Midpoint

Collapse

Announcement

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

  • #46
    Re: Midpoint

    Originally posted by Cyfress View Post
    Michael Blake who won the Oscar for the adaptation of his book Dances With Wolves loves to smoke a little weed before he starts writing and then just likes to disappear into the story for a while.
    “Write drunk, edit sober.” — Peter De Vries

    Yes, I think of a Midpoint when I concoct a feature film story, but first, a premise strikes me, then I figure out events for an Ending, then events for a Beginning, and then, last but not least, the highlights and significant action(s) or event(s) leading up to and including the Midpoint. The same after that, too, leading to the climax. Without a sea change somewhere in the middle, a movie would become either boring or predictable, or both.

    Edit to add: ”It has more to do with how the sequences lay out and not an arbitrary rule or guideline.” Yes, it's only a ”Midpoint” after-the-fact and only because that's where ”the change” naturally occurs, as much as a midpoint of a 300-page novel occurs around page 150.
    Last edited by Clint Hill; 06-05-2020, 12:17 PM.
    “Nothing is what rocks dream about” ― Aristotle

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Midpoint

      Originally posted by JeffLowell View Post
      When I look at the examples given here or in books like Save the Cat, the midpoint is just the plot twist that happens in the middle of the movie. I can pick five or six moments out of most movies that you'd call the midpoint if they happened on page 60.
      Yeah, it's similar to taking something temporal and finite (a movie) then labeling the first part or parts the beginning, the last part or parts the ending, and then unsurprisingly everything else is the middle. Somewhat accurate chronological labels but that's about it.

      The one genre I have seen that sometimes has something like a midpoint is the horror genre where the story changes from "what the hell is that?" to "Let's kill it or run away from it." Although I think that has more to do with how the sequences lay out and not an arbitrary rule or guideline. Beyond that I'm with Jeff.
      Just my 2 cents, your mileage may vary.

      -Steve Trautmann
      3rd & Fairfax: The WGAW Podcast

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Midpoint

        Originally posted by JeffLowell View Post

        midpoints? ... I think they're bullshit.

        ... the midpoint is just the plot twist that happens in the middle of the movie. I can pick five or six moments out of most movies that you'd call the midpoint if they happened on page 60.

        So people who deconstruct movies check the running length, divide it by two, find the plot twist that occurs there, and say "See! You can't make a movie without constructing a midpoint!"
        I don't get Jeff's and KitchonaSteve's position on the Midpoint element. I don't know if it's because of a bias that they have against Syd Fields' paradigm, or if it's just I don't understand their position correctly.

        "people who deconstruct movies check the running length, divide it by two, find the plot twist that occurs there, and say 'See! You can't make a movie without constructing a midpoint!'-

        I don't know if your point to Bono is that it's just an arbitrary plot twist, or movies can be constructed without a midpoint.

        From Bono's opinion on the midpoint, I got the impression that he was insisting a screenplay MUST include a midpoint, therefore, the reason for my post giving the opinion that, no, it's not a required rule to include a midpoint.

        "midpoints? ... I think they're bullshit.-

        I'm not following. You've mentioned before that you think of midpoints when writing your screenplays. Other professional writers mentioned they think of midpoints.

        "the midpoint is just the plot twist that happens in the middle of the movie. I can pick five or six moments out of most movies that you'd call the midpoint if they happened on page 60.-

        Let me pull this quote out: "that you'd call the midpoint-

        Are you objecting to the terminology and the structural stature (major turning point) of calling this plot point a "midpoint- and you prefer to call it just an ordinary "plot twist.- I'm not following.

        In the past, I broke down a full blown action script with plenty of whammo's (producer Silver reference) and it included a midpoint, a major turning point. No other plot point like this before it or after it.

        The film is the 2018 TOMB RAIDER. The film is 118 minutes long. The midpoint would occur somewhere in the area of the 59 minute mark.

        Let's take a look at the story from minutes 56 to 65. Before minute 56, Lara Croft escapes the bad guy's camp and guards chase after her.

        You want to say this is the midpoint/plot twist? I don't agree. Lara has been chasing and being chased by bad guys throughout the story.

        Minutes 56 to 58: Lara treks through the forest.

        Minutes 58 to 59: A TRACKER leaps out (surprise) and clutches her around the neck. She fights and drowns him.

        Minutes 60 to 65: Lara runs through the forest. Spots her father climbing a cliff to his hideout and follows.

        This is the midpoint, or if you prefer to call it a plot twist, fine. It's a major turning point and not an ordinary plot point because her father was long to believed dead.

        So, this not only shifts the story in a fresh different direction, it added an emotional element: the reunion of father and daughter.

        Now, some will say I picked a film to fit, to express my point about the midpoint. My point is what I said in post #36 about the value of structuring a story with a midpoint in mind, but if the story you want to tell doesn't work or requires a midpoint/plot twist halfway through your story, then fine.

        Whatever works.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Midpoint

          I can't speak for Jeff, he obviously has a process that works well for him. But the gist I get from watching videos of writers talking about how they approach the craft is that the movie is full of beats - moments - moments that speak to the inner nature of characters, moments of great surprise and reveal. To find the one in the direct middle of the film and label it is neither here nor there to these writers I hear speaking about how the craft makes sense to them. A writer knows that a story must have a forward progression with a beginning, middle, and end. I think that's all they take with them from the 3 Act structure. All the labels, explanations, and definitions do not mean anything to them.

          They know they need 45 - 60 strong beats to tell this story. To pick one out at the middle and say let's throw this label on it is not important to them.

          But we always find big moments right in the middle, right? So no matter what they say, most stories involve a big story moment somewhere in the middle, right? That's a product of forward progression and the economies of screenwriting. Very white page friendly format, limited length. Stuff has to move very fast.

          It is important I think to get a sense of what the middle of the story looks like, get a picture of it. Where's your hero at? What's on his table in the middle? What's he dealing with? I think you need a sense of all three components beginning, middle, and end before you start outlining. Not exact moments but just a sense of where the story is.

          Again, I think the 3 act structure is a great place to start for any writer and a great place to revisit when blocked, confused, dejected, what have you. At some point you shed all that and can just do it through hard work and craftsmanship.

          If anybody likes Sorkin he has a lot of videos on youtube where he talks about his process and how he looks at story. He said you can't write an effective scene without the intent and the obstacle. When he is struggling in a scene and it's coming out like "ketchup out of a bottle" (which I thought was a great analogy - we've all been there) it means that he doesn't have his intent and obstacle nailed down yet and the scene needs more thought. He approaches every scene that way.

          There's no doubt that somewhere in the middle of the story is a good place to raise the temperature of the story, I think all the greats think the same thing. The second half of ACT 2 can't mirror the first half. Just can't. You'll lose the reader. The reader will only stay engaged if the story is going somewhere scene after scene after scene. The fact that there is a big moment in the middle is not because that's what structure says to do, it's there because of the original conflict that was introduced at the end of ACT 1 must at some point escalate, rise in tension, morph into something dreadful and you usually need a scene to cement this home.

          But like I said, if you turn your story ten pages before the middle and ten pages after it no one is gonna put the story down because at the dead smack middle you're missing a big event.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Midpoint

            For all these terms/formulas -- keep in mind they are tools to help you build your house. Whatever works. If it's a great house -- someone will buy it. If it's a house that needs work -- not so much -- unless they see potential in it like all those flipping houses HGTV shows.

            But after your write it, you turn it in, it's doubtful you will ever talk about how made the food -- just whether the food was tasty. You don't go to chef -- give me the list of all your ingredients and show me how you did this dish -- you say "man that is the best chicken dish I ever had."

            So all these midpoints talks (yes I know I'm OP) and formula stuff is for books. Or film classes. Or screenwriting nerds on forums. It's for screenwriters not for everyone. The rest of Hollywood (not all i know) doesn't care about this. They only care about the pages and story in front of them.

            How many great books of literature did we all read in high school and analyze them to death -- when the author didn't mean any of the things we see it their work to be the message? I recall reading one book that had a page beforehand that said "I just wrote this. Don't look for my intention in it. Just enjoy it." Something like that.

            In other words -- we talk about how to build a house and what tools to use -- but that's because that's what we do. We won't have to fill out of a form when showing our specs of all our bullet points. Or act breaks. Our midpoints. Our dark knight of the soul. They only care if it's good and they like it.

            I think some people miss that point.

            That 99% of Star Wars fans love the movie and they don't think about the beats like we do. They feel the beats and that's why they love the movie.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Midpoint

              Originally posted by JeffLowell View Post
              Alright, Bono, you want a controversial opinion on midpoints? I've been thinking about them, and I think they're bullshit.

              When I look at the examples given here or in books like Save the Cat, the midpoint is just the plot twist that happens in the middle of the movie. I can pick five or six moments out of most movies that you'd call the midpoint if they happened on page 60.

              So people who deconstruct movies check the running length, divide it by two, find the plot twist that occurs there, and say "See! You can't make a movie without constructing a midpoint!"
              I agree with this.

              Consultants derive their paradigms and apply structure from studying stories that already exist. Including Joseph Campbell. As I recall Lucas admitted studying and applying Campbell's work to Star Wars.

              It wasn't because Lucas didn't know how to tell a story, it's that he wanted to tell the best story he could. There are clear elements of The Hero's Journey in Star Wars. Campbell first studied stories, and mythology, that already existed and found elements that are both familiar and similiar and gave them labels.

              Sometimes you realize you're missing a beat. Something feels off. Looking at the "Hero's Journey" to evaluate whether you might need, for example, "a refusal of the call," can result in a better story told. A more realistic feeling story. It doesn't matter if you know it intuitively or you refer to a paradigm.

              Paradigms are tools; a chisel instead of a hammer alone.

              Structuralists study, deconstruct and organize patterns so they can be explained in a way that is easily digested and understood. They are essentially the same patterns.

              Kids know story structure. Something happens, then something else happens, and ohmygod it gets worse, then they take action and resolve the situation.

              Each time a child tells the same story, it evolves. They (and we) make minor adjustments to get a better reaction from our audience. Some adjustments/embellishments work better than others, and some fall short. That's how a child learns to tell a better story. Children REWRITE their own story without any instruction.

              That is what's at the core of rewriting. Making the story the best it can be. Referring to a structure paradigm might work for one writer and not for another. It doesn't matter. Do what works for you.

              Story structure is within us all, I believe that. I think writer's insecurities and arrogance get in their own way. We mistakenly believe because it looks easy, that it is.

              Sometimes we are blinded by our own ambition to succeed. It is only when we realize we have a lot to learn, that we actual do.
              "Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy b/c you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say." -- Edward Snowden

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Midpoint

                I'd like to point out that Joseph Campbell's "The Hero with a Thousand Faces," published in 1949, provides far more of use to screenwriters than a Hero's Journey beat sheet.

                Campbell provided a comparative analysis of myths dating back centuries and, having found similarities in these ancient narratives, he developed his Hero's Journey monomyth -- which he describes as "stages" in the journey. And he also points out that not every story contains each and every stage.

                What I took away from Campbell's book was that (1) storytelling is imprinted on human DNA and (2) we tell stories because humans have a psychological need to find meaning in the "chaos" that disrupts our lives and impose our own sense of order to ultimately conquer chaos.

                For me, "psychological" is the operative word. In the preface to Campbell's book, he quotes Sigmund Freud in the first paragraph. (Campbell quotes Freud in many chapters throughout the book.)

                In his second paragraph, Campbell states (boldface mine):

                "It is the purpose of the present book to uncover the truths disguised for us under the figures of religion and mythology by bringing together a multitude of not-too-different examples and letting the ancient meaning become apparent of itself."

                In my opinion, the main take away for screenwriters from Campbell's book is that the most compelling scripts contain powerful truths disguised in a story that provides "meaning" to fulfill a human psychological need.
                Advice from writer, Kelly Sue DeConnick. "Try this: if you can replace your female character with a sexy lamp and the story still basically works, maybe you need another draft.-

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Midpoint

                  I use it simply to divide Act 2 into two parts. This helps me to make 2nd act more focused, and less meandering. Of course, every page in the script should be focused, and not meandering.

                  I think it's useful for inexperienced writers, if they still struggle with story structure. Otherwise, I don't see why it would be needed, except if you like it as a tool. I like it, so I use it.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Midpoint

                    I've just recently had a personal experience with the Midpoint that caused a story problem.

                    I had sent my action adventure out to two professional writers for feedback. In my story, at the Inciting Incident my story splits with there being two protagonists with two storylines, each having their own midpoint.

                    A couple of weeks ago, I had received their analysis.

                    One pro reviewer's note mentioned how the first half of Caleb's (male protagonist) story and the subplot of a teen secondary character's love life with a teen girl villager was boring.

                    I figured out how this happened and fixed it.

                    The midpoint for my male protagonist happens where he receives information where he takes action and his storyline shifts, changing direction. Until this midpoint happens, he was just hanging out doing his normal routine. A subplot with the secondary character was going on.

                    I was blind because my focus was serving the midpoint that I had structured instead of serving the story. (Point: don't do this.)

                    I've rewritten the story where he takes action immediately to find Shelby, his wife, the other protagonist, and I cut the scenes with the secondary character's love goal to just a couple of mentions that get paid off toward the end of act 3.

                    I hope the rewrite works. Implementing the notes from these two pro writers increased my page count from 123 pages to 129, which is an issue (a story having a page count over 110 pages) that the "TRIM DOWN THAT SPEC" thread is discussing.

                    I don't have a problem with a 129 page script as long as it works.

                    Shortly, I may post a link to the script in the ANNOUCMENT forum where I can get members' eyes on it and you can inform me, in your opinion, if the rewrite and the page count works.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Midpoint

                      There's two types of multi protag stories. There's the buddy film where two guys have the same goal like Dumb and Dumber and then you have the pulp fictions of the world where the story is very "ensamble" with its characters and each character has their own little thing going on that at times crosses paths with another characters special little thing they have going on.

                      The former can fit the classical structure techniques. The ladder needs lots of creativity and can't be cookie-cut. Each character will have a middle to their story so how can one moment in the structure be the "middle"? The middle refers to the progression of story not page numbers. You can be on page sixty and still be setting things up, I guess technically speaking you are somewhere in the middle of the script but creatively speaking you are still in the beginning.

                      The theoretical observation was made long ago that the second half of ACT 2 needs to be intensified greatly. Can't repeat the types of battles the hero faces from the first part of ACT 2 so there is an event that is usually some kind of pay-off to something that was being set-up or it is the introduction of a "game changer" either a character or a raising of the stakes or whatever you can think of - can be anything. McKey says that the simple action of "turning a door knob" can climax an entire movie - IF - you have written the proper set-up. Action movies always raise the stakes somewhere in the middle - lots of them take this cheap way out.

                      The midpoint scene is not about that sole event - it's about understanding what the middle of this hero's journey looks like for your character. Have you come up with a unique journey that really intensifies somewhere in the middle.

                      Cause remember, for the most part, the climax of ACT 2 is the personal hell for the hero. In his story we get glimpses of what life will be like if he wins and certainly a glimpse of what it looks like if he loses. End of ACT 2 is where "hell" takes place because you want your hero to go from the basement(lower than they ever been) to the peak of the mountain all with their last ditch effort to win which happens in Act 3.

                      The difference between Act 2a and Act 2b is that the hero wins in Act 2a. It's not uncommon for a hero to have successes out of the gate. Clues to the murder or the perfect start of a romance or making lots of money in a new endeavor. Act 2b they stop winning and they start losing, real bad.

                      A good writer will take things to a "10" in both directions both good and bad for the hero. Most amateur stuff I read maybe goes to a "3 or 4" in either direction. Meaning sh!t never gets that good or that bad for them. I'm just hanging around a 3 or 4 the whole time.

                      Then you can argue where does talent and ability take over from the knowledge. Anybody with knowledge can teach. Those with know-how do. You can know all day and be conscious of the fact that you must show life at a "10" on the good and bad scale or there is no story but maybe most just can't do it. It's quite possible.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Midpoint

                        Originally posted by JoeNYC View Post
                        I've just recently had a personal experience with the Midpoint that caused a story problem.

                        I had sent my action adventure out to two professional writers for feedback. In my story, at the Inciting Incident my story splits with there being two protagonists with two storylines, each having their own midpoint.

                        A couple of weeks ago, I had received their analysis.

                        One pro reviewer's note mentioned how the first half of Caleb's (male protagonist) story and the subplot of a teen secondary character's love life with a teen girl villager was boring.

                        I figured out how this happened and fixed it.

                        The midpoint for my male protagonist happens where he receives information where he takes action and his storyline shifts, changing direction. Until this midpoint happens, he was just hanging out doing his normal routine. A subplot with the secondary character was going on.

                        I was blind because my focus was serving the midpoint that I had structured instead of serving the story. (Point: don't do this.)

                        I've rewritten the story where he takes action immediately to find Shelby, his wife, the other protagonist, and I cut the scenes with the secondary character's love goal to just a couple of mentions that get paid off toward the end of act 3.

                        I hope the rewrite works. Implementing the notes from these two pro writers increased my page count from 123 pages to 129, which is an issue (a story having a page count over 110 pages) that the "TRIM DOWN THAT SPEC" thread is discussing.

                        I don't have a problem with a 129 page script as long as it works.

                        Shortly, I may post a link to the script in the ANNOUCMENT forum where I can get members' eyes on it and you can inform me, in your opinion, if the rewrite and the page count works.
                        Love to see you post pages, so people can help. I would like to point out something -- unrelated to his thread -- and that is that some of the best notes I've gotten are from up and coming writers. Don't have to pay for notes to get great notes. And even if you meant you sent it to working pro writers for free -- some of my pro friends are great at giving overall advice -- but I"m not getting the same notes I get from my buddies still struggling to make it up the hill. It's because we are in the fight. They already won the fight. So it's hard to go back. Also pro writers are much busier than me.

                        I'm just saying some people on DD only use pro readers and just because they offer a service doesn't mean they do it better than someone on this board. I hope they do. But don't put more weight on someone's take based on who they are. I'm not kidding. My friend who is not a writer gave the best notes on my pilot. He's smart and he reads -- so just be open and skeptical of all notes.

                        My rule is if 3 people give same note -- there is some issue there.

                        And yes -- notes increase pages often -- it's crazy. A great note is CUT THIS AND THIS AND THIS -- that is what makes me happy. It's easier to say "add this" then "take this away and make the movie better." Those are the best notes. Because they are helping you reach your goal and specific advice vs general advice.

                        For instance -- that is boring subplot. Fair note from me to you. But if I was being paid to read it -- I'd better give some ways to fix that or why am I being paid to read this and give notes?

                        2 leads with separate Midpoints -- that's tough. I'm trying to think of an example of that in a movie we all know...

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Re: Midpoint

                          The midpoint to Butch’s story in Pulp Fiction is when he decides to risk getting caught by Marcellus Wallace and go back for his Dad’s watch. The midpoint for Vinny Vega is when he almost kills the boss’ girlfriend.

                          Every story has a middle and a midpoint. If your screenplay has one story that holds all the weight then you’ll have one middle, if your screenplay has four stories that split the weight of the storytelling than you’ll have four middles.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Midpoint

                            I would never use Pulp Fiction as a model to explain structure -- as it has a very unique one. But I hear you.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Re: Midpoint

                              That's the point. The 3 Act structure is a model for single protag or a group but all have the same goal. A singular story. But when you have 3 - 5 characters who all hold the same weight you need to be creative in the way you tell each story and have the intersect. Crash is another example.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Midpoint

                                Originally posted by Bono View Post
                                I would never use Pulp Fiction as a model to explain structure -- as it has a very unique one. But I hear you.
                                If you want to check out structure on ensemble films I'd suggest:
                                Crash
                                Babel
                                Syriana
                                Avengers
                                Ocean's Eleven
                                Lord of the Rings

                                as well as many others.

                                Pulp Fiction, if my memory is correct, was written linearly at first and then during the editing process it was rearranged into a non-linear story. It still has structure, even though it is non-linear.
                                "Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy b/c you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say." -- Edward Snowden

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X