draft, a re-energised development process or at worst: an improved insight in the mechanics of story structure and the dynamics of our film industry.
THE QUIZ
If you have taken the quiz before and failed miserably, try again. Most likely it was not because you can’t see the difference between a main plot and a subplot but … you only had 3.7 secs to type in your answer. That has been fixed, so you can now improve your score!
To pass you need to answer 14 out of 20 questions correctly. The quiz is definitely not for beginners but most of the answers can be found somewhere in the articles of this blog. Click through to see your score and the right answers. Finally you’ll be guided back to the OZZYWOOD web site. Good luck!
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
