As much as I loved it for its characters and situations, my first screenplay turned out to be 132 pages long, twelve pages over the 120 page limit for screenplays.  I knew that I had to cut it down to size and began the editing process.  I came to the conclusion that I was trying to throw too much into one screenplay.  As an excited amateur, I tried to stuff all these ideas I had into 120 pages, and it wasn’t going to work. I also found that many elements of the story weren’t working together.  I was trying to force a lot of situations that just didn’t seem all that natural.

DO I NEED FRANK?

One thing I noticed in particular was my struggle to close a character’s storyline.  His name was Frank, and he was supposed to be ultimately revealed as a figment of the protagonist’s imagination, a fractured creation of his mind due to the trauma of the experiences we see him go through.
I found it wiser to question whether or not I needed Frank. He was something that I fumbled with, something that just would not fit.  It was in my issues with Frank that I realized something important.  Frank may have been memorable, but he was extraneous to the overall plot.  He was a shortcut to explain certain things about the protagonist.  I had taken the cheap way out.  And because of that, ultimately Frank was cut out of the screenplay, and the story reworked.  The lesson that I learned here: All characters must exist for a reason, and a good one.

So, to elaborate on the topic of those who inhabit the world you are creating for an audience: my expertise is in the creation of unique and interesting characters.  These characters are fueled by my real life observations of all the people around me.  By simply opening up my eyes and ears, I overhear little tidbits of conversations of real people who are leading real lives, all with very authentic and genuine emotions.  I like to think that each individual is just that: an individual.  I find out what makes them unique, what drives them to do the things that they do.
In learning these things about a person, you can create a character in the same way.  Use your imagination.  Why does your protagonist do the things he does, why are those emotions in his heart?  Keep asking yourself why.  In the same way that you get to know a person, become very intimate with your character.

THE ROUNDABOUT WAY

Great characters are not all a good screenplay needs.  As great as I was at introducing quirks and writing a unique voice for each of my characters, my screenplays often lacked a strong structure.

I’m a very verbose and structureless person.  And it’s reflected in my writing and my screenplays.  Considering that it’s in my nature to tell stories in a way that are rather indirect and in a roundabout way, changing my writing style was one of my greatest challenges.  If you asked me how to get to the Trump International Hotel in Manhattan, I’d probably tell you that you could go take the D train to 59th St-Columbus Circle stop.  I know this because I used to work the area as an outside salesman.  You get up from the station, and look north.  Across the street and down a block is a store that I made my first sale for that company.  And boy, let me tell you, it was quite a thrill.  From that day on, I decided that I would become the best salesman ever and learn to close 90% of the time.  That’s how I ended up coming across this book entitled Influence, which I bought on Amazon.  Did you know that Amazon has some of the best prices?  You can even get free shipping and…..

And somewhere along the way, I’d forget to tell you precisely how to get there.  Though you’d end up with a great story about my experience as a salesman, you’d also probably be thinking, “Okay…well, that’s great, but how do I get to the hotel?”

The same goes for your screenplay: each moment in your screenplay must be moving towards something.  Your screenplay may have great character depth, but if those characters have no clear direction, your audience will become uninterested and bored as they watch you wander around with the hero in a disjointed fashion.  As such, you have to create a compelling and dramatic story.  Remember to ask yourself, where am I going with this scene?  Does it enhance the drama?  What does it show the audience?

A screenplay is not just pages and pages of dialogue taking place in various locations.  Nor is it simply a pair of talking heads.  It is the blueprint for a film, the culmination of dramatic story telling and compelling characters.  It is an emotional experience.  It is cinema.

INT. LUANNE’S APARTMENT – DAY

Later that day I meet up with Luanne and tell her about my dream.  I am a little hesitant to tell her about the extended hug.  But I tell her everything and lay it out for her, shot by shot.  As I finish recounting my dream to her, she replies with a sophomoric, “Ewww…”  I was right: she’s not very sensitive.  I make a mental note: if I ever need an insensitive and unfeminine figure in my screenplay, I’ll look to Luanne.

-Terry Ip
Self-styled perennial student of film working towards a career with a pension.

Jason Kottke was tipped off on some scripts of The Wire that are accessible through an online file server.

The Wire is to my taste (and many others) the best TV drama you will find.

Aspiring screenwriter Terrence ponders over a question that has bugged all of us at some point: ”Is screenwriting for me?”

Post: Terrence
Editor: Cleo Mees

The bustling streets of lower Manhattan. Ubiquitous blue planks of wood, held up by rusty bars of steel. A pedestrian crowd waves in and out of the shade falling from the skyscrapers.

CU of LUANNE, emerging from the crowd.

PULL BACK to reveal her blue sunflower-print dress. With a big smile, she waves from across the street.

Luanne walks against the crowd and crosses the street to meet ME. We hug for a long time. She gives me a warm grab of the arms. I relax into her and hold on tight. But she breaks off contact and I slouch, rejected.

She walks off and disappears back into the crowd.

LONG SHOT of me, standing still as the crowd floods around me. I become indiscernible. CUT TO BLACK.

Fade in.

This is me waking up from a dream. For the longest time, I have dreamed in a cinematic format. From framing to camera angles to cuts and fades, even sound mixing, my dreams were the stuff of film.

I only started becoming cognizant of these little quirks when I stumbled across the special features on some DVD that I can no longer recall.  It talked about framing shots, creating movement, and a lot more.  I had no idea what a lot of these cinematic principals were at the time, but it certainly opened up my eyes to the true art of motion picture.  After watching those special features I understood that every frame of that movie was by design.  Every shot, every cut, every dolly in and every close up, they were put there for a reason.

When Netflix blessed me with a service center that was not 5 miles away from me, I became obsessed with movies.  I loved rating the movies that I watched.  After all, Netflix did provide viewing suggestions based on your ratings.  By the end of a couple of months, I had rated over 800 movies, and within a year I had watched and rated more than a thousand movies.  At first, they merely served as entertainment, sometimes a distraction from the hustle and bustle and pain of daily life.  But then I started to become more of a discerning consumer.  I started to take an active interest in films.  I started noticing how there would often be shots of actors only from the chest up.  Sometimes one actor’s face would fill nearly the entire frame.  And then sometimes their presence on the screen was a small one, a small dot in the center of an aerial shot.

IS SCREENWRITING FOR ME?

Not having a formal education in film as an art form, I was a self-proclaimed student of film by way of self-study.  My education consisted of my own observations and notes about the hundreds of movies I had watched…Until the day came when I had to register for classes at my college.  It wasn’t a liberal arts college, so I was rather excited to see that there was a new class being offered.  It was Drama 106: Introduction to Film Appreciation.  Boy was I ecstatic!

Throughout the semester, we watched and studied films like The Cabinet of Dr. Galligari, Citizen Kane, Nosferatu, and surprisingly even The Graduate.  As we progressed through the syllabus, I gained a new appreciation for film.  I came to learn the lingo used in film and why we see two-shots, close-ups, how high angles and low angles are used.  I learned about mise en scene, lighting, the use of sound.  I absorbed all of this new knowledge with a great enthusiasm and appreciation.

Shortly after the semester’s end, I began penning a screenplay.  I noticed that the format felt incredibly natural to me.  Scenes started with a time and a place, new characters were introduced, dialogue was written.  The flow of it came easily – everything just seemed to make sense in a movie.  In fact, I saw my life as fitting into little scenes.  Before entering a classroom, I thought to myself, INT. CLASSROOM – DAY.  People became characters to me, and I studied them as such. I remembered bits and pieces of people I saw, be they bums on the street corner or a pretty lady in the New York City subway.

The question this leads us to is, how do you know if screenwriting is for you?  It may not come as naturally to you as it did for me.  I feel that the only way to see if the format is a good fit for you is to go and try to write one.  Just write out a story that you’d like to tell and put it into a screenplay format.  Also, find something that interests you, something that you’re passionate about.  Authenticity comes from real experience and expertise.

-Terry Ip
Self-styled perennial student of film working towards a career with a pension.

As much as I loved it for its characters and situations, my first screenplay turned out to be 132 pages long, twelve pages over the 120 page limit for screenplays. I knew that I had to cut it down to size and began the editing process. I came to the conclusion that I was trying to throw too much into one screenplay. As an excited amateur, I tried to stuff all these ideas I had into 120 pages, and it wasn’t going to work. I also found that many elements of the story weren’t working together. I was trying to force a lot of situations that just didn’t seem all that natural.

DO I NEED FRANK?

One thing I noticed in particular was my struggle to close a character’s storyline. His name was Frank, and he was supposed to be ultimately revealed as a figment of the protagonist’s imagination, a fractured creation of his mind due to the trauma of the experiences we see him go through.

I found it wiser to question whether or not I needed Frank. He was something that I fumbled with, something that just would not fit. It was in my issues with Frank that I realized something important. Frank may have been memorable, but he was extraneous to the overall plot. He was a shortcut to explain certain things about the protagonist. I had taken the cheap way out. And because of that, ultimately Frank was cut out of the screenplay, and the story reworked. The lesson that I learned here: All characters must exist for a reason, and a good one.

So, to elaborate on the topic of those who inhabit the world you are creating for an audience: my expertise is in the creation of unique and interesting characters. These characters are fueled by my real life observations of all the people around me. By simply opening up my eyes and ears, I overhear little tidbits of conversations of real people who are leading real lives, all with very authentic and genuine emotions. I like to think that each individual is just that: an individual. I find out what makes them unique, what drives them to do the things that they do.

In learning these things about a person, you can create a character in the same way. Use your imagination. Why does your protagonist do the things he does, why are those emotions in his heart? Keep asking yourself why. In the same way that you get to know a person, become very intimate with your character.

THE ROUNDABOUT WAY

Great characters are not all a good screenplay needs. As great as I was at introducing quirks and writing a unique voice for each of my characters, my screenplays often lacked a strong structure.

I’m a very verbose and structureless person. And it’s reflected in my writing and my screenplays. Considering that it’s in my nature to tell stories in a way that are rather indirect and in a roundabout way, changing my writing style was one of my greatest challenges. If you asked me how to get to the Trump International Hotel in Manhattan, I’d probably tell you that you could go take the D train to 59th St-Columbus Circle stop. I know this because I used to work the area as an outside salesman. You get up from the station, and look north. Across the street and down a block is a store that I made my first sale for that company. And boy, let me tell you, it was quite a thrill. From that day on, I decided that I would become the best salesman ever and learn to close 90% of the time. That’s how I ended up coming across this book entitled Influence, which I bought on Amazon. Did you know that Amazon has some of the best prices? You can even get free shipping and…..

And somewhere along the way, I’d forget to tell you precisely how to get there. Though you’d end up with a great story about my experience as a salesman, you’d also probably be thinking, “Okay…well, that’s great, but how do I get to the hotel?”

The same goes for your screenplay: each moment in your screenplay must be moving towards something. Your screenplay may have great character depth, but if those characters have no clear direction, your audience will become uninterested and bored as they watch you wander around with the hero in a disjointed fashion. As such, you have to create a compelling and dramatic story. Remember to ask yourself, where am I going with this scene? Does it enhance the drama? What does it show the audience?

A screenplay is not just pages and pages of dialogue taking place in various locations. Nor is it simply a pair of talking heads. It is the blueprint for a film, the culmination of dramatic story telling and compelling characters. It is an emotional experience. It is cinema.

INT. LUANNE’S APARTMENT – DAY

Later that day I meet up with Luanne and tell her about my dream. I am a little hesitant to tell her about the extended hug. But I tell her everything and lay it out for her, shot by shot. As I finish recounting my dream to her, she replies with a sophomoric, “Ewww…” I was right: she’s not very sensitive. I make a mental note: if I ever need an insensitive and unfeminine figure in my screenplay, I’ll look to Luanne.

- Terry Ip

Self-styled student of film working towards a career with a pension.

TBA August 09 – 9:30am-5:30pm – CSGPN Training Room
Level 1, 158 Liverpool Rd, ASHFIELD NSW 2131
Contact: 0407 955 555 - karel@ozzywood.com

WHAT YOU WILL LEARN:
A brilliant read gets you a long way in our industry. This seminar shares the secrets to perfect your screenplay and astound the reader. A whole day full of invaluable basics as well as a bunch of tips, tricks and checklists. Your screenplay may not be perfect, but you can surely make it look the part.
How to avoid the ‘army of ants’? What is ‘vertical writing’? Should you ‘cheat’? What is good dialogue? How much white on the page? Learn to be your own first script editor, proof reader and general devil’s advocate.

Click here to book now and save 20%

BACKGROUND:
Once you have that razor sharp concept and rock solid story, you’ll need to magically work it into a brilliant read for the producer, the executive or the reader who will decide on your future. The key is to keep them turning those pages. Here, not only story structure comes into play but also the elegance of your style and formatting.

ESSENTIAL FOR FILMMAKERS:
Without the knowledge taught in this course, screenwriters, directors and producers stand a better chance of winning the lottery than making it big in movies. Story structure is not just another aspect of screenwriting. It is the stuff that makes or breaks careers.

Combine and save up to 25%

INTENDED AUDIENCE:
Beginning Screenwriters – Make sure your submission for development funds looks impressive.
Intermediate Screenwriters – Brush up on your scene writing skills and scrutinise your style.
Advanced Screenwriters – Speed up and improve your process using the latest software tools.

THE LOCATION:
The CSGPN Training Room in Ashfield.
By car from the city: take Parramatta Rd and turn left into Ashfield. CSGPN is 800ms further on your left, on the corner next to Blockbusters.
By train from Central: 15mins on the train, then a short 3mins walk. Ample parking available.
Here are more detailed directions.

COURSE FEE:
- $165: handouts, coffee/tea, script software, 3 months Premium Ed.
- $132: concessions % early bird (payment received 2 weeks before event).
- $99: for students (call or email to check eligibility first)

Registrations are strictly limited to 20 participants. Click here to receive registration information via email.

Student? Click here for your 40% discount!

ABOUT THE TUTOR:
Executive Producer and Story Analyst Karel Segers, a Licentiate of Germanic Philology (University of Louvain, Belgium) has produced three short dramas and co-produced a documentary and two feature films. As an EP, Karel has facilitated project funding from both government and private investors. Over the past few years he has consulted to award-winning writers, directors and producers on films in development as well as post-production. His views are published in The Story Dept., the undisputed #1 blog on screenwriting in Australia. Both nominees for the 2007 AWG Monte Miller Award were Karel’s clients.

WHAT OTHERS SAY:
“Karel Segers brilliantly conveys the best of what is currently understood about effective story telling for the cinema. His method of teaching is highly responsive, vividly supported by carefully selected visuals, and, best of all, witty and memorable.”
-Ron Cobb
Concept Artist, Writer, Director

“I attended a course of Karel’s in 2007 and two years later the details of what I learned have stayed with me. I catch myself automatically observing films and reading books using the critical tools I learned from Karel, and most importantly – how a story could be improved.”
-Marcus Amann
Professional Writer

“I enjoyed the day enormously and thought you were just wonderful. My knowledge and understanding of films was expanded enormously, and many things I understood instinctively but had never heard articulated about the art of storytelling were nailed firmly in place.
It was fantastic!”
-Kate Forsyth
Best-selling Author ‘Witches of Eileanan’

“Karel is the new breed of Teachers who not only conveys the technicality so effortlessly, but makes you want to write your story. He is passionate, focused and he knows his stuff. Karel you Rock, dude!”
-Gerard John
Producer / Entrepreneur

“I came to you with a bunch of scenes in the hope of finding a story and when I look back I’m still surprised at how far we have come. Now the script has won the 2007 Monte Miller award. Thanks again Karel.”
-Nathan Fielding
Winner 2007 AWG Monte Miller Award

“He never gets distracted with the little stuff that tends to fix itself when the important parts are working harmoniously. Karel is a rare beast amongst story consultants – a film literate and long-standing aficionado of many film genres. I hold Karel in very high regard.”
-Kieran Galvin
Film Director / Screenwriter

“Karel is my go-to guy for Script Development and/or assessment. He has a unique insight into the process and any projects I bring him are always infinitely improved by the time we have finished. His grasp of story and structure is second to none. I have recommended his services to several colleagues in the past, all of whom have been very satisfied with the results.”
- Michael Favelle
International Sales Agent
Top 10 Person to Watch in 2009

“Karel Segers is Australia’s Robert McKee”
– Stephen J De Jager
Creative Director, Roadshow Entertainment

Since writing the below post, I have come to realise that the mid point may well be the last checkpoint to make sure you have the most powerful story you can get.

I believe the mid point can only exist if everything else works. Without knowing exactly what the outer objective is (Turning Point 1) and how the character changes (Turning Point 2) it is impossible to create the right mid point. The mid point changes the direction of the visible goal (Outer Journey), sometimes it completely changes the goal altogether. It also accelerates the Inner Journey as the protagonist is now committed to resolving the Need.

I have added some notes on THE INCREDIBLES and THE LIVES OF OTHERS to the examples below.

Many unsuccessful movies run out of steam halfway. Even a fair few memorable pics are weak in the middle, or have a ‘soft belly’. The Second Act seems to be the hardest nut to crack. But why? Perhaps because the protagonist is chasing the same objective all along? After all we have a massive chunk of script to fill, about an hour of screentime on average. One remedy is to chop the movie up in quarters. First and last act are roughly one quarter each already, so Act Two we just cut in two.

It’s variously called the mid-act climax, the mid-point, first culmination or the mid-point reversal. I prefer the latter, although it is not always a strict 180 degree turn. It doesn’t necessarily have to be a climax either but it must be a ‘major turning point’. Things will be dramatically different from this point onwards.

Syd Field describes it something like this: “An important scene in the middle of the script, often a reversal of fortune or revelation that changes the direction of the story.” Field suggests that driving the story towards the Midpoint keeps the second act from sagging. For once I find Field more helpful than others. An executive at the talent agency ICM is trying to get his head around it:

“An event occurs wherein the character cannot give up his pursuit. It is a “no turning back point.” The bridge has been burned behind him (figuratively speaking), and he can only move forward. Often, this is manifested as a TICKING CLOCK. In classically structure (sic) romantic comedies, this is the point where the man and woman sleep together.” Hmmm… Not sure about that last one.

Here’s my favourite definition, from Frank Daniel:

“Mid-Point or First Culmination: a Major Reversal of fortune, making Main Character’s task even more difficult. Often, give the audience a very clear glimpse of an answer to the Central Dramatic Question “‘ the hope that Main Character will actually succeed at resolving his problem “‘ only to see circumstances turn the story the other way. First Culmination may be a glimpse at the actual resolution of the picture, or its mirror opposite.”

Let’s look at a few examples to understand the mid point better:

THE UNTOUCHABLES – Not only a well-structured, commercial movie with a top notch cast; it has a midpoint that ticks all three boxes: After a shootout on the Canadian border far away from the crime-ridden streets of Chicago, Eliot Ness and his team find out they can get to Capone through his accountant.

The mid-point sequence happens halfway the movie (ironically, not all midpoints really do), it changes the course of the story (Ness is no longer after Capone but after his accountant) and it takes place in a very different environment/change of scenery from the rest of the movie. And indeed: catching the accountant does get Capone in court. Important for the Inner Journey at this point is Ness’ response to the criticism on the way Malone forces a confession out of one of Capone’s men. When he says “Well, you’re not from Chicago”, it proves Ness is now open to approaching things ‘the Chicago Way’, as taught by his mentor Malone.

JAWS – It’s more than thirty years old and scary as ever, and not because of its state-of-the-art FX. Look closely and you’ll see: that plastic shark is a big joke! This is one piece of brilliant writing. Police Chief Brody (Roy Scheider) has been unsuccessful in trying to stop the shark killings by urging the mayor to close the beaches. When his own son narrowly escapes death, he is forced to change tactics (different direction): he must go and attack the shark in its own habitat. It brings a fresh turn to the movie with a change of scenery and the stakes are heightened because we are now fighting the killer on his own territory. What’s more: the protagonist is under greater jeopardy because he can’t swim. At Brody’s Inner Journey mid point, he is committed to tackle things at the core in stead of dealing with the symptoms. See also my notes at the bottom of the structural overview of Jaws.

ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO’S NEST – In his book THE SEQUENCE APPROACH, Paul Gulino mentions another function of the midpoint: it gives the protagonist a flavour of the possible outcome of the story (Frank Daniel’s “glimpse of an answer to the Central Dramatic Question“). Here, Nicholson’s character tastes freedom when he takes the patients out on a trip. The reality however is that after this point he learns he may never leave the asylum again. A powerful reversal: rather than proving he’s insane, he now has to try and get out. The scene/sequence of the mad men’s outing is another beautiful example of a change of scenery. At one stage during the edit, director Milos Forman cut the sequence out. About the result he says: “I cut it down television style, under two hours. And you know what was funny? It felt much longer.”

I wouldn’t necessarily call the following movies class examples but I’ll give them any way because their mid-points worked really well for me:

THE PARALLAX VIEW – Bang in the middle of this classic conspiracy thriller, Warren Beatty’s character undergoes a five minute brainwashing. The scene is borderline unbearable and would have probably been cut by today’s studio heads. We undergo the character’s psychological torture first hand while we stare at the seemingly random images, exactly like the protagonist experiences them. After this, Beatty’s character is no longer the curious outsider vs. the mysterious corporation; he is fighting the system from within, which will ultimately lead to his demise.

GIU LA TESTA (A FISTFUL OF DYNAMITE) – Very much like in THE PARALLAX VIEW, we share the point of view of Rod Steiger’s character Juan while he watches what will cause a major change in his personality and in the course of the movie. At the very midpoint in the movie Juan witnesses a lengthy, traumatic shootout with a life-changing effect: from a mindless and merciless robber dreaming of the ultimate big heist he has now become a freedom fighter and finally commits to the cause of his alter-ego Sean (incarnated wonderfully by James Coburn).

THE QUEEN – The Queen is stuck in the lonely hills near Balmoral, her Land Rover having let her down. Without help from anybody she is out of her comfort zone when she notices the dear her grandsons have been stalking, upon her own advice and encouragement. A moment of realisation (with a lot of symbolism) leads to the decision to chase the dear away in an attempt to save its life from the hunters. The parallel with Princess Diana’s end becomes even more apparent when it turns out the deer was shot by a group of hunters after a chase on a neighbouring land (France?). The Queen has witnessed something that has changed her view and we see it externalised in her lukewarm response to the Queen Mother’s statements about the British people in a following scene.

NORTH BY NORTHWEST – The single most memorably scene of this film sits right in the very middle: the famous cropduster scene. Again, an entirely new setting in the movie, with hardly any other characters around. While most of the movie is rather talky, this sequence offers pure visual cinema with minimal sound design, then gradually picking up the pace and finally (literally) exploding in a symphony of action and music. The reversal: Roger Thornhill learns that Eve has betrayed him.

THE INCREDIBLES – Mister Incredible has successfully completed the task he travelled to the Special World for: eliminating the evil robot. Now, for the first time he is about to meet with his employer.

The reversal happens when his mission turns out to have been a setup to get him killed. The employer is effectively his arch-enemy Syndrome and the mid point delivers two major reversals: 1) in stead of staying on the island, he will have to escape 2) in stead of working alone, he’ll have to collaborate with his family.

THE LIVES OF OTHERS – In the first half of this 2007 Oscar winning drama, Captain Wiesler tries to expose the suspected playwright Dreyer to satisfy his superior at the Stasi (the former Eastern German State Security Service). While listening to a phone call, he learns that Dreyers best friend and mentor has committed suicide. Wiesler realises his work is not doing the good he had always believed it would. He is effectively killing people. When Dreyer plays the piano music he received as a gift from his mentor, Wiesler is so moved that he decides to not expose but protect Dreyer from this point on. To my taste, this is one of the most wonderful and moving mid points in cinema in recent years.

In my earlier blog “STRUCTURING THE FACTS” I briefly mention the midpoint reversal in UNITED 97: The passengers learn this is a suicide flight, therefore they have to change their tactics from trying to notify their relatives on the ground to actively fight back the terrorists.

The start of Act Two is a good place to move to the antagonist’s POV.

We have just seen that our protagonist is ready to take on the main mission of the film. He knows what he is up against, he may even have a plan on how to approach it.

At the beginning of Act Two, you can immediately increase the stakes by creating dramatic irony. You show the protagonist only knows half of the truth and the antagonist is really a lot more powerful and the protagonist may be missing a crucial piece of information.

The shift can happen to any other character, exceptionally even to an omniscient POV. But the most powerful and most frequently used POV outside the protagonist will be that of the antagonist.

Almost always does this increase the stakes as you show how well the villain is prepared, how much stronger this character is than we (and the protagonist) believed and what he/she is capable of.

One of my favourite Act Two opening scenes is in NORTH BY NORTHWEST. Roger Thornhill has to clear his name of the UN murder and he must find out why he is being mistaken for the mysterious Mr. Roger Kaplan.

At the opening of Act Two we are in a boardroom full of unknown faces. The audience’s instinctive reaction will be to find a character to empathise with, to latch on to. None such in this scene.

This is the Secret Service, discussing a fictitious agent, created by them as a decoy for the spies. Now Roger Thornhill has been identified by the spies as this imaginary agent, the secret’s service’s plan works better than hoped for.

Not only do we now know Thornhill’s predicament, we also realise he cannot expect any support from the government as confirmed in the last line of the scene, spoken by one of the agents:

SECRET AGENT
Goodbye, Mr. Thornhill, wherever you are.

This scene shows how powerful a shift of POV can be to reveal an important piece of information the protagonist doesn’t have.

Another favorite example of dramatic irony created by a shifting point of view is taken from ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO’S NEST and it constitutes the Mid Point Reversal.

McMurphy has just been on a fishing trip with his mates, sampling freedom outside the asylum.

The next scene shows the staff of the asylum discussing his fate, whether they should send him back to the work farm or keep him. McMurphy’s antagonist nurse Ratched drives the scene and the outcome is disastrous: he will stay in the asylum indefinitely.

See also:

Omniscient POV
Shifting POV
When to Shift?
POV in Ratatouille’s Deleted Scene
POV as Controller of Tone

Commercial common sense will tell you: yes, you should.

Robert McKee says: “Tell the truth.” (see the previous post)

McKee means: your story needs to reflect your worldview. If you contradict whatever you believe in for the sake of commerce, you will fail. During his Arthouse seminar, he gives the example of Bergman’s THROUGH A GLASS DARKLY, where Bergman forced an ending upon the story in which he didn’t really believe. The story didn’t work, McKee says. Even the great Bergman couldn’t go against his instinct.

The discussion about happy endings is not exactly the same as the discussion about arcs. Protagonists without arcs have starred in films with tremendous success (see the reference to Mystery Man on Film in the previous post).

Although writers with a positive world may have more success in connecting with a large audience, I believe that talented and skilled screenwriters can create stories that work, irrespective of their worldview.

First-timers will have a harder time.

Here is the dilemma: to break in, you need to write something the market wants to see. Yet you’ll have a better chance if this first spec screenplay is written from the heart. You need to tell the truth.

My advice to beginning screenwriters: see how different genres allow to make different statements about the human condition without compromising the chances of success. Horror, crime and satire are darker genres than romance, adventure or kids movies.

Finally, to illustrate McKee’s point, below is a transcript of his introduction to THROUGH A GLASS DARKLY for British television.
______________________________________

Robert McKee: I saw my first Bergman film in Detroit, Michigan when I was 15. It was The Virgin Spring, a tale of revenge for rape and murder. Next came a comedy, Smiles of a Summer Night. After that Brink of Life, a social drama set in a maternity ward, Monika: A Teenage Love Story, Hour of the Wolf, a psycho-horror film. Bergman was like a one-man film studio bringing a fresh eye to many genres and by word of mouth filling cinemas everywhere. But then in the sixties he became a creature of the critics. They treated his films as intellectual crossword puzzles and drove the audience back behind a barricade of critic-speak � symbology, metaphysics, alienation � until it was impossible to watch a Bergman film without the feeling that you were taking an exam. And that�s where he stands today, on a pedestal, intimidating, distant, watched only by a tiny circle of cineastes. I think that over the years we forgot what the early audiences instinctively knew � above all else, Ingmar Bergman was a master storyteller.

Bergman�s difficult. Not to understand, but emotionally tough. He shines light into the darkest corners of life. He asks us to empathise with complex characters who, although very human, are not particularly loveable. Then he spins his stories over an emotional rollercoaster, taking us on a quest for the truth, truth that explodes the little lies that make life comfortable. To watch a Bergman film you have to be willing to invest all your humanity, to open yourself up, to care about life so much you want to know the truth though heaven may fall. It is not intellect Bergman demands so much as courage.

Bergman�s also difficult because he explains nothing. He doesn�t force his ideas into the mouths of his characters. Like Hollywood he tells stories visually, writes naturalistic dialogue and layers his meaning in the subtext. Unlike Hollywood his films are not tales of wish fulfilment, telling seductive lies about how everything works out for the best.

1a: The Film

�for now we see through a glass, darkly:
but then face to face; now I know in part;
but then I shall know even as also I am known

In 1998 McKee signed my first edition hardback of STORY. He wrote:

“To Karel: Tell the TRUTH!”

Ironically with the quote at the top of this article, McKee is not telling his own truth.(*)

He contradicts something he teaches in his art film seminar. On Ingmar Bergman’s THROUGH A GLASS DARKLY(**), McKee makes the point that Bergman

“set out to prove what he desperately wanted to believe and carefully designed this film as a rhetorical argument in dramatic form to make his point. But then his instincts, his integrity, his sense of truth overwhelmed his intellectual ambitions and somehow all the scenes that say the opposite of what he believed overwhelmed the other and as a result the film says that rather than love showing the way to happiness, the more likely fate is that you will end up alone, desperate, blinded with self deception.”

In other words:

If you don’t believe the happy ending, don’t write it.

If you don’t believe characters change in the real world, don’t make them in your screenplays. Tell the Truth.

You don’t have the option to choose between a-protag-with or a-protag-without arc. You must write what you believe in.

Bergman, one of the great storytellers of all time, tried to end THROUGH A GLASS DARKLY on an uplifting note.

He didn’t believe it. It didn’t work.

(*) Earlier this year, Mystery Man refered to the same quote before building his brilliant Case AGAINST Character Arcs. MM substantiates his point with numerous classic films.
(**) Full transcript of McKee’s television introduction to that movie in my next post.

“One may perhaps make a good film out of a bad novel,
but never out of a good one.” -Bela Balazs

WHAT YOU WILL LEARN:
No matter how powerful the source material, if it doesn’t have the seed of a screen drama, your adaptation job will be like hell. This workshop shows why some adaptations worked fine and others flopped. How to find the story in your own material, then structure it into a screenplay that works.

Click here to book now and save 20%

BACKGROUND:
To write great poetry, novels and plays, your mastery of language needs to transcend the functional to the realm of magical. As a screenwriter, the magic is in the material and its structure, not in the text per se. The art of screen adaptation isn’t much of an art at all. It is a learnable skill. To master this skill, you will need to understand a few fundamental differences between the various literary source forms and cinema.

ESSENTIAL FOR FIRST-TIME SCREENWRITERS:
Many great screenplays originate from first-time screenwriters. They tell an original, idiosyncratic story, which has matured for years, with touches of deep realism, flesh-and-blood characters and sparkling, acutely lively situations. The ‘original story’ of the first-time screenwriter is often a direct adaptation of observations from the real world. Writing successfully means: adapting successfully.

Combine and save up to 25%

INTENDED AUDIENCE:
Screenwriters – How the craft of adaptation can start your career in movies.
Novelists, Playwrights, Journalists – Does your material contain the spark?
Producers & Directors – What to option/commission, and how to develop it.

THE LOCATION:
The CSGPN Training Room in Ashfield.
By car from the city: take Parramatta Rd and turn left into Ashfield. CSGPN is 800ms further on your left, on the corner next to Blockbusters.
By train from Central: 15mins on the train, then a short 3mins walk. Ample parking available.
Here are more detailed directions.

COURSE FEE:
- $165: handouts, coffee/tea, script software, 3 months Premium Ed.
- $132: concessions % early bird (payment received 2 weeks before event).
- $99: for students (call or email to check eligibility first)

Registrations are strictly limited to 20 participants. Click here to receive registration information via email.

Student? Click here for your 40% discount!

ABOUT THE TUTOR:
Executive Producer and Story Analyst Karel Segers, a Licentiate of Germanic Philology (University of Louvain, Belgium) has produced three short dramas and co-produced a documentary and two feature films. As an EP, Karel has facilitated project funding from both government and private investors. Over the past few years he has consulted to award-winning writers, directors and producers on films in development as well as post-production. His views are published in The Story Dept., the undisputed #1 blog on screenwriting in Australia. Both nominees for the 2007 AWG Monte Miller Award were Karel’s clients.

WHAT OTHERS SAY:
“Karel Segers brilliantly conveys the best of what is currently understood about effective story telling for the cinema. His method of teaching is highly responsive, vividly supported by carefully selected visuals, and, best of all, witty and memorable.”
-Ron Cobb
Concept Artist, Writer, Director

“I attended a course of Karel’s in 2007 and two years later the details of what I learned have stayed with me. I catch myself automatically observing films and reading books using the critical tools I learned from Karel, and most importantly – how a story could be improved.”
-Marcus Amann
Professional Writer

“I enjoyed the day enormously and thought you were just wonderful. My knowledge and understanding of films was expanded enormously, and many things I understood instinctively but had never heard articulated about the art of storytelling were nailed firmly in place.
It was fantastic!”
-Kate Forsyth
Best-selling Author ‘Witches of Eileanan’

“Karel is the new breed of Teachers who not only conveys the technicality so effortlessly, but makes you want to write your story. He is passionate, focused and he knows his stuff. Karel you Rock, dude!”
-Gerard John
Producer / Entrepreneur

“I came to you with a bunch of scenes in the hope of finding a story and when I look back I’m still surprised at how far we have come. Now the script has won the 2007 Monte Miller award. Thanks again Karel.”
-Nathan Fielding
Winner 2007 AWG Monte Miller Award

“He never gets distracted with the little stuff that tends to fix itself when the important parts are working harmoniously. Karel is a rare beast amongst story consultants – a film literate and long-standing aficionado of many film genres. I hold Karel in very high regard.”
-Kieran Galvin
Film Director / Screenwriter

“Karel is my go-to guy for Script Development and/or assessment. He has a unique insight into the process and any projects I bring him are always infinitely improved by the time we have finished. His grasp of story and structure is second to none. I have recommended his services to several colleagues in the past, all of whom have been very satisfied with the results.”
- Michael Favelle
International Sales Agent
Top 10 Person to Watch in 2009

“Karel Segers is Australia’s Robert McKee”
– Stephen J De Jager
Creative Director, Roadshow Entertainment