Timing, duration and intensity of 'Action' scenes?

cameronproductions

cameronproductions

Hi all!

I guess this goes for many genre of films, but in this case its in respect to horror and thrillers.

Hypothetically speaking, if you have a 90 minute production, where in 'theory' should the most intense 'shock' scenes be? I appreciate this is quite a vague question, as I'm sure the answer may vary from production to production. But generally speaking, I would imagine it would be constant progression of 'intense' scenes up intill the end scene, to prevent the last 1/3 of the film deteriorating, and taking a backwards step - or is this too obvious?

Would it be better to have an interesting story line for 75minutes, and then have a final 15minute scene overload of just what the audience has been waiting for action? Or better to break the 'action' scenes up within the 90 minutes and thus having less of an impact at the end?

Cheers!
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
Hitchcock used his most shocking scene in the first third of his film Psycho and then let the audiences imagination do the rest. It all depends on what you're after - the main thing is to give them a rest between shocks and move the story forward. Plot it out on index cards and try them in different order. Maybe spend the weekend watching the classics - those that broke with formula.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
cameronproductions said:
Would it be better to have an interesting story line for 75minutes, and then have a final 15minute scene overload of just what the audience has been waiting for action? Or better to break the 'action' scenes up within the 90 minutes and thus having less of an impact at the end?
Click to expand...
With these two options the first is "better". Anything that has
less of an impact at the end is not good for a story.

You're right, the answer will vary from story to story, but under no
circumstances should you allow the last third of the story to deteriorate.
A good thriller or horror story can progress in intensity without 15
minutes of action at the end.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Thanks for both your contributions.

directorik said:
With these two options the first is "better". Anything that has
less of an impact at the end is not good for a story.
Click to expand...

I agree Rik, I think its such a simple point put is too often overlooked! I'm just torn by this dilemma, I could quite easily have my storyline 'diluted' throughout the whole of the film, or, the majority of the 'answers' in a 15minute hit at the end.

I always appreciate films that gives enough during the film but then productively overload at the end - in the sense of a thriller/horror, overwhelm the audience with answers to what they wanted to know or couldn't quite work out - but leave them enough room to make there own explanations, interpretations and judgements.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I think that Die Hard is the best example of how to structure an action movie.

At the beginning there's about twenty minutes of interesting cinematic exposition before any of the 'action' starts. Then the game changes very quickly and within a couple of minutes we're involved in a proper action film. The remainder of the two hours isn't spent in constant fight scenes, explosions...etc. It takes its time and arrives at the climax with enough time to spare for an emotional resolution after the Hans Gruber plummets to his death. It's a gradual build up but you can't have an 'action' movie where the first 75 minutes are Michael Haneke and the last 15 are Michael Bay...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
What's a firework show without a great finale? Gotta have some zingers along the way to keep the audience oohing and aahhing, but people know when the finale under delivers or when it rocks.

And Die Hard rocks on so many levels. :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
cameronproductions said:
I agree Rik, I think its such a simple point put is too often overlooked! I'm just torn by this dilemma, I could quite easily have my storyline 'diluted' throughout the whole of the film, or, the majority of the 'answers' in a 15minute hit at the end.
Click to expand...
Both could work.

It's difficult, isn't it? We can each point out movies that do both well
and movies that do both poorly. I still believe it depends on the story.
Some stories just demand that everything speeds up to a "big band"
conclusion. Some demand the slower approach with a last minute
conclusion.

Look at the movies other have mentioned; Die Hard, Psycho and The
Hidden. Each very different in their approach and each excellent stories
handled very well. And none interchangeable in their approach, but each
has a satisfying ending.

So hypothetically speaking, each story has different needs in the way
the story is told. But this isn't hypothetical, is it? Are you struggling
with how to tell your story?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
If you're asking how much you need to show in a horror/thriller, I think an interesting example to look at would be Se7en.
Basically nothing is shown in it in terms of John Doe's actual killings, only the aftermath in most cases. And it still manages to be extremely effective.
It really does depend what sort of thing you're trying to do.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
directorik said:
Both could work.

It's difficult, isn't it? We can each point out movies that do both well
and movies that do both poorly. I still believe it depends on the story.
Some stories just demand that everything speeds up to a "big band"
conclusion. Some demand the slower approach with a last minute
conclusion.

Look at the movies other have mentioned; Die Hard, Psycho and The
Hidden. Each very different in their approach and each excellent stories
handled very well. And none interchangeable in their approach, but each
has a satisfying ending.

So hypothetically speaking, each story has different needs in the way
the story is told. But this isn't hypothetical, is it? Are you struggling
with how to tell your story?
Click to expand...

Spot on!

Well, I'm confident in the story as a whole. I think I've got it straight in my head .. its kind of like a welcome dilemma i guess - I hadn't planned at all for this opportunistic structure variance, I guess I'm just seeking the views of people with the experience -:bow: and I appreciate it!

But I think people have summed things up well - and it really is dependent on what kind of story your rolling with that determines the time, duration and intensity of big hit scenes!

Think i'll brush up on the films listed, hopefully get the noggin churnin!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
cameronproductions said:
Hi all!

I guess this goes for many genre of films, but in this case its in respect to horror and thrillers.

Hypothetically speaking, if you have a 90 minute production, where in 'theory' should the most intense 'shock' scenes be? I appreciate this is quite a vague question, as I'm sure the answer may vary from production to production. But generally speaking, I would imagine it would be constant progression of 'intense' scenes up intill the end scene, to prevent the last 1/3 of the film deteriorating, and taking a backwards step - or is this too obvious?

Would it be better to have an interesting story line for 75minutes, and then have a final 15minute scene overload of just what the audience has been waiting for action? Or better to break the 'action' scenes up within the 90 minutes and thus having less of an impact at the end?

Cheers!
Click to expand...

I think it's good to go either way, cause both have a different but good effect. Pile all the action at the end or break it up. Both are good. Personally I like to break them up, because I am just better at writing those type of action stories.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
It seems MOST people like a movie that crescendos into the climax conflict.
They like all that suspense, build up rubbish.

Whereas I like my movies just like my burgers or coke: first, second, third & so on bite or slurp all taste the same. I like constant action start to finish.

I don't want the first bite to taste like cardboard, work my way up to a saltine, then toast, then hotdog bun w/ ketchup, then cheeze pizza, then... Please. Just... Quit.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top