Nothing major to discuss here. But I noticed something, last night, that I think is a rather significant example of how we can really get overly academic with screenwriting, sometimes.
A lot of us, myself included, like to follow a particular methodology with screenwriting. It being the only method I've significantly read about (and I like it), I follow the "Save the Cat" method. However, it's been relayed to me that Blake Snyder didn't really invent a new method, he just did an awesome job teaching it in everyday language, and that his method is actually really close to a great deal of other screenwriting methods.
If you're not familiar with his work, or any of those similar to his, I can sum it up quickly by saying that he provides a clearly-defined structure that screenplays should follow. Major events are clearly defined, and there is a fairly exact order in which these events should take place.
A quick example -- towards the end of the first act, there should be the "Catalyst", the event that propels our hero into the second act. After that, we need the "Debate", in which the hero questions/ponders whether they should or shouldn't do whatever is needed to actually move into the second act.
In "Star Wars", you could very easily say that the "Catalyst" is
And the "Debate" is
Okay, great, so Lucas was following the "Save the Cat" methodology, and he never even knew it. But wait! In "Star Wars", the Debate comes before the Catalyst. Once our catalyst happens, the decision to move forward into the second act is pretty straight-forward. Luke doesn't really have a decision to make, actually -- at that point, what else is he going to do?
So, here we have a pretty clear example of a very successful movie, loved the world over, cherished by pretty much all of us, and it's breaking the rules of screenwriting!
But the backwards order of the Debate and Catalyst isn't what got me thinking, last night, but the very late introduction of Luke. The pre-Luke part of the story, which pretty much belongs to R2D2 and C3PO, is rather long. There's an age-old rule that says that all major players should be introduced within the first ten pages or so, right? But Luke's introduction is seriously stretching that 10-minute limit, and he's the freaking protagonist! Han's introduction comes significantly later.
Furthermore, the second and third acts are kind of strange, and I think you'd be hard-pressed to force-fit them into Snyder's, or anyone else's, super-defined methodology. The reason I say this is because this is Luke's story, is it not? But his goals aren't all that clearly defined from the beginning, at least in relation to
From Luke's perspective (and the audience's, really), he only sets out to
And he does; great, so the movie should be over. But wait! There's more! What comes next is barely even referenced, earlier in the movie, and our protagonist never had any inkling that this was where he'd be heading, eventually.
Anyway, my ramblings are only to illustrate that though I'm a fan of having some kind of structure, it's important to remember that an over-reliance on pre-prescribed structure can be a serious detriment. I mean, here we have the most influential movie of our generation, and it's breaking rules all over the place!
Your thoughts?
A lot of us, myself included, like to follow a particular methodology with screenwriting. It being the only method I've significantly read about (and I like it), I follow the "Save the Cat" method. However, it's been relayed to me that Blake Snyder didn't really invent a new method, he just did an awesome job teaching it in everyday language, and that his method is actually really close to a great deal of other screenwriting methods.
If you're not familiar with his work, or any of those similar to his, I can sum it up quickly by saying that he provides a clearly-defined structure that screenplays should follow. Major events are clearly defined, and there is a fairly exact order in which these events should take place.
A quick example -- towards the end of the first act, there should be the "Catalyst", the event that propels our hero into the second act. After that, we need the "Debate", in which the hero questions/ponders whether they should or shouldn't do whatever is needed to actually move into the second act.
In "Star Wars", you could very easily say that the "Catalyst" is
the murder of Uncle Owen and Aunt Beru.
Luke's whiny protesting to Obi Wan's insistence that Luke follow him to Alderan, and learn the ways of the force.
Okay, great, so Lucas was following the "Save the Cat" methodology, and he never even knew it. But wait! In "Star Wars", the Debate comes before the Catalyst. Once our catalyst happens, the decision to move forward into the second act is pretty straight-forward. Luke doesn't really have a decision to make, actually -- at that point, what else is he going to do?
So, here we have a pretty clear example of a very successful movie, loved the world over, cherished by pretty much all of us, and it's breaking the rules of screenwriting!
But the backwards order of the Debate and Catalyst isn't what got me thinking, last night, but the very late introduction of Luke. The pre-Luke part of the story, which pretty much belongs to R2D2 and C3PO, is rather long. There's an age-old rule that says that all major players should be introduced within the first ten pages or so, right? But Luke's introduction is seriously stretching that 10-minute limit, and he's the freaking protagonist! Han's introduction comes significantly later.
Furthermore, the second and third acts are kind of strange, and I think you'd be hard-pressed to force-fit them into Snyder's, or anyone else's, super-defined methodology. The reason I say this is because this is Luke's story, is it not? But his goals aren't all that clearly defined from the beginning, at least in relation to
the destruction of the Death Star.
save a captured princess.
Anyway, my ramblings are only to illustrate that though I'm a fan of having some kind of structure, it's important to remember that an over-reliance on pre-prescribed structure can be a serious detriment. I mean, here we have the most influential movie of our generation, and it's breaking rules all over the place!
Your thoughts?
Last edited:
