Plot Point 2

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Re: Plot Point 2

    Can I just remind everyone that the point of this thread is to address the OP's question as best we can? Great to widen the conversation, but best to stay on topic.

    And, you know, be nice. Or be quiet. Either/or. 'Kay?
    sigpic

    Website
    Tweets
    Book

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Plot Point 2

      Originally posted by Biohazard View Post
      I'm the guy who asked you a fair question.
      There's just so many steps in the filmmaking process that there's no reason to assume a sh!tty movie is the result of a sh!tty script.

      It happens, sure. But sh!tty movies come from great scripts too. Correlation doesn't mean causation.

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Plot Point 2

        (sigh) I think the pettiness here illustrates why so many pros have left this site over the years. Better to understand than to be understood.

        Does something significant have to fall on these pages? : Page 10 Page 20-30 Page 50 Page 70 Page 90-95. No. We all know it's about story, content. But metric thing is a good guide. Nothing more.
        "I ask every producer I meet if they need TV specs they say yeah. They all want a 40 inch display that's 1080p and 120Hz. So, I quit my job at the West Hollywood Best Buy."
        - Screenwriting Friend

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Plot Point 2

          Originally posted by Biohazard View Post
          I'm the guy who asked you a fair question.
          Your question is only fair if you think your opinion is more important than the scores of people who love the Pirates movies.

          More importantly, Ted and Terry were EXTREMELY ambitious in their approach to all the Pirate movies. Like the movies or not, they truly strive for greatness. Much of what you didn't like is probably a result of them writing (or trying to write) way above your head and shunning the traditional. They are extremely ballsy too. They speak their mind in a way few writers can or do. They are fighting the fight most of you guys dream of.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Plot Point 2

            Originally posted by stvnlra View Post
            Do pro writers rely on "gut instinct" or "intuition" or past experience so much that they've never learned certain fundamental storytelling principles or techniques, and this is part of the reason some writers' work is inconsistent?
            100% of writers are inconsistent.

            My own experience (which I think is very different from KKKraig, Derekkk's, and Jeff's) is that most of what I have "learned" as far as writing-code has been negative. It has resulted in me second guessing my gut WAY too often. I am now intractably "analytical"

            Many of you have heard me say that I wish I'd never read those books. I wish I could unlearn the paradigms and plot points I picked up from analyzing my scripts with execs/producers. For some writers (like me) it kills freedom. I broke in writing on "instinct." The primary two being: "this sh!t is getting boring right here" and "this sh!t doesn't feel right."

            The best screenwriting advice (even better than "calculate less) is Ted Elliott's, "the primary thing to be aware of when writing is to be interesting." At all times ask yourself, "is this interesting."

            There were far fewer "gurus" when the movies we loved were being written. Fvck Aristotle (or whoever you can pull outta your ass), what I'm saying is Hitchcock, Welles, Wilder, did not come up in a "guru" culture.

            I think if the books genuinely make a writer better, that's awesome, but I doubt that in most instances they do. The gut and passion are what people respond to.

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Plot Point 2

              Originally posted by BattleDolphinZero View Post
              The gut and passion are what people respond to.
              "like"

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Plot Point 2

                Btw, I think "analytical" is great when you're giving someone notes on their script. Then it's good to break sh!t down, chart it, apply theorems and shape things mythically.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Plot Point 2

                  Originally posted by BattleDolphinZero View Post
                  100% of writers are inconsistent.

                  My own experience (which I think is very different from KKKraig, Derekkk's, and Jeff's) is that most of what I have "learned" as far as writing-code has been negative. It has resulted in me second guessing my gut WAY too often. I am now intractably "analytical"

                  Many of you have heard me say that I wish I'd never read those books. I wish I could unlearn the paradigms and plot points I picked up from analyzing my scripts with execs/producers. For some writers (like me) it kills freedom. I broke in writing on "instinct." The primary two being: "this sh!t is getting boring right here" and "this sh!t doesn't feel right."

                  The best screenwriting advice (even better than "calculate less) is Ted Elliott's, "the primary thing to be aware of when writing is to be interesting." At all times ask yourself, "is this interesting."

                  There were far fewer "gurus" when the movies we loved were being written. Fvck Aristotle (or whoever you can pull outta your ass), what I'm saying is Hitchcock, Welles, Wilder, did not come up in a "guru" culture.

                  I think if the books genuinely make a writer better, that's awesome, but I doubt that in most instances they do. The gut and passion are what people respond to.
                  Bronze this.

                  After you've read enough screenplays, watched enough films, written (and more importantly rewritten) enough scenes, you'll develop a sixth sense or some mental shorthand for what works and what doesn't -- without being an egghead about it all.

                  A writer's second guessing would be lessened significantly by reading more, watching more, and rewriting more. Plain and simple.
                  sigpic

                  It's ruff bein' me.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Re: Plot Point 2

                    the primary thing to be aware of when writing is to be interesting.
                    Completely. Nothing is worse than boring.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Re: Plot Point 2

                      And all this perfunctory crap is driving me batty.

                      Every good script contains two things: a brain and a heart.

                      What is the brain? Matt and Quint expanding Brody's (and our) knowledge as to what makes sharks do what they do before they eat again. Ilsa and Laszlo needing the letters of transit to escape to America. McClaine matching wits with Hans and his men.

                      What is the heart? Brody putting his life on the line for his town after the towns folk doubt him and that tender scene with his son in the midst of agony. Rick sticking his neck out to see to it that old flame Ilsa and Laszlo get to America unharmed. McClaine reconciling with his wife at Christmas.

                      As Sean Connery would say, to hell with Blofeld and this "that should happen on page so and so" BS!
                      sigpic

                      It's ruff bein' me.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Re: Plot Point 2

                        Originally posted by Craig Mazin View Post
                        Completely. Nothing is worse than boring.
                        Maybe "fake" is worse than "boring"? Or "pretentious" is worst of all?

                        I don't know. In my case, I find it hard not to be fake when trying to write: situations that feel more like they could happen in a movie than in real life, characters that are that, "characters", instead of people. Then, when I try to run away from movie cliches I often turn to some high-minded theme... That's when it starts to get "pretentious" for me.

                        When reading my pitiful attempts, or when reading or watching the work of others, I think I rather put up with a boring scene than a fake or pretentious one.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Re: Plot Point 2

                          This, from John August is the most useful thing I've ever read about structuring a story:
                          http://johnaugust.com/2004/stressing-over-structure

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Re: Plot Point 2

                            I'll take fake if it's interesting. Pulp Fiction is "fake." Not one character speaks or behaves in a way normal humans behave. But it is an outstanding, brilliant piece of work.

                            All movies are fake, actually. It's just a question of how much verisimilitude you're dialing in or out.

                            Pretentious is bad because it's boring. If I'm interested, it's not pretentious-- it's thought-provoking or profound.

                            Of course, people will differ. Some find Malick pretentious, others profound.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Re: Plot Point 2

                              Originally posted by ricther View Post
                              In a screenplay there are typically five major turning points. The inciting incident(catalsyt), plot point 1(big event), midpoint, plot point 2(crisis), and the climax. My question is does plot point 2 have to be a low point where all hope is lost? Or can it just be a major event that propels us toward the climax? I ask because i been racking my brain on a script im working on and that major event works better as a non crisis. If anything it is a crisis for the antagonist.
                              If you followed all the "rules" up to that point then you probably have no choice. A "protag low point" is probably what the story needs and what strikes a cord with the audience.

                              But, then again, if you have something different that makes your story better - go with that.
                              "I am the story itself; its source, its voice, its music."
                              - Clive Barker, Galilee

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Re: Plot Point 2

                                Originally posted by Craig Mazin View Post
                                I'll take fake if it's interesting. Pulp Fiction is "fake." Not one character speaks or behaves in a way normal humans behave. But it is an outstanding, brilliant piece of work.

                                All movies are fake, actually. It's just a question of how much verisimilitude you're dialing in or out.

                                Pretentious is bad because it's boring. If I'm interested, it's not pretentious-- it's thought-provoking or profound.
                                And/or funny. Juno, case in point.
                                sigpic

                                Website
                                Tweets
                                Book

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X