Although he has had numerous box office successes, in my view he has never equalled the overall excellence of THELMA & LOUISE (1991). It is a fabulous movie and an outstanding debut script by first-timer Callie Khouri.

Here is an attempt to analyse the structural dynamics of this wonderful screenplay and film.

ACT ONE

SEQUENCE A (8.5mins): Preparations.

00.00 Opening Titles: Landscapes that express freedom.
02.00 At diner, Louise is serving & advises against smoking, then smokes.
03.00 Thelma at home, hasn’t asked husband yet for permission to leave.
03.30 Darryl patronises Thelma, humiliates her, she still doesn’t ask.
04.30 Darryl leaves in sportscar, shouts at workmen.
05.00 T. calls L.. After the manager’s innuendo, they arrange their departure.
06.00 Louise leaves, montage shows both getting ready.
07.00 Louise picks up Thelma, who carries half household with her. Polaroid.

SEQUENCE B (13mins): Departure and disaster.

08.30 Driving. T.: I didn’t ask. L.: You get what you settle for (i.e. Darryl).
09.30 Thelma is smoking, looking in the mirror: “I’m Louise.”
10.30 Dusk, Silver Bullet, going to have fun. Different responses to Harlan.
13.30 Louise is reserved, it makes Thelma nervous. Harlan shouts drinks.
15.00 Dancing, line dancing. Thelma dances with Harlan.
16.30 Louise back to table, Thelma keeps dancing. Louise wants to leave.
17.30 Thelma is unwell, they go outside. Louise is looking for Thelma.
18.30 Harlan: Not gonna hurt you. T. resists. He hits her and attempts rape.

19.30 Louise appears with gun. “Suck my dick”. She shoots. (I.I.)

SEQUENCE C (11mins): Figuring out what to do.

21.30 They escape. L. blames T. for her behaviour. Police won’t believe them.
22.30 Louise vomits. Trucks & noise everywhere. Let’s have a coffee & plan.
24.00 They try and figure out what to do. Thelma calls Hal. Nobody home.
25.30 Detective Hal with waitress: Harlan deserved it! She defends T&L.

27.30 No money. Need to figure out what to do.
28.30 They argue. Go to police? Not ready to go to jail.
29.30 T. at the pool, L. calls Jimmy for money. Do you love me?
31.30 L. & T. leave in a hurry. They have decided to run. (PP1)

END OF ACT ONE: The decision has been made to go on the run.

ACT TWO

SEQUENCE D ( 8.5mins): Organising money.

32.30 Hal’s boss: Possibly interstate. Let the FBI in on this.
33.00 Louise: Let’s go to Mexico. Are you up to this? I’m going.
34.30 L. calls Jimmy. He will send the money. I miss you, Peaches.
36.00 T. calls Darryl, he’s watching a game, judging but not concentrating.
39.00 Young handsome JD asks for a lift. Thelma is keen, Louise says no.

SEQUENCE E (10.5mins): To Oklahoma for the money pick-up.

41.00 Hal is on the case, looks up Louise’s car: ‘66 Ford Thunderbird.
41.30 Louise doesn’t want to Mexico go through Texas.
43.00 Hal is investigating at Louise’s place.
43.30 Thelma and Louise are enjoying the ride.
44.00 Detective Hal is investigating at Louise’s Diner.
44.30 They see JD again; Thelma begs to pick him up. Louise gives in.

45.00 Detective Hal interviews Darryl, who is more concerned about himself.
46.00 JD to T.: Your husband sounds like a real asshole. T: he is. They bond.
47.00 JD warns them, they avoid an approaching police car.
47.30 Hal has info on Thelma’s gun etc.
48.30 They go to pick up the money. Jimmy is there, he books rooms.
50.00 JD leaves them and each go to their rooms. L. to T.: Guard the money.

SEQUENCE F (16mins): Mid Sequence, cross-cut.

51.30 Jimmy is jealous & violent. He calms down and proposes to her.
54.00 JD knocks on door. T invites him in. They have fun and make love.
1.00.0 Over breakfast Louise and Jimmy kiss goodbye.
1.04.3 T. arrives: Finally got laid properly. Left money in the room. Run!

1.06.0 Money gone. Louise breaks down. End of Thelma’s innocence.
1.07.0 T. cheers L. up, takes control and drives. Move! (MPR)

SEQUENCE G (10.5mins): Thelma has found her calling.

1.07.3 Hal & Co with Darryl. When she calls, be gentle. Women love that shit.
1.10.0 Thelma robs Store. Drive us to Mexico.
1.11.0 FB: This is a robbery // Hal & Darryl watching. Everybody is shocked.

1.12.3 Thelma brags about her robbery. Found your calling. You’re Disturbed.
1.14.0 Sexist truck driver. They think we like it.
1.15.0 Police now with Jimmy.
1.16.0 Louise with old man, gives him her jewellery.
1.17.0 L.: murder one, little defense. T.: How do you know all these things?

SEQUENCE H (8mins): Fugitives.

1.18.0 Hal blames T.’s robbery on JD. They wouldn’t have otherwise.
1.22.0 Thelma calls Darryl. He knows. L. calls, asks for police.
1.23.3 Hal knows about Mexico. T. talked. L. angry: We’re Fugitives now.

SEQUENCE I (11.5mins): Speeding towards Mexico.

1.26.0 Darryl with cops changes channel, annoys cops, changes back.
1.26.3 Driving through National Park by night.
1.28.3 Dawn. Passing sexist trucker.
1.31.0 T.: Texas. You was raped. L.: I’m not talking about that.
1.32.0 Stopped by cop: clocked at 110km/h. In trouble.

1.34.3 Thelma with gun, shoots radio. They put cop in trunk.
1.37.0 Thelma: I’ve got a knack for this shit.

SEQUENCE I (5.5mins): Dead or alive.

1.37.3 Hal: Brains only get you so far & luck always runs out.
1.38.0 Louise has doubts & regrets. Thelma justifies. Having fun, not sorry.
1.39.0 L. calls Hal: charge w/ murder;knows about Texas. Dead or alive?
1.41.3 Not giving up. Not making any deals. Dead or alive. (PP2)

END OF ACT TWO: Their fate has been sealed. T.’s arc complete.

ACT THREE

SEQUENCE J (6.5mins): Revenge.

1.43.0 Thelma feels awake.
1.44.0 They see macho trucker again. Ready to get serious? Yes.
1.46.0 They ask for an apology. Fuck that! They shoot, truck explodes.

1.48.3 Drive on.

SEQUENCE K (8.5mins): Freedom at last

1.49.3 (POV) Stoned bicycle rider, smoke into air hole.

1.50.3 Police helicopter: closing in.
1.51.3 Police cars chasing them, they go off the road. Cars follow.
1.54.0 Temporarily shake them off under bridge. Eerily quiet.

1.54.3 Thelma: crazy, first chance to express yourself.
1.56.0 They reach the edge of a cliff: Grand Canyon. Hal appears in heli.

1.57.3 Surrounded. Hal lands. Orders to surrender.
1.58.3 Louise: not giving up. Thelma: let’s keep going. (C&R)
2.00.0 They drive, hal runs.

I.I.: Inciting Incident (or Call to Adventure)
PP1: Plot Point 1 (Act 1 Turning Point / Crossing the 1st Threshold)
MPR: Mid Point Reversal
PP2: Plot Point 2 (Act 2 Turning Point / Ordeal & Reward)
C&R: Climax & Resolution (Resurrection)

PROTAGONIST

In my view, Thelma is the protagonist, for the following reasons:

1. She is prominent in the setup and we empathise/sympathise with her.
2. We may hope that she will become less submissive and find freedom.
3. Her story has a clear Inciting Incident (a major event happening to her).
4. She has a clear Mid Point Reversal.
5. She has a clear character arc.

Interestingly, if you look at Thelma’s story in isolation, the first half (before the Mid Point Reversal) she is a passive protagonist, mostly just following Louise. Only after that, she becomes an active protagonist. This passivity is counteracted by Louise’s initiative until the Mid Point.

ACT STRUCTURE

The Inciting Incident is clear: two major events happen to Thelma: Harlan’s rape attempt and Louise’s shooting Harlan. Although Louise later argues that Thelma started it because of her behaviour, Thelma’s actions are two degrees away from the Inciting Incident (Harlan’s death) that kicks off the story. Therefore, this is clearly an event happening to Thelma, not an action by her.

This leaves Thelma with the necessity to act.

The 1st Act Turning point is more problematic: Louise takes the initiative, Thelma agrees by following her. After a period of considering their options, they have decided to go on the run. Although the destination won’t be known until later, Act Two is now set in motion. In my view, this act break is reinforced by the next scene in which we learn the FBI will be on the case. This increasing of the stakes by showing the antagonist’s power is a frequently used technique to open Act Two.

The Mid Point Reversal is at the same time a reversal of fortune (loss of the money) and proof of Thelma’s change of heart. She is now committed to her inner journey towards finding her true identity (or essence) and freedom. Two events trigger this: her first fulfilling sexual experience and the realisation that she has failed to take responsibility by constantly relying on Louise. The evidence in her commitment lies in two immediate actions: she drives the car and robs the store.

The crisis occurs when they learn about the major setback that Hal knows where they are heading and he will charge them with murder. It is a crisis moment for both women: Louise has doubts and regrets, so Thelma has to make a choice. Her newly found strength is the Reward, as well as the fact that Louise hasn’t made a deal with the police. It is a strong Ordeal moment as 1) the image of death occurs when they realise it is now a matter of life or death and 2) it signifies the death of Thelma’s old identity.

At the climax, two important actions take place: 1) Thelma demonstrates her new strength when she stands up for herself in the confrontation with the sexist truck driver and 2) by saying “Let’s keep going” she commits to her new principles with her life and seals it with the ultimate act of defiance.

POINT OF VIEW

After the characters have been set up, every scene has the hero (Thelma) or the antagonist (Harlan/the police), except perhaps one or two.

Any scenes that are not told from Thelma’s POV either add to the jeopardy (as the police makes progress) or they provide comic relief (the black cyclist blowing smoke into the trunk with the cop in it).

A well-structured story has THREE acts. Or FOUR? No big deal.

Earlier I said that the model you use to improve your screenwriting is your own choice. At the end of the day it is all academic. Whatever works for you.

A few things to consider before you choose:

First of all, whichever you choose, you will need to deliver the exact same turning points. In broad terms, these are the Inciting Incident, Turning Point One, Mid Point, Turning Point Two and Climax + Resolution.

In other words, the outcome of your story shouldn’t depend on the model you choose, but on your premise. The same premise should result in the same structure, irrespective of whether you think in three or four acts.

Otherwise the theory interferes with the result and this can’t be the idea.

Now, what IS the difference?

The four-act model equates to three acts with the middle act cut in two.

In many great stories, the objective as stated in Turning Point One changes at the mid point. In other words:

The mid point is not just a PLOT POINT, but a TURNING POINT.

Therefore you may argue we are moving into a new act.

A crystal-clear example is JAWS:

Act One: Amity has a shark problem.
Act Two: Brody tries to solve the problem by closing the beaches.

Mid Point: Brody realises his failure and decides to change tactics.

Act Three: Brody tries to solve the problem by hunting the shark.
Act Four: Brody kills the shark.

This results in four acts of roughly equal duration, which is kind of elegant.
The acts are also shorter and therefore more manageable, which helps.

I still prefer the three-act structure. Here’s why:

Great films have a strong cohesion in the main character’s journeys between Turning Point 1 and Turning Point 2. Cutting Act Two in the middle could cause a writer to ignore this cohesion.

In the example of JAWS, Brody has one over-arching desire: “to protect the people of Amity”. The Inner Journey, too, has a strong cohesion across Act Two: “to learn to act responsibly” (see the structural analysis of JAWS).

Although most great movies have this inner logic, it is often buried deep inside the essence of the character’s journey and not always clear through a simple analysis.

THE UNTOUCHABLES, however, is another great example. In structure and meaning it is not too dissimilar from JAWS:

Act One: Ness learns of the vicious methods of Capone.
Act Two: Ness tries to capture Capone.
Act Three: Ness tries to capture the bookkeeper.
Act Four: Ness captures the bookkeeper.

The over-arching desire, uniting Act Two and Three: “to protect the people of Chicago”. The Inner Journey: “to accept the Chicago way”.

Finally, another good reason to stick with the three-act structure is the fact that not all successful movies have such a strong reversal at the mid point.

Please let me know your views in the comments.

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.

Steven Spielberg first drew me into movies with Close Encounters of the Third Kind, back in 1977.

Because I was too young for Jaws in 1975, it wasn’t until later when I discovered the movie that really made Spielberg.

Jaws literally changed the movie industry as its tremendous success not only started the ‘wide opening’ with over 500 theatres, it also launched the summer season as the most profitable movie season in the US.

The structure below is an attempt to break the film down into its acts and sequences. I would welcome comments as you may or may not agree with this breakdown.

Some turning points are more obvious than others. The films Mid Point (of No Return) is beautifully emphasised with a long shot zooming into the ocean. The end of Act One and Two, however, are less obvious and you may have good reasons to see them differently. Please let me know.

Finally, like any other structural breakdown on this site, it is absolutely essential to view the film as the summaries below won’t make much sense without the context of the actual movie scene.

ACT ONE

Sequence A

00.00 Titles
01.00 Night beach party by campfire
03.00 Girl skinnydipping, boy is too drunk
03.30 POV shark
04.00 Girl taken

05.00 Breakfast, Brodys are strangers in town: concerned for kids.
06.00 Phone call. Wife: Be careful. Brody: In this town??
07.00 Brody with boy on beach: they find girl, is crab meat (I.I.)

Sequence B

08.30 Brody types report, minor office stuff
10.00 Buys sign, paint, orders to paint signs to close beach.
11.30 Mayor protests on ferry, your 1st summer, need summer dollars!
13.00 Watching the beach. “not an islander”
16.00 Dog taken, blood, everybody out. Alex Kintner is gone.
17.30 Town meeting, close beaches for 24hs. Brody: didn’t agree.
20.00 Quint’s proposal: $10,000 to bring it in.

ACT TWO A

Sequence C

21.30 Brody reads on sharks. Sees Mikey in boat, parents fight.
23.30 Quint throwing bait.
24.30 Broday reading: images of sharks & victims
25.30 Charlie falls in, almost taken
26.30 Matt Hooper arrives, wants to see girl’s remains first.
29.00 Ocean posse, everybody out in their boats for bounty.
30.00 post-mortem: no boating accident, was a shark.
31.30 Tiger shark caught. Hooper wants to cut open. Mayor: No.
34.30 Mrs Kintner hits Brody: you knew about girl, about shark.

Sequence D

36.30 Home, Mikey copies Brody. Give us a kiss. I need it.
37.30 Dinner stories. Hooper LOVES sharks. Brody HATES water.
41.30 Cut open shark. Nothing. Go see it in the ocean.
43.30 Boat, Brody about NY & Amity: one man can make difference.
45.00 Fish finder equipment, they find Ben Gardner’s boat.
47.00 Matt dives in, finds tooth and head.
48.30 Great white, no tooth. Mayor: beaches stay open for WE.

Sequence E

51.30 Tourists pour in, boats are patrolling.
54.00 Mayor tells people to go in the water, helicopter (DI)
55.00 Brody tells Mikey to go in the pond
56.00 Mayor lies in interview: all fine
57.00 Shark alert: false alarm, boys prank.
59.00 Shark going into the pond, grabs man
60.30 Mikey dragged out, dead? In shock. Zoom on ocean. (MPNR)

MID SEQUENCE

61.30 Hospital: take him home. Wife: to NY?
62.30 Mayor says sorry, signs voucher for Quint.
63.30 Quint vs. Hooper. Q. wants to go alone.
66.30 Goodbye to wife, getting ready. “Gone fishing.”

ACT TWO B

Sequence F

69.30 On ocean, near accident and warning about compressed air.
71.30 Fishing reel moves, pulling. Q.: very big. Hooper: no shark.
76.00 Quint bossing. Hooper hates it. Don’t have to take abuse.
77.30 Chief throws bait, head of shark appears.
78.00 25-footer. 3 tons, is circling boat.
80.00 Q. is radio’ed by Brody’s wife, tells her all is fine.
80.30 Shark harpooned, takes barrel, disappears.
82.30 Chief wants to quit, get bigger boat. Sunset.

Sequence G

83.00 Q. & Hooper compare scars, drink.
86.00 Quint’s shark story of the Indianapolis, ‘45.
89.30 Whale song, singing together, bonding.
90.30 Boat under attack, start engines, shark leaves.

Sequence H

92.30 Barrel back, they rope it in, shark appears.
94.00 Brody: Mayday. Quint kills radio.
95.00 Hook up another barrel, harpooned & taken by shark.
96.00 Shark is chasing boat, harpooned, 2 barrels & shooting.
97.30 Shark attack

99.30 Shark eats rope, coming closer, more shooting, 3 barrels.
100.0 Shark tows boat, Quint cuts rope
102.3 Decision to head in towards shallow waters.
104.0 Quint at full power, bearings burned, stopped & fire.
105.0 Stuck, sinking & waiting

ACT THREE

Sequence I

106.0 Hooper’s plan: goes into cage with poison.
108.0 shark attacks & fight with Hooper.
111.0 Pull him up! The winch breaks, the cage stays down
112.0 Shark attacks boat, it starts sinking, Quint is taken.
113.0 Brody alone, bull fight, throws tank into shark’s mouth.
114.0 Brody shoots the tank, shark explodes
115.0 Shark sinks to the sea bed.

116.0 Hooper resurfaces.
117.0 Two men swimming to land with the two barrels.
115.3 Shark dies.

Sequence J

116.0 Hooper returns
117.0 Swimming with barrels

Under the surface of this suspenseful monster movie there is a powerful character journey. I once believed this movie is simply about Brody overcoming his fear of water. It is about much more than that.

Brody escaped the hazards of hardcore NY police work to find peace in Amity, where “one man can make a difference”.

But is he ready to make a difference?

When his wife tells him to be careful, he replies: “on this island?”. He is minimising any dangers before they even occur.

Brody is also dealing with symptoms rather than tackle the causes head-on. He tells his son not to play on the swings rather than reparing them. In the same way he tells his wife not to use the fireplace in the den before he goes out on the sea.

In the course of the story, Brody will learn to dig to the heart of the problem and resolve it at the root.

(Read the part about Jaws in this blog post for a brief introduction to the difference between a character’s WANT, NEED and LONGING.)

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.

Better is to consolidate your understanding by applying it to films you know, by watching them and identifying the key turning points.

A breakdown in scenes or plot points is an excellent start. To help you with this, I will regularly publish examples from different genres.

Here is the full list of breakdowns – or ‘beat sheets’:

• Structure: Up
• Structure: The Incredibles
• Structure: Juno
• Structure: Thelma & Louise
• Structure: Australia
• Structure: Jaws
• Structure: Raiders of the Lost Ark
• Structure: Iron Man
• Structure: A Room With a View
• Structure: Shawshank Redemption
• Structure: Terminator 2
• Structure: Ghost World
• Structure: Michael Clayton
• Structure: Assault on Precinct 13

When I watched the film during its theatrical release, I thoroughly enjoyed it. Because of the relatively low budget (an estimated USD$25m) for its production values, Tony Gilroy was able to make some brave non-commercial decisions with his screen story.

This didn’t go entirely unpunished, as the Variety review points out:

Gilroy’s fidelity to his script comes at the expense of the pacing, which initially lumbers forward so assiduously as to feel like a throwback to an earlier era.

and:

Some of the peripheral threads — especially Michael’s relationship with his family, both as an irritated brother and a single dad — occupy time at the outset but really don’t lead anywhere.

-Brian Lowry

Looking at the story structure in the first act, we’ll find some obvious causes for the problems addressed above.

The Inciting Incident doesn’t happen until 25mins into the film and I yet have to find a clear 1st Act Turning Point. The scene with Marty (Sydney Pollack) at 51mins feels like one but at that stage Michael is already on his journey. The monumental 25mins of ‘Ordinary World’ make the story drag on to a point the audience will get very fidgety.

Then, in sequence two – and even before the end of the act – we find an abundance of scenes and characters that are not dealing with the main plot: Michael’s son, his debt, the merger and the scenes from Karen’s POV. These are simply things you cannot do without having clearly set up the main story.

I won’t go into any further story issues, but here is how I would structure the film in terms of plot points and sequences:

ACT ONE

SEQUENCE A: Prologue, Ordinary World

00.00 Arthur’s VO: This is not a relapse.
03.00 POV(*) Bach is settling, at office late at night
04.30 POV Karen in bathroom, tormented
05.00 Michael is gambling, phone rings
07.00 Urgent job: accident, go see client at home
08.30 At client’s: What are you? Miracle worker?
12.00 Phone rings: Michael gives details to referee.
12.30 Driving, GPS flickers.
13.30 Gets out at field with horses
15.00 Car explodes

SEQUENCE B: Subplot and Call to Adventure

15.30 – 4 DAYS EARLIER
16.00 Subplot: Michael drives son Henry to school
18.30 Subplot: Michael needs $75k to repay debts
20.30 At work, assistant asks: Are we merging?
23.00 POV Karen (intercut) rehearsing + interview
25.30 I.I.: Arthur stripped in deposition room
26.00 Arthur’s VO (cont.). Did you meet Anna?
29.00 Arthur: I have blood on my hands.

ACT TWO

SEQUENCE C: To get Arthur back on the case

29.30 POV Arthur tape, U-North people learn about Michael
32.30 Michael will get Arthur back in 3-4 days; find briefcase
33.30 POV Arthur calls Henry: Realm & Conquest.
35.30 Michael & Karen: defends Arthur. She’ll call Marty
37.30 Michael & Arthur as Mentor: “We’ve been summoned.”
39.30 POV Karen calls Mr. Verne
41.00 Arthur has escaped

SEQUENCE D: Allies and Enemies, Midpoint

43.00 POV Karen shows Marty the memo.
43.30 Searching Arthur’s office; psychiatric commitment?
45.00 Arthur followed, Michael leaves msg: janitor to janitor
48.00 POV Arthur calls Anna, call bugged.
50.00 With creditor: one week
51.00 Marty: He’s calling the plaintiffs; Michael asks loan
54.00 Looking for Arthur; with son, sees him
56.00 Mid: Arthur changed. Not the enemy.”Then who?”

SEQUENCE E: Subplot and Ordeal Plot Point

59.30 POV Arthur reads report on voicemail
63.30 POV Karen orders murder
65.00 Asks brother for support; hang for an hour.
67.30 POV Arthur killed
69.30 Brother shows up, off alcohol, in front of Henry
71.00 To son: you’re not like this. You’ve got it.
72.30 Ordeal: phone call, Arthur’s dead
75.00 In pub w/ Marty. Why?? No note. U-North settling.

SEQUENCE F: Ordeal Sequence Approach / and Reward

77.30 Calls Anna, in NY right now.
78.30 Goes to see Anna in motel, being watched
79.00 Anna: “something that would win the case”
81.00 Approach: Gets seal, to Arthur’s place
82.00 Followed, watched; searches flat
83.00 Finds Realm & Conquest; Police come in
84.00 Released from cell, “Who called 911?”
87.30 Reward: 3,000 copies of memo
88.00 POV Karen finds out about memo: ’situation’.
88.30 Marty ready for announcement;
89.00 Subplot Reward: cheque $80k
91.00 Pays off debt.

ACT THREE

SEQUENCE G: To get out, by bringing U-North down

92.30 Gambling // car bomb planted // phone rings, leaves.
95.30 Driving, miracle worker, fixer
96.00 Driving
99.00 Horses // Gimme cell // Explosion
99.30 Throws valuables in, runs off
100.0 Brother picks him up
101.0 POV Karen addressing board w/ settlement proposal
103.3 Climax: Confronts Karen: $10m
106.0 Resolution: Everything on record: NYPD

SEQUENCE H: Return with the Elixir – Finally Out

107.0 Taxi

(*): Scenes marked “POV” are not from the protagonist’s POV.

When McKee talks about the conscious desire being a contradiction of the unconscious desire, would you relate this to the mid act 2 reversal / change in approach? Or would this be true from the very start of the story, script or life of the protagonist?

Answer:

Let’s start with quoting exactly what it is that McKee says:

“The PROTAGONIST may also have a self-contradictory unconscious desire(*).”

He goes on:

“Although these complex protagonists are unaware of their subconscious need, the audience senses it, perceiving in them an inner contradiction. The conscious and unconsious desires of a multidimensional protagonist contradict each other. What he believes he wants is the antithesis of what he actually but unwittingly wants.”

McKee makes a statement, then doesn’t really explain it. He doesn’t give an example either. But here is what I assume he means:

The conscious desire is what Michael Hauge calls the ‘visible goal, with a clearly defined end point’. In DIE HARD, John McClane wants to stop the gangsters and arrest them. In THE LIVES OF OTHERS, Wiesler wants to expose the theater director Dreyman. In JAWS, sheriff Brody wants to stop the shark from killing the people of Amity.

The subconscious desire is what John Truby calls the ‘need’, it is what the protagonist needs to become a more complete character, to overcome the flaw. This flaw often stops the protagonist from doing the right thing:

John McClane is a macho cop who can’t accept his wife to put her career first and Chief Brody can’t swim, so his fear of water keeps him initially from going out and kill the shark out on the sea. Wiesler wants to be a good man, but has only pursued this by following the stasi rule book.

Each of these have to overcome their flaw, before they can succeed in their outer objective: McClane makes a confession over the radio, Brody goes out on the open sea and Wiesler realises being a good man has nothing to do with justice fabricated by a totalitarian system. Sometimes this realisation happens at the mid-point, sometimes at the end of Act Two.

In each case, the inner need is in conflict with the outer ‘want’ from the start. Sometimes the mid-point causes the reversal, sometimes it is the Act Two turning point.

(*)From Robert McKee “STORY”, p.138

Not all of these films are recent and audience’s expectation may have changed since these films were released. I believe that film goers have become more demanding in terms of structure. Some of the stories that worked then, would today be considered as structurally flawed.

Still, if you look at the protagonist’s journey, you will find that most – if not all – have a clear Inciting Incident, Act One Turning Point (Plot Point 1), Act Two Turning Point (PP2), Climax and Resolution.

In ASSAULT ON PRECINCT 13, the Inciting Incident is foreshadowed by presenting the antagonists before we meet our hero Bishop. The sheer violence of the gang puts their storyline on a collision course with Bishop. Right from the start, even before he realises (Dramatic Irony) it puts him in extreme jeopardy, which is an effective way to make an audience connect with the protagonist.

This movie written and directed by John Carpenter is not only very entertaining, it is structured around a powerful reversal. The first (outer) objective of Wilson is to keep the convicts inside the police station, thus protecting the outside world from them. At the mid point, this reverses completely: now he needs to protect the convicts from the gang assaulting the police station.

The structural breakdown was done in a single viewing, without going back to check and most likely I will be wrong here and there. Particularly the Inciting Incident doesn’t seem to be strong enough, nor is there any reluctance or clear plot point leading to the ‘crossing of the threshold’. See for yourself and try to improve my breakdown of this film’s structure.

ACT ONE

SEQ. A: BISHOP’S FIRST DAY: A DANGEROUS AREA
02.40 DI: Anderson, CAL, 3.10am: 6 gang members killed by police
04.30 Press conference: weapons missing, serious threat
05.00 DI: Three war lords become blood brothers, arsenal of weapons
06.00 (04.50): Bishop driving, gets supervising duty Prec.9,div.13

SEQ. B: BISHOP GOES TO ANDERSON
08.30 DI: (05.11): Napoleon Wilson, on death row
10.00 DI: Wilson & Co are being transported
12.30 (05.32): Bishop driving
13.00 DI: (05.37) Father & Daughter lost in Anderson
15.00 DI: Gang members driving in car with weapons
16.00 (05.49): Bishop arrives, deputy informs captain, coffee with Kathy
20.30 Captain briefs bishop: first day on the job.

ACT TWO

SEQ. C: GETTING READY FOR THE NIGHT, NEW TASK
22.30 DI: (06.18) Punk trains gun on people while driving; ice cream van.
24.30 DI: (06.41) Transport goes to Anderson, convict is sick
28.00 DI: Punk kills girl and ice cream man
32.30 Bishop puts up sign as bus arrives, convicts go in holding tanks

SEQ. D: THE CONVICTS BECOME ALLIES; STATION UNDER SIEGE
34.30 Wilson checks out Bishop, men check out Kathy.
36.00 DI: (07.00) Father kills murderer, escapes into Police station
38.30 Nobody in car park. Phone dead. Chaney leaves, power down.
40.30 Bishop goes out, is being shot at. Chaney is dead. Silencers.
41.30 Transport minders shot. Police station under siege.

SEQ. E: REVERSAL – KEEPING THE GANGSTERS OUT
45.00 Making plans: flares; waiting for help; gang army approaches
50.30 Marked for a siege. Do they want father of killed girl?
52.00 Gangsters start assault; move in; Wilson fights back, shoots.
54.30 Everybody helps holding the gangsters at bay; armed. Silence.

SEQ. F: STAYING ALIVE
57.00 Julie dead; barricading doors. Squad car here in 5mins (he hopes).
60.30 Explosives in basement; cars back, bodies gone. All in 30mins.
63.00 Not afraid to die: convict knows about ‘ciolo’ revenge; save ass (Wells)
65.00 Counting spare ammo. Wilson gets a cigaret from Kathy.

SEQ. G: GETTING OUT
66.00 Patrol car Unit 7 checking the area
67.30 (08.15): Basement solution – hotwire car.
70.00 Wells goes out: “I’m doomed.”
71.00 Someone will come. “A man with faith”. Wells’ mission fails.

ACT THREE

SEQ. H: SETTING UP A TRAP
74.30 Renewed attack: “out of luck”; basement
78.00 The explosives; patrol: nothing unusual, phone worker dead.
80.00 Molotov attack, invasion & explosion

SEQ. I: HELP ARRIVES
83.00 Police support: “Anybody’s got a smoke?”
84.00 Bishop defends Wilson

(DI: Dramatic Irony)

I am not sure which film this student had in mind as a successful example of non-conventional structure, but I bet you it was PULP FICTION. Ever since 1994, filmmakers have been hoping to get away with it in the same way Tarantino did. In my view PF has done far more damage to the craft of screenwriting than its success will ever justify. The irony is that PULP FICTION is relatively conventional in its structure, just not linear. Check Linda Aronson’s book SCREENWRITING UPDATED.

But all that is completely beside the point. The point is that writers often have this immature attitude. “But my script is different.” Another one that keeps coming back: “Hollywood only makes crap, audiences really don’t want to see that stuff anymore.” This one I only heard today: “It all works in my head, the film experience will be very different from the script!”

Call me conservative but the more I learn about film, the more I am convinced audiences are conditioned by an increasingly structured type of filmmaking. Time and time again I hear people rejecting structure one minute, and raving about highly structured films the next.

Ever since the story of a boy and a princess in space 30 years ago, audiences – whether you like it or not – have been conditioned by a more sophisticated version of the 3-act structure, i.e. the Hero’s Journey. And this process has only been reinforced since that paradigm was written down by Christopher Vogler. (I almost called The Hero’s Journey ‘a structure’ but it was never really intended to be. Yet it can often be elegantly blended with the three act structure.)

LEARN THE RULES, THEN BREAK THE RULES

Despite my endless complaints about Australian writers, I have had the pleasure and honour of meeting and working with dozens of writers who are dedicated to learning the craft. They read, study, analyse, attend seminars etc.

Most of them learn with the intention of later applying what they have learned. Others take the basics on board and explore ways of being original and creative within the boundaries. Yet others fully intend to knowingly break the rules with their first screenplay.

Now that may be unwise.

The statement above reading “Learn the Rules, then Break the Rules” is in my view a dangerous one. I would rather replace it with something like:

“Master the Rules, then Bend Them.”

It often happens that screenwriters only get their first screenplay made after years of learning the craft. When the film finally hits the screen, they realises that although they believed they had learned the skills, they hadn’t. An audience is a funny thing. You want them to feel this way, but they respond that way.

As a writer you won’t know if you actually master the craft until the film goes out and is successful. Believing that you can learn the rules and break them with your first script, is a dangerous illusion.

Of course every year there will be at least one success story of a breakthrough screenplay that didn’t apply the principles. Everybody will write and talk about that one person. Bottomline: if you are in this game for the long term, it pays to look at the statistics and then review your chances.

THE ONE THAT GOT AWAY

I am currently working with a client on a screenplay that reminded me in some peripheral way of the French rural drama Jean de Florette, starring Gerard Depardieu and the late Yves Montand*. I watched the film again with my wife and paid attention to its structure.

Although I had seen the film at least twice before, what I found out this time, literally blew me away.

The screenplay was adapted by director Claude Berri and veteran scribe Gerard Brach, from a hugely successful original French classic by Marcel Pagnol. The film had been a breakout arthouse hit across the world, with major prizes in its home country but also in England and the U.S. where it was nominated for a Golden Globe.

My wife and I had seen this film last about ten years ago, yet neither of us remembered much of the plot. We did remember the characters and even individual scenes. Not the plot.

Why??

Because the structure is quite extraordinary.

The whole film is structured following a text-book three-act structure. Inciting incident, first act turning point, second act are all ‘tres formulaic’. But what seemed unusual to me, and the primary reason why I think this film still looked so fresh to us: the story is structured around the antagonist’s journey.

My advise: don’t try this at home. As a beginning screenwriter, make sure you try your hand at convential material before you venture into this type of territory. The screenwriters of Jean de Florette were both highly experienced, with many successes to their names. Unfortunately, although the follow-up to Jean de Florette (Manon des Sources) may have brought a more upbeat closing to the rural saga, the writing was less inspiring.

When you have the chance, do watch both films, analyse these structural exceptions and asks yourself what is different, why this one works and the other doesn’t (so well).

It is always fascinating.

*Nice coincidence: when I was out the following night my wife randomly picked the Marilyn Monroe classic “Let’s make Love” from our DVD shelf and watched it, only to find it had – again – Yves Montand in a major role.

THE WORKSHOPS WORK

More than one week to go until 10 February and the Sydney story workshop is sold out. This weekend I’ll be teaching for the first time in Queensland, at the International Film College. My next Sydney Workshop will be on Sunday 13 April and bookings are open now.

The emphasis of the workshops has shifted slightly. The first sessions were heavily theoretical, focusing on aspects of the 3-act structure. Lately I have shifted towards more practical examples from a wider diversity of films, both old and recent, across completely different genres: from action movie to comedy, from Touch of Evil (1958) and Die Hard (1988) to The Incredibles (2004) and The Lives of Others (2006).

Some people find that the material taught in these classes is advanced. Let me tell you this: it is not. It represents the bare essentials. It is the absolute minimum you need to know if you want to even consider breaking into the scene. That doesn’t mean that it will sink in the first time around. You will still need to watch films, analyse them and apply what you have learned to your own work.

Next, you will need to call in the assistance from a professional. But you will be so much better prepared to enter into a dialogue about your work if you have laid the foundations by learning the terminology. Not only will it speed up your development, it will potentially save you hundreds or thousands of dollars as your script editor will talk to you about your script on your level.

THE PREMIUM EDITION

The Premium Edition has had visitors from New York to the country of Jean de Florette (Provence, South of France), from Australia’s East and West Coasts to the City Library of Amsterdam. Meanwhile, the first paying subscribers have signed up, from Australia and overseas!

Eight users are online while I am writing this, of which no less than seven guests and a few search engine spiders. Check it out for yourself by subscribing for a year at only the cost of one cappuccino a fortnight.

Among the newly added content, Premium Members now have also access to a list of mistakes I have come across in screenplays lately, as well as a few suggestions on how to avoid them.

In the coming days and weeks new articles will be added and I will be conducting an interview with Michael Hauge (who is coming to Australia this May) and will talk about the dangers of mystery.