Coincidences

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Coincidences

    So on today's Scriptnotes John and Craig talked about coincidences. Basically, the gist of it was that you're generally fine with one coincidence. Any more than that, and it begins to look like divine intervention, or at the very least, it looks like everything is planned out beyond the character's control.
    (Correct me of I'm summarizing anything wrong, Craig)

    However, John mentioned he likes to see lucky villains. And I do too. My personal view is that coincidences that create more conflict are far easier to forgive than coincidences that resolve or alleviate conflict. We can all relate to a day where everything goes wrong. Days where everything goes right are rarer, and frankly, not very interesting to an audience.

    Craig I'd be curious if when you suggested one major coincidence, you meant a beneficial one? Such as your cash example in Boogie Nights. Or do you think that too many negative coincidences are bad storytelling as well?

    When I was thinking about this stuff, Pulp Fiction came to mind. It's full of coincidences that, for the most part, put the characters through hell. I think the movie is stronger because of it.

    Butch and Marcellus just happen to cross paths at the right time.
    They just happen to enter a pawnshop owned and operated by rapists.
    Vince happens to use the bathroom at the wrong time.
    Mia happens to take the wrong bag.
    The couple happens to rob a diner where two hit-men are eating (you could argue this benefits the couple, but with the timeline, it hurts Vince in the long run)

    I'd love to hear what everyone else thinks. It's a fascinating topic.
    Ring-a-ding-ding, baby.

  • #2
    Ridiiculous Coincidences

    I'll risk repeating myself, here, from a DD post, nine years ago.

    "In the New York Herald, November 26, year 1911, there is an account of the hanging of three men. They died for the murder of Sir Edmund William Godfrey; Husband, Father, Pharmacist and all around gentle-man resident of: Greenberry Hill, London. He was murdered by three vagrants whose motive was simple robbery. They were identified as: Joseph Green, Stanley Berry, and Daniel Hill. Green, Berry, Hill. And I Would Like To Think This was Only A Matter Of Chance."
    In MAGNOLIA, Paul Thomas Anderson thus began his film with a tale taken from chapter 2 of Charles Hoy Fort's Wild Talents:

    "In the New York Herald, Nov. 26, 1911, there is an account of the hanging of three men, for the murder of Sir Edmund Berry Godfrey, on Greenberry Hill, London. The names of the murderers were Green, Berry, and Hill. It does seem that this was only a matter of chance. Still, it may have been no coincidence, but a savage pun mixed with murder."

    Since Anderson never checked the newspaper story, he assumed that this account was contemporaneous and wrote it into the script, as tho it happened in "1911". It did not.

    Sir Edmund Berry Godfrey, a magistrate, (not a pharmacist), was found murdered at Primrose Hill, in London, on October 17, 1678. Robert Green, Henry Berry, and Laurence Hill were convicted on testimony, by Miles Prance, (which was recanted, after these innocent men were hung in February of 1679). There was: no Joseph Green, no Stanley Berry, no Nigel Hill, nor any Greenberry Hill, in London. There was no coincidence, but, without any authority being cited, it continues to be repeated, as tho it were true.

    It is only by coincidence that Anderson also wrote BOOGIE NIGHTS. Or is it?
    JEKYLL & CANADA (free .mp4 download @ Vimeo.com)

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Coincidences

      I think they may have mentioned it in an early podcast as an offhand remark or I might have read it somewhere else, but coincidences can lead to conflict, but coincidences should never take the characters out of conflict. Dues Ex Machina is and should be reviled-- Movies are about individuals struggling to succeed, not struggling and being saved at no consequence of their own efforts.

      Comment


      • #4
        Another Coincidence

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXVwMsk7JK8
        JEKYLL & CANADA (free .mp4 download @ Vimeo.com)

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Another Coincidence

          Loved Harvey.

          Originally posted by CBurden View Post
          I think they may have mentioned it in an early podcast as an offhand remark or I might have read it somewhere else, but coincidences can lead to conflict, but coincidences should never take the characters out of conflict. Dues Ex Machina is and should be reviled-- Movies are about individuals struggling to succeed, not struggling and being saved at no consequence of their own efforts.
          I agree, for the most part. There's only a handful of writers/directors that have pulled off (for me) successful Deus Ex Machinas. The Coen Brothers come to mind.
          Ring-a-ding-ding, baby.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Coincidences

            Full disclosure: I absolutely hated Magnolia. So that said, yeah I hate that example. True or not, it seems too contrived to be believed ... so of course it's not a surprise to learn that yes, in fact the whole thing was contrived.

            When coincidences happen -- they must SEEM as though they still resulted from causality.
            Causality may or may not exist ... but at the very least the illusion of casuality must always be present.

            The famous example from Aristotle ... a man killed Mitys, and then a statue of Mitys fell on that man and killed him too.
            The illusion of causality exists ... it seems as if the two events are related.

            Of course, usually most writing teachers will say that one coincidence is allowed to begin a story ... such as two future lovers meet by pure chance at the beginning of a film. However, imagine how much deeper the story would be if that meeting is not by chance ... imagine if one of them thinks it is a chance encounter, but the other person had a very specific purpose the entire time ... and then you as a writer automatically have a classical turning point for later in the film, when that character's intentions are revealed, and you can focus on the other lover's reaction.

            ^^
            So much better than coincidence.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Coincidences

              Coincidences that make things more difficult for the hero - good.

              Coincidences that help the hero - bad.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Coincidences

                I think the coincidences of movies like Pulp Fiction, Magnolia, and I'll throw in Crash are there because that's basically what weaves the characters together. Which brings up the other commonality of all these movies and that is an ensemble cast. The coincidence is mostly played for a WTF? moment or "the last person I want to see right now" moment.

                Obviously, this is definitely one of those things that needs to be handled skillfully or it comes off as stupid.

                On the other hand, many well-made, well-received, well-written (otherwise) flicks have blatant coincidences. But the action and story is usually too enthralling to notice until long after the viewing. Dark Knight comes to mind, but there are thousands of others. Even Empire Strikes Back has Darth Vader waiting at a table for the gang to arrive. How long was he waiting at that table for that impressive reveal?
                On Twitter @DeadManSkipping

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Coincidences

                  Originally posted by NoirDigits View Post
                  Butch and Marcellus just happen to cross paths at the right time.
                  They just happen to enter a pawnshop owned and operated by rapists.
                  Vince happens to use the bathroom at the wrong time.
                  Mia happens to take the wrong bag.
                  The couple happens to rob a diner where two hit-men are eating (you could argue this benefits the couple, but with the timeline, it hurts Vince in the long run)

                  I'd love to hear what everyone else thinks. It's a fascinating topic.
                  I'm sorry, but apart from your first example, these are NOT coincidences.

                  I've not yet had chance to listen to the latest podcast, but I definitely agree with what's being said about only 'one coincidence'. I think you can get away with a major coincidence just once in your story. In fact, a particular coincidence could be the very reason why the story, as a whole exists. It can be the reason for writing it. The coincidence is the story (on certain occasions that is).

                  But any more, and I think you're playing with fire.

                  In reference to the examples you mentioned, except for the first one, they are not coincidences. How is it a 'coincidence' that rapists own the pawnshop? What if the owner was, instead, an ex-astronaut. What coincidence would that be?

                  There is no coincidence. It's just a plot-point. Perhaps an unorthodox one, or a contrived one, or an interesting one, but still just a plot point. No coincidence.

                  The couple robbing the diner with two hitmen inside is not a coincidence either. Someone had to be inside there, why not two hitmen? I'm betting there were also some office workers, and alcoholics, and personal trainers, and bus drivers in there too. But that doesn't make it a coincidence.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Coincidences

                    First of all, I haven’t listened to the newest Craig & John podcast yet, but I think they’re great.

                    I think people say things like ‘coincidences that help = bad, coincidences that hurt = good’ because they’ve heard other, successful writers say them and it’s easier to just go around repeating these so-called rules than come up with your own way of thinking.

                    I ALWAYS notice the coincidences, and they frequently pull me out of the story, whether they happen early or late, whether they help or hurt, whether there’s one or more, etc.

                    I think it’s best to write with a goal of none, acknowledging that a single coincidence, early in the story and usually serving as the inciting incident, is sometimes unavoidable.

                    For example, in the movie Win Win, the protagonist is a lawyer / wrestling coach who just happens to be handling the affairs of a man whose grandson is a champion wrestler.

                    Okay. Mildly implausible, but forgivable, especially in a film written so well.

                    But a film like Crazy, Stupid Love, which is, for a while, so great that you can see why Dan Folgelman is averaging $3 million per script, we have a


                    [SPOILERS]


                    protagonist who is unknowingly hooking up with his son’s teacher, and that son is in love with the baby sitter, who is secretly in love with the dad, who is getting dating advice from a wingman who is unknowingly dating his daughter.

                    All for the purpose of one of those farcical, chaotic climaxes that could never happen outside of a Neil Simon play.

                    It’s too much.

                    You love the characters so much that you want to forgive it, but you can’t.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Coincidences

                      Originally posted by fanatic_about_film View Post
                      I'm sorry, but apart from your first example, these are NOT coincidences.

                      I've not yet had chance to listen to the latest podcast, but I definitely agree with what's being said about only 'one coincidence'. I think you can get away with a major coincidence just once in your story. In fact, a particular coincidence could be the very reason why the story, as a whole exists. It can be the reason for writing it. The coincidence is the story (on certain occasions that is).

                      But any more, and I think you're playing with fire.

                      In reference to the examples you mentioned, except for the first one, they are not coincidences. How is it a 'coincidence' that rapists own the pawnshop? What if the owner was, instead, an ex-astronaut. What coincidence would that be?

                      There is no coincidence. It's just a plot-point. Perhaps an unorthodox one, or a contrived one, or an interesting one, but still just a plot point. No coincidence.

                      The couple robbing the diner with two hitmen inside is not a coincidence either. Someone had to be inside there, why not two hitmen? I'm betting there were also some office workers, and alcoholics, and personal trainers, and bus drivers in there too. But that doesn't make it a coincidence.
                      Coincidence
                      • A remarkable concurrence of events or circumstances without apparent causal connection.
                      • Correspondence in nature or in time of occurrence.
                      They just happen to enter a pawnshop owned and operated by rapists.
                      Butch needed help so he entered the nearest establishment. Most establishments would have called the police. Most establishments are not owned by criminals or rapists. But coincidentally, the one he entered was. This forces him and Marcellus to work together.
                      Vince happens to use the bathroom at the wrong time.
                      If Butch didn't forget his watch, he never would have had a reason to go back to his apartment. If Vince wasn't using the bathroom at that time, Butch never would have had access at that time.
                      Mia happens to take the wrong bag.
                      Okay, this ones a bit dicey. But still, another case of Vince using the bathroom at an inopportune time. Also, Mia is a cokehead and she coincidentally finds something in Vince's pocket that looks like coke (but isn't)


                      The couple happens to rob a diner where two hit-men are eating (you could argue this benefits the couple, but with the timeline, it hurts Vince in the long run)
                      Where to begin with all of the coincidences at play here...
                      • The robbers happen to pick a joint where two dangerous assassins are eating
                      • Two assassins pick a joint to eat at that's about to be robbed
                      • Jules previously had a religious experience (arguably because of a freak incident of chance) so he essentially is not afraid. This definitely changes his reaction to the robbery.
                      • If Vince wasn't using the bathroom when he was, he would never have been able to get the drop on Honey Bunny.
                      Pulp Fiction is loaded with chance and coincidences. It's practically what defines the movie. How all of these people's lives interconnect in part, yes, because of their actions. But also because of coincidences and freak events.
                      Ring-a-ding-ding, baby.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Coincidences

                        Nope, not buying it. They're not coincidences, even by the definition you supplied.

                        Originally posted by NoirDigits View Post
                        Butch needed help so he entered the nearest establishment. Most establishments would have called the police. Most establishments are not owned by criminals or rapists. But coincidentally, the one he entered was. This forces him and Marcellus to work together.
                        But what makes this a 'coincidence'? It's not one.

                        What if the establishment was owned instead by a serial killer? Would that have made it a coincidence?

                        What if it was owned instead by a religious fanatic? Would that make it a coincidence?


                        Originally posted by NoirDigits View Post
                        If Butch didn't forget his watch, he never would have had a reason to go back to his apartment. If Vince wasn't using the bathroom at that time, Butch never would have had access at that time.
                        Well his girlfriend forget the watch (but that's beside the point). He specifically wanted her to go and get it because he KNEW that there was a high probability that Travolta or someone would be in the apartment or watching the apartment, waiting for him to show up. But, he makes a voluntary decision to go back there himself, despite the potential danger involved. And at first it seems to be all clear. Phew!

                        The fact that Travolta was in the bathroom isn't even important. It's the fact that he (stupidly) left his gun in the kitchen.

                        Was it also a coincidence that Bruce Willis was feeling hungry, and there just so happened to be Poptarts in his cupboards?

                        Is it a coincidence that there were bullets in Travolta's gun, and that Travolta died from those bullets when Bruce pulled the trigger?

                        Originally posted by NoirDigits View Post
                        Where to begin with all of the coincidences at play here...
                        • The robbers happen to pick a joint where two dangerous assassins are eating
                        • Two assassins pick a joint to eat at that's about to be robbed
                        • Jules previously had a religious experience (arguably because of a freak incident of chance) so he essentially is not afraid. This definitely changes his reaction to the robbery.
                        • If Vince wasn't using the bathroom when he was, he would never have been able to get the drop on Honey Bunny.
                        No, no, no. These are not coincidences. This is just the story and plot points. The ups and downs of narrative.

                        What if it was owned by a female archaeologist? Would that make it a coincidence?

                        Nothing about a Butch and Marcellus running into a pawnshop that's owned by a rapist is a coincidence. Nothing. There is no coincidence in this.

                        Yes, the robbers happen to pick a diner with two dangerous assassins. But they also happened to be in a diner with all sorts of people. Like I said, i'm sure there was probably a bus driver in there too. Is that a coincidence? I'm sure there was an off-duty cop in there. Is that a coincidence. Maybe there was an ex-porno star in there. Would that be coincidence? Maybe a Librarian too. And a golf player. And a truck driver.


                        In the opening of Raiders, Indiana Jones is leaving after grabbing hold of a golden treasure of an ancient civilization, and guess what, a gigantic boulder almost crushes him. Coincidence?

                        In Taxi Driver, De Niro drives a cab around New York city and starts to become unhinged. Coincidence?

                        In Jurassic Park, scientists clone dinosaurs and they escape their cages. Coincidence?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Coincidences

                          I'm not a big fan of coincidence at all, to be honest. I try and fight it, with occasional capitulations.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Coincidences

                            Couldn't nearly all romcoms be based on a coincidence?
                            On Twitter @DeadManSkipping

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Coincidences

                              Originally posted by Mr. Earth View Post
                              Couldn't nearly all romcoms be based on a coincidence?
                              Well as I stated earlier (and it's just a personal opinion) but I think a film/story can have 'one' coincidence.

                              But only one. Any more and you are playing with fire.

                              And it's my opinion that the coincidence can, on occasion, be the story. It's the reason the story exists. It's what the entire story hangs on. The coincidence is the movie.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X