• Wondering which camera, gear, computer, or software to buy? Ask in our Gear Guide.

Would this character make this type of decision logically?

H

harmonica44

In my story, a cop (let's call him cop A) wants revenge on the villain because he thinks that the villain killed another cop (let's call him Cop B). The villain hears on the news that Cop A is on the loose and that he is likely out to kill the villain, and that other police are looking for him.

The villain and Cop B, were actually working together, but no one else knows that. So the villain thinks in order to get Cop A from coming after him out of revenge, he has to prove to him, that he was working with Cop B, and that he was not responsible for his death. The villain also hopes to prove to Cop A, that since Cop B was crooked and working with him, it's not worth avenging him, and getting charged with murder, especially when he is going after the wrong guy, over a corrupt cop anyway.

Now the villain has to contact Cop A to get proof of Cop B's corruption to him. However, would the villain logically do something like that to get Cop A off his back?

Mainly for the way I want the plot to go, I need Cop A and the villain to meet up in the same place and time, so is this a reason for the villain to make contact with Cop A, saying he needs to talk and show him proof as to why it's not worth avenging Cop B, and that he wasn't directly involved in his death?

Or what would the villain logically do if this were the case, in order to stop Cop A from getting revenge on him?

Thanks for the advice, I greatly appreciate it.
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
I highly doubt the villain would purposely put himself in a face to face meeting with a person who wanted to kill him. Additionally, Cop A would most likely be extremely emotional, and I'm not entirely sure convincing him that his good friend was actually corrupt, would be any less likely to get you shot in the face.

Villains typically only choose to meet face to face on their terms when they have the advantage and hold all of the cards. If the situation could get them killed, they wouldn't risk it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The only play the villain would have in this scenario is proof that he didn't kill Cop B. However giving that proof to Cop A would most certainly result in his death. When a person is out for blood they are going after everyone involved. Using it as leverage however to keep himself alive long enough to turn the tables on Cop A is a standard villain device. Although I doubt he would risk it on purpose.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Okay thanks. How could the villain get it to Cop A then, since Cop A is out for blood, and is not at home, or at work, or anything?

Do you think that maybe I should have the villain in hiding and Cop A finds him, and then in order not to be killed, the villain gives him the proof, in a last chance attempt to save himself? But would the villain have the evidence on hand, if he was not planning on giving it to the cop in the first place?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
harmonica44 said:
In my story, a cop (let's call him cop A) wants revenge on the villain because he thinks that the villain killed another cop (let's call him Cop B). ... Mainly for the way I want the plot to go, I need Cop A and the villain to meet up in the same place and time, so ... what would the villain logically do if this were the case, in order to stop Cop A from getting revenge on him?
Click to expand...
A villain could choose to:
1. Kill Cop A first.
2. Implicate that Cop A and Cop B are both crooked to the regular police and arrange for them to catch him.
3. Have Cop A's love interest as a captive.
4. Fake his own death. Possibly in front of regular police so Cop A is blamed.
5. Meet and have Cop B step out and kill/capture Cop A. Cop B faked his death.

But I always enjoy reading your inventive solutions. :pop:
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
Either cop a finds the Villain who then scrambles and uses the fact that he knows who the real killer is to keep himself alive. Or the Villain meets with cop A in a situation where cop A can't hurt him.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Okay thanks. Well the villain will not have to time to scramble the evidence together if he is caught by surprise, so I was thinking that it would be best for the villain to get the evidence together and then get it to Cop A.

What's a way for the villain to do that though? Is meeting in a public place enough, or is that not enough and he has to do more? Would he have to get the cop to come to a place, where he can take the cop by surprise, disarm and capture him?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
All the Villain would have to do is claim he wasn't the killer and say he could prove it. However bad cop A wants to kill him, he will desperately want the real killer. If he exists. So cop A will allow the Villain a reprieve to get the evidence.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Okay thanks. But I need the villain and Cop A, to arrive in the same place and time for the ending I want. Is this possible, since the villain would naturally not want to meet Cop A in person to give it to him?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
harmonica44 said:
Would this character make this type of decision logically?
Click to expand...

Unless Cop A and the villain are both computer programs, what has logic got to do with anything? A cop seeking to commit murder (for revenge) is not logical, so applying a logical decision to an illogical scenario is nonsensical. The villain's decision/actions will depend entirely on his personality, on how his personality dictates his response to the variables at play: His fear of being murdered, his judgement of how/if cop A can be reasoned with and any other factors/motivations. Why, for example, would the villain take any of the actions suggested in this thread rather than doing the obvious and just getting as far away from cop A as possible?

A common trend in virtually all your filmmaking questions is your attempted application of logic. That approach is fine for purely technical questions but in filmmaking, few questions/decisions are purely technical! In which case, logic is at best only partly relevant, what's really relevant is whether or not it's believable and believability depends almost entirely upon context! In this particular instance the question is therefore; is the action/decision taken by your villain consistent/believable with their personality? In other words, the answer to your question depends on the context, on how you've established and developed your villain character (and your cop A character).

Until you can learn to apply judgements in context, rather than looking for simple, logical answers (regardless of context), you are just going to keep going round in circles with your filmmaking. Despite being told this numerous times, all you seem to do is say "okay thanks" and then a few days/weeks later just do exactly the same thing all over again. A popular definition of insanity is to keep doing exactly the same thing over and over and expect a different result. Are you insane?

G
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Okay thanks. It's just I have been told by others that it is illogical, so I use that term cause it's a problem for others. The reason why the villain does not get away, is because figures if he is going to live in hiding for the rest of his life, it's worse than prison so he feels he might as well just take his chances and come forth. But others tell me that that is not logical of him and what he would actually do is stay on the run. So how can I convince others not to apply 'logic', if that's what they are doing?

I mean since I created the villain, and he is a scared man at this point, my instincts would tell me he would want to come forward and try to defuse the dangerous situation against him. But readers tell me that no, he would not do that. So I need to see what readers see I guess, since I cannot see the forest for the trees, with my own characters it seems.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
Okay thanks. One thing I have a habit of doing is I do what writing books tell me. The books say to come up with the premise and then come up with the ending next, so you know how to build into that ending. I think that is my problem is that maybe I want to come up with an ending I think is good, and then build into it.

Now I have taken opposite approaches for this story as well, and created outlines where I don't know what the ending is going to be and just had the characters make the most logical, smartest decisions they could. But every outline I come up with, where they do that, I feel that it always leads to an ending I do not like it all. The endings are anticlimatic or undewhelming, because I did not come up with the best ending I could first, and instead the characters decisions have come to an ending that is not good.

I could go with one of those outlines, but I am concerned that readers may read and feel cheated that they did not get more of a thoughtful ending, compared to an ending which may feel anticlimatic, like an ending to a story you may hear on the news, rather than a climatic third act in fiction. When it comes to writing, should I come up with the ending last, and whatever ending that resulted from the characters actions, is the right ending to use? Or should I come up with what I think would be the biggest ending for the reader, for suspense and theme, and try to build into it?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
AudioPostExpert said:
Until you can learn to apply judgements in context, rather than looking for simple, logical answers (regardless of context), you are just going to keep going round in circles with your filmmaking. Despite being told this numerous times, all you seem to do is say "okay thanks" and then a few days/weeks later just do exactly the same thing all over again. A popular definition of insanity is to keep doing exactly the same thing over and over and expect a different result. Are you insane?

G
Click to expand...

harmonica44 said:
Okay thanks. ... The reason why .... But others tell me .... So how can I ... ? So I need to see what readers see I guess, since I cannot see the forest for the trees, with my own characters it seems.
Click to expand...
You'll need to ask your readers then. I'm not aware that you've posted the script here so none of us are readers. We also need to see what the readers see. You keep changing your story and characters. The choices are dependent on how you develop your characters. As non-readers, making our suggestions in a vacuum are at best just guesses. It may help to work with a neurotypical writer in developing your characters.

It feels more like a comedy routine watching your request for help when you don't provide a copy of the script or script segment for consideration. You could be right and your readers wrong, but we can't say since we aren't privy to the script.

VENDOR: Would you like some ice cream?
CUSTOMER: Sure. How about a scoop of chocolate.
VENDOR: Sorry, we're outta chocolate.
CUSTOMER: Okay, how about strawberry.
VENDOR: We're outta strawberry.
CUSTOMER: Then just give me a scoop of vanilla.
VENDOR: Nobody likes vanilla so I don't carry vanilla.
CUSTOMER: Well what flavors do you have?
VENDOR: Monday, I have orange, Tuesday grape, Wednesday rocky road, Thursday coconut and Friday praline.
CUSTOMER: Okay, today's Friday. I'll take the praline.
VENDOR: I'm all outta praline.
CUSTOMER: This is stupid! I'll take whatever flavor you got.
VENDOR: I got orange sherbet.
CUSTOMER: Why did you ask if I wanted ice cream if all you have is orange sherbet?
VENDOR: It's an ice cream truck not a sherbet truck.

Good luck :pop:
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Been there, done that, have the t-shirt... except that my partner and best friend wasn't killed. If Cops A & B were partners or best friends, and Cop A was in the least bit emotional (and who wouldn't be?), he'd be on desk duty, talking to the department psychiatrist, and possibly have surrendered his service weapon. And he'd be watched like a hawk. If it was just one cop revenging a fellow cop... sorry, but there's not enough time in the day to play vigilante on every animal who shoots a peace officer. I was going to a dozen funerals a year (homicide, suicide, accident, alcohol related natural causes), which gives you an idea of how cheap our lives can be . And the odds of Cop A BELIEVING the suspect is somewhere between slim and "@#$% you!" If you're looking for realism, every peace officer in the world is going to groan and toss Diet Coke cans at the screen/television with that story. Sorry, but your entire plot is just to much cliche. If you COULD work it into the story, Alcove Audio's "The villain IS Cop B, who faked his own death" is the best solution, IMHO. But SOMEONE out there is going to take that tired 1940's cliche and tell it in a whole new and exciting way, validating William Goldman's "NOBODY in Hollywood knows ANYTHING!" It's YOUR story, write it YOUR way and prove me wrong. I'll happily eat a double helping of crow if you can do it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Okay thanks. However why does Cop B fake his own death? I was not given any motivation as to why Cop B would do that. It's all about character motivation, right? So why is he faking is death at all? Plus the villain cannot be cop B, because that will raise just as many plot holes, as this problem. It doesn't really fix the situation, is just creates holes in several other areas.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top