Protag/Antag question

Collapse

Announcement

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

  • #61
    down to the wire

    Catrin,

    Just out of curiosty... have you written screenplays? And have they sold? Don't care about titles, checks or box office receipts, I'd just like to know if you put into practice your anti-theory theory and if it worked for you. If so, good on ya lad.


    PS.

    Are you even slightly aware of how Casablanca got written? (Who is the antagonist there, just by the way?)
    Nazis, dewd, always the Nazis.

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: >human stories

      I think part of the confusion over who is the "real" protagonist in "Shawshank Redemption" is that it's actually a story within a story - there is Red's story which includes the telling of Andy's story as a part of what happened to him (Red) while he was at the prison.

      Andy is definitely the protagonist of Red's story (with Red being the "author" of this story). But Red's telling of life at the prison is the "outer" story or the general story of the movie the audience is watching (the screenplay).

      A tricky piece of storycraft and done to perfection with this movie.

      Red's story is the movie that we, the audience, see and hear as the movie called, "Shawshank Redemption."

      A part of Red's story is his telling of yet another story.

      Make sense? http://www.handykult.de/plaudersmilies.de/nut.gif

      Comment


      • #63
        Re: >human stories

        It makes sense, but it is just not the case.

        Red is the narrator. Period. He's not telling a story about life at prison. He's telling Andy's story at Shawshank prison. If Red was telling his own story about life at prison, the film "Shawshank Redemption" would have started with Red's crime and subsequent incarceration. Not with Andy's incarceration. There would have been absolutely no need to show the circumstances surrounding Andy's incarceration if the story were about Red.

        The bottom line is, you could take Red's VO narration and chuck it into cinematic oblivion, and the story would still work. Why? Because what you see in the film is Andy's story.

        If you took Andy's actions out of the picture, you would have absolutely nothing. Why? Because Andy's actions drive the story.

        Andy's story is the meat, potatoes, vegetable side, and the bread you use to mop up the gravy. Red's narration is just the parsley on the side of the plate.

        This argument is one great reason why screenwriters should try to avoid using VO.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: >human stories

          it's really not.
          It is if you're writing a script using VO and it is causing you to confuse question who the protagonist is.

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: >human stories

            shawshank redemption is an example of voice over that works. because a bunch of people on a message board are arguing about who the protagonist is, is not a reason to not use voice over.

            and if, while writing, you don't know whose story you're telling, that's hardly the fault of any of the techniques you happen to be utilizing at the time. it's your fault.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re: >human stories

              This argument is one great reason why screenwriters should try to avoid using VO.
              it's really not.

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: >human stories

                Very true, Bligh. All very true. I retract that statement.

                I'll leave it on my post, though, so people won't be confused as to what we're talking about.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Re: >human stories

                  Well, I'll watch the SR again sometime. I may change my mind, who knows. I'm not above admiting I was wrong.

                  Pipewriter:
                  Christopher Vogler disagrees with you. The protagonist is the character who learns the most.
                  Who's he?

                  I would disagree with this statement. Protagonists do not have to have an arc. Protagonists don't have to learn anything.

                  Who learned more during their brief encounter, John McClane or Hans? If Hans was to rob another skyscrapper tomorrow, and John was to suddenly find himself defending one tomorrow, who would change their tactics more?

                  Now, who were you cheering for?

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Re: human stories

                    :rolleyes

                    Vogler has been a Development Executive, Story Analyst, and Consultant for the studios for fifteen years. He wrote the widely used book "THE WRITER'S JOURNEY" based in content on Joseph Campbell's work THE HERO WITH A THOUSAND FACES. If for no other reason to just enjoy it, you should give it a read.

                    McClean learned to love his wife properly, Hans learned nothing.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Re: human stories

                      Volger? I don't even know her!

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Re: human stories

                        If Red was telling his own story about life at prison, the film "Shawshank Redemption" would have started with Red's crime and subsequent incarceration. Not with Andy's incarceration.
                        If we can forget about this particular movie for just a moment but keep the "dramatic device" employed and use it to set up a wholly different story, you could get something like the following...

                        We see onscreen a group of Boy Scouts lost in the woods without their Leader and we hear a V.O. narration of a FATHER character telling some horrid outcome for these boys. We may see a mysterious shadow fall over them as the monster is about to pounce.

                        Then we cut to "reality" and a Father is telling a spooky bedtime story to his SON who lays under the covers.

                        As father tucks the kid in, stands up and exits the room, we may hear more V.O. of the father saying something like, "I always knew my boy had too much adventure in his soul for his own good..."

                        And the V.O. may lead us into the next scene and the Father rushing into the School Nurse office where we learn the boy has gotten himself injured in another one of his reckless behaviors.

                        The protagonist is a worried father trying to bring his son up to be a man and the main Boy Scout in the bedtime stories is just like his little boy - the stories are meant to teach a lesson.

                        Anyway, the protagonist of the screenplay really is the father and not the "protagonist" of the ongoing story he tells throughout the screenplay.

                        It's a movie-within-a-movie or story-in-a-story dramatic device.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Re: human stories

                          I dont know if this thread is about voiceover, protagonists, or structure, but I just wanted to say that although I'm sure a professional reader could read one of my screenplays and tell me what the inciting incident was, or the secondary conflict, or the act two bridge or whatever, I myself, cannot.

                          That doesn't mean I reject the rules, it's just that they don't really do anything for me.

                          The story either works or it doesn't. It's either boring or it's not.


                          Edited to add: a few posts here have drawn analogies between writing and music, and to some extent, art is art.

                          I have a few friends who are succesful professional musicians, and in both cases it was obvious that this was going to be their career (if they wanted it to be) by the time they were 10 years old.

                          They both went to prestigious music schools instead of college, and learned theory, but have admitted that the networking and collaboration were the bigger benefit.

                          I'm still not sold on the idea of someone being born a writer, though, so it's kind of apples and oranges.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Re: human stories

                            I think it's great fun and actually stimulating to the gray cells to take a subject and poke and prod it from all points of view.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Re: human stories

                              Vogler has been a Development Executive, Story Analyst, and Consultant for the studios for fifteen years. He wrote the widely used book "THE WRITER'S JOURNEY" based in content on Joseph Campbell's work THE HERO WITH A THOUSAND FACES. If for no other reason to just enjoy it, you should give it a read.

                              McClean learned to love his wife properly, Hans learned nothing.

                              Fairtrax, keep writing!

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Re: human stories

                                Pipewriter:
                                Your last post was the reason why I have been a lurker here at done deal for longer than I have been a participator. Often times posters tend to stray off the topic and attack the participant, and it often leads to ugly time consuming arguments about nothing which I will not participate in.

                                Your commentary in this thread concerning protagonists and antagonists has caused the direction of the discussion to turn from the topic, to the participant. Instead of handling the fact that you do not know who Christopher Vogler is with maturity and research, you chose to act like he knows nothing because you haven't heard of him. The reason that your follow up to my explanation of Vogler is directed toward my experience as a writer and not the topic, is because you found yourself in the situation of having no information to rebut with, so you choose to attack my character. I purposely have avoided these long winded and tempting threads because posters like you are incapable of detaching your emotions from your commentary.

                                In the future please try to remember that my background in writing, which is sufficient for participation in this topic, is not the topic of the thread. Your attempts to trivialize my knowledge are neither warranted nor valuable to the thread.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X