Tweet
Just read it for the second time- and I can't help but declare it my favorite script as of yet. I know it goes against a lot of what you're not "supposed" to do- yet I am still in absolute adoration with it. Just saying. :rollin Some of the best scripts don't listen to these silly regulations we make up for ourselves.
-
-
But we have to abide by the silly regulations to get in the door -- THEN you can do away with them :-) -
travis bickle was inspiration for one of my characters. i'm still having trouble with expressing his character arc. did he have one? or did it come almost full circle?Comment
-
-
Travis Bickle doesn't arc in the classical sense. The story is circular. He is as crazy at the end as he is at start. So says Paul Schrader. It is indicated in the story that Travis doesn't change. He gives Betsy a ride home at the end, for free, seemingly indicating that he has completed his arc to growth. But that ride is followed by his crazy/paranoid glare into the rearview mirror at her. That look, accompanied by jagged violin strains, indicates that Travis is really still as nuts as when he started the story.
TAXI DRIVER explores an already deranged and alienated man's descent into extreme violence. There is something in his backstory that led him to his insomnia and isolation. (Travis is a Viet Nam era veteran. He has scars on his back that are visible when he does push-ups.) He is already nuts when the movie starts...illustrated by his odd comments during his hiring as a cab driver. The climax of blood at the end is not growth or a character arc, it is a release or explosion of all the frustration that precedes it.
The scariest and saddest thing about Travis Bickle, as indicated by his crazy look at Betsy, is that there is a fair probability that he will eventually do it all over again.Comment
-
yeah, i'm waiting for the sequelThe scariest and saddest thing about Travis Bickle, as indicated by his crazy look at Betsy, is that there is a fair probability that he will eventually do it all over again.
Comment
-
I guess this myth will always be with us -- but it's incorrect.But we have to abide by the silly regulations to get in the door -- THEN you can do away with them :-)
First off, there are no screenwriting "regulations." Second, the number of spec scripts that have sold or gotten writers work despite breaking multiple supposed "rules" proves you don't have to adhere to them in order to get in the door.
The "regulations" don't matter. Nobody ever sold a bad script because he followed all of the "rules," and nobody ever failed to sell a great script just because he broke some of the "rules."
People in Hollywood aren't looking for scripts that are written and formatted in 100 percent accordance with Dave Trottier's Screenwriter's Bible or the tenets held sacred at any online screenwriting forums. They're looking for great stories, great characters, great dialogue, and a great read.
When you see a movie on film, you have no idea if the writer used "we see." All you know is whether or not the movie's entertaining you. And that's all the people who make movies care about, regardless of whether you're Charlie Kaufman or a complete unknown.Comment
-
Also, do you think Charlie Kaufman would have ever gotten his foot in the door if he followed all the rules of making a nice, marketable script that adheres to everything we're "supposed to" adhere to? And what about all those "Shane Blackisms"? It's not like he started writing with his own style AFTER the fact.
Some nice posts here. :hatComment
-
To me, it seemed as if he started out as a guy who wanted to see "the rain wash the scum off the streets" or something to that extent, and he gradually took matters into his own hands.i'm still having trouble with expressing his character arc. did he have one? or did it come almost full circle?Comment
Comment