Tuesday, March 28, 2006

Journey, Setting, and Tone

The last one of my little commercial ideas mini-series articles is here!

Basically, all great commercial films take us on a journey through a specific "world". To unclarify things -- in Campbell Herospeak this is the "external goal" of the film. A few examples: INDEPENDENCE DAY explores the world of an Earth under siege by genocidal aliens, THE MATRIX explores the world of human subjugation by machines, LORD OF THE RINGS explores the world of Middle Earth in the face of Sauron. My observation (after having read about 10,000 scripts (I kid you not)), is that screenplays that fail to make the next round in evaluation fail because they don't clearly identify exactly what the journey is and what kind of world we are exploring. Why are we here? Why should we care? And exactly what is this film about anyway?

I had a difficult time writing this post because I had to unpack a few things in my brain that are part of the industry's jargon. In Hollywood filmmaking, we talk about "setting" meaning, the world, its tone, and any other conceptual things about the world that will let us know what type of journey we are about to undertake. Truly commercial screenplays clue the reader and audience in early to the types of things that can happen in this world. The "promise" of the screenplay's setting (the rules, regulations, and norms) must be set up in the first minutes (pages) of the film, or the reader/audience starts to wonder why they are on this journey. And the minute that happens, you've already lost. Your script will be skipped through, flipped around (I know readers who skip to page 30, page 60 page 90 and the end, then write up their coverage) and generally mistreated.

A great example of setting is 13 DAYS by DAVID SELF. This screenplay is readily available on the internet and should be read if you are a die-hard drama writer. The film itself suffered from information overload, but was probably one of the most commercial ways to bring a story like this to the screen. The opening is essentially two parallel ribbons -- one details a spy plane capturing those infamous shots of the missile silos, the second follows a man at home with his kids, only this guy's not ordinary, he's got two phones in the kitchen, one black and one red, and breakfast table conversation includes a game of Name-That-Diplomat. From the beginning of the film, we know we are going to be treated to intrigue, and that our eyes and ears are going to be domestic, sympathetic, and very very politically plugged in. It also does a neat job of foreshadowing exactly what is at stake should our heroes fail to resolve the problem -- the end of those beautiful little babies we get to love in the opening.

Another great drama example is LA CONFIDENTIAL. It starts off establishing the tone of the film with a 50's style series of montage images and newspaper headlines, then immediately plunges into a little editorial commentary:

Palm trees in silhouette against a cherry sky. City lights twinkle. Los Angeles. A place where anything is possible. A place where dreams come true. As the sky darkens, triple-kleig lights begin to sweep back and forth.
That line "A place where dreams come true" defines as much as anything else, what type of journey we are going on, and what the stakes are in that journey -- the life and death of our dreams. Now don't get all crazy and prose-write your way through the script. Keep it down to a line or two across a sequence. These should rightfully be saved for establishing things at the top of act breaks and during major turning points in the script, when this writer's conceit won't be as noticeable, because, hopefully, your characters and story will have earned some buy-in by your audience.

Science fiction and adventure scripts have a very rigid 7 or 9 act structure which builds in the description of the setting and the journey. It's called the "teaser" or "inciting incident". In romantic comedies, dramas and other subgenres, this part of the screenplay is typically given over to a character introduction which is meant to do the same thing, but which frequently trips up inexperienced writers.

A character's introduction must establish setting and journey not just the character's idiosyncrasies. If your leading lady is a klutz who always puts her foot in her mouth and she's going to fall for Mr. Suave, please don't show her tripping on her own shoe laces to land at his feet. This doesn't give us much to go on in terms of the world we are going to be in, nor does it establish the rules for the other characters in the script.

Another way that films "cheat" in doing this is through casting established actors. Movie stars bring with them their own "baggage" as far as establishing setting and journey. We know that if we see Jim Carrey, the film will be funny, if we see Reese Witherspoon we'll be treated to a character-work deeply rooted in motivation (as opposed to say, Jessica Biels or Chad Michael Murray whose respective acting appeal is rooted in hotness), if it's Tom Cruise, we'll see a hero working through his own arrogance and foibles to save the day. These actors have done a good job in defining what their audiences are looking for in their work, and finding roles that deliver that, when they stray from the formula, actors (and movies) are generally punished by low audience turnout. This is a whole post in and of itself, so I'll leave that one for now.

To wrap up what's turned into The World's Longest Post, the journey = the setting = $$$$. There are a lot of things to master in filmmaking. This is just a bit of technique. Think of it as the tempo in a bit of music.

Monday, March 27, 2006

Movies, movies, movies

Watching MILLION DOLLAR BABY right now, and I'm thinking to myself -- why can't more big budget action/adventure films have interesting dramas at their heart? It's sad really. When you watch a film like THE TERMINATOR, as cheesy as the music and effects look now, at the center of the story is a love story. It's not as developed as the one in THE NOTEBOOK, but it's far more developed than the one I just saw in V FOR VENDETTA this weekend. It's a hard balance, some filmmakers actually count out the number of scenes devoted to each storyline (the A plot and the B romance subplot), Hitchcock is a great one to study for that, others rely on intuitive or arcane story theories (I heard from a friend that the folks at Bruckheimer have a 17-beat outline, if anyone has it email it to me, 'kay?). Anyway, my 2 cents for the day. Back to the grindstone.

Tuesday, March 21, 2006

I'm baaaaack!

And I will be posting the final in the commercial ideas mini-series that I'm writing. I had an incredibly productive retreat with a wonderfu group of women writers and I'm ready to kick butt and take names -- bring it on Hollywood!

If there are any questions floating out there feel free to email them to me, or post them to comments.

Wednesday, March 08, 2006

Vacation....

Just thought I'd post a little to let you all know why I'm MIA. I'm on vacation. Hah! For the next 10 days I will be writing. A few proposals, a treatment or two, a biz plan and my fiction book. I've already banged out a blog entry (five pages that needs to be 8 paragraphs) for a great political blog I'm guest-posting on (hopefully), and now I'm going to start on my other business stuff so I can get to the nitty-gritty fruity creative stuff over the weekend.

I build frequent writing "retreats" into my schedule. As a writer/producer it's tough for me to do both at the same time and I prefer to really focus when possible. Last year I did the whole 4-6 hours writing in the morning and then business all afternoon thing, but found that it didn't leave me enough time to really plan a writing project from start to finish. Subsequently I went off half-cocked on a bunch of crap I'm now having to re-structure. And I give my writers a hard-time for doing exactly that, so shame on me! Part of the reason I started the blog was so that I could learn how to follow my own (brilliant) advice. Lucky you, huh? :-) Anyway, while I dodge mosquitoes and sunburn (And wouldn't you like to know where I am?? ;-) Not telling. ) I'll be thinking of my next post in the mini-series on commercial ideas: A Journey Worth (Under)Taking. All about how to pick a good "world" for your character's emotional journey and some ideas on how to get the research done.

After that I'm going to circle back around to demographics, and I may even have a mini-interview or two on here if I can get my sh*t together and write up the questions. As always, if there are questions or comments you'd like to share have at it.

Wednesday, March 01, 2006

I Need A Hero (Updated)

Penultimate Post on Commercial Films....

Every movie needs a hero. Not just any hero, but someone we can root for, even if we hate him or her. People often mistake "sympathetic" for likable. Sympathy is rightfully defined by the American Heritage Dictionary as:

1a. A relationship or an affinity between people or things in which whatever affects one correspondingly affects the other. b. Mutual understanding or affection arising from this relationship or affinity. 2a. The act or power of sharing the feelings of another. b. A feeling or an expression of pity or sorrow for the distress of another; compassion or commiseration. Often used in the plural. See synonyms at pity. 3. Harmonious agreement; accord: He is in sympathy with their beliefs. 4. A feeling of loyalty; allegiance. Often used in the plural: His sympathies lie with his family.
Basically, you are trying to describe a person in whom the audience can believe, follow, and invest. The definition above gives a good little road map for your story's progression.

One of my favorite films, LA FEMME NIKITA, has a deeply flawed heroine. Nikita is a drugged out punk rocker who kills with no compunction at the open of the film. She goes to court where she literally spits in the eye of authority and is sentenced to death. All this by the end of the first 15 minutes, (the "inciting incident" or act 1 of a 5 or 7-act structure, or the end of the first half of Act 1 if you are following a 3-Act structure). From here, the first major twist comes along -- Nikita is made an offer to work for an ultra secretive spy agency or die. Given this choice, she picks the lesser of two evils, at least that's what she thinks at first.

As training progresses, Nikita refuses to join in all the litte reindeer games painting graffitti on the walls of her dorm room, not participating in the make up and hair sessions, ultimately leading Bob (played by Tcheky Karyo) to remind her that her death sentence has already been issued and can be carried out with impunity. Freshly motivated, Nikita decides to go along with the program and it is this choice (which happens around the minute 40 mark, neatly beginning Act 3 of a 5 or 7-act or Act 2 0f a 3-Act) which sends Nikita's sympathy factor skyrocketing. Before this we're invested because the outlandish things that are happening to her have a strong appeal, but each minute that ticks by after Nikita's decision to really try, makes us care for her more and more as we see her insecurity in her womanhood. By the time of her "graduation dinner" with Bob at a fancy restaurant, we are rooting for her because of the emotional obstacles she's overcome, we've been impressed by her native talent and intelligence in learning the assassin's skill set and we share in her quiet pride as she dresses, flawlessy does her makeup and hair and heads out.

Then Bang! All this sympathy which Besson has been careful to build up is immediately put to work. If you haven't seen it, it's worth watching just for the restaurant sequence -- an action turn that satisfies as much for it's gratuitous stunts and unlikeliness as it does for the narrative push that it gives to Nikita's character and the development of her character's central dilemma.

If I can squeeze it out I'll round out the series with one more piece tomorrow then answer a couple of questions that I received through one of my development consultations. A writer hired me to help shape up a piece he's finishing and we had a long discussion about the changes he'd have to make to his story to make it more "commercial".

AND my potential Backer called my friend yesterday to say how excited the company was about my pitch! Still no checks, but the 2nd in command wants to see my biz plan and talk turkey. Can't wait. Now I just have to get my CPA to work on contingency.... :-)

UPDATE:

Chris Soth points out in the comments section the prejudicial nature of the word "HERO" in screenwriting. The main point of my using the word "sympathetic", and then going on to define it, was to clarify that the main character, the PROTAGONIST, doesn't have to be likeable, but rather someone the audience can understand and follow. Hope my earlier colloquialism didn't muddy the waters any. I do think it's an important semantic distinction (I have a degree in Comp Lit so I love me some semantics) to make.